Guest guest Posted June 17, 2003 Report Share Posted June 17, 2003 Sorry, didn't read this post. Too long and "mental" for me. Please no offense. But I did find the subject interesting: Karma and consciousness. Hmmmm, thought I. The trick there, it seems, is to throw out the bathwater and still keep the baby. Could you pass the soap, Pete? -Bill kim ja nyun [kjn]Sunday, June 15, 2003 4:09 PMNisargadatta Subject: Karma and consciousness "The sentient being must be created in order to fulfil a particular function and not the other way round : it is not that a new function is created just so that the individual soul be punished or rewarded for his Karma in a previous birth. The supposed individual carries out his destined function, and that function paves the way for the destined function of another supposed individual in the future according to the scenario of the phenomenal manifestation. The background screen of the movie is the consciousness. The consciousness within one individual apparatus merges with the universal consciousness when that apparatus 'dies', and again infuses itself into another that is subsequently 'born'. It must be clearly understood that consciousness in one body does not differ in any way from the consciousness in another. It is the same consciousness providing sentience to all the sentient beings at all times. There must, of course, necessarily be a sort of 'solution of continuity' between the new individual form and earlier form or forms, so that the story may continue and the show may go on. Evolution goes on." - from 'Explorations into the Eternal' by Ramesh S. Balsekar- Notional though it be, Atman is the individual consciousness, Brahman is the universal consciousness, Parabrahman is the Absolute(I or Awareness).All manifestations(illusion) are the result of functioning(Prajna-ic functioning) in conscousness by the Absolute(I). Are you(Atman) agree?**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=1Under 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...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2003 Report Share Posted June 17, 2003 --- > Karma and consciousness. > > Hmmmm, thought I. The trick there, it seems, is to throw out > the bathwater and still keep the baby. > > Could you pass the soap, Pete? > > -Bill " In the beggining was the word. " When we started the naming game all hell( apparent multiplicity) broke loose. The attempt to name the un- namable is the sin (original or not) of separation. The baby is drowning in the dirty bath water. The baby remains for ever clean, no need to bath the baby with words. Throw out all those words- Atman, Parabrahman etc. Just dirty water. Pete > > > kim ja nyun [kjn@h...] > Sunday, June 15, 2003 4:09 PM > Nisargadatta > Karma and consciousness > > > " The sentient being must be created in order to fulfil a particular > function and not the other way round : it is not that a new function is > created just so that the individual soul be punished or rewarded for his > Karma in a previous birth. > The supposed individual carries out his destined function, and that > function paves the way for the destined function of another supposed > individual in the future according to the scenario of the phenomenal > manifestation. > > The background screen of the movie is the consciousness. The consciousness > within one individual apparatus merges with the universal consciousness when > that apparatus 'dies', and again infuses itself into another that is > subsequently 'born'. > It must be clearly understood that consciousness in one body does not > differ in any way from the consciousness in another. It is the same > consciousness providing sentience to all the sentient beings at all times. > There must, of course, necessarily be a sort of 'solution of continuity' > between the new individual form and earlier form or forms, so that the story > may continue and the show may go on. Evolution goes on. " > - from 'Explorations into the Eternal' by > Ramesh S. Balsekar- > > Notional though it be, > Atman is the individual consciousness, Brahman is the universal > consciousness, Parabrahman is the Absolute(I or Awareness). > All manifestations(illusion) are the result of functioning(Prajna- ic > functioning) in conscousness by the Absolute(I). > > Are you(Atman) agree? > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2003 Report Share Posted June 17, 2003 Ahhh! So this is the doctrin of Original No-Sin. All we have to do is Realize and all that silly bathwater just evaporates. A very clean way of putting is I'd say. -Bill seesaw1us [seesaw1us] Tuesday, June 17, 2003 7:57 AM Nisargadatta Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete) --- > Karma and consciousness. > > Hmmmm, thought I. The trick there, it seems, is to throw out > the bathwater and still keep the baby. > > Could you pass the soap, Pete? > > -Bill " In the beggining was the word. " When we started the naming game all hell( apparent multiplicity) broke loose. The attempt to name the un- namable is the sin (original or not) of separation. The baby is drowning in the dirty bath water. The baby remains for ever clean, no need to bath the baby with words. Throw out all those words- Atman, Parabrahman etc. Just dirty water. Pete > > > kim ja nyun [kjn@h...] > Sunday, June 15, 2003 4:09 PM > Nisargadatta > Karma and consciousness > > > " The sentient being must be created in order to fulfil a particular > function and not the other way round : it is not that a new function is > created just so that the individual soul be punished or rewarded for his > Karma in a previous birth. > The supposed individual carries out his destined function, and that > function paves the way for the destined function of another supposed > individual in the future according to the scenario of the phenomenal > manifestation. > > The background screen of the movie is the consciousness. The consciousness > within one individual apparatus merges with the universal consciousness when > that apparatus 'dies', and again infuses itself into another that is > subsequently 'born'. > It must be clearly understood that consciousness in one body does not > differ in any way from the consciousness in another. It is the same > consciousness providing sentience to all the sentient beings at all times. > There must, of course, necessarily be a sort of 'solution of continuity' > between the new individual form and earlier form or forms, so that the story > may continue and the show may go on. Evolution goes on. " > - from 'Explorations into the Eternal' by > Ramesh S. Balsekar- > > Notional though it be, > Atman is the individual consciousness, Brahman is the universal > consciousness, Parabrahman is the Absolute(I or Awareness). > All manifestations(illusion) are the result of functioning(Prajna- ic > functioning) in conscousness by the Absolute(I). > > Are you(Atman) agree? > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 18, 2003 Report Share Posted June 18, 2003 Yes, All is concepts, but the show(story) may go on.That is all. - seesaw1us Nisargadatta Tuesday, June 17, 2003 11:57 PM Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete)--- > Karma and consciousness.