present and present moment

June 24, 2003

Quotation from 'Explorations into the Eternal'. " 'I' am the eternal present moment, the 'me' is the conceptual flow of time from the future to the past, a flow that makes the relative present impossible to exist. By the time an event is perceived, cognized and interpreted in consciousness by the mind in duality - the split-mind - the event has already become the past. The duration of the process of perceiving, cognizing and interpreting an event makes it impossible for an event to exist in the present vis-a-vis the past and the future. The 'present' must surely be nothing but conceptual as a presence, only a notion in mind, an appearance in consciousness having no factual existence whatever: We are here and now in the present moment, and can know no present in duration. In other words, the flow of the future into the past can only be witnessed in the present moment. Whatever we think we are doing in the 'present' has already been done in the past that has been irretrievably lost. In these circumstances, can our volitional actions have any meaning in regard to their affecting the future? If not, then can what we recognize and believe as our 'living' have any meaning either? Living, as such, can only be in a duration which must have a present and future, but when we realize the flow of the future into the past is merely a fantasy witnessed by the 'I' which is the only constant, here and now, it should be clear that there cannot be any objective 'time', any duration, independently of this 'I' which is conceiving it as such, here and now. In other words, the ineluctable fact emerges that space-time duration is only a device by which the objective manifestation of the supreme unicity of the subjective 'I' could be extended and measured."

June 24, 2003

on 6/23/03 1:22 PM, kim ja nyun at kjn wrote:

> Quotation from 'Explorations into the Eternal'.

>

> " 'I' am the eternal present moment, the 'me' is the conceptual flow of time

> from the future to the past, a flow that makes the relative present impossible

> to exist. By the time an event is perceived, cognized and interpreted in

> consciousness by the mind in duality - the split-mind - the event has already

> become the past. The duration of the process of perceiving, cognizing and

> interpreting an event makes it impossible for an event to exist in the present

> vis-a-vis the past and the future.

>

> The 'present' must surely be nothing but conceptual as a presence, only a

> notion in mind, an appearance in consciousness having no factual existence

> whatever: We are here and now in the present moment, and can know no present

> in duration. In other words, the flow of the future into the past can only be

> witnessed in the present moment. Whatever we think we are doing in the

> 'present' has already been done in the past that has been irretrievably lost.

> In these circumstances, can our volitional actions have any meaning in regard

> to their affecting the future? If not, then can what we recognize and believe

> as our 'living' have any meaning either?

>

> Living, as such, can only be in a duration which must have a present and

> future, but when we realize the flow of the future into the past is merely a

> fantasy witnessed by the 'I' which is the only constant, here and now, it

> should be clear that there cannot be any objective 'time', any duration,

> independently of this 'I' which is conceiving it as such, here and now. In

> other words, the ineluctable fact emerges that space-time duration is only a

> device by which the objective manifestation of the supreme unicity of the

> subjective 'I' could be extended and measured. "

>

You guys need to come down. This conceptual mental gymnastics will get you

nowhere. Are you a body? Have you no fear? Have you nothing to want? Surely,

the most obvious love that IS would be more obvious in your mental ramblings

if you understood to the point of ** & ^%%$#$%@.??? Space-time surely exists

for the mind that says it does not. Who is thinking all this crap?

If you were already *there*, I doubt that such things would come from your

nonexisting mouths....but maybe that's just me...well of course it is!

Hey thanks for bringing me back!

)))))))Shawn

June 24, 2003

Depend on the consciousness!- shawn Nisargadatta Tuesday, June 24, 2003 3:28 PMRe: present and present momenton 6/23/03 1:22 PM, kim ja nyun at kjn wrote:> Quotation from 'Explorations into the Eternal'.> > " 'I' am the eternal present moment, the 'me' is the conceptual flow of time> from the future to the past, a flow that makes the relative present impossible> to exist. By the time an event is perceived, cognized and interpreted in> consciousness by the mind in duality - the split-mind - the event has already> become the past. The duration of the process of perceiving, cognizing and> interpreting an event makes it impossible for an event to exist in the present> vis-a-vis the past and the future.> > The 'present' must surely be nothing but conceptual as a presence, only a> notion in mind, an appearance in consciousness having no factual existence> whatever: We are here and now in the present moment, and can know no present> in duration. In other words, the flow of the future into the past can only be> witnessed in the present moment. Whatever we think we are doing in the> 'present' has already been done in the past that has been irretrievably lost.> In these circumstances, can our volitional actions have any meaning in regard> to their affecting the future? If not, then can what we recognize and believe> as our 'living' have any meaning either?> > Living, as such, can only be in a duration which must have a present and> future, but when we realize the flow of the future into the past is merely a> fantasy witnessed by the 'I' which is the only constant, here and now, it> should be clear that there cannot be any objective 'time', any duration,> independently of this 'I' which is conceiving it as such, here and now. In> other words, the ineluctable fact emerges that space-time duration is only a> device by which the objective manifestation of the supreme unicity of the> subjective 'I' could be extended and measured."> You guys need to come down. This conceptual mental gymnastics will get younowhere. Are you a body? Have you no fear? Have you nothing to want? Surely,the most obvious love that IS would be more obvious in your mental ramblingsif you understood to the point of ** & ^%%$#$%@.??? Space-time surely existsfor the mind that says it does not. Who is thinking all this crap?If you were already *there*, I doubt that such things would come from yournonexisting mouths....but maybe that's just me...well of course it is!Hey thanks for bringing me back!)))))))Shawn**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.

June 30, 2003

Adding to the previous Quotation. "Remain in the conceptual present moment or the Here-And-Now.Presence in the Here-And-Now is eternal because there is no individual who can know it phenomenally." - kim ja nyun Nisargadatta Tuesday, June 24, 2003 8:22 AM present and present momentQuotation from 'Explorations into the Eternal'. " 'I' am the eternal present moment, the 'me' is the conceptual flow of time from the future to the past, a flow that makes the relative present impossible to exist. By the time an event is perceived, cognized and interpreted in consciousness by the mind in duality - the split-mind - the event has already become the past. The duration of the process of perceiving, cognizing and interpreting an event makes it impossible for an event to exist in the present vis-a-vis the past and the future. The 'present' must surely be nothing but conceptual as a presence, only a notion in mind, an appearance in consciousness having no factual existence whatever: We are here and now in the present moment, and can know no present in duration. In other words, the flow of the future into the past can only be witnessed in the present moment. Whatever we think we are doing in the 'present' has already been done in the past that has been irretrievably lost. In these circumstances, can our volitional actions have any meaning in regard to their affecting the future? If not, then can what we recognize and believe as our 'living' have any meaning either? Living, as such, can only be in a duration which must have a present and future, but when we realize the flow of the future into the past is merely a fantasy witnessed by the 'I' which is the only constant, here and now, it should be clear that there cannot be any objective 'time', any duration, independently of this 'I' which is conceiving it as such, here and now. In other words, the ineluctable fact emerges that space-time duration is only a device by which the objective manifestation of the supreme unicity of the subjective 'I' could be extended and measured."