Jack River

What I mean is how do you know the essence of there intuition wasn’t derived from the limited field of thought? If that makes it clearer.

The insight I speak of is not the product of thought/the past. So it is not a continuation of that that has been invented by thought. What did Einstein do that points to something that? I know he had trouble meeting with I think it was Bohr. They both couldn’t commune as they both held to there own bias/opinion/theory. This is a sign that they lacked this insight I speak of.

You mean for example e=mc2?

Yep. Thought in its nature denies truth. It is implicit in its own structure that it enters a investigation with assumption or a bias of some sort. Thought is limited by its contents of explanation. I think we are not using insight and intuition to mean the same thing. It is said that Einsteins intuition was still limited to desire/thought. Not sure about the other dude. This insight I speak of for example sees the whole of the nature of thought. That seeing is totally void of thought itself. In order for this holistic insight to act there has to be a total ending of thought as a movement.

Remember though love comes in the purity of silence. That cannot be understood in any other way.

Of course. It’s taking advantage of the cultivation of memory. Although, Science or any activity cultivated by thought is inherently limited to invention. Nothing of thought is truly creative or original, if I can use that word. But I know what you meant dude. Well said.

I can see that now. Just a context thing. Your threads are different. Different is healthy

I understand this very much. Yet as you are aware people “know” that, still move in that pattern of psychological evolution. That was my point. Thanks for clarifying though. I agree 1000% I’m with you. The seeing is not the result of choosing/“the chooser” I understand you now very much. I agree. Thank you very much for clearing it up for a simpleton like myself. I will go over your thread again a few times. It’s great practice to understanding different language styles of communication. Your awsome?

Hard to communicate without understanding context or how we are using certain words.

It will be difficult to communicate if we are using a certain train of thought like Buddhism or Taoism or whatever. Context will make the communication difficult fosho

I see it in the sense not being able to SEE, as in intelligence/insight, because of the psychological attachment to thought/knowledge. Is this pointing of to the same thing, yet the context is different @deci belle?

@Serotoninluv cool. I’ll check it out. Thanks

No. New or old?

For most people thought is the constant. But for this post rational being as you refer to it, silence is the constant and thought arises and falls back into the ground when its is needed to solve practical problems. But thought doesnt move compulsively psychologically anymore. This means the majority of the day is spent in pure silence dude. If there is this deep deep silence maybe even nothingness/nonbeing. Gnarly dude?

Yeah lol It’s an art dude. Thought responds when necessary, when not necessary, thoughts doesn’t respond. That is ‘the silence’ But what about nonbeing? That’s where the magic happens huh ?

One problem with rationalism/rationality is the psychological/emotional bias that is inherent in thought itself. The clinging to our own experience/knowledge to satisfy the selfs own psychological needs. When this disease is transcended thought works much more efficient/coherently. That and not seeing that thought is always limited implicitly as well. Knowledge is always in incomplete. This post rational thinking can still do everything it could before, better actually. A certain capacity isn’t given up, it’s just used where it is useful, and not used when it has no place.

The self psychologically seeks out reward and avoids punishment. Pretty much all action it takes is in that pattern. Start by watching that at work.

Fosho. Intuition or insight puts order in the mechanism of thought itself. I agree

It’s actully really important. The lack of corruption in thought, as in science, means less distorted psychological disposition when it comes to humans and there understanding of there place in the universe. Then you don’t get this I am “merely” blood and bones in a mechanical machine called the universe.

The lack of personal psychological measure is compassion or responsibility. The alone do not choose to act. Love acts on its own. Love is action dudes.

It’s all you dude ?

Maybe don’t seek out love/light, but understand the nature of fear/darkness. Come to the positive through understanding the negative.

Psychological time. The killer of the spiritual/love

I fee ya. Maybe because we inherently are trying to evolve psychologically. What do you think. Evolve as in, psychological becoming. Maybe if that stops that defensiveness stops as well.

That the defensive nature of self for you. I agree. That’s is the result of not seeing our own limitation. Well said dude