Guest guest Posted June 12, 2003 Report Share Posted June 12, 2003 Nisargadatta , " Bill Rishel " <plexus@x> wrote: > " All waiting is futile. To depend on time to solve our problems is > self delusion. The future if left to itself merely repeats the > past. Change can only happen now, never in the future. " > Nisargadatta > > He says change can only happen now, never in the future. > This means change is not in time. > > Action, however, *is* inherently in time. > > Therefore, per this quote of SNM, *real change* is > never via action. > > So what are the *options*? > > They seem all stripped away. > > Suppose there are none... > > What then? > > > -Bill What is the issue, and why? If you can for a moment, accept that all options are stripped away, what does that leave? If all options are stripped away, truly, nothing has changed. We can imagine a reality in which we make plans, and then carry out those plans. We can imagine that our plans will only work, if there are options, 'choices', alternatives. If we cannot choose, if there are no options _right now_, what has changed? Nothing changes from right now. Yet, we still live and breathe. Our hearts beat. The sun rises and sets. Yet, we have no options. What options would you like to order? Could it be that what we consider to be options, choices, etc, are simply the reality that we always have access to? To entertain the concept, that we live in a 'realm of possibilities', is perhaps to realize that what we consider 'doing' is merely the enactment of a mere segment of what is possible. And that the unenacted segments, 'what we do not choose', are not absent at all, but that we deny ourselves sight of those segments, due to our peculiar, conditioned way of Being? What I am saying, in response to your question, is that there is no alternative to the way that it is; no options are ever available. Now, if you hear of a 'spiritual realizer' who floats in the air, who levitates, do you see that as a possibility for yourself? Do you see that as a non-possibility? Do you start looking for the spiritual recipe of 'how to learn to float in the air'? By what power, by what talent, do we divide, index and compartmentalize the realm of possibilities? However we are doing that, it is by that means, that we then feel the need for options. If we cover one eye, the feeling is that vision has been restricted, and the call is to restore full vision. How then, was the eye originally covered? We are born (most of us) into a world whose cultures demand only one-eyed participants; is it any surprise that many of us, feel that something is wrong, at a basic level? Is it any surprise, that so many 'realizers' have offered to share their view of the world, as seen through two eyes? Is it any surprise, that such offerings are immediately seized by the one-eyed, in their typical way of grasping at remedies for half-sight? And that such grasping, has nothing whatsoever to do with seeing through one eye, only? That the supposed 'remedy' is not a prescription for gaining full sight, but simply a description of what reality looks like to a fully sighted person? " Here, try this: Look at this. Does it look like (two-eyed description)? " " Uh, no. It looks like (one-eyed description) " " Well, that proves you are seeing it with one eye only " " Master, what should I do? " " It is not a matter of opening your other eye; it is a matter of removing what is obscuring the vision of that eye. That occluded eye is certainly open, but what it sees, is not what is, except to itself. You have not only vision in just one eye, but you also have a conflict of vision, between two eyes. " " Here is a true prescription, for the half-blinded; Close the other eye. " " But master, if I close the open eye, I will then truly be fully blind! And that is the opposite of what I want! " " Yes, if you close the open eye, you will not see the world. But then, you will see only what the your usually blind eye always sees. When you close your eyes, you see only what is already there, inside you. You are not distracted by any true vision; instead, you get a full dose of why you are blinded in one eye. You will get to see, what you always see, but refuse to see, by this method. " " Furthermore, I will tell you a great secret. It is the land of the blind, in which the one-eyed man is master. Only be acquainting yourself with the world within yourself, will you become familiar with the world of the blind. And it is that world, which all men proudly inhabit. It is in that world, the land of the blind, that so many useless nostrums are sold, to restore sight to the fully sighted. " " Master, I am sure you have said something very profound, but as usual, I don't get it " " Student, do you mean to tell me, that even after I try to tempt you to simply close both eyes and look closely at what is there already, and that by doing that you will find mastery over the one-eyed, that you still don't get it? " " Sorry, master, but I don't already see what you are pointing to, so that is proof to me, that there is nothing there, although I love and respect your pointing finger, as usual. " ==Gene Poole== What is the doing that is the undoing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 12, 2003 Report Share Posted June 12, 2003 Gene Poole [gene_poole] Thursday, June 12, 2003 11:34 AM Nisargadatta Re: all futility is action > What is the issue, and why? There is no issue. Why do you assume there is? > If you can for a moment, accept > that all options are stripped away, > what does that leave? That was my question. There are no " options " . They can't even be " stripped away " , as there are none. You seem to have missed my point altogether. Which is fine, of course. Just mentioning it. My point was that N's quote implies that all action is inherently