12-06-2007, 02:05 AM
You're not wise enough to be a philosopher.
A philosopher would know that the conglomerate of energy fields is not called "true". The ego-self, identity is called "true". And it doesn't exist, or perhaps I should say, as I already have elsewhere, it has no inherent existence.
People call this body "true". They don't call the energy fields "true". They don't even see the energy fields.
The energy fields exist, but the ego-self is an appearance of one specific assemblage point. The ego-self, perhaps what CC called the human form, appears in a very specific and narrow band of emanations. Move the AP and where is it?
Nowhere.
It is, as CC says, mere self-reflection.
When you say or think "I", what happens?
Do you not engage your past memories and accumulated knowledge? Is it not that which we are referring to as "myself"? That and the body that this mind identifies with?
Even Descartes observed "I think, therefore I am". This "philosopher" was more observant than you. You're just quoting books.
The "I" concept co-arises with thought as the thinker. If you don't think, where is this "I"? I'm sure you agree that one can not think, ie stop the internal dialogue. So consequently, you might agree that the "I" collapses as well. And I'm sure you would agree that your energy body is still present when you've stopped the internal dialogue.
When the internal dialogue is stopped, there is just perceiving. Perceiving without the perceiver, without the "I"-thought.
If you'd practiced this yourself we wouldn't be having this discussion.
And all the discussion in the world won't lead you to practicing.
Just do it.
A philosopher would know that the conglomerate of energy fields is not called "true". The ego-self, identity is called "true". And it doesn't exist, or perhaps I should say, as I already have elsewhere, it has no inherent existence.
People call this body "true". They don't call the energy fields "true". They don't even see the energy fields.
The energy fields exist, but the ego-self is an appearance of one specific assemblage point. The ego-self, perhaps what CC called the human form, appears in a very specific and narrow band of emanations. Move the AP and where is it?
Nowhere.
It is, as CC says, mere self-reflection.
When you say or think "I", what happens?
Do you not engage your past memories and accumulated knowledge? Is it not that which we are referring to as "myself"? That and the body that this mind identifies with?
Even Descartes observed "I think, therefore I am". This "philosopher" was more observant than you. You're just quoting books.
The "I" concept co-arises with thought as the thinker. If you don't think, where is this "I"? I'm sure you agree that one can not think, ie stop the internal dialogue. So consequently, you might agree that the "I" collapses as well. And I'm sure you would agree that your energy body is still present when you've stopped the internal dialogue.
When the internal dialogue is stopped, there is just perceiving. Perceiving without the perceiver, without the "I"-thought.
If you'd practiced this yourself we wouldn't be having this discussion.
And all the discussion in the world won't lead you to practicing.
Just do it.