Guest guest Posted October 26, 2004 Report Share Posted October 26, 2004 Apart from thought, there is no independent entity called "world". In deep sleep, there are no thoughts and there is no world. In waking and dreaming, there are thoughts, and there is a world. Just as the spider emits the thread (of the web) out of itself and then withdraws it, likewise, the mind projects the world out of itself and then withdraws it back into itself. Raman Maharshi, Essential Teaching, A Visual Journey .. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 26, 2004 Report Share Posted October 26, 2004 > Apart from thought, there > is no independent entity > called "world". > > > In deep sleep, there are no thoughts > and there is no world. In waking and > dreaming, there are thoughts, and there > is a world. > > > Just as the spider emits the thread (of the web) > out of itself and then withdraws it, likewise, > the mind projects the world out of itself and > then withdraws it back into itself. > > Raman Maharshi, Essential Teaching, A Visual Journey All this is so often totally misunderstood. Thought and world are mutually and reciprocal dependent CONCEPTS in nondual wholeness... We can compare these two concepts to the two ways in which we can talk about light... wave-like or particle-like... it just depends on HOW one is dealing with light. What IT actually is, is more than those concepts or whatever concepts we use to 'talk about it'. Better not to use Ramana's text to value 'thought' more than 'world' or 'world' less then 'thought'. They are conceptual distinctions. When one reads Ramana very carefully one sees that very clearly. Problem is that so many translations and commentaries were done by those who did not understand from the same clarity what Ramana said in clarity. They used words and sentences that show more about their in-comprehension than the clear light that Ramana emanated. Wim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 26, 2004 Report Share Posted October 26, 2004 , "Wim Borsboom> > Antoine wrote---- Apart from thought, there > > is no independent entity > > called "world". > > > > > > In deep sleep, there are no thoughts > > and there is no world. In waking and > > dreaming, there are thoughts, and there > > is a world. > > > > > > Just as the spider emits the thread (of the web) > > out of itself and then withdraws it, likewise, > > the mind projects the world out of itself and > > then withdraws it back into itself. > > > > Raman Maharshi, Essential Teaching, A Visual Journey > Wim wrote:- > All this is so often totally misunderstood. > Thought and world are mutually and reciprocal dependent CONCEPTS in > nondual wholeness... > We can compare these two concepts to the two ways in which we can talk > about light... wave-like or particle-like... it just depends on HOW > one is dealing with light. What IT actually is, is more than those > concepts or whatever concepts we use to 'talk about it'. > Better not to use Ramana's text to value 'thought' more than 'world' > or 'world' less then 'thought'. They are conceptual distinctions. When > one reads Ramana very carefully one sees that very clearly. Problem is > that so many translations and commentaries were done by those who did > not understand from the same clarity what Ramana said in clarity. They > used words and sentences that show more about their in- comprehension > than the clear light that Ramana emanated. > > Wim Namaste, I would say Antoine is quite accurate in his understanding. The same thing is said in many of the Upanishads and other Texts. In fact the spider analogy is actually Ramana quoting one of these texts himself. However I would take it one step further and say there is no mind to subsume the world into ultimately. You are right on one thing though, thought and world are part of the mind and therefore unreal, as unreal as the spider.........ONS...Tony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 28, 2004 Report Share Posted October 28, 2004 Antoine quoted Ramana: "Apart from thought, there is no independent entity called world". In deep sleep, there are no thoughts and there is no world. In waking and dreaming, there are thoughts, and there is a world. Just as the spider emits the thread (of the web) out of itself and then withdraws it, likewise, the mind projects the world out of itself and then withdraws it back into itself." ~ Raman Maharshi, Essential Teaching, A Visual Journey Wim wrote: "All this is so often totally misunderstood. Thought and world are mutually and reciprocal dependent CONCEPTS in nondual wholeness... We can compare these two concepts to the two ways in which we can talk about light... wave-like or particle-like... it just depends on HOW one is dealing with light. What IT actually is, is more than those concepts or whatever concepts we use to 'talk about it'. Better not to use Ramana's text to value 'thought' more than 'world' or 'world' less then 'thought'. They are conceptual distinctions. When one reads Ramana very carefully one sees that very clearly. Problem is that so many translations and commentaries were done by those who did not understand from