|
Home > Archive > Yoga > August 2006 > "Projecting onto the world..."
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
"Projecting onto the world..."
|
|
| howdydave 2006-08-20, 9:27 pm |
| Howdy!
This phrase was used in a different thread and I thought
that I might share some possible interpritations.
One is that this is "bass-ackwards" due to the fact
that one does not project onto the world -- rather that
the world is a projection of the mind.
This is a difficult concept at first glance.
Think of it this way...
How does one perceive the world?
With ones senses!
Most people think of the eyes, ears, nose, tongue and
skin as the "sense organs." As I see it they are merely
the INSTRUMENTS -- the actual sense ORGAN is the brain.
Sever the optic nerves and one is blind in spite of the
fact that the eyes themselves may still be working
perfectly.
Thus none of us can talk about the world per se, only
our own personal PERCEPTION of it. If we go through
the appropriate logical gymnastics, we can eventually come
to a conclusion that (in this context) PERCEPTION and
PROJECTION are, for all intents and purposes, the same thing.
Dave
| |
| omjaroo 2006-08-21, 2:25 am |
| howdydave wrote:
> Howdy!
>
> This phrase was used in a different thread and I thought
> that I might share some possible interpritations.
I believe the author was referring to the psychological concept of
"projection".
That is where an individual will "project" or ascribe to his/her
external environment their internal believes, motivations or
perceptions and then react accordingly. . Kind of like the thieve who
is constantly on guard (afraid) of being stolen from...
Jared
o
^
| |
|
|
Howdy Dave,
What you are trying to explain is put in the terms of FILTERS in NLP.
Even adjustments are easily done according to NLP...
I love NLP as it is a short cut to our knowledge in many respect...
Puma
howdydave wrote:
> Howdy!
>
> This phrase was used in a different thread and I thought
> that I might share some possible interpritations.
>
> One is that this is "bass-ackwards" due to the fact
> that one does not project onto the world -- rather that
> the world is a projection of the mind.
>
> This is a difficult concept at first glance.
>
> Think of it this way...
> How does one perceive the world?
> With ones senses!
>
> Most people think of the eyes, ears, nose, tongue and
> skin as the "sense organs." As I see it they are merely
> the INSTRUMENTS -- the actual sense ORGAN is the brain.
>
> Sever the optic nerves and one is blind in spite of the
> fact that the eyes themselves may still be working
> perfectly.
>
> Thus none of us can talk about the world per se, only
> our own personal PERCEPTION of it. If we go through
> the appropriate logical gymnastics, we can eventually come
> to a conclusion that (in this context) PERCEPTION and
> PROJECTION are, for all intents and purposes, the same thing.
>
> Dave
| |
| howdydave 2006-08-21, 4:28 pm |
| Howdy Puma!
NLP? Hmmm...
Neuro-Linguistic Programming
Natural Language Programming/Processing
Non-Linear Processing?
It's another one of those TLAs!
Dave
puma wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> Howdy Dave,
>
> What you are trying to explain is put in the terms of FILTERS in NLP.
> Even adjustments are easily done according to NLP...
> I love NLP as it is a short cut to our knowledge in many respect...
>
> Puma
>
> howdydave wrote:
| |
| howdydave 2006-08-21, 4:28 pm |
| Howdy Puma!
I am a bit leary of shortcuts in the learning
process myself.
Very often one does not get to discover the
principal behind something. This is the difference
between "learning" something and "comprehending"
something.
Then again, maybe we are talking about different
NLPs!
Dave
puma wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> Howdy Dave,
>
> What you are trying to explain is put in the terms of FILTERS in NLP.
> Even adjustments are easily done according to NLP...
> I love NLP as it is a short cut to our knowledge in many respect...
>
> Puma
>
> howdydave wrote:
| |
|
|
Howdy Dave,
You`ve placed the stone into its place very well...I see that you are
a waiting man,waiting time,place and occasion...Right?
