Dear Viswa,
if we look at labelling, forming images as a whole, should we not also ask what its function is? Images are a tool to fullfill a task e.g. to produce something, develope something, make plans for work, cook something, find our way home etc. These images help in actually doing the tasks but are they the most important thing to fullfill the task? If we look at it, obviously not as we have to actually do things and be attentive for what is actually happening now. The images can never describe what actually is happening now. They only show a projection of our remembered memories, our past. So being active we can use images and they might help but being attentive for the actual is more important than the image. Sticking to image can even put us in danger for example if we carelessly cross a street because we want to be home soon. If we see this, what function has the image making process, the labelling then about ourselves? Is there a function at all or do we create one? And if we create one, why do we do it?
best wishes
Erik
So we are right back where we started: you have to see for yourself and not merely be persuaded. Therefore, what is the whole point of dialogue? Thatâs the real question. Moving from description to description, refining more and more the description, is that the dialogue? That may be part of it, but thereâs surely something more. So where are we now? Are we still together? Or have we got further and further apart?
Dear Paul,
right we are back at start and my question: can we start with the fact? The fact being the conditioning, the being full of images, descriptions, labelling, the division between people and with it conflict. Can we start with the fact and the crisis resulting of it. And can we see that we are that and explore together what brought us there. And is there a real interest in finding out, if there is a different way of meeting and living together? Or indeed, is the form of dialogue just a pleasurable thing? The latter I can definitely deny for myself. Getting lost in description and ideas is just continuing what we do anyway and will lead to nothing else than conflict. If we cannot start together differently, here or in any dialogue like on saturday one should better stop.
best wishes
Erik
Lots of thoughts, ideas and images. Whatâs the source?
Dear Will,
who wants to know? And why? The source of thoughts, images and ideas is the thinking process. That is fairly easy to see. What do we do now with this fact?
The thinking process? Maybe too easy. Whatâs the source?
So, first, we are separate. Thatâs actually the fact, isnât it? Geographically, we are separate; yet we can easily use our knowledge, thought and technology to solve this problem if we really want to meet in person. Psychologically, what is it that separates us? You say it is our conditioning with its images, descriptions, labels, division and conflict. But it may be something else. I donât know. All I have is the fact that we are separate and the question, what is it that separates us? I have no answer to it. Now, are we both at the same place with this, so there is only the fact and the question?
Dear Paul,
so we have the question, what is separation? What is division? What does it mean? How does it come about psychologically?
Who wants to know and why? And why do you say maybe too easy? Do we understand the thinking process? And would it not be the question: What is the source of the thinking process? And what is the function of the thinking process or its nature?
Yeah Erik - these images are used to fulfill the task - and we can be attentive for it - while crossing road,as such - or else sticking to it put in danger (So these are images about âsomethingâ). But there are images more than âsomethingâ (i.e. there are images of âmeâ/âothersâ)
We create an image about âmeâ as âa good looking/educated/nice/well dressed/lovable person,etcâŚâ - and when someone says/scolds us âyou are a fool/idiot/ugly/waste/useless/hate-able personâ before public/colleagues/etc⌠- the image gets âhurtâ. And also we create the images of âother personâ in the same manner - and while these images are get hurt - there arises feelings of anger,misery,pleasure,etc⌠In these way there are âbeliefsâ too. We have to observe these as a whole.
What function is that
- there is âsufferingsâ and,
- there is âfearâ of being nothing
and so - the âimages/beliefs/labellingâ are formed - to stop it or come out from it - to provide pleasure.
Regards
Viswa
Hi @Will
Are you asking âis there source for thought like knowledge,experience?â
But this question of source only creates an âideaâ and becomes a barrier to âobserveâ the thought and itâs movement as a whole.
Because even if we found the source - we cannot stop/act upon it and also creates conflict. Every-time thought arises and by watching carefully itâs whole function and nature as @ErikProchnow questioned seems relevant.