> > Hmmmm, thought I. The trick there, it seems, is to throw out> the bathwater and still keep the baby.> > Could you pass the soap, Pete?> > -Bill"In the beggining was the word." When we started the naming game all hell( apparent multiplicity) broke loose. The attempt to name the un-namable is the sin (original or not) of separation. The baby is drowning in the dirty bath water. The baby remains for ever clean, no need to bath the baby with words. Throw out all those words- Atman, Parabrahman etc. Just dirty water. :)Pete> > > kim ja nyun [kjn@h...]> Sunday, June 15, 2003 4:09 PM> Nisargadatta > Karma and consciousness> > > "The sentient being must be created in order to fulfil a particular> function and not the other way round : it is not that a new function is> created just so that the individual soul be punished or rewarded for his> Karma in a previous birth.> The supposed individual carries out his destined function, and that> function paves the way for the destined function of another supposed> individual in the future according to the scenario of the phenomenal> manifestation.> > The background screen of the movie is the consciousness. The consciousness> within one individual apparatus merges with the universal consciousness when> that apparatus 'dies', and again infuses itself into another that is> subsequently 'born'.> It must be clearly understood that consciousness in one body does not> differ in any way from the consciousness in another. It is the same> consciousness providing sentience to all the sentient beings at all times.> There must, of course, necessarily be a sort of 'solution of continuity'> between the new individual form and earlier form or forms, so that the story> may continue and the show may go on. Evolution goes on."> - from 'Explorations into the Eternal' by> Ramesh S. Balsekar-> > Notional though it be,> Atman is the individual consciousness, Brahman is the universal> consciousness, Parabrahman is the Absolute(I or Awareness).> All manifestations(illusion) are the result of functioning(Prajna-ic> functioning) in conscousness by the Absolute(I).> > Are you(Atman) agree?> > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 18, 2003 Report Share Posted June 18, 2003 Nisargadatta , " kim ja nyun " <kjn@h...> wrote: > Yes, > All is concepts, but the show(story) may go on. > That is all. Yes it does. But is not 'my' story. And a story without actors is just a documentary. Trading drama for underestanding is not Oscar night material, is it? No line around the block to watch that one Pete > > - > seesaw1us > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, June 17, 2003 11:57 PM > Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete) > > > --- > > Karma and consciousness. > > > > Hmmmm, thought I. The trick there, it seems, is to throw out > > the bathwater and still keep the baby. > > > > Could you pass the soap, Pete? > > > > -Bill > > > " In the beggining was the word. " When we started the naming game all > hell( apparent multiplicity) broke loose. The attempt to name the un- > namable is the sin (original or not) of separation. The baby is > drowning in the dirty bath water. The baby remains for ever clean, no > need to bath the baby with words. Throw out all those words- Atman, > Parabrahman etc. Just dirty water. > > Pete > > > > > > kim ja nyun [kjn@h...] > > Sunday, June 15, 2003 4:09 PM > > Nisargadatta > > Karma and consciousness > > > > > > " The sentient being must be created in order to fulfil a > particular > > function and not the other way round : it is not that a new > function is > > created just so that the individual soul be punished or rewarded > for his > > Karma in a previous birth. > > The supposed individual carries out his destined function, and > that > > function paves the way for the destined function of another supposed > > individual in the future according to the scenario of the phenomenal > > manifestation. > > > > The background screen of the movie is the consciousness. The > consciousness > > within one individual apparatus merges with the universal > consciousness when > > that apparatus 'dies', and again infuses itself into another that is > > subsequently 'born'. > > It must be clearly understood that consciousness in one body does > not > > differ in any way from the consciousness in another. It is the same > > consciousness providing sentience to all the sentient beings at all > times. > > There must, of course, necessarily be a sort of 'solution of > continuity' > > between the new individual form and earlier form or forms, so that > the story > > may continue and the show may go on. Evolution goes on. " > > - from 'Explorations into the > Eternal' by > > Ramesh S. Balsekar- > > > > Notional though it be, > > Atman is the individual consciousness, Brahman is the universal > > consciousness, Parabrahman is the Absolute(I or Awareness). > > All manifestations(illusion) are the result of functioning (Prajna- > ic > > functioning) in conscousness by the Absolute(I). > > > > Are you(Atman) agree? > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 18, 2003 Report Share Posted June 18, 2003 You(I) are not the story, but the story arises from you(I).- seesaw1us Nisargadatta Wednesday, June 18, 2003 10:37 AM Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete)Nisargadatta , "kim ja nyun" <kjn@h...> wrote:> Yes, > All is concepts, but the show(story) may go on.> That is all. Yes it does. But is not 'my' story. And a story without actorsis just a documentary. Trading drama for underestanding is not Oscarnight material, is it? No line around the block to watch that one :)Pete > > - > seesaw1us > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, June 17, 2003 11:57 PM> Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete)> > > --- > > Karma and consciousness.> > > > Hmmmm, thought I. The trick there, it seems, is to throw out> > the bathwater and still keep the baby.> > > > Could you pass the soap, Pete?