But surely, a person as yourself did know that I was talking about
Neuro-Linguistic Programming... Hmmm!
Puma
howdydave wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> Howdy Puma!
>
> NLP? Hmmm...
>
> Neuro-Linguistic Programming
> Natural Language Programming/Processing
> Non-Linear Processing?
>
> It's another one of those TLAs!
>
> Dave
>
>
> puma wrote:
| |
| howdydave 2006-08-21, 9:24 pm |
| Howdy Puma!
I didn't have a clue about what you were talking about!
I have been away from academia too long to keep
myself up to date!
NLP is just another one of those multifunctional
TLAs (Three Letter Acronyms.)
A "waiting man" eh?
Never heard myself discribed that way before!
For the last ten years or so I've been digging into the
past not keeping myself up to date on current technology.
Dave
puma wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> Howdy Dave,
>
>
> You`ve placed the stone into its place very well...I see that you are
> a waiting man,waiting time,place and occasion...Right?
>
> But surely, a person as yourself did know that I was talking about
> Neuro-Linguistic Programming... Hmmm!
>
> Puma
>
>
>
>
> howdydave wrote:
| |
| howdydave 2006-08-21, 9:24 pm |
| Howdy Puma!
I didn't have a clue about what you were talking about!
I have been away from academia too long to keep
myself up to date!
NLP is just another one of those multifunctional
TLAs (Three Letter Acronyms.)
A "waiting man" eh?
Never heard myself discribed that way before!
For the last ten years or so I've been digging into past
wisdom, not keeping myself up to date on current technology.
Dave
puma wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> Howdy Dave,
>
>
> You`ve placed the stone into its place very well...I see that you are
> a waiting man,waiting time,place and occasion...Right?
>
> But surely, a person as yourself did know that I was talking about
> Neuro-Linguistic Programming... Hmmm!
>
> Puma
>
>
>
>
> howdydave wrote:
| |
| howdydave 2006-08-21, 9:24 pm |
| Just had a quick peek at Neuro-Linguistic Programming
on Wikipedia.
NLP appears to me (at first glance) to be a rehash of the
VERY old Jnani principles of "categorical frameworks"
and "superimposition."
IMO: Language is the primary factor in categorical
frameworks because sentence structure and word
conjugations are a very integral ingredient into a
person's thought process. i.e.; A person who thinks
in English thinks differently than a person who thinks
in French (or German or Russian or Arabic or Latin or
whatever!)
Dave
howdydave wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> Howdy Puma!
>
> I didn't have a clue about what you were talking about!
>
>
> I have been away from academia too long to keep
> myself up to date!
>
>
> NLP is just another one of those multifunctional
> TLAs (Three Letter Acronyms.)
>
>
> A "waiting man" eh?
> Never heard myself discribed that way before!
>
>
> For the last ten years or so I've been digging into past
> wisdom, not keeping myself up to date on current technology.
>
>
> Dave
>
>
> puma wrote:
| |
| howdydave 2006-08-21, 9:24 pm |
| Just had a quick peek at Neuro-Linguistic Programming
on Wikipedia.
NLP appears to me (at first glance) to be a rehash of the
VERY old Jnani principles of "categorical frameworks"
and "superimposition."
IMO: Language is the primary factor in categorical
frameworks because sentence structure and word
conjugations are a very integral ingredient into a
person's thought process. i.e.; A person who thinks
in English thinks differently than a person who thinks
in French (or German or Russian or Arabic or Latin or
whatever!)
Then again... I'm a "semantics freak" anyway! ;->
Dave
howdydave wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> Howdy Puma!
>
> I didn't have a clue about what you were talking about!
>
>
> I have been away from academia too long to keep
> myself up to date!
>
>
> NLP is just another one of those multifunctional
> TLAs (Three Letter Acronyms.)
>
>
> A "waiting man" eh?