the same clarity what Ramana said in clarity. They used words and sentences that show more about their in- comprehension than the clear light that Ramana emanated." Tony answered: "I would say Antoine is quite accurate in his understanding." Wim: I did not dispute Antoine's understanding at all, as you would have seen in the posts between him and me that followed. It is you Tony who does not get it... Tony: "The same thing is said in many of the Upanishads and other Texts. In fact the spider analogy is actually Ramana quoting one of these texts himself. However I would take it one step further and say there is no mind to subsume the world into ultimately. You are right on one thing though, thought and world are part of the mind and therefore unreal, as unreal as the spider.........ONS...Tony." Wim: Your answer ("You are right on one thing though, thought and world are part of the mind and therefore unreal, as unreal as the spider") shows that you did not understand Ramana at all, nor what I wrote. When i say, "Thought and world are mutually and reciprocal dependent CONCEPTS in nondual wholeness." the ideas (thought and world) behind the words are conceptual, whatever the words and concepts describe IS NOT. The CONCEPTUAL DISTINCTIONS "thought" and "world" are unreal... the distinctions are unreal... "Whatever it is" that is conceptualized by the human mind IS REAL, the conceptualized mental format itself is not... Concepts, just like theories that they can be part of, are provisional aids; they are of a temporary nature, somewhat like chemistry catalysts but less concrete of course. After understanding the initially incomprehensible `larger picture', concepts are discardable and to BE DISCARDED, they were only there to help us in our philosophical and scientific understanding of WHAT IS. They are ways of talking about what IS, to make what IS easier to comprehend. Hopefully we do that to return to the full reality that we may have lost over time. The big problem then becomes that in the human mind, those concepts start to envelop, hide and even replace the reality that the concepts pointed to or tried to circumscribe in the first place. This - unfortunately - eventually leads many humans to live according to those discardable concepts and thus made them lose touch with reality again and even more. Ramana (Nissargadatta and many others) is one of those who guide us back to see that, so that we can live REALITY again. They help us to let go of the concepts, the mentalized pseudo reality that is actually somewhat like the nature of dreams, illusive, not happening. Thus they help us to empty the mind of constructs that constricts humans to live in Reality, Wisdom and Bliss (Sat Chit Ananda). So again "Whatever it is" that is conceptualized by the human mind IS REAL, the conceptualized mental format itself is not. It is that what you Tony don't see. You may know about this Belgian artist Magritte who painted a pipe and titled it "This is not a pipe" http://www.ed.uiuc.edu/EPS/PES-Yearbook/94_docs/PALERMO.HTM http://spinaltapfan.com/articles/seife/seife3.html Here is another example. Let's say you show me a photo of a group of people and you point at a certain figure in the photo and you say "That is me!" I can play the smart ass and say, "That's not you; that it is you is an illusion." I'm sure that you will say something like, "Of course, it is just a picture. Of course it's not me, but looks at me, pinch me, I'm real." Ramana says the same about "thought" and "world", those concepts are even less real then pictures, they are descriptions of the pictures that we form about REALITY in our mind, they are not real. If anything they are only representational energies, "world" and "thought" are mentally distilled images... but... what they represent IS, IS REAL. You will never hear any Ramana type people say that reality is a dream, reality IS, that's why it's called reality. We have to get rid (or play with it very carefully) of that `mental medium', the mental intervention which almost convincingly makes us feel separate from reality... Reality is not illusive or conceptual, that's why it is called reality. That is what all those scriptures mean... and if they do not say or mean that, it is because of inept translations by those who did not get what the master(s) or master text(s) originally said. The translators or commentators instead represent their own (unbeknownst to themselves that it is actually flawed) understanding as the meaning of the master texts. These `mixed message' commentaries invariably are very popular with those who have a hard time living in reality, those who have a hard time taking on the responsibility of UNCONDITIONAL life in love and truth, they hold on vehemently to those commentaries as a way of avoiding reality and backing it up with misunderstood quotes, saying that it is a all dream and not happening, they suffer from what I at some point called a pathology of illusion. Please Tony, do not make a mockery of the master(s) and master text(s) anymore by replacing them with a projection of ignorance. Wim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.