Fabrice D:
I was watching a video where Alan Watts said there is no such thing as a place where thoughts make impressions. Such a place that we would call ME.
So.... did he mean that the stream of thought is all there is?
Obviously, I can't speak for Alan Watts, and I'm not familiar with that video.
What I understand this to mean is that, implications to the contrary nonwithstanding, there is no-one there to use these thoughts to balance against, or in other words, to define themselves, or iow to identify themselves with, or iow to own them, or iow to be them, even if that's heavily implied.
Every thought (verbal or maybe image or abstract).. carries its own weight (sankharas)? (just my extrapolation from Goenka's discourses..)
Does that make any sense?
The memory of my name and surname is just carried by the flow of sankharas?
Not sure that view makes much difference as there are still all those thoughts that must be flying somewhere when they are not experienced at the present moment...
confused ?_?
Why should they be flying somewhere when not experienced?
For example, certain ancient Egyptian texts were known at some point, then completely forgotten for millennia, and only with the decipherment of the hieroglyphs were they known again. They weren't flying anywhere. There were just strangely shaped rocks, storing the memory of these texts in the shapes that were etched into them.
Our brains have mechanisms for storing stuff. This stuff doesn't have to be constantly "known". It can be retrieved as needed from the configuration of certain chemicals in neurons (or however this works, don't know the details).
Cheers,
Florian