> Never heard myself discribed that way before!
>
>
> For the last ten years or so I've been digging into past
> wisdom, not keeping myself up to date on current technology.
>
>
> Dave
>
>
> puma wrote:
| |
| hbkta@aol.com 2006-08-21, 9:24 pm |
|
howdydave wrote:
> Howdy!
>
Howdy,
when I first saw the title of your thread, I was pleased, thinking
"Dave has saved me some time", as I was thinking the mechanics of
perception might be useful in my answer to Jared on the "straining...."
thread.
> This phrase was used in a different thread and I thought
> that I might share some possible interpritations.
>
then I noticed I had been misquoted.
> One is that this is "bass-ackwards" due to the fact
then I noticed you were being a bit of a sassmart. :-)
> that one does not project onto the world -- rather that
> the world is a projection of the mind.
>
> This is a difficult concept at first glance.
and here you lost me.
I am thinking, how can anyone visiting alt.yoga find the simple
mechanics of perception a "difficult concept"? My 12 year old daughter
can follow the process on an intellectual level.
>
> Think of it this way...
> How does one perceive the world?
> With ones senses!
>
> Most people think of the eyes, ears, nose, tongue and
> skin as the "sense organs." As I see it they are merely
> the INSTRUMENTS -- the actual sense ORGAN is the brain.
>
brain may be termed the sense oragan.
but mind is the organ of perception.
> Sever the optic nerves and one is blind in spite of the
> fact that the eyes themselves may still be working
> perfectly.
even if everything is attatched and working properly, perception only
occurs if attention is given, or available to the sense instruments
inferential wave.
ever been reading a book and not heard someone who has come up and
started talking to you? ever passed by someone you knew on the street
and not seen/recognized them because you were thinking about something
else? brain is working, sense instruments are working, but mind's
attention is elsewhere.
>
> Thus none of us can talk about the world per se, only
> our own personal PERCEPTION of it. If we go through
> the appropriate logical gymnastics, we can eventually come
> to a conclusion that (in this context) PERCEPTION and
> PROJECTION are, for all intents and purposes, the same thing.
>
> Dave
question.
have you ever, even once, followed a tanmatra, an inferential wave, on
the experiential level, ie BEING there, from the moment it hits sense
instrument through the various processes to end phase of outward
projection? or is this all logical gymnastics without actual real time
witnessing of the processes involved?
| |
| howdydave 2006-08-21, 9:24 pm |
|
hbkta@aol.com wrote:
> howdydave wrote:
>
> Howdy,
> when I first saw the title of your thread, I was pleased, thinking
> "Dave has saved me some time", as I was thinking the mechanics of
> perception might be useful in my answer to Jared on the "straining...."
> thread.
>
>
> then I noticed I had been misquoted.
>
>
> then I noticed you were being a bit of a sassmart. :-)
>
>
> and here you lost me.
> I am thinking, how can anyone visiting alt.yoga find the simple
> mechanics of perception a "difficult concept"? My 12 year old daughter
> can follow the process on an intellectual level.
>
>
> brain may be termed the sense oragan.
> but mind is the organ of perception.
>
>
> even if everything is attatched and working properly, perception only
> occurs if attention is given, or available to the sense instruments
> inferential wave.
> ever been reading a book and not heard someone who has come up and
> started talking to you? ever passed by someone you knew on the street
> and not seen/recognized them because you were thinking about something
> else? brain is working, sense instruments are working, but mind's
> attention is elsewhere.
>
>
> question.
> have you ever, even once, followed a tanmatra, an inferential wave, on
> the experiential level, ie BEING there, from the moment it hits sense
> instrument through the various processes to end phase of outward
> projection? or is this all logical gymnastics without actual real time
> witnessing of the processes involved?
Howdy hbkta!
The whole point of this new thread is to examine the general concept
rather than the specific instance in a specific context.