non-action. That nothing occurs in time. That anything that presumes time is illusion. Hence there are no choices, no options before any " apparent " (and *only* apparent) *anybody*. Timeless, we are distilled beyond this appearance. Whatever this appearance may be to " you " , it is only appearance. His words are only to catalyze a realization that " such is the case " . -Bill Nisargadatta , " Bill Rishel " <plexus@x> wrote: > " All waiting is futile. To depend on time to solve our problems is > self delusion. The future if left to itself merely repeats the > past. Change can only happen now, never in the future. " > Nisargadatta > > He says change can only happen now, never in the future. > This means change is not in time. > > Action, however, *is* inherently in time. > > Therefore, per this quote of SNM, *real change* is > never via action. > > So what are the *options*? > > They seem all stripped away. > > Suppose there are none... > > What then? > > > -Bill What is the issue, and why? If you can for a moment, accept that all options are stripped away, what does that leave? If all options are stripped away, truly, nothing has changed. We can imagine a reality in which we make plans, and then carry out those plans. We can imagine that our plans will only work, if there are options, 'choices', alternatives. If we cannot choose, if there are no options _right now_, what has changed? Nothing changes from right now. Yet, we still live and breathe. Our hearts beat. The sun rises and sets. Yet, we have no options. What options would you like to order? Could it be that what we consider to be options, choices, etc, are simply the reality that we always have access to? To entertain the concept, that we live in a 'realm of possibilities', is perhaps to realize that what we consider 'doing' is merely the enactment of a mere segment of what is possible. And that the unenacted segments, 'what we do not choose', are not absent at all, but that we deny ourselves sight of those segments, due to our peculiar, conditioned way of Being? What I am saying, in response to your question, is that there is no alternative to the way that it is; no options are ever available. Now, if you hear of a 'spiritual realizer' who floats in the air, who levitates, do you see that as a possibility for yourself? Do you see that as a non-possibility? Do you start looking for the spiritual recipe of 'how to learn to float in the air'? By what power, by what talent, do we divide, index and compartmentalize the realm of possibilities? However we are doing that, it is by that means, that we then feel the need for options. If we cover one eye, the feeling is that vision has been restricted, and the call is to restore full vision. How then, was the eye originally covered? We are born (most of us) into a world whose cultures demand only one-eyed participants; is it any surprise that many of us, feel that something is wrong, at a basic level? Is it any surprise, that so many 'realizers' have offered to share their view of the world, as seen through two eyes? Is it any surprise, that such offerings are immediately seized by the one-eyed, in their typical way of grasping at remedies for half-sight? And that such grasping, has nothing whatsoever to do with seeing through one eye, only? That the supposed 'remedy' is not a prescription for gaining full sight, but simply a description of what reality looks like to a fully sighted person? " Here, try this: Look at this. Does it look like (two-eyed description)? " " Uh, no. It looks like (one-eyed description) " " Well, that proves you are seeing it with one eye only " " Master, what should I do? " " It is not a matter of opening your other eye; it is a matter of removing what is obscuring the vision of that eye. That occluded eye is certainly open, but what it sees, is not what is, except to itself. You have not only vision in just one eye, but you also have a conflict of vision, between two eyes. " " Here is a true prescription, for the half-blinded; Close the other eye. " " But master, if I close the open eye, I will then truly be fully blind! And that is the opposite of what I want! " " Yes, if you close the open eye, you will not see the world. But then, you will see only what the your usually blind eye always sees. When you close your eyes, you see only what is already there, inside you. You are not distracted by any true vision; instead, you get a full dose of why you are blinded in one eye. You will get to see, what you always see, but refuse to see, by this method. " " Furthermore, I will tell you a great secret. It is the land of the blind, in which the one-eyed man is master. Only be acquainting yourself with the world within yourself, will you become familiar with the world of the blind. And it is that world, which all men proudly inhabit. It is in that world, the land of the blind, that so many useless nostrums are sold, to restore sight to the fully sighted. " " Master, I am sure you have said something very profound, but as usual, I don't get it " " Student, do you mean to tell me, that even after I try to tempt you to simply close both eyes and look closely at what is there already, and that by doing that you will find mastery over the one-eyed, that you still don't get it? " " Sorry, master, but I don't already see what you are pointing to, so that is proof to me, that there is nothing there, although I love and respect your pointing finger, as usual. " ==Gene Poole== What is the doing that is the undoing? ** If you do not wish to receive individual emails, to change your subscription, sign in with your ID and go to Edit My Groups: /mygroups?edit=1 Under the Message Delivery option, choose " No Email " for the Nisargadatta group and click on Save Changes. 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.