What is the metaphor trying to say: that the loop of images creating problems and solving them is like the loop of an addict craving drugs and taking them?
1 Like
Give up our life? Explain, please.
The center that I identify as cannot be seen as the only thing of importance, the ultimate authority that must be obeyed. Which is how we usually feel (because we are that feeling), despite any intellectual pose as to the contrary.
The refusal to cause harm must be stronger, the understanding that I create the world (the world of suffering) that I experience must be stronger.
Then there is less resistance to awareness, less clinging to reality.
I don’t understand Inquiry why you ask if this is “all” the brain can do?
Isn’t “taking an interest in what thought is doing” - including “why thought is causing confusion and conflict/suffering” - already a massive step? - a crucial step?
Why be greedy for more?
I remember K saying that in the very investigation into thought a transformation may already be taking place. So the investigation itself has significance.
Of course, if it is merely an intellectual investigation then this will have little effect. But by being directly aware of the movement of thought, by seeing directly the effects of image-making in the mind, the jealousy and fear and hurt it creates (for example), one is contacting the actual process of thinking.
It’s all the PC brain can do because it is limited…not because it’s greedy.
I remember K saying that in the very investigation into thought a transformation may already be taking place. So the investigation itself has significance…by being directly aware of the movement of thought, by seeing directly the effects of image-making in the mind, the jealousy and fear and hurt it creates (for example), one is contacting the actual process of thinking.
I said earlier that a kind of transformation takes place when the brain takes at least as much interest in what thought is actually doing as in getting what it wants.
As I said earlier.
Yes, but if what you mean by “all” is the capacity to pay attention to, be interested in, become aware of
this is already something pretty significant.
What I meant was the fundamental limitation of the PC brain is that it is limited to continuous thinking with occasionally extended gaps between successive thoughts, allowing for partial insight.
Can thought become aware of itself, its continuous movement? And if so, can it simply stop and allow the brain to be quiet?
And if not, why not? Habit, momentum, fear? Given that a quiet, silent brain may be what mankind lacks (aka intelligence) to keep us from ultimately destroying ourselves, thought’s incessant movement must somehow come to an end? If it can’t end itself, what can?
1 Like
We all know that it can’t deliberately “stop and allow the brain to be quiet”. If it stops or allows for extended gaps between successive thoughts, it is unintentional.
thought’s incessant movement must somehow come to an end? If it can’t end itself, what can?
Thought is a mechanism. It does what it’s programmed to do, and it is programmed to react to certain things that are threatening or dangerous, enabling us to survive as a species. But the mechanics of thought can be put to use as a program for enabling the survival of the ego, I, which seems to be what has happened.
Ok. But we have been saying that fear is thought, jealousy is thought, desire is thought, etc.
Can’t one be aware of the fact that one feels anxious, or envious, or hurt?
If I may point it out, intellectually arguing about the impediment of having a conditioned brain is not the same thing as being directly in contact with the feeling of fear, hurt, anxiety.
There is no space for intellectual arguments when one is in pain. So, similarly, when one is afraid, there is an opportunity to notice this - even of one lacks the capacity to do so for long, or to have a comprehensive insight into the movement of fear.
Can fear or hurt or jealousy become aware of itself?
(It is the same question).
Yes it is and K has posed the same question regarding thought: can it be aware of its own movement? He said, I believe, that “there is no other factor”. What you name above are all sensations that the brain recognizes and resists. Now we are questioning that reflex of resistance and considering them as possible ‘undiscovered’ treasures, jewels…
Thought is memory. Can a memory be aware of itself as memory?
If.there is a periodic awareness of the seeming continuous movement of thought, is the source of that awareness in the brain or outside of it?
Ordinary awareness, as I understand it, is part of the brain 
.
The brain is aware of thought but can do nothing to shut it off?
I don’t think there is anything to be done positively. But the brain can be negatively aware of the movement of thought. It can be aware of what is going on, and notice that it’s happening. Present moment awareness of thought is possible for the brain.
One sees what thought does in the world and in one’s mind. Thought repeats sensations and memories. Mostly post traumatic memories to safeguard … If one understands thought one doesn’t react to thought as a problem.
I’m wondering if after we discuss something here, there is some kind of change in our awareness.
We were discussing images, saying that the image we have of people distorts our perception and actually prevents us from seeing with clarity. We have an image of a friend, and see her through this image rather than how she actually is. After we talk about this, do we actually see more clearly when we look at the face of someone we know, or someone sitting opposite us on the train? Is there more awareness of the distortion caused by images, even if only for a short time?
1 Like
Yes, I think so. If one becomes aware in oneself of an image (or reaction or judgement) that is constantly interfering in relationship to another person, one is naturally more alert to the distortions this may cause.
So rather than completely identifying oneself with this image/reaction/judgement (as one may have been doing by habit), one sees it as an image.
And if one sees an image as an image, it is easier to put it aside or at least bracket it, question it - which one cannot do if there is no awareness present.
If there is complete attention in the moment of relationship, then the image is not merely put aside or bracketed, it is dissolved. Even if we find it difficult or rare to have such complete attention, we can have a sense of this in discussing it I feel.
Merely to have an awareness of this fact (if it is an actuality, something going on), is already a big deal.