> > > > -Bill> > > "In the beggining was the word." When we started the naming game all > hell( apparent multiplicity) broke loose. The attempt to name the un-> namable is the sin (original or not) of separation. The baby is > drowning in the dirty bath water. The baby remains for ever clean, no > need to bath the baby with words. Throw out all those words- Atman, > Parabrahman etc. Just dirty water. > > Pete> > > > > > kim ja nyun [kjn@h...]> > Sunday, June 15, 2003 4:09 PM> > Nisargadatta > > Karma and consciousness> > > > > > "The sentient being must be created in order to fulfil a > particular> > function and not the other way round : it is not that a new > function is> > created just so that the individual soul be punished or rewarded > for his> > Karma in a previous birth.> > The supposed individual carries out his destined function, and > that> > function paves the way for the destined function of another supposed> > individual in the future according to the scenario of the phenomenal> > manifestation.> > > > The background screen of the movie is the consciousness. The > consciousness> > within one individual apparatus merges with the universal > consciousness when> > that apparatus 'dies', and again infuses itself into another that is> > subsequently 'born'.> > It must be clearly understood that consciousness in one body does > not> > differ in any way from the consciousness in another. It is the same> > consciousness providing sentience to all the sentient beings at all > times.> > There must, of course, necessarily be a sort of 'solution of > continuity'> > between the new individual form and earlier form or forms, so that > the story> > may continue and the show may go on. Evolution goes on."> > - from 'Explorations into the > Eternal' by> > Ramesh S. Balsekar-> > > > Notional though it be,> > Atman is the individual consciousness, Brahman is the universal> > consciousness, Parabrahman is the Absolute(I or Awareness).> > All manifestations(illusion) are the result of functioning(Prajna-> ic> > functioning) in conscousness by the Absolute(I).> > > > Are you(Atman) agree?> > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 18, 2003 Report Share Posted June 18, 2003 Now I'm just watching this from the sidelines, but... may I interject a question? "What story?" hmmmmmmmmmm...??? Does it progress through time? If not, not really a 'story' is it? So like I said, "What story?" -Bill kim ja nyun [kjn]Tuesday, June 17, 2003 6:52 PMNisargadatta Subject: Re: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete) You(I) are not the story, but the story arises from you(I). - seesaw1us Nisargadatta Wednesday, June 18, 2003 10:37 AM Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete) Nisargadatta , "kim ja nyun" <kjn@h...> wrote:> Yes, > All is concepts, but the show(story) may go on.> That is all. Yes it does. But is not 'my' story. And a story without actorsis just a documentary. Trading drama for underestanding is not Oscarnight material, is it? No line around the block to watch that one :)Pete > > - > seesaw1us > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, June 17, 2003 11:57 PM> Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete)> > > --- > > Karma and consciousness.> > > > Hmmmm, thought I. The trick there, it seems, is to throw out> > the bathwater and still keep the baby.> > > > Could you pass the soap, Pete?> > > > -Bill> > > "In the beggining was the word." When we started the naming game all > hell( apparent multiplicity) broke loose. The attempt to name the un-> namable is the sin (original or not) of separation. The baby is > drowning in the dirty bath water. The baby remains for ever clean, no > need to bath the baby with words. Throw out all those words- Atman, > Parabrahman etc. Just dirty water. > > Pete> > > > > > kim ja nyun [kjn@h...]> > Sunday, June 15, 2003 4:09 PM> > Nisargadatta > > Karma and consciousness> > > > > > "The sentient being must be created in order to fulfil a > particular> > function and not the other way round : it is not that a new > function is> > created just so that the individual soul be punished or rewarded > for his> > Karma in a previous birth.> > The supposed individual carries out his destined function, and > that> > function paves the way for the destined function of another supposed> > individual in the future according to the scenario of the phenomenal> > manifestation.> > > > The background screen of the movie is the consciousness. The > consciousness> > within one individual apparatus merges with the universal > consciousness when> > that apparatus 'dies', and again infuses itself into another that is> > subsequently 'born'.> > It must be clearly understood that consciousness in one body does > not> > differ in any way from the consciousness in another. It is the same> > consciousness providing sentience to all the sentient beings at all > times.> > There must, of course, necessarily be a sort of 'solution of > continuity'> > between the new individual form and earlier form or forms, so that > the story> > may continue and the show may go on. Evolution goes on."> > - from 'Explorations into the > Eternal' by> > Ramesh S. Balsekar-> > > > Notional though it be,> > Atman is the individual consciousness, Brahman is the universal> > consciousness, Parabrahman is the Absolute(I or Awareness).> > All manifestations(illusion) are the result of functioning(Prajna-> ic> > functioning) in conscousness by the Absolute(I).> > > > Are you(Atman) agree?> > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 18, 2003 Report Share Posted June 18, 2003 It(story) is a dream.Why do you(I) dream?I don't know, but I dream a waking dream and a sleeping dream, without cause and reason. - Bill Rishel Nisargadatta Wednesday, June 18, 2003 12:07 PMRE: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete)Now I'm just watching this from the sidelines, but... may I interject a question? "What story?" hmmmmmmmmmm...??? Does it progress through time?If not, not really a 'story' is it? So like I said, "What story?" -Bill kim ja nyun [kjn]Tuesday, June 17, 2003 6:52 PMNisargadatta Subject: Re: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete)You(I) are not the story, but the story arises from you(I).- seesaw1us Nisargadatta Wednesday, June 18, 2003 10:37 AM Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete)Nisargadatta , "kim ja nyun" <kjn@h...> wrote:> Yes, > All is concepts, but the show(story) may go on.