God May Not Need To Think

IT IS PRESUMPTUOUS TO THINK THAT GOD NEEDS TO THINK LET ALONE THINK JUST LIKE YOU THINK BECAUSE IF HE KNOWS AND SEES EVERYTHING AS THE BUDDHA SAID, HE MAY NOT NEED TO THINK LIKE YOU DO BEFORE COMING TO A CONCLUSION.
SINCE GOD KNOWS AND SEES EVERYTHING, WHAT IS THERE FOR GOD TO THINK OR WORK OUT?
Why It Is Not Possible For People To Stop Thinking:
If you can see and know everything as God & the Buddha can, then you may not need to think or you only need to think sparingly. It may be presumptuous that the Buddha needs to think before he composes an answer to your question. Because he knows and sees everything, he can come up with the exact not just appropriate answer. Just as the Buddha said it is possible for him to stop breathing at the highest levels of meditation, he can sit in meditation for days, he can go without food for days, it may be possible he does not need to think just as he does not dream. No one who is enlightened entertains dreams anymore.
THE CRUCIAL REASON WHY PEOPLE CANNOT STOP THINKING IS BECAUSE THERE IS ALWAYS ADDED FORCE IN THEIR THINKING THAT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR STRETCHING, CHANGING SPEED AND LOUDNESS OF THEIR MENTAL SYLLABLES. ANYTHING THAT IS FORCEFUL HAS MOMENTUM THAT IS DIFFICULT TO STOP AND IF YOU KEEP STRETCHING, CHANGING SPEED AND LOUDNESS IN YOUR MENTAL SYLLABLES, THE THINKING BECOMES SELF PERPETUATING LIKE A MAD CAROUSEL THAT ONCE GOT ON, IS HARD TO GET OFF.
THE REASON WHY I CAN STOP THINKING FOR INCREASINGLY EXTENDED PERIODS IS BECAUSE THERE IS NO STRETCHING OF MY MENTAL SYLLABLES, NO CHANGES IN SPEED AND LOUDNESS SO THAT MY THOUGHTS DO NOT ECHO IN MY MIND, DO NOT GENERATE AN URGE TO SUSTAIN THINKING.
THE CRUCIAL IMPORTANCE OF LEARNING TO STOP THINKING WHEN THERE IS NO REASON TO THINK IS THAT A PERSON WHO THINKS CONSTANTLY UNNECESSARILY IS PRACTICING CONTROLLED MADNESS THAT WILL DESCEND INTO FINAL MADNESS AND THE CESSATION OF THINKING LEADS TO TWO EONS IN HEAVENLY BLISS ACCORDING TO THE BUDDHA.
People think to distract themselves:
Emotion is the drive to constant thinking. When people are angry they keep on thinking about the incident or thing that causes them to be angry, they try to justify their anger and blame others by fabricating things. When people are sad, they are driven by self pity to keep thinking things that reinforce their sadness. Therefore emotion is a major reason why people think continuous and because emotion is nothing more than speed and strength changes of the person’s mental force of going against self, it is a false reason to think.
People also think to distract themselves. For instance in awkward social situations, to avoid social contact, they force themselves to think so they will be mentally transported from the awkward physical situation eg sitting in a bus facing a bellicose man. When they run out of things to say in the midst of a conversation, they force themselves to think of things to say just to break the ‘awkward’ silence. This is not harmless but deadly because you are training yourself to think for no reason or training yourself to become mad.
Getting It All Wrong:
If something can be deduced and you say it cannot be deduced whilst another thing cannot be deduced and you say it can, you have wrong perception and logic and is headed for madness.
Thus if in the Altanturya case, it is possible to deduce that the police are not pursuing the truth of the matter, Razak must be more guilty than what he admitted (he called in the police to patrol his house but not harm her) because no man will admit more guilt than his true guilt and you say it is not possible for me to righteously say that, you have false perception and are dicing with future mad perception. If it is not possible that the trial will be fair and you say it is possible, again that is dicing with false perception.
How It May Be Possible For God To See & Know All:
Because this is a consciousness generated universe and there is a permanent video like record of all that has happened not just in this Age or eon but all the past eons that an enlightened person can access, it may be possible for God to similarly access this record even though you cannot and thus he can see and know everything that has ever happened.
JUST AS A COMPUTER HARD DISK HAS A PERMANENT RECORD OF WHATEVER IS STORED ON IT FOR ANYONE TO ACCESS, BECAUSE THERE IS A PERMANENT VIDEO LIKE RECORD OF WHATEVER THAT HAS HAPPENED NOT JUST IN THIS EON BUT ALL PAST EONS, IT IS POSSIBLE FOR ENLIGHTENED ONES AND GOD TO ACCESS THIS RECORD AND KNOW AND SEE ALL.
If you can effortlessly and directly know and see everything, why should you trouble yourself to think, to work what has happened or what is the truth of what someone said has happened? If you can travel at the speed of light like angels can, why bother getting yourself a Ferrari or driving a Ferrari? Therefore there may be no need at all for God to think and rather than glorious or exalted, thinking is an impediment, a trap and fetter to lower states of existence and the Buddha is right to say that you must work towards the cessation of all thinking.
