Guest guest Posted May 1, 2002 Report Share Posted May 1, 2002 Hi Judi -- Hey Dan - I agreed with you up until this: > The awareness to which an object appears is > also my doing. > > ******* No doer, only awareness. There's no doer. But awareness is a doing. It is a doing that occurs with an object which is an aspect of the same doing. ***** What object would that be? :-) I'd like to see one. :-) > > Who is doing awareness involves no activity, > and isn't a subject or an object -- > each of which requires the other ... > > *** No one is doing awareness, it just is. The " who " isn't a doer, it's " this. " The " who " isn't something being done. The " who " isn't something that is. *** Yes, non-existant. " This " isn't awareness - since awareness is something which we cognize, which we say allows an object to appear. ***** Awareness itself needs no object. Perhaps a better word would be consciousness. -- Dan -- Happy Days, Judi http://www.users.uniserve.com/~samuel/judi-1.htm TheEndOfTheRopeRanch http://www.livingston.net/allison/sacred01.htm Rev. Helen Hiwater, D.D. ... " Straighten up and bow down! There's nooooo way around it! " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 1, 2002 Report Share Posted May 1, 2002 Dave Sirjue wrote: > > > Hiya Judi, > ******* Heya Dave! > What's happening over at the ranchy > these days ? ******* Well, James and I have gone into business together selling Sacred Bundt Pans. And we're having a lot of fun with that. Have you seen them yet? We're out to replace the Xtian version of the cross with a kinder, gentler version, as no one has ever been killed with bundt pan. Not once! Like James says, oh yea, people have been " thonked " , " plonked " , and generally threatened, :-), but no one has ever actually been killed. James really outdid himself on the packaging and the explanation insert is the work of a genius. So far we've gotten nothing but rave reviews. > Just barged in and noticed you're pretty > active on this list. > Have the horses abandoned ship or what ? ******Not last time I looked, I always move around a bit and check out what's going on other lists. Lob one in from time to time. > ..and your darling Da what's with him lately ? > **** Gee, I have no idea, last I heard he's in northern California attending to some health problems. I assume he's doing alright. > ..anyway might be interesting, so tell us 'bout > this " absolute peace " or " awareness " that > you seem to know. > ..and are there two categories of peace ? > ***** Sure, there's the peace when the kids are finally in bed asleep and there's the peace where it doesn't make a damn bit of difference one way or the other. > > ~dave > > ****** Nice to know you're still around. How's everything with you? Judi -- Happy Days, Judi http://www.users.uniserve.com/~samuel/judi-1.htm TheEndOfTheRopeRanch http://www.livingston.net/allison/sacred01.htm Rev. Helen Hiwater, D.D. ... " Straighten up and bow down! There's nooooo way around it! " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 1, 2002 Report Share Posted May 1, 2002 > But awareness is a doing. > > It is a doing that occurs with an object > which is an aspect of the same doing. > > ***** What object would that be? :-) > I'd like to see one. :-) Anything you're looking at ... That's your object ... Anything of which you're aware, including " awareness " ... > The " who " isn't a doer, it's " this. " > The " who " isn't something being done. > The " who " isn't something that is. > > *** Yes, non-existant. Not existent or nonexistent. Not pertaining to categories. > > " This " isn't awareness - since awareness > is something which we cognize, which we > say allows an object to appear. > > ***** Awareness itself needs no object. Perhaps a better word would be > consciousness. Consciousness is what you've cognized to represent something that has no beginning or end. For whom does the concept " consciousness " serve a purpose? Who expresses through the thought " consciousness? " Not " consciousness, " which is merely the idea of being aware. If you can be aware, you can be unaware. Otherwise, there is no meaning. If there is no meaning, there is no reason to use any particular term. What has no opposite has neither a meaning nor lacks a meaning. So, it isn't consciousness, which has a meaning. Love, Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 1, 2002 Report Share Posted May 1, 2002 dan330033 wrote: > > > So, it isn't consciousness, which has a meaning. > *** Oh really? :-) Let's hear it? :-) I'm all ears. :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 2, 2002 Report Share Posted May 2, 2002 Nisargadatta, Judi Rhodes <judirhodes@e...> wrote: > dan330033 wrote: > > > > > > So, it isn't consciousness, which has a meaning. > > > *** Oh really? :-) Let's hear it? :-) I'm all ears. :-) Exactly! Stay all ears ... Stay tuned ... It's not in anything you've been talking about ... :-) 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.