In any study we undertake, it is very important to have a realistic and logical approach to doubt. As we all know “doubt” is and important tool to obtain a lucid discern in any issue of mind search. But “doubt” sometimes is assume and taking to the extreme and rigid notion. At that point it becomes a barrier to true understanding. Angel.

Angel Miolan wrote:
But “doubt” sometimes is assume and taking to the extreme and rigid notion. At that point it becomes a barrier to true understanding. Angel.

When the doubt becomes rigid notion, then it has no more a doubt but has become a concept, a belief, a fixed entity. Now it will certainly become a barrier to true understanding. Unless the doubt is given due attention , it will not reveal its significance. Doubts should be discussed and resolved with friendliness,courtesy and respect in the hearts.

FLOW WITH LIFE!

Dear Angel,

Pleased to meet you.

you say:

"But “doubt” sometimes is assume and taking to the extreme and rigid notion. At that point it becomes a barrier to true understanding. Angel."

Yes, what is interesting is that, as one lives it here, doubt plays an essential role in undoing conditioned behaviour coming from a conditioned mind, but it definitely has its limits also.

Because in that which is whole/absolute/thoughtless/timeless, there is nothing there even to be doubted, to be related to in any way.

You look at a wonder of a tree for example. There is only looking. No conclusion/judgement/image being formed, only timeless looking. So, nothing there that could be "doubted", since no idea/belief is formed in the first place.

One is pointing out the connection of doubt with thought here and how there indeed is a 'state' of being in which doubt is also being undone, undoubtedly! :-).

Love

Very Nice to meet you Nina,

Mina Martini wrote:
Because in that which is whole/absolute/thoughtless/timeless, there is nothing there even to be doubted, to be related to in any way.

to acquire that stage we rely on doubts which guide us in a proper direction.

Mina Martini wrote:
You look at a wonder of a tree for example. There is only looking. No conclusion/judgement/image being formed, only timeless looking. So, nothing there that could be "doubted", since no idea/belief is formed in the first place.

Can we see like that? can we see people/relatives like that...if so what is the point of 'family system'? why cant we live like other creatures?

Dear Grace,

Very nice to meet you too. :-)

'Can we see like that? can we see people/relatives like that...if so what is the point of 'family system'? why cant we live like other creatures?'

Yes, there is seeing without image/division. It of course puts an end to any/all systems that stem from this division. Family is no longer a 'closed circle' based on a limited interest of a group of egos identified as "us", but it is a Family of Man! Yes! There are no borders, no identification.

Nature, the trees for example do not use language/words, so it is more difficult to have any 'unresolved past issues' with them than with the people we know. :-) But really, it does not really make a difference what is being looked, when innocence/no past/no knowledge is looking, it will see no past.

"Doubt is an unpleasant condition, but certainty is absurd"

Voltaire

Dear Nick,

Pleased to meet you.

"Doubt is an unpleasant condition, but certainty is absurd"

Certainty as a conclusion, rigid idea, is indeed absurb.

Doubt experienced as an unpleasant condition is an indication, is it not, of an experiencer separate from the experienced.

This brings us to the connectedness of doubt, with thought, as was written earlier in this thread.

Doubt, as well as reason and logic, are excellent servants, but at the moment they become masters (and that happens when thought is identified with, creating the "me"), they can no longer be truly reasonable, logical. At that moment logic is that of a self, so limited, serving division instead of unison!

Mina Martini wrote:
Doubt, as well as reason and logic, are excellent servants, but at the moment they become masters (and that happens when thought is identified with, creating the "me"), they can no longer be truly reasonable, logical. At that moment logic is that of a self, so limited, serving division instead of unison!

I don't know what you mean by "logic is that of a self". What is a self? How is it different from thought?

'I don't know what you mean by "logic is that of a self". What is a self? How is it different from thought?'

Yes, the expression "logic is that of a self' could be rephrased as "logic is that of thought".

Mina Martini wrote:
'I don't know what you mean by "logic is that of a self". What is a self? How is it different from thought?'
Yes, the expression "logic is that of a self' could be rephrased as "logic is that of thought".

But logic is always "of thought". Logic does not exist apart from thought, so it still isn't clear what you're trying to say.

This post was last updated by nick carter Tue, 04 May 2010.