> That is all. Yes it does. But is not 'my' story. And a story without actorsis just a documentary. Trading drama for underestanding is not Oscarnight material, is it? No line around the block to watch that one :)Pete > > - > seesaw1us > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, June 17, 2003 11:57 PM> Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete)> > > --- > > Karma and consciousness.> > > > Hmmmm, thought I. The trick there, it seems, is to throw out> > the bathwater and still keep the baby.> > > > Could you pass the soap, Pete?> > > > -Bill> > > "In the beggining was the word." When we started the naming game all > hell( apparent multiplicity) broke loose. The attempt to name the un-> namable is the sin (original or not) of separation. The baby is > drowning in the dirty bath water. The baby remains for ever clean, no > need to bath the baby with words. Throw out all those words- Atman, > Parabrahman etc. Just dirty water. > > Pete> > > > > > kim ja nyun [kjn@h...]> > Sunday, June 15, 2003 4:09 PM> > Nisargadatta > > Karma and consciousness> > > > > > "The sentient being must be created in order to fulfil a > particular> > function and not the other way round : it is not that a new > function is> > created just so that the individual soul be punished or rewarded > for his> > Karma in a previous birth.> > The supposed individual carries out his destined function, and > that> > function paves the way for the destined function of another supposed> > individual in the future according to the scenario of the phenomenal> > manifestation.> > > > The background screen of the movie is the consciousness. The > consciousness> > within one individual apparatus merges with the universal > consciousness when> > that apparatus 'dies', and again infuses itself into another that is> > subsequently 'born'.> > It must be clearly understood that consciousness in one body does > not> > differ in any way from the consciousness in another. It is the same> > consciousness providing sentience to all the sentient beings at all > times.> > There must, of course, necessarily be a sort of 'solution of > continuity'> > between the new individual form and earlier form or forms, so that > the story> > may continue and the show may go on. Evolution goes on."> > - from 'Explorations into the > Eternal' by> > Ramesh S. Balsekar-> > > > Notional though it be,> > Atman is the individual consciousness, Brahman is the universal> > consciousness, Parabrahman is the Absolute(I or Awareness).> > All manifestations(illusion) are the result of functioning(Prajna-> ic> > functioning) in conscousness by the Absolute(I).> > > > Are you(Atman) agree?> > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 18, 2003 Report Share Posted June 18, 2003 First you say story, now you say dream. Make up your mind! You say "It (story) is a dream". You still haven't answered my question: "What story?" -Bill kim ja nyun [kjn]Tuesday, June 17, 2003 8:47 PMNisargadatta Subject: Re: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete) It(story) is a dream. Why do you(I) dream? I don't know, but I dream a waking dream and a sleeping dream, without cause and reason. - Bill Rishel Nisargadatta Wednesday, June 18, 2003 12:07 PM RE: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete) Now I'm just watching this from the sidelines, but... may I interject a question? "What story?" hmmmmmmmmmm...??? Does it progress through time? If not, not really a 'story' is it? So like I said, "What story?" -Bill kim ja nyun [kjn]Tuesday, June 17, 2003 6:52 PMNisargadatta Subject: Re: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete) You(I) are not the story, but the story arises from you(I). - seesaw1us Nisargadatta Wednesday, June 18, 2003 10:37 AM Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete) Nisargadatta , "kim ja nyun" <kjn@h...> wrote:> Yes, > All is concepts, but the show(story) may go on.> That is all. Yes it does. But is not 'my' story. And a story without actorsis just a documentary. Trading drama for underestanding is not Oscarnight material, is it? No line around the block to watch that one :)Pete > > - > seesaw1us > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, June 17, 2003 11:57 PM> Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete)> > > --- > > Karma and consciousness.> > > > Hmmmm, thought I. The trick there, it seems, is to throw out> > the bathwater and still keep the baby.> > > > Could you pass the soap, Pete?> > > > -Bill> > > "In the beggining was the word." When we started the naming game all > hell( apparent multiplicity) broke loose. The attempt to name the un-> namable is the sin (original or not) of separation. The baby is > drowning in the dirty bath water. The baby remains for ever clean, no > need to bath the baby with words. Throw out all those words- Atman, > Parabrahman etc. Just dirty water. > > Pete> > > > > > kim ja nyun [kjn@h...]> > Sunday, June 15, 2003 4:09 PM> > Nisargadatta > > Karma and consciousness> > > > > > "The sentient being must be created in order to fulfil a > particular> > function and not the other way round : it is not that a new > function is> > created just so that the individual soul be punished or rewarded > for his> > Karma in a previous birth.> > The supposed individual carries out his destined function, and > that> > function paves the way for the destined function of another supposed> > individual in the future according to the scenario of the phenomenal> > manifestation.> > > > The background screen of the movie is the consciousness. The > consciousness> > within one individual apparatus merges with the universal > consciousness when> > that apparatus 'dies', and again infuses itself into another that is> > subsequently 'born'.> > It must be clearly understood that consciousness in one body does > not> > differ in any way from the consciousness in another. It is the same> > consciousness providing sentience to all the sentient beings at all > times.> > There must, of course, necessarily be a sort of 'solution of > continuity'> > between the new individual form and earlier form or forms, so that > the story> > may continue and the show may go on. Evolution goes on."> > - from 'Explorations into the > Eternal' by> > Ramesh S. Balsekar-> > > > Notional though it be,> > Atman is the individual consciousness, Brahman is the universal> > consciousness, Parabrahman is the Absolute(I or Awareness).> > All manifestations(illusion) are the result of functioning(Prajna-> ic> > functioning) in conscousness by the Absolute(I).> > > > Are you(Atman) agree?> > **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=1Under 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...
