Guest guest Posted November 14, 2001 Report Share Posted November 14, 2001 Namaste All, I really liked Maharaj's statement that we are not even the 'knowers of the field', ( Saguna Brahman). Leaving only the Nirguna Concept. Even though the does say we are none but Praneaswara, (Saguna) as well for those that cannot grasp the notion of Nirguna and want to believe in some manifestation.......ONS...Tony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 17, 2001 Report Share Posted November 17, 2001 Nisargadatta, " Tony O'Clery " <aoclery> wrote: > Even though the does say we are none but Praneaswara, (Saguna) as > well for those that cannot grasp the notion of Nirguna and want to > believe in some manifestation.......ONS...Tony. 'Nirguna' is not a notion to be grasped (except among 'vndists' perhaps), but a reality 'to be experienced'. Namaste, Omkara Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 17, 2001 Report Share Posted November 17, 2001 Nisargadatta, " Omkara " <coresite@h...> wrote: > Nisargadatta, " Tony O'Clery " <aoclery> wrote: > > Even though the does say we are none but Praneaswara, (Saguna) as > > well for those that cannot grasp the notion of Nirguna and want to > > believe in some manifestation.......ONS...Tony. > > 'Nirguna' is not a notion to be grasped (except among 'vndists' > perhaps), but a reality 'to be experienced'. > > Namaste, > > Omkara Namaste, Nirguna cannot be experienced for there is no experiencer or even knower of the field. Ultimately not even a concept is born.........ONS....Tony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 18, 2001 Report Share Posted November 18, 2001 Nisargadatta, " Tony O'Clery " <aoclery> wrote: > Namaste, > > Nirguna cannot be experienced for there is no experiencer or even > knower of the field. > > Ultimately not even a concept is born.........ONS....Tony. " Without qualities " could be considered a 'quality' :-). Language is possible thanks to 'nirguna brahman', not the other way around -- not really worth trying to describe " something " that isn't a " thing " at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 18, 2001 Report Share Posted November 18, 2001 Nisargadatta, " Omkara " <coresite@h...> wrote: > Nisargadatta, " Tony O'Clery " <aoclery> wrote: > > Namaste, > > > > Nirguna cannot be experienced for there is no experiencer or even > > knower of the field. > > > > Ultimately not even a concept is born.........ONS....Tony. > > " Without qualities " could be considered a 'quality' :-). Language is > possible thanks to 'nirguna brahman', not the other way around -- not > really worth trying to describe " something " that isn't a " thing " at > all. Namaste Tim, Only in the description or vak itself.......ONS....Tony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 19, 2001 Report Share Posted November 19, 2001 > " Omkara " <coresite >Nisargadatta >Nisargadatta > Re: I really like how he gets down to it. >Sun, 18 Nov 2001 10:47:09 -0000 Tony o' > > > > Nirguna cannot be experienced for there is no experiencer or even > > knower of the field. Tim(otty Leary) > " Without qualities " could be considered a 'quality' :-). Language is >possible thanks to 'nirguna brahman', not the other way around -- not >really worth trying to describe " something " that isn't a " thing " at >all. Hmm, remembering the words of wisdom " those who fight and run away will haunt them until they return! " I look forward for more sensational action as the battle between the two T's continue :-), ...and while you guys are at it, is there really " something " out there that language cannot describe ? Maybe it all in the wishful imagination ? Even if there is something like " nirguna brahman " or rather a state of " unity " , " you " can never experience it, since experience itself is limited to a subject-object division or dicotomy. But the paradox remains and several mystics have declared in the affirmitive that there is such a state of unicity. So who or what experiences this undivided state ? ~dave _______________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 19, 2001 Report Share Posted November 19, 2001 " I look forward for more sensational action as the battle between the two T's continue :-) " Dave --------------------- In keeping with the " theme " ......... You have seen Tim's picture. Here is Tony's picture. http://homepage.mac.com/elizabethwells/ .. ---------------------------- Nisargadatta, " Dave Sirjue " <davesirjue@h...> wrote: > > > > > " Omkara " <coresite@h...> > >Nisargadatta > >Nisargadatta > > Re: I really like how he gets down to it. > >Sun, 18 Nov 2001 10:47:09 -0000 > > Tony o' > > > > > > Nirguna cannot be experienced for there is no experiencer or even > > > knower of the field. > > Tim(otty Leary) > > > " Without qualities " could be considered a 'quality' :-). Language is > >possible thanks to 'nirguna brahman', not the other way around -- not > >really worth trying to describe " something " that isn't a " thing " at > >all. > > Hmm, remembering the words of wisdom " those who fight > and run away will haunt them until they return! " > I look forward for more sensational action as the > battle between the two T's continue :-), > > ..and while you guys are at it, is there > really " something " out there that language > cannot describe ? Maybe it