Guest guest Posted March 28, 2001 Report Share Posted March 28, 2001 Hi Dan, The whole thing could only be akin to a hallucination or a dream. How does such a simple reality appear so incredibly tangled and convoluted? It is indeed a mystery. Some have put forth the notion of all this being 'a survival mechanism', and offered various other explanations, none of which really make much sense (seen from here). It seems that sometimes inquiry takes place in dream or immediately upon waking. Waking up this morning, I was struck with how it can be so clearly observed that 'things age' (milk 'becomes' rancid left out of the refrigerator, a magazine from 1802 looks 'old', etc.) and so how can it be derived 'there is only now'? Realizing of course (after waking up more fully) that this is how things appear to thought only... but why there's such a great abundance of evidence of 'time passing' in the manifest seems a mystery as well. Can you shed any light on this? Thought asks -- if 'time does not pass', why is there such a great deal of appearance of 'time passing'? Namaste, Tim Nisargadatta, Daniel Berkow <berkowd@u...> wrote: > Hi Tim! > > > >How does 'self' stand apart and observe 'self'? > > A great mystery. > How is it that memory > can say, " I remember being > in a room with you yesterday " , > in way which not only involves > the perception of a self noticing > itself in a room, but a self > looking at its memory of itself, > remembering how it was thinking > about whether or not to speak, > due to something it remembered > about itself and the person to > whom it was speaking? > > Acutely observed, the paradox is > incredible. Without acute > observation, it's just accepted > as the way things actually are. > > >This is something > >that makes no sense. Never mind whether the 'self' is 'real' or not, > >how about just answering that one, can somebody help?? :-) > > The functioning of memory and thought > construct an apparently tangible > reality of time and space, requiring > the appearance of an " observer " > to whom " events, feelings, and > perceptions occur " ... > > For the " observer " to seem to appear, > along with time, space, and substance, > there must be a self noticing itself, > as memory functions in a way > that constructs time. > > Namaste, > Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 28, 2001 Report Share Posted March 28, 2001 >Tim: ...why there's such a great abundance >of evidence of 'time passing' in the manifest >seems a mystery... Mind may resolve this mystery by careful observation of the dreaming phenomenon. In the " sleeping dream " whenever an entity appears--person, thing or whatever--it is accompanied by a complete history that endows it with compelling meaning within the context of the dream. This is equally true in the " waking dream. " However, awareness detached from the dream, either during or following the sleep state is able to ascertain that this seemingly comprehensive history is entirely ad hoc. That is, the timeline or worldline of the dream event is seen to erupt into consciousness all at once. Detached awareness discerns that the history, though integrally consistent within its context, is yet a spontaneous creation. This ability to discern the spontaneous creation of worldlines is the reason that sleeping dreams are discounted as being less real than waking dreams, where such discrimination is far less common, owing to the fact that awareness is more likely to be enthralled by the contents of the dream. The paradox is resolved when the assumption of continuity is eliminated. The problem is that in the waking dream continuity goes largely unquestioned, owing to the seamless consistency of events occurring within its venue. -tomas ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >Tim: The whole thing could only be akin to a hallucination or a dream. >How does such a simple reality appear so incredibly tangled and >convoluted? >It is indeed a mystery. Some have put forth the notion of all this >being 'a survival mechanism', and offered various other explanations, >none of which really make much sense (seen from here). >It seems that sometimes inquiry takes place in dream or immediately >upon waking. Waking up this morning, I was struck with how it can be >so clearly observed that 'things age' (milk 'becomes' rancid left out >of the refrigerator, a magazine from 1802 looks 'old', etc.) and so >how can it be derived 'there is only now'? >Realizing of course (after waking up more fully) that this is how >things appear to thought only... but why there's such a great >abundance of evidence of 'time passing' in the manifest seems a >mystery as well. Can you shed any light on this? >Thought asks -- if 'time does not pass', why is there such a great >deal of appearance of 'time passing'? >>Dan: A great mystery. >>How is it that memory >> can say, " I remember being >> in a room with you yesterday " , >> in way which not only involves >> the perception of a self noticing >> itself in a room, but a self >> looking at its memory of itself, >> remembering how it was thinking >> about whether or not to speak, >> due to something it remembered >> about itself and the person to >> whom it was speaking? >> Acutely observed, the paradox is >> incredible. Without acute >> observation, it's just accepted >> as the way things actually are. >>The functioning of memory and thought >> construct an apparently tangible >> reality of time and space, requiring >> the appearance of an " observer " >> to whom " events, feelings, and >> perceptions occur " ... >>For the " observer " to seem to appear, >> along with time, space, and substance, >> there must be a self noticing itself, >> as memory functions in a way >> that constructs time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 29, 2001 Report Share Posted March 29, 2001 Hi Tim! The whole thing could only be akin to a hallucination or a dream. How does such a simple reality appear so incredibly tangled and convoluted? The key word in the above paragraph is " appear " ... ;-) It is indeed a mystery. Some have put forth the notion of all this being 'a survival mechanism', and offered various other explanations, none of which really make much sense (seen from here). All explanations are temporary, and are formulations adequate to temporarily soothe the one who seeks an explanation. When one who seeks an explanation isn't asserted, then no explanation is required. Mystery opens to what is beyond mystery, the most profound mystery, in which there isn't someone who can say " I am mystified " ;-) It seems that sometimes inquiry takes place in dream or immediately upon waking. Yes, inquiry in dream-state can be important " opening " ... Waking up this morning, I was struck with how it can be so clearly observed that 'things age' (milk 'becomes' rancid left out of the refrigerator, a magazine from 1802 looks 'old', etc.) and so how can it be derived 'there is only now'? Realizing of course (after waking up more fully) that this is how things appear to thought only... but why there's such a great abundance of evidence of 'time passing' in the manifest seems a mystery as well. Can you shed any light on this? Not without providing what is only a temporary explanation ;-) Time, form, the observer, memory, thought, and perception all " go together " . They inform each other. To inquire about time is to inquire about the nature of the observer, the nature of memory, etc. The bottom line is that the " Timeless One " is not only unsplit, it includes all possible possibilities as its unsplit nature, as it is infinity. This includes the possibility of " experiencing reality as if split " , which is to say, " subject and object, such that form is observed and experienced " . Possible possibilities are necessarily expressed, as there is nothing to prevent or interfere with expression. This expression requires perception. Time apparently separates events, allows them to be expressed, brings perceivers into apparent being. Perceivers require memory to give form to " being " . Perceivers seem to exist to themselves, and seem to inhabit an existing world of experience. This world of experience necessitates the sensation of time passing, without which memory couldn't function, and without which there couldn't be perception/experience of/as form. Love, Dan Thought asks -- if 'time does not pass', why is there such a great deal of appearance of 'time passing'? Namaste, Tim 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.