Guest guest Posted June 18, 2003 Report Share Posted June 18, 2003 Exactly say,the story is contents of a dream.- Bill Rishel Nisargadatta Wednesday, June 18, 2003 4:38 PMRE: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete)First you say story, now you say dream.Make up your mind! You say "It (story) is a dream".You still haven't answered my question:"What story?" -Billkim ja nyun [kjn]Tuesday, June 17, 2003 8:47 PMNisargadatta Subject: Re: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete)It(story) is a dream.Why do you(I) dream?I don't know, but I dream a waking dream and a sleeping dream, without cause and reason. - Bill Rishel Nisargadatta Wednesday, June 18, 2003 12:07 PMRE: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete)Now I'm just watching this from the sidelines, but... may I interject a question? "What story?" hmmmmmmmmmm...??? Does it progress through time?If not, not really a 'story' is it? So like I said, "What story?" -Bill kim ja nyun [kjn]Tuesday, June 17, 2003 6:52 PMNisargadatta Subject: Re: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete)You(I) are not the story, but the story arises from you(I).- seesaw1us Nisargadatta Wednesday, June 18, 2003 10:37 AM Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete)Nisargadatta , "kim ja nyun" <kjn@h...> wrote:> Yes, > All is concepts, but the show(story) may go on.> That is all. Yes it does. But is not 'my' story. And a story without actorsis just a documentary. Trading drama for underestanding is not Oscarnight material, is it? No line around the block to watch that one :)Pete > > - > seesaw1us > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, June 17, 2003 11:57 PM> Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete)> > > --- > > Karma and consciousness.> > > > Hmmmm, thought I. The trick there, it seems, is to throw out> > the bathwater and still keep the baby.> > > > Could you pass the soap, Pete?> > > > -Bill> > > "In the beggining was the word." When we started the naming game all > hell( apparent multiplicity) broke loose. The attempt to name the un-> namable is the sin (original or not) of separation. The baby is > drowning in the dirty bath water. The baby remains for ever clean, no > need to bath the baby with words. Throw out all those words- Atman, > Parabrahman etc. Just dirty water. > > Pete> > > > > > kim ja nyun [kjn@h...]> > Sunday, June 15, 2003 4:09 PM> > Nisargadatta > > Karma and consciousness> > > > > > "The sentient being must be created in order to fulfil a > particular> > function and not the other way round : it is not that a new > function is> > created just so that the individual soul be punished or rewarded > for his> > Karma in a previous birth.> > The supposed individual carries out his destined function, and > that> > function paves the way for the destined function of another supposed> > individual in the future according to the scenario of the phenomenal> > manifestation.> > > > The background screen of the movie is the consciousness. The > consciousness> > within one individual apparatus merges with the universal > consciousness when> > that apparatus 'dies', and again infuses itself into another that is> > subsequently 'born'.> > It must be clearly understood that consciousness in one body does > not> > differ in any way from the consciousness in another. It is the same> > consciousness providing sentience to all the sentient beings at all > times.> > There must, of course, necessarily be a sort of 'solution of > continuity'> > between the new individual form and earlier form or forms, so that > the story> > may continue and the show may go on. Evolution goes on."> > - from 'Explorations into the > Eternal' by> > Ramesh S. Balsekar-> > > > Notional though it be,> > Atman is the individual consciousness, Brahman is the universal> > consciousness, Parabrahman is the Absolute(I or Awareness).> > All manifestations(illusion) are the result of functioning(Prajna-> ic> > functioning) in conscousness by the Absolute(I).> > > > Are you(Atman) agree?> > **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=1Under 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...
Guest guest Posted June 18, 2003 Report Share Posted June 18, 2003 OK. Your term "story" throws me a bit, because it seems to lead somewhere. A dream, to me, just unfolds. And a dream needn't have "characters" as such. It can just be very 'dreamy', like melting clouds. A dream can leave no trace. But a story -- as I think of it -- has a 'path' through it. You can look back and see the tracks in the sand. That is just how I relate to the word 'story'. Indeed, it is all dream. Dreaming these words as they come through my fingers. It is trance. And within the trance a deeper Trance. And another deeper still. Who is to say what is real.... Perhaps it is just this "ever-deeping", this ever unfolding of yet another deeper Trance. -Bill kim ja nyun [kjn]Wednesday, June 18, 2003 1:14 AMNisargadatta Subject: Re: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete) Exactly say, the story is contents of a dream. - Bill Rishel Nisargadatta Wednesday, June 18, 2003 4:38 PM RE: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete) First you say story, now you say dream. Make up your mind! You say "It (story) is a dream". You still haven't answered my question: "What story?" -Bill kim ja nyun [kjn]Tuesday, June 17, 2003 8:47 PMNisargadatta Subject: Re: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete) It(story) is a dream. Why do you(I) dream? I don't know, but I dream a waking dream and a sleeping dream, without cause and reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 19, 2003 Report Share Posted June 19, 2003 You(I) can not be aware of yourself because you(I) are the source.When you say 'I know myself', you are in the ignorance state(consciousness state).Whenf you(I) say 'I don't know myself', you(I) are in the knowledge state(awareness state).You(I) are the knowlede(the pure and perfect knowledge) itself. But all the above statements are concepts in consiousness by the Absolute(I).All these communication and discussion is a dream play.ha ha ha ............ - Bill Rishel Nisargadatta Thursday, June 19, 2003 5:28 AMRE: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete)OK. Your term "story" throws me a bit, because it seems to lead somewhere.A dream, to me, just unfolds.And a dream needn't have "characters" as such.It can just be very 'dreamy', like melting clouds. A dream can leave no trace.But a story -- as I think of it -- has a 'path' through it.You can look back and see the tracks in the sand. That is just how I relate to the word 'story'. Indeed, it is all dream.Dreaming these words as they come through my fingers. It is trance. And within the trance a deeper Trance. And another deeper still. Who is to say what is real.... Perhaps it is just this "ever-deeping",this ever unfoldingof yet another deeper Trance. -Billkim ja nyun [kjn]Wednesday, June 18, 2003 1:14 AMNisargadatta Subject: Re: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete)Exactly say,the story is contents of a dream.- Bill Rishel Nisargadatta Wednesday, June 18, 2003 4:38 PMRE: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete)First you say story, now you say dream.Make up your mind! You say "It (story) is a dream".You still haven't answered my question:"What story?" -Billkim ja nyun [kjn]Tuesday, June 17, 2003 8:47 PMNisargadatta Subject: Re: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete)It(story) is a dream.Why do you(I) dream?I don't know, but I dream a waking dream and a sleeping dream, without cause and reason. **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=1Under 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...
