Bring4th

5.2

Ra Wrote:The body is a creature of the mind’s creation.

In the thread entitled The Horrors of STS, an interesting tangent presented itself, and this tangent seems to me to be directly relevant to the meaning of the above Ra quotation.

The conversation until now:

zenmaster Wrote:[@3DMonkey] Have you figured out what 'mind' is yet?

3DMonkey Wrote:Thoughts

Shin'Ar Wrote:Gonna be hard for us to argue that one Zen, lol.

Pickle Wrote:Thoughts are recorded experience. Is mind a recording?

Or a program? I think my issue with this thinking is that it is known that each of us is a program, part of a larger program, and that the soul chooses this specific program before incarnation. And so any "horror" is fully known ahead of time.

JustLikeYou Wrote:It is commonly thought that the mind is that which thinks. This is not precisely true. The mind is thinking itself. Therefore, the mind is constituted of concepts in the same way the body is constituted of atoms.

zenmaster Wrote:Then what is precisely true?

While numinous to some, thoughts equating to mind is almost on the same ontological level of vagueness as consciousness equating to beingness. Each density and each subdensity has a 'mind'. And we know that mind, like body, evolves. Monkey says mind is a container for thoughts, that thoughts are 'in my head'. That's not true either.

3DMonkey Wrote:In order to prove thoughts are not the mind, you would need to be something outside of your own mind. This is not possible. Thinking there is a mind is a thought. There is no constant with which to apply variables.

zenmaster Wrote:Not sure how to respond to Monkey - communication exists. How does that square with everything only existing in your head?

3DMonkey Wrote:Simple. If a tree falls and nobody's around, it does not make a sound.

---

You say it is vague, zenmaster, to equate the mind with the act of thinking, but I do not see the vagueness. I know it is difficult to grasp, but the concept that time and space constitute our material reality rather than contain our material reality is equally difficult to grasp. In fact, these two concepts are parallel and demonstrate the major stumbling-block that we have in recent times to make any progress in both physics and philosophy. The mind does not contain even though it appears to contain. Rather, it is the substance out of which thoughts individuate.

You claim ontological vagueness, but are consciousness and beingness vague concepts? Or are they basic? They seem vague because there is not much to be said about them, but if they underlie all speaking, then it is not vagueness we are dealing with, but fundamentality. It is well known the the most difficult thing for the eye to see is its own mechanics.

Mind is Creator, Body is Creation. These fundamental functions define the realities of these experiences. That of which the body is composed is a stuff that is constantly being created. That of which the mind is composed is a stuff that is constantly creating. Each thought, each concept creates a reality -- each atom, each molecule is a created reality. If we look to our shared reality in Creation (the 3D world) and ask whence its origin, we need only look to the shared concepts (Archetypical Mind) which Create that reality. Communication, then, is precisely those concepts of which all of our minds are composed. Uniqueness is precisely those concepts which constitute parts of my mind that vary from yours.

Again, I will emphasize that what sometimes seems vague is really only basic and therefore demands a very small vocabulary. For if we were to use a broad array of technical terms to define basic concepts, how can we ever make basic concepts support complex concepts when we use complex concepts to define the basic ones?

I think Don asked this question in relation to the mind/body/spirit complex.

The answer is long, and also interwoven.

- -

30.2 Questioner: Thank you. Would you define mind, body, and spirit separately?

Ra: I am Ra. These terms are all simplistic descriptive terms which equal a complex of energy focuses; the body, as you call it, being the material of the density which you experience at a given space/time or time/space; this complex of materials being available for distortions of what you would call physical manifestation.

The mind is a complex which reflects the in-pourings of the spirit and the up-pourings of the body complex. It contains what you know as feelings, emotions, and intellectual thoughts in its more conscious complexities. Moving further down the tree of mind we see the intuition which is of the nature of the mind more in contact or in tune with the total being-ness complex. Moving down to the roots of mind we find the progression of consciousness which gradually turns from the personal to the racial memory, to the cosmic influxes, and thus becomes a direct contactor of that shuttle which we call the spirit complex.