IMO: "Mind is the organ of perception" is untenable due to the fact
that
"Mind is an organ" is contradictory. In generally accepted terms, an
organ is a physical object that carrys out a physiological function.
As for being there -- YES (more than once)
As for TANMATRA -- no.
This is due to the fact that my experience was subjective as opposed
to objective. Tanmatra requires a rudimentary element (object.)
Following a tanmatra is dependant on linear, dualistic principles.
Advaita is both non-linear and non-dualistic.
Dave
| |
| howdydave 2006-08-22, 2:24 am |
| Howdy hbkta!
The whole point of this new thread is to examine the general concept
rather than the specific instance in a specific context.
IMO: "Mind is the organ of perception" is untenable due to the fact
that "Mind is an organ" is contradictory. In generally accepted
terms, an organ is a physical object that carrys out a physiological
function.
As for being there -- YES (more than once)
As for TANMATRA -- no.
This is due to the fact that my experience was subjective as opposed
to objective. Tanmatra requires a rudimentary element (object.)
As I understand it, following a tanmatra is dependant on linear,
dualistic principles.
Advaita is both non-linear and non-dualistic.
Dave
hbkta@aol.com wrote:
> howdydave wrote:
>
> Howdy,
> when I first saw the title of your thread, I was pleased, thinking
> "Dave has saved me some time", as I was thinking the mechanics of
> perception might be useful in my answer to Jared on the "straining...."
> thread.
>
>
> then I noticed I had been misquoted.
>
>
> then I noticed you were being a bit of a sassmart. :-)
>
>
> and here you lost me.
> I am thinking, how can anyone visiting alt.yoga find the simple
> mechanics of perception a "difficult concept"? My 12 year old daughter
> can follow the process on an intellectual level.
>
>
> brain may be termed the sense oragan.
> but mind is the organ of perception.
>
>
> even if everything is attatched and working properly, perception only
> occurs if attention is given, or available to the sense instruments
> inferential wave.
> ever been reading a book and not heard someone who has come up and
> started talking to you? ever passed by someone you knew on the street
> and not seen/recognized them because you were thinking about something
> else? brain is working, sense instruments are working, but mind's
> attention is elsewhere.
>
>
> question.
> have you ever, even once, followed a tanmatra, an inferential wave, on
> the experiential level, ie BEING there, from the moment it hits sense
> instrument through the various processes to end phase of outward
> projection? or is this all logical gymnastics without actual real time
> witnessing of the processes involved?
| |
| howdydave 2006-08-22, 2:24 am |
| Howdy hbkta!
hbkta@aol.com wrote:
> howdydave wrote:
>
> Howdy,
> when I first saw the title of your thread, I was pleased, thinking
> "Dave has saved me some time", as I was thinking the mechanics of
> perception might be useful in my answer to Jared on the "straining...."
> thread.
>
>
> then I noticed I had been misquoted.
The whole point of this new thread is to examine the general concept
rather than the specific instance in a specific context.
>
>
> then I noticed you were being a bit of a sassmart. :-)
Who, ME???
>
>
> and here you lost me.
> I am thinking, how can anyone visiting alt.yoga find the simple
> mechanics of perception a "difficult concept"? My 12 year old daughter
> can follow the process on an intellectual level.
>
Perception goes a lot deeper than "the mechanics of perception."
Many doctrinal dissertations have been done on the simple
question: "What is perception?"
To me, "the simple concepts of perception" is paramount to
the simple concept of: "What is reality?"
>
> brain may be termed the sense oragan.
> but mind is the organ of perception.
>
IMO: "Mind is the organ of perception" is untenable due to the fact
that "Mind is an organ" is contradictory. In generally accepted
terms, an organ is a physical object that carrys out a physiological
function.
>
> even if everything is attatched and working properly, perception only
> occurs if attention is given, or available to the sense instruments
> inferential wave.