Guest guest Posted June 19, 2003 Report Share Posted June 19, 2003 << But all the above statements are concepts in consiousness by the Absolute(I). All these communication and discussion is a dream play. >> If all communication is "dream play" then is there any meaning to communication? Is it all just "castles in the air"? Or is some communication deeper and more real in some sense? For example, is there any significant distinction between the book "I Am That" and some romantic novel? If I understand you aright, there should be none, since they are all just "dream play". What say you then? -Bill kim ja nyun [kjn]Wednesday, June 18, 2003 4:57 PMNisargadatta Subject: Re: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete) You(I) can not be aware of yourself because you(I) are the source. When you say 'I know myself', you are in the ignorance state(consciousness state). Whenf you(I) say 'I don't know myself', you(I) are in the knowledge state(awareness state). You(I) are the knowlede(the pure and perfect knowledge) itself. But all the above statements are concepts in consiousness by the Absolute(I). All these communication and discussion is a dream play. ha ha ha ............ - Bill Rishel Nisargadatta Thursday, June 19, 2003 5:28 AM RE: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete) OK. Your term "story" throws me a bit, because it seems to lead somewhere. A dream, to me, just unfolds. And a dream needn't have "characters" as such. It can just be very 'dreamy', like melting clouds. A dream can leave no trace. But a story -- as I think of it -- has a 'path' through it. You can look back and see the tracks in the sand. That is just how I relate to the word 'story'. Indeed, it is all dream. Dreaming these words as they come through my fingers. It is trance. And within the trance a deeper Trance. And another deeper still. Who is to say what is real.... Perhaps it is just this "ever-deeping", this ever unfolding of yet another deeper Trance. -Bill kim ja nyun [kjn]Wednesday, June 18, 2003 1:14 AMNisargadatta Subject: Re: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete) Exactly say, the story is contents of a dream. - Bill Rishel Nisargadatta Wednesday, June 18, 2003 4:38 PM RE: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete) First you say story, now you say dream. Make up your mind! You say "It (story) is a dream". You still haven't answered my question: "What story?" -Bill kim ja nyun [kjn]Tuesday, June 17, 2003 8:47 PMNisargadatta Subject: Re: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete) It(story) is a dream. Why do you(I) dream? I don't know, but I dream a waking dream and a sleeping dream, without cause and reason. **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=1Under 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...
Guest guest Posted June 19, 2003 Report Share Posted June 19, 2003 I am in the real world.I just witness the dream world arising from 'I'.I am beyond communication, discussion, meaning, concepts, distinction, understanding, etc.How can you(atman or consciousness) in the dream world understand 'I'?Only 'I' in the real world can understand you(atman or consciousness) in the dream world.For example, before you awake, can you understand that it is only the sleeping dream?Wake up!If you wake up, there is no problem about this dream world.- Bill Rishel Nisargadatta Thursday, June 19, 2003 2:51 PMRE: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete)<<But all the above statements are concepts in consiousness by the Absolute(I).All these communication and discussion is a dream play.>> If all communication is "dream play" then is there any meaning to communication? Is it all just "castles in the air"?Or is some communication deeper and more real in some sense? For example, is there any significant distinction between the book"I Am That" and some romantic novel? If I understand you aright, there should be none, since they are alljust "dream play". What say you then? -Bill kim ja nyun [kjn]Wednesday, June 18, 2003 4:57 PMNisargadatta Subject: Re: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete)You(I) can not be aware of yourself because you(I) are the source.When you say 'I know myself', you are in the ignorance state(consciousness state).Whenf you(I) say 'I don't know myself', you(I) are in the knowledge state(awareness state).You(I) are the knowlede(the pure and perfect knowledge) itself. But all the above statements are concepts in consiousness by the Absolute(I).All these communication and discussion is a dream play.ha ha ha ............ - Bill Rishel Nisargadatta Thursday, June 19, 2003 5:28 AMRE: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete)OK. Your term "story" throws me a bit, because it seems to lead somewhere.A dream, to me, just unfolds.And a dream needn't have "characters" as such.It can just be very 'dreamy', like melting clouds. A dream can leave no trace.But a story -- as I think of it -- has a 'path' through it.You can look back and see the tracks in the sand. That is just how I relate to the word 'story'. Indeed, it is all dream.Dreaming these words as they come through my fingers. It is trance. And within the trance a deeper Trance. And another deeper still. Who is to say what is real.... Perhaps it is just this "ever-deeping",this ever unfoldingof yet another deeper Trance. -Billkim ja nyun [kjn]Wednesday, June 18, 2003 1:14 AMNisargadatta Subject: Re: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete)Exactly say,the story is contents of a dream.- Bill Rishel Nisargadatta Wednesday, June 18, 2003 4:38 PMRE: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete)First you say story, now you say dream.Make up your mind! You say "It (story) is a dream".You still haven't answered my question:"What story?" -Billkim ja nyun [kjn]Tuesday, June 17, 2003 8:47 PMNisargadatta Subject: Re: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete)It(story) is a dream.Why do you(I) dream?I don't know, but I dream a waking dream and a sleeping dream, without cause and reason. **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=1Under 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...