This spirit complex is the channel whereby the in-pourings from all of the various universal, planetary, and personal inpourings may be funneled into the roots of consciousness and whereby consciousness may be funneled to the gateway of intelligent infinity through the balanced intelligent energy of body and mind.

You will see by this series of definitive statements that mind, body, and spirit are inextricably intertwined and cannot continue, one without the other. Thus we refer to the mind/body/spirit complex rather than attempting to deal with them separately, for the work, shall we say, that you do during your experiences is done through the interaction of these three components, not through any one.

- -

the body complex seems to be the 'unit of experience' and continues all the way into 6th Density. The body is the interface and the reflection of experience.

The spirit is direct connect to Light, that which connects us to the universal.

THE MIND is that 'thing' that sits in-between, and encompasses consciousness, memory, thoughts, and 'processing of experience'.

- -

The Mind is truly an amazing and infinitely rich/versatile thing.

If you want to dwell on the Mind, think of the Chariot (the 7th card of the Mind).

it will reveal much in it's metaphor (as you probably already know lol).

I'm glad you bring that quotation in, plenum. One of the main reasons I have begun to view the mind as constituted by a complex of concepts is that Ra frequently refers to the mind as a Tree, but in this tree, the roots are concept complexes known as Archetypes. Therefore, since the roots of a tree are made of the same stuff as the trunk and the branches, we can conclude that the entire Tree of Mind is literally made up of concepts. As your username reminds us, plenum, space is not a void but a plenum. It is out of this coiled up abundance that all material emerges. This gives space the appearance of being a container, but it is not precisely a container since the container is identical to the contained. I am suggesting that the same is true of the mind.

I like that Ra quote.. It makes sense.

Maybe we can interpret consciousness to be a spectrum of experience. On the root level or what we would call highest levels is intelligent infinity. And near it are the transpersonal experiences. On the lowest level are direct physical sensations and near it are hormonal emotions, instincts and lower mental functions like reflexes.

Each bandwidth on the spectrum has it's own experiences which are generated by a variety of systems. For example, the physical senses, the hormone system, the brain whose low level reflexes are probably located in the flesh to higher level functions, (conscious awareness, thinking, identity, personality) which may be situated in the astral double that could go from body to body in reincarnation. Above that is the interpersonal level which is the part of us that is our families, our societies, our species, an earth consciousness, solar consciousness, galactic consciousness and intelligent infinity.

Our consciousness reaches from the intelligent infinity to the lowest level of cellular mechanisms. But we're without training typically aware only of a small bandwidth around thought and self image.

Mind is a subset of this spectrum.

The major thing to note from my suggestion is that consciousness is an infinite white light which has reflected in itself the various systems that make up our life experiences. Another thing to note is that we're connected as one entity at the interpersonal level. We're like two branches of a tree meeting and thinking the other branch is another entity.

The entire organism is connected at it's root and branches out throughout the psychoverse much like a tree. Which is where the tree of life myths i.e. yggdrassil come from. Note that cells of our body are related to us as we are related to our planet.

Great thread- very interesting to read. Based on what we've shared and learned here, is it fair to say that animals have no mind, as such?

animals have a mind!

(03-13-2012, 04:01 PM)Eric Wrote: [ -> ]Great thread- very interesting to read. Based on what we've shared and learned here, is it fair to say that animals have no mind, as such?

Perhaps you could elaborate on that conclusion?

I am very appreciative for the thread. Thank you, jlYou.

Taking it further, the reason I say 'it's all in my mind':

When I think about the body, those thoughts are the mind, not the body. Same thing with spirit. If body exists in consciousness, it's still only consciousness that exists. Without mind, there is no thought. Without thought, I can't think of anything, not even 'I'.

How do you feel about first density environments Monkey? Do you believe that they don't exist unless a mind enters to observe them?

No, they don't. Why do I think that? Because 'exist' belongs to mind.

---

Meaning, as long as we are talking about something existing, we are talking about thought of our mind.

