Everything is present.

Above both look like statements.But actually they should be taken as questions.

I don't know

Action ,and reaction takes place only in present.When there is reaction, it can happen only with the input from the memory alone.The retraival from the memory of past record may be at this instant, the content from the old record stored in memory is past, that is what the thought projects in the reaction.To the extent thought is ment for retraival from the memory,it is in present,but its projection is continuation of the past.We thrive on past records even for psychological stuff, apart from the teconological stuff.

I am that Iam.

Memory is present, no?

I don't know

dhirendra singh wrote:
Memory is present, no?

True,but it contains old record alone.Without thought the record is never out.Utility point of view,it is good enough.It project the dirty old record of psychological stuff creating psychological conflicts if one does not undestand the thought and its nature.

I am that Iam.

What is thought? A material process? So it is present, like other material process, like burning sun.

Probably it is working in wrong field.

I don't know

dhirendra singh wrote:
Probably it is working in wrong field.

Rick asks the further question....Is thought&awareness the same..or different?

THE TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE

dhirendra singh wrote:
like burning sun.

How easily the thought has brought it under its hold!!
gb

We are watching, not waiting, not expecting anything to happen but watching without end. JK

dhirendra singh wrote:
Probably it is working in wrong field.

That wrong field may be the domain of the past records from the memory.Let us not come to any conclussion that fast.The discussion on the this topic helps us to understand the nature of thought better.

I am that Iam.

dhirendra singh wrote:
Everything is present.

(Every thing)That happens is in the present.

I am that Iam.

kamarajugadda Mallik ArjunaRao wrote:
That wrong field may be the domain of the past records from the memory.Let us not come to any conclussion that fast.The discussion on the this topic helps us to understand the nature of thought better.

Well, there are some thoughts in this matter:

What is past?

There were Dinosaurs, now they are not, they are past.Past is part of now, which is modifying, moving every moment.Now is modified past.

Is memory past?

It is now, updating every moment.

What is thinking/thought?

Thinking is a special mechanical process based on memory, communicating with current happening.It is not past, it is now.

Thinking, by using information, updating them with present is okay, it is not past.Then what is wrong with us?

I don't know

RICK LEIN wrote:
Rick asks the further question....Is thought&awareness the same..or different?

I think they are totally different.

Thought is now here but awareness is no where.

Thought is present but awareness is absent.

Thought is a thing, awareness is no thing.

Thought is 'what is', but awareness is 'what should be'.

Awareness created thought, thought created self, self blocked the awareness and created hell, which is us.

Self must die, but self don't want to die.

Well be aware:).

I don't know

dhirendra singh wrote:
There were Dinosaurs, now they are not, they are past.Past is part of now, which is modifying, moving every moment.Now is modified past.

It is too simplestic a notion of the past.What is its impact on psychological conflicts?Your view of past is no where near it.

dhirendra singh wrote:
Thinking is a special mechanical process based on memory, communicating with current happening.It is not past, it is now.

This is happening of thought process,which has to be in the present,but its influence on mind is that of a reaction based on the old record from the past.We value the status of mind,what is its status after totally taken over by the old?

dhirendra singh wrote:
Thinking, by using information, updating them with present is okay, it is not past.Then what is wrong with us?

What ever that is happening is not past, its affect afterwards and the psychological problems that it creats matters. In the context of our mind problems, thought always projects past.What do we do?

I am that Iam.

This post was last updated by kamarajugadda Mallik ArjunaRao Mon, 03 Oct 2011.

kamarajugadda Mallik ArjunaRao wrote:
What do we do?

dhirendra singh wrote:
Well be aware:).

We are watching, not waiting, not expecting anything to happen but watching without end. JK

dhirendra singh wrote:
Well be aware:).

you mean think.
gb

We are watching, not waiting, not expecting anything to happen but watching without end. JK

Post#11 you could have added 'when' to all those sentences.
gb

We are watching, not waiting, not expecting anything to happen but watching without end. JK

kamarajugadda Mallik ArjunaRao wrote:
a reaction based on the old record from the past

How can thought react otherwise?Recordings are data, not old or new.Thought needs record.

kamarajugadda Mallik ArjunaRao wrote:
thought always projects past.

I think it is more right to say that 'thought always use recordings to deal with present situation, why it should be otherwise?

kamarajugadda Mallik ArjunaRao wrote:
what is its status after totally taken over by the old?

In fact it has been taken over by 'self', an imagination which appear as real.It is not question of old or new, point is, all actions are being controlled through an imagined center.

Thoughts, recordings, memory and olds are not problem.

Problem is, they are being used by an imagined center at wrong place.

kamarajugadda Mallik ArjunaRao wrote:
What do we do?

Self, which is imagined entity of thought, is asking this question.So we can only react.

Whatever we do, it will strengthen the self.

So, self must die, it is only problem, nothing else.

I don't know

dhirendra singh wrote:
So, self must die, it is only problem, nothing else.

Hello dhirendra.....since recently I doubt that .
would we be so badly built in ? why not ? it is very possible and would explain much so the neo cons and all past and future invaders were and are right we are only violent and competitive creatures , I cannot put this aside of course..

