a fool’s logic that only the educated cannot understand. The greatest minds in the world were/are too educated to figure what only a fool would laugh at: there is no dreaming. In a dream there is no dreaming only the mind that, at best, thinks it is dreaming. In a dream the mind IS THE DREAM and so it cannot be dreaming. (If the mind is both the subject and object of the dream then there is no duality that needs doing, dreaming -- only the dream that is the mind. A mind can no more dream than a book can write itself so that it can then read itself. IF a mind could dream then TVs would be TVing and movies would be movieing) And if the mind cannot dream then it cannot think otherwise it would know the difference between thinking and dreaming which it cannot because there is no dreaming. And it takes Laughter to make a fool realize That the mind cannot even tell the difference between thoughts and memories. The mind cannot tell the difference between thoughts and memories because IT IS the thoughts which it takes to be memories. I don’t think I don’t write I am the Laughter that hands think and egos write.
Well, I suppose you've made your point. I'm somewhat educated and I certainly don't understand. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Is there supposed to be something behind all this or are you just killing time?
I agree. We are traditionally lead to believe that dreams are something that happens to us, something that is apart from us, that dreams isn't us. But on what grounds can we say such a thing?! We say it on the grounds of a particular preference that the state we consider "awake" is preferable to the state of "sleep". (I'll not go into the grounds for this preference though, for now.) Interesting conclusion. I think the term "dreaming" is a particular qualitative and ontological assessment of one of our states of being/acting; whereby this state is generally evaluated as something less valuable than the state of "waking". Indeed, memories are mental contents, just as other thoughts are. It's rather, that you are being thought. But mind that writing is useful, and necessary to come to the insight that it is egos that write.
genep: Nay; the dream is part of the mind. The mind produces a dream, much like it producse a thought, and then plays around with it, whilst being detached from the dream. In what way do you relate dreams to TVs and movies to movies? Technically, a TV only displays broadcasted information, or in the case of prerecorded material, recorded material. Movies also do not "movie", a projector projects a movie onto a screen. So the mind doesn't think? This is an apparent absurdity. Demonstrate why this is so? Perhaps yours, but I clearly can. The mind is surely not the thoughts, but the originator of thoughts. No more is the mind thought than the ground is the grass, because the grass springs from the ground and is intimately connected to it. Poetry does not make something right.
I know what you mean, it's not fools that think like that though. It's the realisation of the realising. The be. The am. Though to become a memory to share it with yourself, is not the same to become a thought and to share with yourself. Though yourself is the same.
A fool’s logic is the reasoning that believes that gibberish contains meaning and then discovering that….it does!!!!!
