Hanns(H): Time for a quick dialogue: “to pick out words” ?
To communicate: “to bring out what is in common.” (Dave’s definition)
I am looking at the aspects of communication in my art book, how communication includes these parts:
- the sender
- the message
- the encoding
- the medium ( the element in which the message is physically transmitted)
- the receiver
- the context
- the function (the goal of whoever sent the message)
Given all these, it almost seems like a miracle that we can communicate at all. It’s taking something easy and making it complex?
The Club beyond Time and Space and Minds (TCB): True communication is hard. It is easy to say a few words, but to really convey the meaning, for the other person to understand, is hard. Even you and we try to communicate, it is the linking “of minds,” your context, that is your mind, is always different, so we have to “pick the right words,” that is the meaning of “dialogue,” yes? We have to pick the right words to bring out the right meaning in that moment, that is not just your “mind,” but the overall situation, the word you are in at that moment.
So earlier you asked, what is the medium? Clearly, thoughts and the neurons of the brain. Here, medium and encoding system sort of merge. But for you, at this moment, that is all we have. And the context is also the total mind and situation you are in.
Now, we can hear that you are wondering if all this is made up, if we are real, and granted, today the reception is not “as clear” as normal, however what is not made up? We talked about this. Is not any thought somehow made up, and fabricated, enfolded in the first, unfolded, and already contained in the next? Picking out the words, “the message” that is to convey the meaning and function?
Only, can we always pick out the best words in a given context, a given world? And how to you pick out the words that will convey your message “to another,” for his or her world will be perceived completely different than yours? It is all not that easy. Even mind to mind.
The biggest problem for mind to mind is both the medium, and being (for you) in the right context: receptive. Willing, right energy, attuned, and so on, and the not getting in the way.
TCB: I am still not clear on what is the medium in all of this? I keep getting the word “medium” as in a person who is “channeling,” in which case he or she is just like a receiver, an intermediate, speaking out voices as she hears them. What we are doing is different, right? In that I am fully awake here.
TCB: Right, however the idea is the same. What needs to be picked up, we may call it, is a substratum of thought. That, which is before thought, before a thought is fully formed.
H: So consciousness?
TCB: Yes and not, your word “consciousness” is so overloaded. But before a thought is formed, either in words or an image, it goes through something much more subtle. Your psychologists have called this subconscious and collective consciousness, but it really is one continual process. Let us call it the “substratum of thought,” the underground, or ground of thought.
That is really “the medium” and pre-encoding phase of thinking. At that level it is where mind to mind can get linked, consciousness can merge. So to get into that state of the “superconscious,” to allow that name, is not easy. But it helps what you are doing. Simply free writing, with the willingness and activation energy to talk to us. And then we can link up on this substratum.
H: I just got like a base frequency, a carrier wave, on which the high end frequencies can dance.
TCB: Yes and no.
H: Distracted by that truck outside idling.
TCB: A base rhythm. So yes, there is something like a base carrier wave. If you can tune into that, then the rest can come to you easier.
H: Does this go into brain waves and so on?
TCB: It is related.
H: I am sorry, not a good reception. That truck really disturbs.
But aren’t brain waves not physical states, like alpha, beta, theta states?
TCB: Yes, but your brain is harmonizing in a more receptive state. A state in which “entanglement” can happen. Just as you read about the tuning fork example: If there are two tuning forks at 400Hz, and one is struck, the other one will also start humming, through the process of “entrainment,” [I had entanglement first, and they asked me to look it up].
H: So that’s what you mean by a base carrier wave, the brain, the medium, has to be receptive to this substratum and the right trigger are all that is needed and thoughts can come?
TCB: Something along those lines. We will stop right now. Look up the word “stratum” and see what you find.
H: OK, not the best reception today.
TCB: We got across what we wanted.
H: Glad to hear [ laughing]. Bye!
[ Continued the next day. ]
Afterwards I looked up these words:
“stratum” – horizontal layer, spread out, from IE *stere: to spread.
Something seemed familiar, and I pulled up some books about Buddhism. And there it was, too:
Buddhist: substratum consciousness, “alayavijna,” the flow of consciousness, or “storehouse consiousness” (wherein all ideas, ever, are contained).
Also looked up “tacit,” because that word also had come up in a book by David Bohm which I’ve been re-reading ( “On dialogue”)
“tacit” from Latin “tacitus,” from “tacere,” to be silent. Understood or stated without being stated.
Namaste — I bow to you and the Divine in you.
Copyright © Hanns-Oskar Porr