Do not ideas have to exist a priori to mind in order for mind to have them as a part of itself? In order for an idea to be a thought, must it not be observable? What I am getting at is that although perceptible reality as we experience it does indeed consist of thought-forms, thought is not the end all of the process. One could say "It's all in the mind", and they would be both correct and incorrect. Mind, in this way, is also limited by the mind's conception of mind. Therefore, there must be realities anterior to thought. Mind is something that comes out of consciousness, Mind is the world of Ideas, but Ideas are not the entirety of mind. Also, Mind is still not Spirit, for Spirit is something which moves Mind, and it is still not the Body, which is that which the Mind and Spirit express through.

To suggest that existence is a product of the mind is to suggest that the mind is a product of itself. This is true, in a way, but it does not take in to account all the necessary considerations of process. One could possibly benefit from divorcing the concepts of "Mind" and "Thought", for there is more in the Deep Mind than simply thought.

You are referring to the WORD "exist". Yes, that belongs to mind. Yet, the FACT of existence, is something that the Mind only perceives.

god's always watching. does a tree make a sound if there's noone around? yes. god is always around, eh?

(03-13-2012, 05:11 PM)3DMonkey Wrote: [ -> ]When I think about the body, those thoughts are the mind, not the body. Same thing with spirit. If body exists in consciousness, it's still only consciousness that exists. Without mind, there is no thought. Without thought, I can't think of anything, not even 'I'.

Yet without the body the thoughts you speak about cannot exist either. This is demonstrated by the fact that if you damage or drug the brain the conscious entity can no longer entertain certain thoughts. If the mind existed outside the body, it could not be affected by it...

the mind does exist outside. but the brain cannot use the mind.

There is only thought. Every written response is only from mind. The idea of a body is a thought of the mind. That a there is a Universal Consciousness is a thought of the mind. That there is a mind/body/spirit complex is a thought of the mind. That there is a universal order observed in matter is a reflection of how the mind perceives it. That all religions, psychanalyses, archetypes follow the same pattern is a reflection of the mind.

IMO, of course

"Let us for a moment consider thought. What is it, my friends, to take thought? Took you then thought today? What thoughts did you think today? What thoughts were part of the original thought today? In how many of your thoughts did the creation abide? Was love contained? And was service freely given? You are not part of a material universe. You are part of a thought. You are dancing in a ballroom in which there is no material. You are dancing thoughts. You move your body, your mind, and your spirit in somewhat eccentric patterns for you have not completely grasped the concept that you are part of the original thought."


----

As far as the 1D environments go, I don't think that we have the ability to conceptualize the mind which allows for the existence of 1D. Just because what we might consider a mind is not perceiving it does not mean that there is not recognition within creation that it exists. The faculties of the human mind are probably simply a single expression in an infinite number of ways the mind can be expressed.

(03-13-2012, 08:52 AM)JustLikeYou Wrote: [ -> ]You say it is vague, zenmaster, to equate the mind with the act of thinking, but I do not see the vagueness.

But that was not what was said. I was responding to the notion of mind being equated to self-contained "thoughts".

Also, the faculty of thinking is one aspect of "mind", it is not mind.

---

(03-13-2012, 04:01 PM)Eric Wrote: [ -> ]Based on what we've shared and learned here, is it fair to say that animals have no mind, as such?

Mind is a principle that's an intricate part of each density. Even photons have a 'mind'. Each density provides some analog of the mind we are familiar with.

---

(03-13-2012, 06:04 PM)Azrael Wrote: [ -> ]One could say "It's all in the mind", and they would be both correct and incorrect.

This is why it begs the question of why the container idea continues to be repeated, as if it was providing contrast for some seemingly antithetical view. Possibly 3DM perceives that what is non-subjective can't be known. But then communication (or any teach/learn roles for that matter) would not be possible.

(03-14-2012, 01:16 AM)zenmaster Wrote: [ -> ]Mind is a principle that's an intricate part of each density. Even photons have a 'mind'. Each density provides some analog of the mind we are familiar with.

Aspect and his team discovered that under certain circumstances subatomic particles such as electrons are able to instantaneously communicate with each other regardless of the distance separating them. It doesn't matter whether they are 10 feet or 10 billion miles apart. Somehow each particle always seems to know what the other is doing.

