Is It Possible To Listen Without Naming What Is Being Said?

Is yes, how?


If no, why?

Is It Possible To Listen Without Naming What Is Being Said?
Most of what is being said is of little importance and little consequence. However, the speaker is unlikely to see it that way. Some just cannot tolerate silence leaving the rest of us to listen.
Reply:Yes.





Anything is possible.





In a zen like way of listening you do not need to name what you have already named before. You need only accept that feeling of deja vu that you have heard this all before somewhere somehow.





I think the question here is do you have to recognize something is in front of you to understnd that if you ignore that something you will trip over it? No.





Like the ottoman in the Dick Van Dyke Intro you simply know that it should be there and dance around it.





In the end all you have accomplished it to remember the possible outcome of a past experience or thought.





Were you not paying attention?





You must have been.





Did you recognize anything?





That is hard to say.





But, people do things instinctively all the time, and the patterns seldom have a name.
Reply:Difficult to answer.





If what you mean by naming is some categorization, I would have to say probably not. The reason why is that one of the first things our mind tries to do with any experience is to put it into an already known category. It does a comparisons of essential features or attributes corresponding to how it has semantic memories stored. If it cannot find a category it might throw into some "unknown" category. But in each case it ends up with a label of some sort.





If there is a long duration to the listening many categorizations might take place. In addition the listening might trigger both autobiographical (episodic) memories or semantic memories and the mind might ignore the stream of sounds for a while to run with the tangent thought.





It is also known that a person can be listening at a sub-cortical level. Its categorizations there might be looser.





The question is whether the brain is responding at an unconscious level to the sounds still being heard even though the mind is distracted by its own internal thoughts or the listening is perfunctory and inattentive. I don't know that. I don't know if some sort of categorization is still taking place or not. Could go either way.
Reply:I think some people are missing the point.. but by Listen you mean to acknowledge what is being said, then possibly yes, as to listen you must understand what is being said however you may only acknowledge this information to yourself and then not be able to repeat or name...





Very difficult question with many answers i am sure of that
Reply:Yes. It is an automatic function of the Enlightened condition that is transcendent of the mind/ego. The well known Dr. David R. Hawkins describes this process in his books, audio and video lectures. It happens on it own as silent knowingness.
Reply:you don't have to articulate every raw energy or feelings delivered by your senses.





something flies quickly to your eyes, your natural response is to close your eyes. your reflex did this without ever naming the thing.
Reply:yes. if i said "gurldefurgalurg" you wouldn't be able to name what i said, would you? even more, if i said "durgelfurgelkurgephurgashnoodlepoodedaf...


you wouldn't know what the **** i said!
Reply:It's essential.


To name a thing is to place a lable over it's true reality.


If you name what you are hearing 'drivel' you might


well miss the one wise thing the poor fool has to teach you.
Reply:yes, cause you can study the body language of the person who is talking
Reply:Yes by listening to body language and feeling the expression and mood of the person who might not even be talking
Reply:Anything is possible even little green men in flying saucers!!!!!
Reply:Things just are. They don't have to be named.


Just listen and observe without judging.
Reply:yes... it's nice when he seems to figure out what's wrong with me when i don't say a word.