WHEN YOU CAN SEE CLEARLY ALL THAT IS HAPPENING AT THE MOMENT, WHAT IS THERE TO THINK ABOUT? WHEN IT IS POSSIBLE FOR YOU TO CONSULT THE PAST RECORD OF WHAT HAS HAPPENED WHAT IS THERE FOR YOU TO THINK WHAT REALLY HAPPENED? THUS IT IS ONLY FOR BEING WHO DO NOT SEE, CANNOT SEE, WHO DO NOT KNOW, CANNOT KNOW THAT THEY MUST RESORT TO THE OFTEN UNRELIABLE AND LABORIOUS INSTRUMENT OF THOUGHT.
NAME ME SOMEONE APART FROM THE BUDDHA WHO HAS TOLD IT IS POSSIBLE TO PRACTICE TO STOP THINKING AND FAR FROM DEGENERATE IT IS INCOMPARABLY MORE BLISSFUL MODE OF EXISTENCE AS I CAN ATTEST AND WILL OPEN VISTAS NEVER IMAGINED BEFORE.
IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR SOMEONE WHO THINKS WITH FORCEFUL STRETCHING OF SYLLABLES, CHANGING OF SPEED AND LOUDNESS TO STOP THINKING. ONLY WHEN YOU HAVE ACHIEVED THE ABILITY TO THINK WITHOUT STRETCHING SYLLABLES, CHANGING SPEED AND LOUDNESS WILL IT BE THE NATURE OF THINGS FOR YOU TO INCREASINGLY CLOSE SHOP TO STOP THINKING WHEN THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT.
Prerequisites To No Thinking:
Before you can stop thinking, you must achieve letting your yes be yes only in not just whatever you say or do but what you perceive (see, hear, smell, taste and touch) and think. It is impossible for someone who does not let his yes be yes only to stop thinking and because people in this world never let their yes be yes only they have never stopped thinking and that is the reason why no one, not even your favorite guru has taught you about it.
Before you can stop thinking you must first achieve the stopping of all application of force on your mind that necessitates stop stretching of syllables, stop changing speed and loudness, stopping being emotional, stopping all liking and disliking. Because people in this world always apply force on their minds, always like and dislike, are always emotional and always forceful stretch syllables, change speed and loudness, they have never stopped thinking and that is the reason why no one, not even your favorite guru has taught you about it.
Before you can stop thinking you must stop saying or doing things to please, impress, intimidate and dominate others. Because pleasing, impressing, dominating and intimidating others is going against self, you must apply force on your mind to say or do things to please, impress, intimidate or dominate others you cannot stop thinking. Even if you think your immaculate, charming and benevolent smile, if it applies force that is changing in speed and strength on your mind and conveys no meaning except to please or impress or even intimidate (eg an evil or menacing smile) others, you cannot stop thinking.
BECAUSE ALL ORDINARY PEOPLE ARE THEMSELVES GUILTY OF THE IMPEDIMENTS THAT DETAIN THEM IN THINKING, THEY ARE SOMNOLENT THAT IT IS POSSIBLE TO STOP THINKING AND THE INCOMPARABLE BENEFITS IT BRINGS.
Reason To Think:
TRUE THINKING IS ESSENTIALLY REASONING, WORKING OUT OR RECOLLECTING WHAT REALLY HAPPENED AND JUST AS TRUE THINKING IS REASONING, THERE MUST BE REASON OR CAUSE TO REASON OR THINK.
Unless you want to court and finally succumb to madness there must always be reason for you to think or for what you think. Just as true thinking is essentially reasoning (even if it is trying to recollect past events as faithfully as possible), there must be reason to think (or reason) otherwise you are unwittingly courting madness thinking without reason or for emotional reasons (eg conceit, egotism, dislike, like, malice, lust, greed). There cannot be reason to think all the time and therefore continuous thinking is never due to reason but due to force or emotion or an urge to keep thinking reflecting loss of control like a monstrous freight train that the driver cannot or is indulgently unwilling to stop.
IT IS WRONG VIEW AND DELUSION (THAT LEADS TO HELL OR THE ANIMAL WOMB) THAT IT IS A NATURAL HARMLESS CONDITION TO THINK CONTINUOUSLY WHEN ONE IS CONSCIOUS BUT IT REFLECTS THAT ALL ORDINARY PEOPLE’S THINKING IS FORCEFUL BASED ON FALSE REASON NAMELY EMOTIONS (THAT CAN ULTIMATELY BE TRACED TO LIKING AND DISLIKING) NOT TRUE REASON OR NEED THAT THEIR THINKING HAS NOW TURNED MALIGNANT OR UNCONTROLLABLE THAT IT IS NOW CONTINUOUS.