(03-13-2012, 07:03 PM)3DMonkey Wrote: [ -> ]There is only thought. Every written response is only from mind. The idea of a body is a thought of the mind. That a there is a Universal Consciousness is a thought of the mind. That there is a mind/body/spirit complex is a thought of the mind. That there is a universal order observed in matter is a reflection of how the mind perceives it. That all religions, psychanalyses, archetypes follow the same pattern is a reflection of the mind.

IMO, of course

It is my conviction that the reason humans have not evolved beyond our humanity is because we all express the same mind. We aren't going to evolve past this. War is the same. Sex is the same. Religion is the same. GOvernments are the same. Generation after generation, humans follow the same patterns. Same story written again and again and again. Dreams are the same. Visions of angels are the same. Experiences after death are the same. To me, this doesn't indicate something beyond, but something that is common with what we have. Humanity repeats itself because humanity will always be oblivious that it repeats itself because it will always reason for war, reason for deity, reason for preservation. The idea of ET, while logically likely, is nothing new. Humans' mind is such that it always imagines something out there, for generations. Does that mean that something is out there, or does it mean, quite simply!, that humans' mind always believes there is something out there? To me, it has got to be the latter.

From here, I would like to go into deep thought about how the ET mind might possibly have such different nuances of what they would consider 'mind' that compatibility with our communication of thought is totally impossible. I won't go further than that because even the mention of it is a practice in how the human mind likes to imagine what is 'out there', or what is beyond comprehension. We love that stuff- another common trait throughout time.

Not physical matter. Not metaphysical essence. We are thoughts. As long as we are thinking, we are thoughts.

---

@zenmaster, where you and I have always disagreed is that I say thinking about thinking is just thinking. You say thinking about thinking is an observable reality. .... We see eye to eye on most things. From my view, you refuse to allow the idea that the entire study of thought is just somebody thinking about stuff.

We are the continuation of the First Thought.

Thought is sound frequency which creates form and shape. These waves and frequencies are all that exist.

But they are affected by other sounds and thoughts. Emotions are frequencies, and our very DNA and genetic makeup is affected by frequency. So the state of our emotion and the frequency that we emit as a result, directly affects the reality of the universe of sound wave and frequency in which we exist.

Love and fear are the only two emotions. All others are subsections of those two. Love creates a hiugher frequency which activates more of our DNA coding, where fear is a slower frequency which inhibits our growth and development.

We have the choice to love or to experience fear. To evolve or not to evolve. To emit higher frequecnies into existecne or lower. When we travel the world of attachment to the flesh and subject ourselves to the fear that is connected with it, we emit lower frequency into creation.

Avoid living like that! Seek love and Light and do the creation a favor, and stop worrying about what you can do for yourself. There are far greater things to experience and create than your tiny little illusion.

Love versus Fear is a dichotomy. Dichotomies are prevalent throughout the history of Mind.

Two :
Eyes ears legs arms hemispheres poles genders up/down

Is it any wonder that we like to think of things in twos?

Consider the Law of Attraction, the theory of the Holographic Universe and the phenomenon of thoughts = manifestations (all which correlate to similar things). We exist in a highly interactive holographic construct in which our individualized portions of the infinite awareness of the Creator may meander, space being that which events occur within and movement is possible, with time acting as the wedge which separates events and distinguishes them from one another by creating the illusion of a fluid transition from moment to perceivable moment, yet know too that space and time also exist as constructs. The reality of the individual is the direct reflection of their psyche, this notion being lent credence to by the first 3 concepts I mentioned. How it is the mind truly interacts with the larger mind around it remains a mystery, but what is known is that there is indeed an interaction between the 'smaller' mind and the surroundings which it both weaves and embeds itself in.

As for the essence of mind, this much is certain: mine has been completely and utterly blown by this thread!!

Here is also some related reading that might be of some interest: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nous

---

Pickle, the link you posted especially is extremely, extremely informative.

(03-14-2012, 12:29 PM)3DMonkey Wrote: [ -> ]Love versus Fear is a dichotomy. Dichotomies are prevalent throughout the history of Mind.

Two :
Eyes ears legs arms hemispheres poles genders up/down

Is it any wonder that we like to think of things in twos?

No it is natural. The universe is polarized and duality is the natural expression of everything. It is the manifestation of the One.