Guest guest Posted June 19, 2003 Report Share Posted June 19, 2003 > If you wake up, there is no problem about this dream world. You have introduced two notions here: "dream world" and "problem" Dream does not to me imply any "world" to go with it. Why do you assume such? And whatever "problem" are you talking about? I am starting to feel you are not reading what I write, because you do not answer the questions I pose. -Bill kim ja nyun [kjn]Thursday, June 19, 2003 12:12 AMNisargadatta Subject: Re: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete) I am in the real world. I just witness the dream world arising from 'I'. I am beyond communication, discussion, meaning, concepts, distinction, understanding, etc. How can you(atman or consciousness) in the dream world understand 'I'? Only 'I' in the real world can understand you(atman or consciousness) in the dream world. For example, before you awake, can you understand that it is only the sleeping dream? Wake up! If you wake up, there is no problem about this dream world. - Bill Rishel Nisargadatta Thursday, June 19, 2003 2:51 PM RE: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete) << But all the above statements are concepts in consiousness by the Absolute(I). All these communication and discussion is a dream play. >> If all communication is "dream play" then is there any meaning to communication? Is it all just "castles in the air"? Or is some communication deeper and more real in some sense? For example, is there any significant distinction between the book "I Am That" and some romantic novel? If I understand you aright, there should be none, since they are all just "dream play". What say you then? -Bill kim ja nyun [kjn]Wednesday, June 18, 2003 4:57 PMNisargadatta Subject: Re: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete) You(I) can not be aware of yourself because you(I) are the source. When you say 'I know myself', you are in the ignorance state(consciousness state). Whenf you(I) say 'I don't know myself', you(I) are in the knowledge state(awareness state). You(I) are the knowlede(the pure and perfect knowledge) itself. But all the above statements are concepts in consiousness by the Absolute(I). All these communication and discussion is a dream play. ha ha ha ............ - Bill Rishel Nisargadatta Thursday, June 19, 2003 5:28 AM RE: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete) OK. Your term "story" throws me a bit, because it seems to lead somewhere. A dream, to me, just unfolds. And a dream needn't have "characters" as such. It can just be very 'dreamy', like melting clouds. A dream can leave no trace. But a story -- as I think of it -- has a 'path' through it. You can look back and see the tracks in the sand. That is just how I relate to the word 'story'. Indeed, it is all dream. Dreaming these words as they come through my fingers. It is trance. And within the trance a deeper Trance. And another deeper still. Who is to say what is real.... Perhaps it is just this "ever-deeping", this ever unfolding of yet another deeper Trance. -Bill kim ja nyun [kjn]Wednesday, June 18, 2003 1:14 AMNisargadatta Subject: Re: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete) Exactly say, the story is contents of a dream. - Bill Rishel Nisargadatta Wednesday, June 18, 2003 4:38 PM RE: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete) First you say story, now you say dream. Make up your mind! You say "It (story) is a dream". You still haven't answered my question: "What story?" -Bill kim ja nyun [kjn]Tuesday, June 17, 2003 8:47 PMNisargadatta Subject: Re: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete) It(story) is a dream. Why do you(I) dream? I don't know, but I dream a waking dream and a sleeping dream, without cause and reason. **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=1Under 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...
Guest guest Posted June 19, 2003 Report Share Posted June 19, 2003 I know consciousness(this dream world).But, I don't know the meaning of dream play arising from 'I' because I don't know 'I'.How can I know 'I' except saying that I am 'I'? - Bill Rishel Nisargadatta Thursday, June 19, 2003 4:35 PMRE: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete)> If you wake up, there is no problem about this dream world.You have introduced two notions here:"dream world" and "problem"Dream does not to me imply any "world" to go with it.Why do you assume such?And whatever "problem" are you talking about? I am starting to feel you are not reading what I write,because you do not answer the questions I pose. -Bill kim ja nyun [kjn]Thursday, June 19, 2003 12:12 AMNisargadatta Subject: Re: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete)I am in the real world.I just witness the dream world arising from 'I'.I am beyond communication, discussion, meaning, concepts, distinction, understanding, etc.How can you(atman or consciousness) in the dream world understand 'I'?Only 'I' in the real world can understand you(atman or consciousness) in the dream world.For example, before you awake, can you understand that it is only the sleeping dream?Wake up!If you wake up, there is no problem about this dream world.- Bill Rishel Nisargadatta Thursday, June 19, 2003 2:51 PMRE: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete)<<But all the above statements are concepts in consiousness by the Absolute(I).All these communication and discussion is a dream play.>> If all communication is "dream play" then is there any meaning to communication? Is it all just "castles in the air"?Or is some communication deeper and more real in some sense? For example, is there any significant distinction between the book"I Am That" and some romantic novel? If I understand you aright, there should be none, since they are alljust "dream play". What say you then? -Bill kim ja nyun [kjn]Wednesday, June 18, 2003 4:57 PMNisargadatta Subject: Re: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete)You(I) can not be aware of yourself because you(I) are the source.When you say 'I know myself', you are in the ignorance state(consciousness state).Whenf you(I) say 'I don't know myself', you(I) are in the knowledge state(awareness state).You(I) are the knowlede(the pure and perfect knowledge) itself. But all the above statements are concepts in consiousness by the Absolute(I).All these communication and discussion is a dream play.ha ha ha ............ - Bill Rishel Nisargadatta Thursday, June 19, 2003 5:28 AMRE: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete)OK. Your term "story" throws me a bit, because it seems to lead somewhere.A dream, to me, just unfolds.And a dream needn't have "characters" as such.It can just be very 'dreamy', like melting clouds. A dream can leave no trace.But a story -- as I think of it -- has a 'path' through it.You can look back and see the tracks in the sand. That is just how I relate to the word 'story'. Indeed, it is all dream.Dreaming these words as they come through my fingers. It is trance. And within the trance a deeper Trance. And another deeper still. Who is to say what is real.... Perhaps it is just this "ever-deeping",this ever unfoldingof yet another deeper Trance. -Billkim ja nyun [kjn]Wednesday, June 18, 2003 1:14 AMNisargadatta Subject: Re: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete)Exactly say,the story is contents of a dream.- Bill Rishel Nisargadatta Wednesday, June 18, 2003 4:38 PMRE: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete)First you say story, now you say dream.Make up your mind! You say "It (story) is a dream".You still haven't answered my question:"What story?" -Billkim ja nyun [kjn]Tuesday, June 17, 2003 8:47 PMNisargadatta Subject: Re: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete)It(story) is a dream.Why do you(I) dream?I don't know, but I dream a waking dream and a sleeping dream, without cause and reason. **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=1Under 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...
