The right question 
is āwhat is listeningā?
1 Like
Youāre all asking the wrong question! 
The correct question is : who are we listening to?
Invariably, our conditioned responseā¦me.
1 Like
Many have gotten it, yourself included I would guess.
The issue isnāt getting it, that is relatively easy if one is the least bit serious. The problem is that the understanding isnāt actionable because it is thought-based.
The central question is whether our reality is solely determined by our beliefs, ideas and yes, our understandings.
Thinking then can play no role in determining1 if there is a pristine reality not predicated on thought, obviously. That is only logical. Every conclusion, bad or good, is a form of thought. There is no smart or stupid but thinking that makes it so.
Quite the conundrum for an entity entirely composed of ideas and beliefs, that is, thought. No path forward.
1 N.B.: The word ādetermineā is misleading, It is derived from ātermā, that is naming, which is the basis of thought. Likewise, experience. Every experiment is backed by thought and only serves to exemplify the all-encompassing scope of the problem.
2 Likes
Discussing problems, difficulties, technicalities, and looking for answers or trying to resolve an issue, of which these are inherently yours, mine, is not actually talking together.
Nothing is missing. Except what I am missing. Its what I am putting into it, from memory, from knowledge, from cleverness, that is not the listening and getting the quality of the togetherness.
1 Like
Our reality is āsolely determined by our beliefs, ideas, and our understandingsā, but thought doesnāt stop to find out if this is true. I, the mind, thought, āgetsā what K was saying, but doesnāt dare verify it.
Togetherness vs. friendship,
Friendship is missing. Intelligence is missing. Without intelligence, true and real friendship is missing. Always, oneās go-to example is the big fat lie guyās followers all screaming together the lie of Trump. They ARE ātogetherā, but none of these people are real friends with each other, are they?? So, just because there is a group of people spouting the same thing and appearing ātogetherā, their ātogethernessā is meaningless and fake. People talk together to establish friendship, because friendship is meaningful, and friendship means love. Without love, there is just thought and a pretense of friendship. You see, someone who pretends friendship, is operating in the field of ālikeā, of being popular. The groupies actually just ālikeā being with each other. That is the danger of ātogethernessā. And the reason they behave like this is that they really donāt know themselves. So, it is very difficult to establish a friendship with someone who doesnāt know themselves. So, just because people talk together just implies that they like each other, which is meaningless. They like and agree with what the other is saying. In the end, this sense of togetherness is an illusion, because it is all based on thought.
I would add ādangerousā to it.
Hi Wim,
I did !!! Seeā¦
People talking together about some serious topic differs to casual conversation, passing the time of day, socially, but in both cases, there is a willfulness. In casual conversation the willfulness is it, them and me, him and her. When it is discussion, the willfulness is hidden behind the custom of verbally responding.
The question is not clear, people talk to each other for different reasons for example If you want to buy a car you have to talk to some people.
Right, it is not clear.