(03-14-2012, 01:23 PM)ShinAr Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-14-2012, 12:29 PM)3DMonkey Wrote: [ -> ]Love versus Fear is a dichotomy. Dichotomies are prevalent throughout the history of Mind.

Two :
Eyes ears legs arms hemispheres poles genders up/down

Is it any wonder that we like to think of things in twos?

No it is natural. The universe is polarized and duality is the natural expression of everything. It is the manifestation of the One.

It is all two sides of the same coin! A thing may be defined by the opposite of the it, by understanding what it one is not one gains better understanding of what the other thing is.

(03-14-2012, 12:29 PM)3DMonkey Wrote: [ -> ]Two :
Eyes ears legs arms hemispheres poles genders up/down

Is it any wonder that we like to think of things in twos?

The mind records things best in threes.

Besides, I don't know about you, but I have 3 eyes.

Ah, so much in this thread that is quotable! GREAT discussion.

I've heard the idea repeated in my studies that goes something like, "Reality is only as real as the seeker". This idea ties into the discussion happening regarding the nature of the mind, I think. I hope. Below are statements to this end from Ramana Maharshi. Though no longer in incarnation, a living embodiment of the Law of One as far as I'm concerned.

Quote:Ramana Maharshi: The sight is from the eye. If you are seeing with gross eyes, you find others gross. If with subtle eyes others appear subtle. If the eyes becomes the Self, the Self being infinite, the eye is infinite.

Quote:Ramana Maharshi: Are the objects different from you? There can be no objects without a subject.

Quote:Ramana Maharshi: The other worlds require the Self as a spectator or speculator. Their reality is only of the same degrees as that of the spectator or thinker. They cannot exist without the spectator, etc., Therefore, they are not different from the Self. Even the ignorant mans sees only the Self when he sees objects, But he is confused and identifies the Self with the object, i.e., the body and the senses, and plays in the world. Subject and object - all merge in the Self. There is no seer nor objects seen. The seer and the seen are the Self. There are not many selves, either. All are only one Self.

Quote:Ramana Maharshi: The state of the object is according to the state of the seer.

Quote:Ramana Maharshi: All facts are only as true as the seeker.

Why is this relevant?

If we, from our seemingly limited standpoint, assume that the nature of all things is unbroken unity/infinity. Right here, right now. In our daily lives, in our interactions through this forum. One and one only.

Then what makes it appear otherwise to us?

One of my basic answers is the mind. I see the mind as a diversifying, differentiating mechanism, reflecting experience through the prism of time, of space, and of whatever other personal collection of thoughts and experiences have further diversified and differentiated the one into illusory, separate components. (Including as Ra said, thoughts, emotions, intuition, and various layers of group mind until reaching the cosmic mind.)

Mind is not the Original, undifferentiated, unmanifest light, but reflects that light into innumerable fragmentary pieces.

In that sense, everything in creation is Mind. (Or mind/body.) Our individual minds are reflecting from other mind-reflections, whether it is the mind reflection of a rock, or the complexity of the mind-reflections of an other-self.

This is why I speculate that Ra said, "The mind contains all things".
5.2


Mind - whether personal or collective or cosmic - is the mechanism creating all things by way of reflecting the "world" and the individual "self" and individual other "selves" and time and space themselves into existence. Thus it "contains" all that there is.

This is why Ra I believe recommends the balancing exercises in order to help the student grasp the dual-nature of mind. If the student experiences one half of the balance in their daily ongoings, the balancing exercises help the student to perceive that the mind already "contains" the other half in latency. Thus transcendence of duality is achieved.

And this is why I believe Ra speaks to the virtue of concentration as a prerequisite to work with spirit. In order to sink into and abide within the original, self-luminous, self-emanating light, it is necessary to put the brakes on the diversifying mechanism (i.e., the mind) with its many, many mirrors of reflected light.

This brings the countless fragmented reflections to a standstill; to - as the eastern metaphor goes - a serene, unmoving body of water. In gazing upon this unmoving body of water, ONE reflection is made -- that of the infinite, form-less, bound-less, self-radiant Self.

PS: Everything you all contribute to the forums blows my mind. : )

(03-14-2012, 11:38 PM)Bring4th_GLB Wrote: [ -> ]This is why I speculate that Ra said, "The mind contains all things".
5.2

The mind would have to be underlying everything, inside/outside of our awareness. What they call "god".

