Guest guest Posted March 26, 2001 Report Share Posted March 26, 2001 Hi Sandeep, You got thrown out of the Advaitin list as well? Namaste! Welcome to the growing crowd that seems to get thrown out of the Advaitin list for not toeing the line over there. Fellow Reject ;-), Tim P.S.. This list seems much more open and accepting than Advaitin and in fact has the 'best' atmosphere maybe of any of them! Nisargadatta, " Sandeep Chatterjee " <sandeepc@b...> wrote: > You will be please to note that I got thrown out of the Advatin > List, after creating some similar ruckus out there. > > Oh well > > Let me revert to my Remy Martin and Dobeeee doooing. > > > > - > Daniel Berkow > Nisargadatta > Monday, March 26, 2001 04:52 AM > Re: dreams of facilitation > > > >That the dream never occurred is > > " awakening " -- hence no facilitation > > required nor available. > > > >Dan > >-------------- > > > >Put another way, > >how could anything facilitate something > >that never happened. > > > >El > > ~ Doesn't the denial of the existence of something > confirm it? It has to appear in order to be negated. > > Or, negating it assumes an appearance subject to > being negated. > > >If there is no dream, what conversations about the > > non-existence of it could we be typing and reading > here? > > Conversations that rely on " the past " and " memory " ... > > > Of course, you could say we are not having a conversation, > > You just said that. > > > but this sort of denial is simply a mental game. > > Now, you label the words you put in > another's mouth as " denial and mental games " . > Have you not here played the mental game of > constructing and negating a > mental image of " another " ? > > > In fact, you > could call the entirety of the dream the same. But that does > not say there is no appearance of dream forms... > only that they are not what they seem to be. > > The dream relies on assumed separation, including > the separation of affirmation (birth, creation, > validating, having, being) > and negation (death, destruction, > invalidating, losing,nonbeing). > That the dream never occurred means that > affirmation and negation were never really > separable, nor separated. > It doesn't mean that " no appearance can appear > to appear " -- it means " the appearance that > appears to appear, neither can be said > to be nor not to be " > > There is no other that appears, regardless > of any sense that another has appeared, > nor is there any outside in which such > appearance could take place, regardless > of any sense that an outside has appeared. > > Love, > Dan > > 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.