Guest guest Posted January 13, 2004 Report Share Posted January 13, 2004 Observe deep into everything. The most important things are not on the surface. http://www.sheilah.net Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 13, 2004 Report Share Posted January 13, 2004 Nisargadatta , " Sheilah " <sheilah@s...> wrote: > > Observe deep into everything. The most important things are not on the > surface. > > http://www.sheilah.net The most important thing doesn't have a surface. http://www.nodepth.glug Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 13, 2004 Report Share Posted January 13, 2004 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> wrote: > Nisargadatta , " Sheilah " <sheilah@s...> wrote: > > > > Observe deep into everything. The most important things are not on > the > > surface. > > > > http://www.sheilah.net > > The most important thing doesn't have a surface. > > http://www.nodepth.glug look deeply into the surface and stay away from superficial depths http://www.whatyouseeiswhatyouhave.dot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 13, 2004 Report Share Posted January 13, 2004 > The most important thing doesn't have a surface. The most important thing is not a thing. Well, I agree with what I just wrote (no surprise), I agree with what Dan wrote, and I agree with whta Sheilah wrote. So what gives. Don't they contradict? Not to me. Meaning depends on context. And of the three comments, it seems to me that Sheilah's comment is the most *useful*. If one is to " inquire " , then inquire *deeply*. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 13, 2004 Report Share Posted January 13, 2004 > look deeply into the surface > and stay away from superficial depths Now that is cool! Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 13, 2004 Report Share Posted January 13, 2004 Nisargadatta , " Bill Rishel " <plexus@x> wrote: > > The most important thing doesn't have a surface. > > The most important thing is not a thing. > > Well, I agree with what I just wrote (no surprise), > I agree with what Dan wrote, and I agree with > whta Sheilah wrote. > > So what gives. Don't they contradict? > > Not to me. > > Meaning depends on context. > > And of the three comments, it seems to me that > Sheilah's comment is the most *useful*. > > If one is to " inquire " , then inquire *deeply*. > > Bill Useful? Oh no, now you're using things that people say to help you inquire deeply? You, the guy who said there are no questions now? Ah, Bill -- all that inquiry is just to satisfy yourself that there is no inquiry. -- Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 13, 2004 Report Share Posted January 13, 2004 Nisargadatta , " eric paroissien " <brahmanshines@a...> wrote: > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> > wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Sheilah " <sheilah@s...> wrote: > > > > > > Observe deep into everything. The most important things are not > on > > the > > > surface. > > > > > > http://www.sheilah.net > > > > The most important thing doesn't have a surface. > > > > http://www.nodepth.glug > > look deeply into the surface > and stay away from superficial depths > http://www.whatyouseeiswhatyouhave.dot Yes, exactly. It's much too easy to inquire into the depths, once you get the hang of it. It's way more demanding to stay right at the surface, like one of those insects that walks along the lake, without ever falling in -- http://www.insectoidlove.grub Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 13, 2004 Report Share Posted January 13, 2004 > > And of the three comments, it seems to me that > > Sheilah's comment is the most *useful*. > > > > If one is to " inquire " , then inquire *deeply*. > > > > Bill > > Useful? Oh no, now you're using things that > people say to help you inquire deeply? Nope. > You, the guy who said there are no questions now? > > Ah, Bill -- all that inquiry is just to satisfy yourself that > there is no inquiry. Not the point at all. For me: > > The most important thing is not a thing. is a statement that works just dandy. But for someone else, that may not be the case at all. It could be meaningless to someone else. I occurred to me that what Sheila said may be just right for her... at this time. So I appended my remark with those qualifications. Regarding " useful " , useful is useful if you have a use for that kind of thing. Depends on the person. I don't seem to have a use for " useful " at the moment. Maybe you don't either. This goes around a point I never seem to put my finger on. It has to do with what is " appropriate " being different for different people. For example, Nisargadatta's dialogs he addresses different people in very different ways. There is no such thing as statements that express absolute truths. When you say inquiry is just to end all inquiry... well... yes you are right... to me at this time that makes perfect sense. But it is not the statement for everyone. At least....*so it seems to me* : ) Bill - " dan330033 " <dan330033 <Nisargadatta > Tuesday, January 13, 2004 7:47 PM Re: Depth > Nisargadatta , " Bill Rishel " <plexus@x> wrote: > > > The most important thing doesn't have a surface. > > > > The most important thing is not a thing. > > > > Well, I agree with what I just wrote (no surprise), > > I agree with what Dan wrote, and I agree with > > whta Sheilah wrote. > > > > So what gives. Don't they contradict? > > > > Not to me. > > > > Meaning depends on context. > > > > And of the three comments, it seems to me that > > Sheilah's comment is the most *useful*. > > > > If one is to " inquire " , then inquire *deeply*. > > > > Bill > > Useful? Oh no, now you're using things that > people say to help you inquire deeply? > > You, the guy who said there are no questions now? > > Ah, Bill -- all that inquiry is just to satisfy yourself that > there is no inquiry. > > -- Dan > > > ** > > 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...