I know that people get confused thinking that thoughts are the mind. Thinking is just a running program.

Most interesting bits of this thread for me...

1) I see JustLikeYou and Plenum's discussion of "Mind" as different from the discussions of thought/perception (thought/perception = the activities of Mind, among other things.)

2) Unity is "unmanifest"--inherent in "manifestation" is duality/division. Thus duality/separation is the foundation of this manifest illusion, but the reality is unity. I just had to hear it in these terms for it to make sense.
@JustLikeYou--this goes along with those first couple chapters of The Mystical Qabalah. The division is what gives us "manifestation."
@Shin'Ar--I think I see how you understand this world as being, in its nature, dualistic--or as Ra says, polarized. Is the foundation of your understanding of good and evil based upon this notion? As participants in the illusion, we have to participate in the game, so to speak, playing by its own rules. On this 3D chess set, there's a white queen and a black queen, and we have to pick a side. It's fine and dandy to KNOW that there is no good and evil when all is One, but here, in the illusion, they are real forces and we make choices to be part of either one or the other. And Ra did clearly say that there is a bias towards STO and that it is the most efficient polarity.

Further, even the Confederation, when faced with an EQUAL foe, must choose the path of resistance to avoid enslavement. We can absorb that which is less powerful, but an equal force will neutralize us or enslave us if we "accept" it. Interesting...in terms of daily application...but I suppose that would be another thread.

Nevertheless, I think it may not be entirely useful to conceptualize oneself as taking a side in a war against other selves because such a stance emphasizes the illusory nature of 3D. So, while not condoning, accepting, or supporting that which steals free will from others, one must paradoxically hold the ideal in one's mind that all are one.

Max Levner: "Life is a protracted struggle agains the Adversary, which is man himself."

Anais Nin: "We see things not as they are, but as we are."

Great quotes for discussion...

Sorry...I guess I'm off track--@Gary--feel free to move this if it doesn't belong here in this thread.

Back to Mind--I think the quote given by Plenum gives us a definitive and comprehensive description so I'll repeat it:

The mind is a complex which reflects the in-pourings of the spirit and the up-pourings of the body complex. It contains what you know as feelings, emotions, and intellectual thoughts in its more conscious complexities. Moving further down the tree of mind we see the intuition which is of the nature of the mind more in contact or in tune with the total being-ness complex. Moving down to the roots of mind we find the progression of consciousness which gradually turns from the personal to the racial memory, to the cosmic influxes, and thus becomes a direct contactor of that shuttle which we call the spirit complex.

So the spirit complex is a shuttle--and so what then might be "the soul" as differentiated from the spirit?...new thread anyone? Plenum?

Lastly--on animals...I believe they have "Mind", but they have not yet evolved the same kind of "consciousness" that is prerequisite for true free "will" to exist--but they will evolve it, and will be a higher "humanity" than we have been (just as each successive generation builds upon the foundation of the last). Notice in the underlined part that there is a "progression" of consciousness--consciousness is something that evolves. As we are to the Angels, the animals are to us...yep, you can add that thought to the meat-eating thread... (yes, I'm a vegetarian).

animals may have bean brains but they're having lessons of learning how to be individual, they have different lessons. they're us in the past. they're not less than us. just as we're not less than 4D beings. we're them in the past. animals have a mind, it's just at a different stage.

(03-15-2012, 05:51 AM)Oceania Wrote: [ -> ]just as we're not less than 4D beings. we're them in the past. animals have a mind, it's just at a different stage.

I would say "at a different alchemy"... Most animals around us are older than the human species. They had the time we had to evolve and longer. So their minds are as evolved as ours. But different... To answer a different question. But anyone who has animals will be able to tell about the complexity of animal emotions and thought.

They may not be able to engage in the symbolic thought humans do. But that's a feature in the mind that we evolved, equating it to being advanced is similar to saying that a car is more advanced than a cheetah because it goes faster.

An animal will not likely reach our stage of evolution. They may... But the cerebellum explosion in humans is quite unique. And not a requirement for conscious life.