Dear Viswa, does not lie the root of suffering and fear also in labelling, images? Are they not caused by it? If so we have to go into the question if there is a function to label oneself, to create images about oneself psychologically? As an image is only a description of something - physical or psychological - it is not the real. In the physical world images are about something which is real. But about what are images in the psychological realm? Are they not just images about itself, about thinking and the knowledge one has? And the content of knowlege is only the past, something which is not actual and real but just a description.
Not quite. When we put it in terms of separation and division it still all feels rather abstract, as though we are dealing with a problem outside or away from us. What is it that separates us, you and I? Obviously, there is the spatial distance of so many hundreds of miles; that distance we can bridge. But what else separates us?
What separates are ideas, thoughts, opinions, knowledge one has. That is obvious. You believe and I believe, you know and I know, in that lies the division, the distance. I am this nationality, you are this and we both identifie with it etc. We can even bridge the geographical distance, be physically in one room and still be separated. People live together and are lonely. That is a fact. So it is not something abstract but real.
I am not so sure. It may only ever be abstractions that keep us separate; there may be nothing real behind them at all. For example, our beliefs and knowledge. These only keep us separate while they remain in the background, unvoiced, unaired, unshared. When we bring them out for scrutiny, look at them carefully together, they have already lost some of their power. So when you say that our ideas keep us separate is that a belief or a fact? Is it something you know or something you see? Do you see the point? If I say, âI know that knowledge keeps us apart,â thatâs more knowledge. But if we see it together very clearly that knowledge of any kind must inevitably keep us separate in relationship, we have already begun to see a significant change in that relationship.
What do you say Will? What is the source?
Dear Paul, I see what you mean. But we are talking about facts and not what might be or if we might see something cleary. As far as I understand we started to look at what is. And that is the separation. Knowledge or ideas separate. One can see that easily in every day life. Ideas are abstractions. They always are. Their existence is a fact because we can think them. But the content of ideas is never a fact. They might be about a fact. But the content of an ideas is always just an abstraction, description. That is the nature of an idea. The same accounts about knowledge in general. Can we see that together that ideas are always abstractions? It is like language. The words or written senteces are never that which they describe. They are just abstractions. And is not creating an abstraction already a separation, speaking in a neutral way? Does the thinking process in itself not create a separation between a fact or something real and an abstraction about it? Is not the nature of the thinking process exactly to do that? With that I am not saying that the thinking process is wrong. We need that tool. But where do we need it and where not? Why are we leading a life in separation from each other, from nature in general etc.?
No, what is it that separates us? The verbal answer to this question doesnât really matter because a verbal answer will merely provide more content; and this content separates us further still. When we say it is separation, division, knowledge, thought or self-centred activity, we have stopped looking directly at what it is that separates us one from the other and weâve moved on to looking at it as an abstract problem or issue. Therefore what matters is not the string of answers we may present; what matters is the quality of our looking. The fact is we are separate. Are we facing this fact head on? Or are we already starting to react to it in the hope of changing the fact?
Right are we facing it? Are we staying with the separation, seeing what it is, how it comes about? Are we clear that we are separation, division? If we do, we can look at what it is. And if we look, we can see - that is not just a verbal statement - that it involves ideas, knowledge, thinking. All these are about abstractions. That is a fact. So we have to look at the nature of abstractions and their function? Why do they lead to a life in separation between human beings? Is it a natural development or is it something learned? Is it created by us humans?
Sorry - I couldnât understand what you are saying here.
Are you asking - only because of âlabelling/imagesâ (which is nature) - there is sufferings and fear?.
Now - my wife dead - âi sufferâ and i 'fear that âam i going to live alone for the whole life?â
So - could you explain (in this context of my wifeâs death) why you question that âsufferings/fearâ are caused by âimagesâ and the function to label oneself - so we can inquire that deeply together.
Yes Erik - the content of knowledge is past and not actual - but i couldnât understand the âimages about itself, about thinking and the knowledge one has?â - could you please explain briefly explain about this - so i may see and learn about this.