THE WISE PERSON, THE PERSON OF TRUTH, THINKS ONLY WHEN THERE IS REASON OR CAUSE TO THINK OR REASON, IF THERE IS NO REASON TO THINK, HE CLOSES SHOP TO NOT THINK AND ONLY PERCEIVE (SEE OR HEAR) OR PERCEIVE TO SAY OR DO. HE IS TRULY A MASTER OF HIMSELF NOT THE PERSON WHO THINKS ALL THE TIME OVER THIS AND THAT LIKE A MONKEY JUMPING FROM BRANCH TO BRANCH.
True reasons to think are few but false reasons to think are many.
What are the true reasons to think?
To recollect as accurately as possible what happened in the past to learn its lessons or apply them to the current or future situations.
To establish what is the basis or truth of or underlies a current scenario or explain why something is happening.
To make decisions of what to do or say if there are possible different options in courses of actions or to solve problems.
What are the false reasons or excuses to think?
To think because of emotions (anger, sadness, lust, greed, envy, hate) or like or dislike or they compel you to do so.
To recollect the past repetitively in a biased even falsified way that magnifies your perceived strengths and diminish your weaknesses and evils.
To emotionally fantasize about realities that do not exist like if you struck a lottery, you are married to a certain girl, if you were a rich man, if you are superman, etc.
Recollecting about what happened in the past so that you may discover what went wrong or right too is a form of reasoning but it will be false reasoning to keep revisiting the past selectively to exaggerate or falsify your feats and refuse to countenance your past follies to boost your ego and self image.
To think to worry or you cannot help worrying.
Thinking to doubt or antagonize or refuse to accept yourself or others either intentionally or reflexively.
Thinking to falsify or lie about a situation. Giving excuses are thinking to falsify.
Anyone who tells lies or tampers with the truth must think first or orchestrate first more than the person who lets his yes be yes only speak the truth.
To think to see the funny side of things or fabricate and present jokes.
To think to impress yourself or others how intelligent and knowledgeable you are.
IF YOU EXAMINE WHATEVER THOUGHTS THAT PEOPLE ENTERTAIN, THEY CAN BE CLASSIFIED OBJECTIVELY AS EITHER TRULY NECESSARY OR UNNCESSARY (SUCH AND SUCH ARE NECESSARY THOUGHTS AND SUCH AND SUCH ARE UNNECESSARY THOUGHTS). IF YOU DID SO YOU WILL FIND THAT MANY OF THEIR THOUGHTS ARE BASED ON FRIVOLOUS OR FALSE REASONS AND IT IS NOT SURPRISING THAT SUCH THOUGHTS ARE THEMSELVES DELUSIONS THAT VERY FEW IF ANY DELUDED PEOPLE DO NOT HOLD DEAR TO THEIR BOSOMS.
There is truth to be gleaned even from falsity:
If one is presented with falsity, provided one can recognize falsity, one can establish the truth which must be the opposite of what is presented falsely, thus there is truth to be gleaned even from falsity.
When I mentioned the Altantuya murder case, I was ticked off for drawing conclusions and told that I may be prejudicing a case that is still in process by drawing (unjustified) conclusions.
The apparent purpose in telling me to withhold comment is based on reason or ‘fair play’ but it is an excuse and the motivation is actually emotional, to tick me off (I am wrong or bad to comment).
If you believe justice will prevail in this Altantuya case when it is a foregone conclusion it will be a trial that is for show with much vested interests already exposed, then you have wrong view or poor perception that will end in suffering.
It is the police and the judiciary that is prejudicing the case, not me.
The police has prejudiced the case in summarily dismissing the possibility of others being involved when they have only ridiculously charged two policemen with carrying out the murder and Razak for abetting. In any murder there must someone who ordered and surely the policemen know who ordered them and they are likely to have told fellow police officers who did so and it is no feat of investigative prowess to ascertain who ordered the killing.
Razak has admitted complicity that must be more than what he admitted in his affidavit that he merely requested the policemen to patrol his house and not harm her because it is not credible that two policemen will carry out murder without inducements merely because someone told them to patrol the house. His mention about the policeman killing six people is half the convenient truth to shift blame that he failed to mention the other half that it was said in relationship to a mission to exterminate her without trace.
The judiciary has acted unfairly in granting Razak bail in an offence that should not be bailed, the judge acted beyond his official role as impartial judge by scolding the defense lawyer for bringing the good name of the deputy PM into this case in mentioning meeting the police officer in the DPM’s office the next day. He has false perception if he thinks that mention of meeting in the deputy PM’s office on official business the next day sullies his good name. Why is he so keen to uphold the DPM’s good name?
Why hasn’t the police charged Razak with ordering the murder but only charged him with abetting when they should know who did it? Either it is true he only abetted or there is again favoritism that is again not conducive of justice prevailing.
WHETHER YOU REALIZE IT OR NOT, IN TICKING ME OFF FOR SPEAKING ABOUT THE CASE FOR FEAR OF PREJUDICING THE CASE, YOU ARE TELLING ME I AM WRONG OR BAD TO DO SO AND IF WHAT YOU SAID TURNS OUT TO BE DRIVEN BY EMOTIONAL RESENTMENT TO PUT ME DOWN, THERE WILL BE PENANCE DOWN THE LINE.