Guest guest Posted October 3, 2002 Report Share Posted October 3, 2002 Nisargadatta, " Bill Rishel " <plexus@x> wrote: > > It's just impossible to affirm without negating, > > or negate without affirming. > > > Hypercognosis or even cognosis can only undermine itself, > > so why affirm anything or negate anything > > cognitively? > > > Probably because that's how cognosis cognizes. > I.e., there is no need to answer the question " why affirm > or negate? " because " it's just happening " . > > I find your distinction of negating and affirming > interesting. Are those the possibilities? Negating > and affirming both refer to the making of assertions. > What of poetic utterances? A poetic utterance affirms the poetic meaning being uttered. A critic of that meaning negates, but affirms the criticism and critic. Saying anything affirms there is something to be said. Saying nothing is generally understood as affirming the value of stillness, and sometimes as negating the meaning of speaking ... I am alluding to " mind " which knows in terms of affirmations and negations -- in reality no creation or destruction has ever occurred, so no affirmation or negation ... > Regarding: > > > > Like, " I'm not cognizing myself while I'm > > > > cognizing, but I am cognizing that I'm > > > > not cognizing the one who's cognizing > > > > what's being cognized ... " > You speak here of " the one who's congnizing " . > The cognition of " the one who's congnizing " is > (if I understand your usage here) simply > phenomenal appearance. True. And of course, I was referring to Wei-Wu-Wei's attempt to say something meaningful. He was forced to resort to the trick of referring to a cognizer who couldn't be cognized. But by saying that, " this " has already been cognized (as noncognizable yet cognizing.) Unspoken remains this insight of no inside or outside, no behind or in front, no way to be known or be missed. We can say this can't be missed, but when we say it always is, we've forced it into unreal limitation. > > Now, in: > " I am cognizing that I'm not cognizing the one > who's cognizing what's being cognized ... " , > the part that follows the word 'that' is evidently > a cognition *within* phenomenal appearance. Evidently. And, of course, the whole statement is cognition. And all ideas about nonphenomenality are phenomenal. > What I'm trying to get at here is that there are > two " logical types " involved in the use of > cognizing/cognition here. In terms of " the one > who's cognizing " the cognition is phenomenal > appearance. But the concepts expressed in emails > such as these are not the concepts of the " the > one who cognizes " but are the " apparent concepts " > of someone who appears to exist within phenomenal > appearance. There is no " the one who cognizes " except as a cognition arising. Just as there is no noumenon, except as a phenomenal concept. What arises then, doesn't arise. No creation, no destruction. > The cognition of " the one who cognizes " is simply > the appearance of Now. Okay. > If what-we-are is " the one who cognizes " , then > simple attention to the Now is as close as attention > can get to what-we-are. Yet if " the one who cognizes " is a cognition appearing, there is no such thing as getting to what-we-are. There is no such thing as attending to " what is " -- there only is the cognition arising that there can be attending to " what is " ... > *Perhaps* abiding in Now leads to an " apperception " > of the noumenality out of which phenomenal appearance > arises, i.e. an apperception of " the one who cognizes " . Frankly, there is no " an apperception of the noumenon " ... just the cognition of an apperception of whatever ... > But there is little point in speculating on that. > It is enough to simply abide in Now. There is no other place to be. There is not a choice involved, except that a cognition arises which says " there is abiding in Now " or " there is not abiding in Now. " There is no split, no now separable from then, no one separated who could abide in or out. --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.