all in the > wishful imagination ? Even if there is something > like " nirguna brahman " or rather a state of " unity " , > " you " can never experience it, since experience itself > is limited to a subject-object division or dicotomy. > But the paradox remains and several mystics have > declared in the affirmitive that there > is such a state of unicity. > So who or what experiences this undivided state ? > > > ~dave > > > > _______________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 19, 2001 Report Share Posted November 19, 2001 Nisargadatta, elizabeth_wells2001 wrote: Namaste, If you really want my picture check out kundalini-gateway at groups in the photos. http://photos.kundalini-gateway/lst?.dir=/Faces & .src=gr & .order= & .view=t & .done=http%3a//photos. kundalini-gateway/lst%3f.dir=/Faces%26.src=gr%26.view=t......ONS Tony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 19, 2001 Report Share Posted November 19, 2001 --- elizabeth_wells2001 wrote: > You have seen Tim's picture. And I keep laughing as if I was enlightened... me mac you mac? we mac. caiti Find the one for you at Personals http://personals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 19, 2001 Report Share Posted November 19, 2001 --- Tony O'Clery <aoclery wrote: > Nisargadatta, elizabeth_wells2001 wrote: > Namaste, > If you really want my picture check out >kundalini-gateway at in the photos. sorry Tony....it was not possible quote: " Oops... You are not a member of the group Kundalini-Gateway. " Maybe I need to meditate some more..!???! caiti (just freaky today) Find the one for you at Personals http://personals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 19, 2001 Report Share Posted November 19, 2001 Nisargadatta, " Tony O'Clery " <aoclery> wrote: > Nisargadatta, elizabeth_wells2001 wrote: > > Namaste, > > If you really want my picture check out kundalini-gateway at > groups in the photos. -------------------------------- Hey! Nice! El .. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 20, 2001 Report Share Posted November 20, 2001 Nisargadatta, " Dave Sirjue " <davesirjue@h...> wrote: > So who or what experiences this undivided state ? The 'state' itself 'experiences' this state. But you'll find no satisfaction in verbal answers or thoughts about it, so there's no point in even asking the question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 20, 2001 Report Share Posted November 20, 2001 Nisargadatta, " Omkara " <coresite@h...> wrote: > Nisargadatta, " Dave Sirjue " <davesirjue@h...> wrote: > > So who or what experiences this undivided state ? > > The 'state' itself 'experiences' this state. But you'll find no > satisfaction in verbal answers or thoughts about it, so there's no > point in even asking the question. Namaste, There is no state experiencing anything. A mind is needed to experience like saguna. However nirguna has no mind.......ONS...Tony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 20, 2001 Report Share Posted November 20, 2001 Namaste Tony, i use the word 'experience' very loosely (not in the usual sense of the word) to describe something essentially indescribable (futile of course, but how else to discuss?). Nirguna as imagined by the mind seems like something dry, sterile and basically meaningless/empty. But how do you know it is so, if limited by the mind's 'interpretation' or ideas about Nirguna? Tim Nisargadatta, " Tony O'Clery " <aoclery> wrote: > There is no state experiencing anything. A mind is needed to > experience like saguna. However nirguna has no > mind.......ONS...Tony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 20, 2001 Report Share Posted November 20, 2001 > " Omkara " <coresite >Nisargadatta >Nisargadatta > Re: I really like how he gets down to it. >Tue, 20 Nov 2001 07:46:19 -0000 > >Nisargadatta, " Dave Sirjue " <davesirjue@h...> wrote: > > So who or what experiences this undivided state ? > >The 'state' itself 'experiences' this state. Nay,'state' experiencing itself ? Maybe it's more accurate to say the 'state' *being* itself - an innate, intrinsic *feeling* of being that which-is, the true nature of how things are. ....which actually boils down to simply *being* truthful,honest and sincere about your own self by ceasing to defend the false and neurotic personality thereby releasing the layers of lies, misinformation, misconceptions, deception,pretense,impersonation and self-delusion. ~dave _______________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 20, 2001 Report Share Posted November 20, 2001 Nisargadatta, " Dave Sirjue " <davesirjue@h...> wrote: > >Nisargadatta, " Dave Sirjue " <davesirjue@h...> wrote: > > > So who or what experiences this undivided state ? > > > >The 'state' itself 'experiences' this state. > > Nay,'state' experiencing itself ? > Maybe it's more accurate to say > the 'state' *being* itself - an > innate, intrinsic *feeling* of > being that which-is, the true nature > of how things are. Thanks, that does kind of explain it better, although perhaps more applicable to the " Saguna " aspect (Beingness) which Nisargadatta talked about a lot, but he very rarely even discussed " Nirguna Brahman " or " Parabrahman. " i agree tho, that " the state experiences itself " is a very poor description. 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.