To be clear, what was ‘suggested’ by K and DB is that somewhere along the development line of the human brain, a ‘wrong turn’ was made. That ‘turn’ as I see it, is thought (the material thought process ) assuming the role of ‘controller’ of the organism. It created an entity / image (the thinker) apart from its normal activity as a ‘sense’ . It ‘moved’ from its proper functioning, acting in cooperation with the other senses, sight, hearing, smell, etc. and assumed the role, with its creation: the thinker, the ‘me’, the ‘I’ as an individual, separate and divided from all other humans and nature in general. That is where we are today.
Okay Ayham.
Now take this word ‘looking’.
What if our ‘looking’ is not pure without images,etc…?
What if we delude us that “I look without distortions” but actually “thought” directs us to look only such things we ‘want’?
What if we say “there is only here and now” - but only meet people with knowledge,images through thoughts?
To look/understand “what is put on the table”, that looking should be whole/non-fragmented. Isn’t it?
To reach here and now - there should be no ‘past/present/future/thoughts/limitations’.
Why I say “to reach here and now” is because of our limitations of ‘me’,‘images’,etc… - we (if not you -i’m sorry) only look through ‘past’/thoughts/limitations/fragments’.
So, until there is thoughts - this ‘looking’ or ‘here and now’ is not actually it is. And so I say, “Ending of thoughts” is the first thing - one has to do - to ‘look’ afresh.
Nope. I’m aware that images distorts to see you - so the ‘image’ if any present there - disappears when I start to talk with you.
We can’t throw away images once and for all. It keeps on forming. But while meeting - I’m aware and in that awareness - image dies.
When I wrote suggested in the last paragraph I meant what was suggested from my side as a part of this thread not that K and Bohm meant what I said, in case there was confusion there.
To carry on, sure. The wrong turn humanity took. As I’ve heard the talks or some of the talks, it was never confirmed what was the wrong turn, but they asked if humanity did.
Assuming the wrong turn in a particular way is dangerous and quite unnecessary. Especially when the wrong turn is presenting itself to us in thought itself.
Yes I don’t see it being met as well. Let’s try again:
What you mentioned about the role of thought is only one of many scenarios as I see it.
So taking it back a bit. Thought comes in interpreting the input coming from the sense, and not even all of it because soon enough the conclusion will be drawn and the attention will be limited to the conclusion.
Now, since we covered the ground work together so far I don’t think it is necessary to go and attend to explain it. So…
Is it possible to look at the arrival of thought as one of the sources of input and not make an experience out of a happening? Through that it is inline with the other sources of input ‘The senses’. In practice the outer and the inner are one field. And thought was called ‘A sense of the past’.
But it is only thought itself that can see the mistake it has made and is making. It is the ‘presenter’ as well as the ‘presentee’ (the ‘me’)… only it with Intelligence could cease continuing in the wrong direction. It’s very movement as thought / thinker prolongs the conflict and suffering. It would be happy to stop…but only if it could continue to move.
I have one image/observation right now - and I feel it is to be conveyed to you.
In this forum, many does ignore my replies and just escape from meeting that question. It may be because, they don’t feel it as important/serious or they feel it is not related to their ‘want/desire’ - I don’t know why.
But, from you (also @James and @ErikProchnow ), didn’t escaped from the messages pointing you and I feel you treat everyone equally. Always inquire deeply and clarify you/others. Involve in most of the dialogues voluntarily and not ignore others as joker/insane/etc… 
though you (Paul) play with ‘words’ and make yourself/others angry/frustrated 
Now, I see that I’m getting aware and the image is disappearing 
Take care
Thanks
The arrival of thought is the arrival of the past as a memory, which is a word, a label, an image, an idea, a concept. But there are times when a memory is also attached to a feeling, which may be felt as sadness, guilt, shame, regret or some other strong emotion. Can we be aware of this thought-feeling as an original happening before it starts to spread out into a familiar experience?
Are we getting closer?
Why have you noticed this one particular image? Isn’t it because of the feeling of frustration?
Nope. I can feel yours and others anger in your play. I may be wrong too. If I feel frustrated - I would have surely conveyed. I had frustrated - when I felt of wasting time in Forums - a month before. More than that - I didn’t feel any such.
And more than that - I had said many images about you in the previous reply
That’s what I am getting at. You are reacting to the expression of a feeling.
Yes. Feelings. - Not reacting to expression but the feeling is ‘Compassion’.
That’s it! That’s your self-image. You are calling it compassion when it appears in yourself. But when it appears in others you are calling it anger. They may be exactly the same thing.
Self-Image? Why you say so?
So, one should sit quiet and not be compassionate towards all?
I think so
I don’t know if this is clear to me as a conditioned mind. I get carried away in a chain reaction not knowing which has a charge and which doesn’t. For all I care, each thought carries some kind of a trigger of a charge, was it big enough to be called a feeling or not. You see what I am trying to get at?
Yes.
I am not saying so. You are telling me that you are compassionate.
I think here lies an assumption that we have seen the full movement and spread of thought. I doubt that I did.
See Paul. I will again go slow. Just watch carefully what I am trying to say.
I had seen you play with words (image or whatever) - and I saw that because of that play - frustrations/anger happens within you and others.
So, I come forward and try to show you. What making me coming forward - is some kind of feeling - and I name it as ‘Compassion’.
If my view as “you went anger” is wrong - Say that “It is wrong.” - It’s fine.
But what do you mean by ‘self-image’?
When it has a charge, I am already caught up in the experience. The charge is the residual energy of an unresolved experience. I lost my father or my mother and the memory of that experience is highly charged; so this charge may emerge via many different triggers. It may just be one random word or picture that triggers it. There is no chain reaction without a charge and a trigger. So can I see that I am caught up in this chain reaction? Not necessarily at the beginning, but at any point in this chain reaction.
You are missing it. You are responding to anger with compassion. But they are both responses. So what you are calling anger and compassion have exactly the same root. But you don’t call it anger in yourself; you have attached the image of anger on to someone else. On to yourself you have attached the image of compassion.