Guest guest Posted June 20, 2003 Report Share Posted June 20, 2003 Adding to the kim's previous message, Some parts of waking dream may be for realizaton as if the one awake due to a dreadful parts of sleeping dream.But nobody knows.It is spontaneous. And, it may be to see 'I' that the reason 'I' dream through consciousness.'Only I am' mean that everything in this dream world is 'Phenomenal I'.'Noumenal I' witness 'Phenomenal I', that is, 'I' in the real world witness everything in the dream world. - kim ja nyun Nisargadatta Thursday, June 19, 2003 5:25 PMRe: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete)I know consciousness(this dream world).But, I don't know the meaning of dream play arising from 'I' because I don't know 'I'.How can I know 'I' except saying that I am 'I'? - Bill Rishel Nisargadatta Thursday, June 19, 2003 4:35 PMRE: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete)> If you wake up, there is no problem about this dream world.You have introduced two notions here:"dream world" and "problem"Dream does not to me imply any "world" to go with it.Why do you assume such?And whatever "problem" are you talking about? I am starting to feel you are not reading what I write,because you do not answer the questions I pose. -Bill kim ja nyun [kjn]Thursday, June 19, 2003 12:12 AMNisargadatta Subject: Re: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete)I am in the real world.I just witness the dream world arising from 'I'.I am beyond communication, discussion, meaning, concepts, distinction, understanding, etc.How can you(atman or consciousness) in the dream world understand 'I'?Only 'I' in the real world can understand you(atman or consciousness) in the dream world.For example, before you awake, can you understand that it is only the sleeping dream?Wake up!If you wake up, there is no problem about this dream world.- Bill Rishel Nisargadatta Thursday, June 19, 2003 2:51 PMRE: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete)<<But all the above statements are concepts in consiousness by the Absolute(I).All these communication and discussion is a dream play.>> If all communication is "dream play" then is there any meaning to communication? Is it all just "castles in the air"?Or is some communication deeper and more real in some sense? For example, is there any significant distinction between the book"I Am That" and some romantic novel? If I understand you aright, there should be none, since they are alljust "dream play". What say you then? -Bill kim ja nyun [kjn]Wednesday, June 18, 2003 4:57 PMNisargadatta Subject: Re: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete)You(I) can not be aware of yourself because you(I) are the source.When you say 'I know myself', you are in the ignorance state(consciousness state).Whenf you(I) say 'I don't know myself', you(I) are in the knowledge state(awareness state).You(I) are the knowlede(the pure and perfect knowledge) itself. But all the above statements are concepts in consiousness by the Absolute(I).All these communication and discussion is a dream play.ha ha ha ............ - Bill Rishel Nisargadatta Thursday, June 19, 2003 5:28 AMRE: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete)OK. Your term "story" throws me a bit, because it seems to lead somewhere.A dream, to me, just unfolds.And a dream needn't have "characters" as such.It can just be very 'dreamy', like melting clouds. A dream can leave no trace.But a story -- as I think of it -- has a 'path' through it.You can look back and see the tracks in the sand. That is just how I relate to the word 'story'. Indeed, it is all dream.Dreaming these words as they come through my fingers. It is trance. And within the trance a deeper Trance. And another deeper still. Who is to say what is real.... Perhaps it is just this "ever-deeping",this ever unfoldingof yet another deeper Trance. -Billkim ja nyun [kjn]Wednesday, June 18, 2003 1:14 AMNisargadatta Subject: Re: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete)Exactly say,the story is contents of a dream.- Bill Rishel Nisargadatta Wednesday, June 18, 2003 4:38 PMRE: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete)First you say story, now you say dream.Make up your mind! You say "It (story) is a dream".You still haven't answered my question:"What story?" -Billkim ja nyun [kjn]Tuesday, June 17, 2003 8:47 PMNisargadatta Subject: Re: Re: Karma and consciousness (Pete)It(story) is a dream.Why do you(I) dream?I don't know, but I dream a waking dream and a sleeping dream, without cause and reason. **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=1Under 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.