> ever been reading a book and not heard someone who has come up and
> started talking to you? ever passed by someone you knew on the street
> and not seen/recognized them because you were thinking about something
> else? brain is working, sense instruments are working, but mind's
> attention is elsewhere.
Are you talking about PERCEPTION or RETENTION?
(Sounds like you are talking about retention.)
Scientific research and applications (especially the use of hypnotism
in criminology) clearly show that just because something was not
consciously acknowledged and stored in long term memory does
not mean that it was not perceived. Not only was it perceived, but
it was quite possibly perceived and retained in the subconscious.
>
>
> question.
> have you ever, even once, followed a tanmatra, an inferential wave, on
> the experiential level, ie BEING there, from the moment it hits sense
> instrument through the various processes to end phase of outward
> projection? or is this all logical gymnastics without actual real time
> witnessing of the processes involved?
As for being there -- YES (more than once)
As for TANMATRA -- no.
This is due to the fact that my experience was subjective as opposed
to objective. Tanmatra requires a rudimentary element (object.)
As I understand it, following a tanmatra is dependant on linear,
dualistic principles.
Advaita is both non-linear and non-dualistic.
| |
|
| Howdy Dave,
NLP was established in 1974-1975. A semantic person as yourself should
really know about it. For this reason I would like to give you a push
to get into the gate;""""
WHAT IS NEURO-LINGUISTIC PROGRAMMING
by Tad James, M.S., Ph.D., Certified Master NLP Trainer
NLP, or Neuro Linguistic Programming, is the art and science that can
be described in a nutshell, as an "attitude and a methodology that
leaves behind a trail of techniques."
" First, the attitude of NLP is one of curiosity and experimentation.
Next, the methodology is modeling, which is the process of duplicating
excellent behavior. Another person's behavior can be duplicated by
studying what that person does inside their head (language, filters,
programs, etc.) to produce results. NLP was initially created in 1975
by Richard Bandler and John Grinder, who began modeling and duplicating
the "magical results" of a few top communicators and therapists. Some
of the first people to be studied included Hypnotherapist Milton
Erickson, gestalt therapist Fritz Perls and family therapist Virginia
Satir. Since then, many others have contributed to the growth and
development of the field. And finally, the trail of techniques created
through this type of modeling is what is commonly known as NLP. The
programs in this catalog describe the many different techniques we
teach and use.
Today, NLP is widely used in business to improve management, sales and
achievement/performance, inter-personal skills; in education to better
understand learning styles, develop rapport with students and parents
and to aid in motivation; and of course, NLP is a profound set of tools
for personal development.
Sure you can surf the Internet! And we know you know computers!
..=2E...... But what about your mind?
THE INTERNET (TODAY) -- You've managed to use a Web Browser and you're
here, aren't you? But how much do you know about what's going on inside
yourself and others? Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) is about just
that. Knowing about what is going on inside yourself and what's going
on inside others! Perhaps you've wondered, "How do I communicate
better," or, "How do I get in control of my own personal computer -- my
brain!" New technology finally makes it easy to understand how we
think, how we communicate, and how we process emotions!
NLP techniques and processes help us to understand ourselves and
others, and to produce new, and more effective ways to:
Attract the right person for you
Create ideal relationships
Advance your career & make more money
Increase motivation and energy
Create your desired self-image
Communicate to produce the kind of results you wan
Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP) is a behavioral technology, which
simply means that it is a set of guiding principles, attitudes, and
techniques about real-life behavior, and not a removed, scientific
theorem. It allows you to change, adopt or eliminate behaviors, as you
desire, and gives you the ability to choose your mental, emotional, and
physical states of well-being. With NLP, you learn how to grow from
every single life experience, thus increasing your ability to create a
better quality of life. NLP is a very pragmatic technology based on an
ability to produce your desired results, thus allowing you to become
proficient at creating your future! In the end it is not a lot
different from understanding how to program a computer -- your own
bio-computer.
If you understand computers, you already understand how NLP works!