Guest guest Posted January 14, 2004 Report Share Posted January 14, 2004 Nisargadatta , " Bill Rishel " <plexus@x> wrote: > > > And of the three comments, it seems to me that > > > Sheilah's comment is the most *useful*. > > > > > > If one is to " inquire " , then inquire *deeply*. > > > > > > Bill > > > > Useful? Oh no, now you're using things that > > people say to help you inquire deeply? > Nope. > > > You, the guy who said there are no questions now? > > > > Ah, Bill -- all that inquiry is just to satisfy yourself that > > there is no inquiry. > Not the point at all. > > For me: > > > The most important thing is not a thing. > is a statement that works just dandy. > > But for someone else, that may not be the case at all. > It could be meaningless to someone else. Oh, I see, you're concerned about " someone else " -- > I occurred to me that what Sheila said may be just > right for her... at this time. And, you're looking out for Sheila, too. Nice of you, I'm sure she appreciates it. > So I appended my remark with those qualifications. Yes, God bless you for looking out for folks. > Regarding " useful " , useful is useful if you have > a use for that kind of thing. Depends on the person. You're the one making the statement. But now, I see that you're speaking on behalf of what may be helpful for " someone else. " Nice of you. > I don't seem to have a use for " useful " at the moment. > Maybe you don't either. Ya think? > This goes around a point I never seem to put my finger > on. It has to do with what is " appropriate " being > different for different people. The reason you can't put your finger on it, is because there's nothing there to put your finger on. > For example, Nisargadatta's > dialogs he addresses different people in very different ways. Bill, each moment is different, if you notice. While we are speaking, the moment in which each letter appears is different, let alone talking about how different people get addressed in different ways. > There is no such thing as statements that express > absolute truths. That itself is an absolute statement. Just thought you should know. :-) > When you say inquiry is just to > end all inquiry... well... yes you are right... > to me at this time that makes perfect sense. > But it is not the statement for everyone. God bless you for looking out for all of them. And hopefully someone is looking out for God, so God can get blessed, too. > At least....*so it seems to me* : ) The only point of inquiry is to reach the end of inquiry, and thus, inquiry is pointless. Which is why and how inquiry is to be engaged, fully and pointlessly, utterly and motivelessly. This pointlessness includes all being. Thus, there aren't any other ones, with their own points, which need to be looked out for, by someone else who is at another point. -- Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 14, 2004 Report Share Posted January 14, 2004 Yes, well, you know me. I look out for people. Why? After all they don't exist, right? And why did you write your response to me Dan? Are you trying to help me understand something? Perhaps for you it is a kind of Solitare. Playing chess with yourself. Except there is no one playing chess with himself. There is just a watching of the chess playing play itself. Yes? Well... same here. Just watching the " looking out for people " happen. No one watching that either. Even the watching " just happens " . Bill - " dan330033 " <dan330033 <Nisargadatta > Wednesday, January 14, 2004 10:10 AM Re: Depth > Nisargadatta , " Bill Rishel " <plexus@x> wrote: > > > > And of the three comments, it seems to me that > > > > Sheilah's comment is the most *useful*. > > > > > > > > If one is to " inquire " , then inquire *deeply*. > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > Useful? Oh no, now you're using things that > > > people say to help you inquire deeply? > > Nope. > > > > > You, the guy who said there are no questions now? > > > > > > Ah, Bill -- all that inquiry is just to satisfy yourself that > > > there is no inquiry. > > Not the point at all. > > > > For me: > > > > The most important thing is not a thing. > > is a statement that works just dandy. > > > > But for someone else, that may not be the case at all. > > It could be meaningless to someone else. > > Oh, I see, you're concerned about " someone else " -- > > > I occurred to me that what Sheila said may be just > > right for her... at this time. > > And, you're looking out for Sheila, too. Nice of you, > I'm sure she appreciates it. > > > So I appended my remark with those qualifications. > > Yes, God bless you for looking out for folks. > > > Regarding " useful " , useful is useful if you have > > a use for that kind of thing. Depends on the person. > > You're the one making the statement. But now, I see > that you're speaking on behalf of what may be helpful > for " someone else. " Nice of you. > > > I don't seem to have a use for " useful " at the moment. > > Maybe you don't either. > > Ya think? > > > This goes around a point I never seem to put my finger > > on. It has to do with what is " appropriate " being > > different for different people. > > The reason you can't put your finger on it, is because > there's nothing there to put your finger on. > > > For example, Nisargadatta's > > dialogs he addresses different people in very different ways. > > Bill, each moment is different, if you notice. > > While we are speaking, the moment in which each letter appears > is different, let alone talking about how different > people get addressed in different ways. > > > There is no such thing as statements that express > > absolute truths. > > That itself is an absolute statement. Just thought you > should know. :-) > > > When you say inquiry is just to > > end all inquiry... well... yes you are right... > > to me at this time that makes perfect sense. > > But it is not the statement for everyone. > > God bless you for looking out for all of them. > > And hopefully someone is looking out for God, so > God can get blessed, too. > > > At least....*so it seems to me* : ) > > The only point of inquiry is to reach the end of > inquiry, and thus, inquiry is pointless. > > Which is why and how inquiry is to be engaged, > fully and pointlessly, utterly and motivelessly. > > This pointlessness includes all being. > > Thus, there aren't any other ones, with their own > points, which need to be looked out for, by someone > else who is at another point. > > -- Dan > > > > ** > > 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...
Guest guest Posted January 14, 2004 Report Share Posted January 14, 2004 Nisargadatta , " Bill Rishel " <plexus@x> wrote: > Yes, well, you know me. I look out for people. > Why? > After all they don't exist, right? Nonsense. You'd have to exist to say they don't exist, right? And if you exist, they exist, right? > And why did you write your response to me Dan? > Are you trying to help me understand something? I've given up on you, Bill :-) > Perhaps for you it is a kind of Solitare. The unbounded kind. > Playing chess with yourself. There's not even one to be a self to play. > Except there is no one playing chess with himself. What do you mean " except " ?? > There is just a watching of the chess playing play > itself. Yes? There is just " this " -- define it how you wish, you haven't. So, fit the context, and it means something, don't fit it, and it doesn't mean something. Either way, it's still just " this. " > Well... same here. There isn't anything once, so how does it get to be the same somewhere else? > Just watching the " looking out for people " happen. So you say. > No one watching that either. You'd have to exist to know that! > Even the watching " just happens " . Even the Rolex just watches. :-) Cheers upon your head, 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.