I see the "option" to be aware that "I" am the best and not taking it into account under some circumstances , which I mention here often.Then the self will not die.
When and if it sees , deeply not casually with words , that some of its "doing" are clearly and obviously what hurts so deeply , then doubt will starts on its own...it can be a start in a different direction but here I find that any expectation mostly hidden will be again in conflict with what is really going on in the field of facts.

this is why I think that the first move will come from using a catalyst(what is behind sorrow ,boredom and so on ) , this will be needed to by-pass the self attitude...

Dan.....

This post was last updated by Muad dhib (account deleted) Tue, 04 Oct 2011.

dhirendra singh wrote:
How can thought react otherwise?Recordings are data, not old or new.Thought needs record.

If things happen just the way you presentd it, it looks ok.But actually impact on mind ,involving psychological stuff,reactions are just the repeat of the past with slight modificatio, making the conflict much more complex.Ruining the sensitivity of mind and intelligence.

dhirendra singh wrote:
I think it is more right to say that 'thought always use recordings to deal with present situation, why it should be otherwise?

I question it.It's role in psychological issues is defenetly a continuation of the past.

dhirendra singh wrote:
In fact it has been taken over by 'self', an imagination which appear as real.It is not question of old or new, point is, all actions are being controlled through an imagined center.

You mean self is the thinker.Assume that it is an imagination which appears real.It implies that self is not real.The old record is in the memory and this false fellow is retriving the old record.That makes the memory is also false.Taking thought as real and self as something not real does not sound logical.

I am that Iam.

dhirendra singh wrote:
Thoughts, recordings, memory and olds are not problem.

Yes,but their influence on psychological stuff,and conflicts they creat, are the problem.It is the thought that matters.The self may be thinker.The fact is thinker is the thought.

dhirendra singh wrote:
Problem is, they are being used by an imagined center at wrong place.

There are some mixing of things which needs to looked into.The self and centre I feel must be introduced little slowly,and with caution.
otherwise whole discussion would be very illogical.

I am that Iam.

This post was last updated by kamarajugadda Mallik ArjunaRao Tue, 04 Oct 2011.

The self, thought, time,memory, and, centre from which the self acts are all entities supplament and complement each other.Their introduction and definitions lead to falses if we are not caustious.These are expected to be from the domain of the known, inspite of some of them creating paradoxes.Key point is the understanding of exisitance,or ,appearance of the self ,though every one is with it and acknowldge its impartance, when it comes to actually tell what it is ,there are several variations in their dispositions.Standards never maintained.I shall give a separate posting, which would be my view. It is for the discussion.

I am that Iam.

Muad dhib wrote:
this is why I think that the first move will come from using a catalyst(what is behind sorrow ,boredom and so on ) , this will be needed to by-pass the self attitude...

Hi Dan

I understand what you mean.:)

I don't know

kamarajugadda Mallik ArjunaRao wrote:
I question it.It's role in psychological issues is defenetly a continuation of the past.

As you said,now we move slowly, step by step.I think there is no past psychologically.

What is psychological?There are innumerable recordings, they are data.Only a small part of these data, which is 'self and related emotions, is psychological.

These data are just information, which may be true or false.This particular bundle of information, which is psychological/self, is false.Now, what is past, psychologically.

What is fundamental problem?Is it recordings or past.Or is it this particular part of false information, self, which is presently base of our all actions/reactions?

I don't know

dhirendra singh wrote:
These data are just information, which may be true or false.This particular bundle of information, which is psychological/self, is false.Now, what is past, psychologically.

you are just passing the buck to the self from the thought, in fact both are mutuals, complementing to each other.and suplamenting each other.It is centre which give them act thus.Inspite of that it is the thought that needs to be understood.

I am that Iam.

kamarajugadda Mallik ArjunaRao wrote:
Inspite of that it is the thought that needs to be understood.

Why?

I don't know

dhirendra singh wrote:
Why

It is creator of many of its clounes just for its survaivals,such as,so called self, thinker, and centre ,&several others.Otherwise why is it spliting itself as thinker and thought and centre?

I am that Iam.

RICK LEIN wrote:
Rick asks the further question....Is thought&awareness the same..or different?

Is Rick and his question same or different?

What are you waiting for?

dhirendra singh wrote:
There were Dinosaurs, now they are not

dinosaurs are past. memory is past. but memory is present. so dinosaurs are present.

but max told me that only dead bodies exist. live bodies do not exist

so, is a dinosaur a dead body and does max exist

and is rick a dinosaur?

janitorus rex?

What are you waiting for?

dhirendra singh wrote:
Why?

that's it. bingo!

What are you waiting for?

kamarajugadda Mallik ArjunaRao wrote:
you are just passing the buck

that buck is not as young as he used to be, but he is still hopeful

What are you waiting for?

kamarajugadda Mallik ArjunaRao wrote:
you are just passing the buck

that buck is not as young as he used to be, but he is still hopeful

What are you waiting for?