Computers are about man-machine interface. NLP is about mind-body
interface. The entire process is very similar! Maybe it's time to learn
about your own personal computer -- your mind!
WHAT OTHERS SAY ABOUT NLP:
"NLP cannot be dismissed as just another hustle. Its theoretical
underpinnings represent an ambitious attempt to codify and synthesize
the insights of linguistics, body language, and the study of
communication systems." Psychology Today"
"(NLP) does offer the potential for making changes without the usual
agony that accompanies these phenomena. . . Thus it affords the
opportunity to gain flexibility, creativity, and greater freedom of
action than most of us now know. . ." Training and Development Journal
.. . . real estate brokers and salespeople use Neuro-Linguistics to
enhance their communication skills and provide them with more choices
when working in a difficult situation. . . it shows how we make sense
of the world around us and communicate." Real Estate Today
Click here if you would like to read about our Product or Trainings
WHY STUDY NLP & TIME LINE THERAPY=AE
While many people study NLP and Time Line Therapy=AE techniques for
their own personal growth and development, they are also of the utmost
value to the professional. Some professions using NLP include
Salespeople, Business Executives, Managers, Business Owners, Lawyers,
Teachers, Trainers, Counselors, Educators, Doctors, Chiropractors,
Massage Therapists, Consultants, Hypnotherapists, Psychologists,
Athletes, Entertainers and Performers. Regardless of profession, the
majority of NLP participants are searching, and finding, better and
more effective ways to increase their performance and improve their
effectiveness.
How will studying NLP and Time Line Therapy=AE techniques benefit me?
Through using these techniques, your personal happiness and
professional success will be much more consistent, and much more
predictable. Your effectiveness working with others will be
dramatically increased, and your ability to empower yourself for
optimum results will be increased. You will be able to generate
empowering emotional states within yourself at will, eliminate any
negative emotions or limiting decisions, identify and change limiting
beliefs, inspire yourself with a compelling future that will have much
better chances of coming true, and create patterns of excellence from
any role model you choose.
Achieving Professional Excellence. Whether you're already succeeding in
your profession, having some difficulties, or if you're transitioning
into a new position, NLP and Time Line Therapy=AE techniques can help
you achieve, maintain and enhance excellence. Managers and
Entrepreneurs use the information to develop strong teamwork and
relationships, and to foster positive interpersonal skills.
Negotiations and problem solving sessions are enhanced to create
solution-oriented, win-win approaches. Salespeople learn to build deep
levels of rapport, elicit and fulfill the criteria and values of
clients, and develop effective methods for handling buyer's remorse or
future objections so the sales relationship is long-term and mutually
satisfying. Trainers and Educators learn new paradigms for inspiring
and engaging students, as well as effective techniques for dealing with
challenging learning environments. . Mental Health Professionals learn
new skills and techniques that supplement their repertoire, and gain
additional insights into helping clients make the changes that support
their own process of healing....""""
Puma
howdydave wrote:[vbcol=seagreen]
> Howdy Puma!
>
> I didn't have a clue about what you were talking about!
>
>
> I have been away from academia too long to keep
> myself up to date!
>
>
> NLP is just another one of those multifunctional
> TLAs (Three Letter Acronyms.)
>
>
> A "waiting man" eh?
> Never heard myself discribed that way before!
>
>
> For the last ten years or so I've been digging into past
> wisdom, not keeping myself up to date on current technology.
>
>
> Dave
>
>
> puma wrote:
P=2E[vbcol=seagreen]
| |
| hbkta@aol.com 2006-08-23, 9:31 pm |
|
howdydave wrote:
> Howdy hbkta!
>
Howdy Dave.
>
> hbkta@aol.com wrote:
>
> The whole point of this new thread is to examine the general concept
> rather than the specific instance in a specific context.
>
Ok.
Then it seems to me that the quotation marks and reference to other
thread are superfluous.
