Quote:
Originally Posted by Lisa
Tolle suggests a practice of watching one's thoughts. Observing one's thoughts. It is awareness that watches thought.
|
OK you say it is awareness that watches thought. Thought occurs by itself, yes? And awareness is there and aware of the act of thought occurring.
Or, thoughts are occurring but you're not aware of them. Would you say the thoughts are occurring in reality, if you're not aware of them (for whatever reason?)
Question - are thoughts and awareness in anyway separate? If you say they are, can the distinction be made outside of thought itself? If the distinction is thought, and we agree that awareness watches thought, then how can that be a reliable and trustworthy description of a reality? Isn't it true that we cannot know weather awareness and thought are separate or not, without both awareness being present and thought forming an answer to my question? As such, we can't really know weather they are separate or not. Because the very idea of separation lies within thought. It's not pointing to thought and saying "we can't know because it's all thought" -- thereby using thought to make a distinction of what reality is. But merely recognizing this fact, rather than relying and pointing to thought. Big difference there.
Quote:
"You" are your thoughts, in that "you" are identified with your thoughts.
|
I don't understand this. You're making a statement that "me" -- who I think I am and feel I am -- a person, a body, living in the world -- AM thoughts. A very clear statement. But then you really complicate it by saying that "I" am identified with MY thoughts. But dear, if I AM my thoughts, who is there to be identified with "my" thoughts?
Who/what is one's thoughts? Whose thoughts? What is identification with thoughts? Is that just more thought? Doesn't awareness just view this? Can awareness do anything else but be aware? Isn't any attempt to watch thoughts just a mind-movement that awareness is aware of? What is the difference between thoughts and thoughts that are "identified" with?
Quote:
Observing thought frees one from this identificiton with thought.
|
You seem to be indicating or outright admitting awareness can do something ELSE besides observe/watch whatever is occurring.
Saying "observe thought" is telling awareness to DO something. "Look over here at this!"
Speaking of it from the standpoint of BEING thought, how could I ever observe myself when I can only be myself? (the eye cannot see itself.)
Quote:
(which is who you think you are, but not who you are.
|
You using thought to say that's what I think I am, and then after you set me up as this 'thought-entity' you knock me down by saying that is NOT who I am.
Get it straight. Am I or am I not thought?
And who are YOU to presume to tell ME who/what I am? How would you know?
Quote:
You are that which is observing, watching thought. You are the awareness that watches thought.)
|
That is your perspective (thought-based) point of view. It says nothing about me. It in fact has nothing to do with what/who I am.
Quote:
The watcher is who you are.
|
Again flatly telling me what I am.
And the watcher is a product of thought.
Quote:
It watches in the present moment- which is all there is.
|
To me there is no present moment. Well, there is, but it's only though thinking it comes into existence. So you're telling me thought is all there is, lol.
Quote:
There is no "your own life."
|
Um actually yeah there is. I'm living it. (I speak from experience rather than assumptions) *coughs*
Quote:
Tolle is saying, like all true spiritual masters say, "there is no person."
|
It is your opinion that anyone who says "there is no person" is a true spiritual master. It is my opinion your opinion is worthless.
To me, weather there is, or is not a person, weather it has absolute reality, or seemingly reality, ALL has to do with what PERSPECTIVE is taken.
Quote:
You're meant to be who you already are. God. The impersonal, formless, one consciousness.
|
*rolls eyes*
If I already am God, the impersonal, formless, why do you even bother? Why bother with bringing up "person" at all, ever? If it has no existence, does not exist, ("as all true masters say" *gags*) then why talk about it? Why talk and bring up something that simply does not exist? How does it make someone a master to offer a perspective? To point to something that doesn't exist and say "that doesn't exist." I mean, ok?
So are you God, lisa? Or are you still a person? If you're still a person, how can you feel qualified to tell others what YOU yourself only suspect might be true of yourself?
Power that could devour me on sight, eh? *smirks*