>
> Who, ME???
>
ya, sometimes you seem that way, but then again it takes one to know
one.
>
> Perception goes a lot deeper than "the mechanics of perception."
Of course Perception goes a lot deeper than the mechanics of
perception:
however, the model offered in your initial post does not.
You offer the world (object) percieved through the senses, sense
instruments,
with processing of incoming sense information in the brain, which you
term the sense organ, and projecting of that information such that the
world (object) seems external.
This is a model of the simple mechanics of perception. To such was my
comment directed.
> Many doctrinal dissertations have been done on the simple
> question: "What is perception?"
>
Which is again beyond the scope of your intial post
You do not even attempt any definition of "perception" other than we
percieve the world through the senses; and that perception is the
projection of the information gathered by the senses.
> To me, "the simple concepts of perception" is paramount to
> the simple concept of: "What is reality?"
>
This again is beyond the scope of your initial post.
No mention is made in your initial model of "reality" or "simple
concepts of perception".
>
> IMO: "Mind is the organ of perception" is untenable due to the fact
> that "Mind is an organ" is contradictory. In generally accepted
> terms, an organ is a physical object that carrys out a physiological
> function.
>
The word "organ" has more than one meaning. It can be used to denote
any "structure" that carries out a specialized function.
In generally accepted terms the eyes, ears, nose, skin, tongue are the
sense organs, not the brain. Does that mean your model is untenable?
>
>
> Are you talking about PERCEPTION or RETENTION?
> (Sounds like you are talking about retention.)
>
I am using the word, perception, in generally accepted usage of the
word, the sense of being consciously aware of the sensory input and, as
per your model, having that consciously perceived data projected out as
the world.
Here:
> Scientific research and applications (especially the use of hypnotism
> in criminology) clearly show that just because something was not
> consciously acknowledged and stored in long term memory does
> not mean that it was not perceived. Not only was it perceived, but
> it was quite possibly perceived and retained in the subconscious.
>
you have given an example of retention.
No arguments there, information can be recorded and retained without
having been consciously acknowledged at time of event. But your
position seems to be that this information is "perceived".... again
this does not seem to fit with your model.
According to the model offered we percieve through the senses and what
we perceive is projected out as the world. ("perception and projection
are... the same thing") However, do note that when something is not
consciously acknowledged it is not projected, and thus it is not
"perceived".
although I am not familiar with hypnotism, my experience with
retreiving such data is that when it is brought to conscious awareness
it is not projected outwards to be perceived as the external world but
is seen for what it is, a memory, internal object, of something which
happened in past. Your model also made no mention of subconscious,
where is that in the brain?
>
> As for being there -- YES (more than once)
> As for TANMATRA -- no.
>
I am not sure as to what you are saying "yes" to and what you are
saying "no" to.
The question was directly concerned with the model of perception you
offered in your post.
Re: external object
emanates tanmatras, inferential waves,
which are picked up by one or other of the sense receptors,
routed to the brain
processed and percieved internally
and projected outwards so as to form the external world.
Saying no to Tanmatras is the same as saying the model of perception
you have offered is just intellectual gymnastics on your part.
> This is due to the fact that my experience was subjective as opposed
> to objective. Tanmatra requires a rudimentary element (object.)
>
> As I understand it, following a tanmatra is dependant on linear,
> dualistic principles.
>
So?
Are you saying you have no real knowledge of the model of perception
that you offered, but only know it through intellectual constructs?
> Advaita is both non-linear and non-dualistic.
Your point being what?? ? ? ?
Do you see your computer screen with the squiggly lines on it?
Do you feel the key board as you type in your posts?
Do you hear your phone ring?
Can you smell and taste your food when you eat it?
All these are emersed in linear, dualistic principles.
Seems to me that the model of perception you offered is built on these
same principles.
Then again I am no Jnani, so maybe I am not getting something.
|
| |
|
|