Guest guest Posted February 1, 2004 Report Share Posted February 1, 2004 Doing nothing is my thing. Doing nothing, is being no thing- Being as snow falling on water, Like a river entering the sea. Like the moment before falling asleep- A surrendering to fading, a blissful not caring, A slipping away. Pete SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 1, 2004 Report Share Posted February 1, 2004 I can dig it, Pete. Me, too. I been doin nothing for a long time. That's why when I found these advaita dudes on the Web, I was like, whoa, these are my kinda people. I sit & do nothing for hours (I used to be into Zen). Now, that I've picked up on " self-inquiry " , doing nothing just gets better & better (nothing gets " better & better " ? who'd a thunk it?). Thanks for the cool pome. Later... Nisargadatta , pete seesaw <seesaw1us> wrote: > Doing nothing is my thing. > Doing nothing, is being no thing- > Being as snow falling on water, > Like a river entering the sea. > Like the moment before falling asleep- > A surrendering to fading, a blissful not caring, > A slipping away. > > Pete > > > > > > SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it! > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 1, 2004 Report Share Posted February 1, 2004 What do you mean by inquring, Dana? If you don't mind my inquiring. Nisargadatta , " danananda2004 " <danananda2004> wrote: > I can dig it, Pete. Me, too. I been doin nothing for a long time. > That's why when I found these advaita dudes on the Web, I was like, > whoa, these are my kinda people. I sit & do nothing for hours (I used > to be into Zen). Now, that I've picked up on " self-inquiry " , doing > nothing just gets better & better (nothing gets " better & better " ? > who'd a thunk it?). Thanks for the cool pome. Later... > > Nisargadatta , pete seesaw <seesaw1us> > wrote: > > Doing nothing is my thing. > > Doing nothing, is being no thing- > > Being as snow falling on water, > > Like a river entering the sea. > > Like the moment before falling asleep- > > A surrendering to fading, a blissful not caring, > > A slipping away. > > > > Pete > > > > > > > > > > > > SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it! > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 2, 2004 Report Share Posted February 2, 2004 Self-enquiry? That's that stuff Ramana Maharshi & Beedie Baba & Papaji & them guys were into. Who am I? I am. I. Etc. I done tracked the " I " down. I know what I is. Here's what I aint solved: What's up with this Big Self that Ramana & the Maharaj were talkin about? I can't find it. I mean, I can see where they are gettin it from (it's that ol time Hindu religion), but there aint no Big " I " in the Sky or nothing like that, Pete. That's just another Narcissistic projection. There is no self. No little one. No Big One. Unless you can show me different, Seesaw. I'm countin on you to set me straight. Give me the straight stuff. Don't water it down. I can handle it. The above question is most definitely open to comment from anyone else who may possess some in-sight on the subject-object. Thank you for your support. Peace out. Danananda. Nisargadatta , " seesaw1us " <seesaw1us> wrote: > What do you mean by inquring, Dana? If you don't mind my inquiring. > > Nisargadatta , " danananda2004 " > <danananda2004> wrote: > > I can dig it, Pete. Me, too. I been doin nothing for a long time. > > That's why when I found these advaita dudes on the Web, I was like, > > whoa, these are my kinda people. I sit & do nothing for hours (I > used > > to be into Zen). Now, that I've picked up on " self-inquiry " , doing > > nothing just gets better & better (nothing gets " better & better " ? > > who'd a thunk it?). Thanks for the cool pome. Later... > > > > Nisargadatta , pete seesaw <seesaw1us> > > wrote: > > > Doing nothing is my thing. > > > Doing nothing, is being no thing- > > > Being as snow falling on water, > > > Like a river entering the sea. > > > Like the moment before falling asleep- > > > A surrendering to fading, a blissful not caring, > > > A slipping away. > > > > > > Pete > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it! > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 2, 2004 Report Share Posted February 2, 2004 - Yeap, No 'I' in the sky. It's all an attempt at ownership and identification. Ego is bad, Self is good, they naively say. No matter how subtle or grandiose any identification is a 'me.' So we must throw out the baby, the bath water, and the washing basin too. There is only the Unknown. The unknown reflected in consciousness sees itself as the 'other.' Once the illusory other is postulated, an illusory self follows. They are inseparable. Once that's seen thrugh, it's back to square one: The unknown can only be lived, it can't be own, or known. And that's the itch that can't be scratched. LOL Pete -- In Nisargadatta , " danananda2004 " <danananda2004> wrote: > Self-enquiry? That's that stuff Ramana Maharshi & Beedie Baba & > Papaji & them guys were into. Who am I? I am. I. Etc. I done tracked > the " I " down. I know what I is. Here's what I aint solved: What's up > with this Big Self that Ramana & the Maharaj were talkin about? I > can't find it. I mean, I can see where they are gettin it from (it's > that ol time Hindu religion), but there aint no Big " I " in the Sky or > nothing like that, Pete. That's just another Narcissistic projection. > There is no self. No little one. No Big One. Unless you can show me > different, Seesaw. I'm countin on you to set me straight. Give me the > straight stuff. Don't water it down. I can handle it. > > The above question is most definitely open to comment from anyone > else who may possess some in-sight on the subject-object. Thank you > for your support. Peace out. Danananda. > > Nisargadatta , " seesaw1us " <seesaw1us> > wrote: > > What do you mean by inquring, Dana? If you don't mind my inquiring. > > > > Nisargadatta , " danananda2004 " > > <danananda2004> wrote: > > > I can dig it, Pete. Me, too. I been doin nothing for a long time. > > > That's why when I found these advaita dudes on the Web, I was > like, > > > whoa, these are my kinda people. I sit & do nothing for hours (I > > used > > > to be into Zen). Now, that I've picked up on " self-inquiry " , > doing > > > nothing just gets better & better (nothing gets " better & > better " ? > > > who'd a thunk it?). Thanks for the cool pome. Later... > > > > > > Nisargadatta , pete seesaw <seesaw1us> > > > wrote: > > > > Doing nothing is my thing. > > > > Doing nothing, is being no thing- > > > > Being as snow falling on water, > > > > Like a river entering the sea. > > > > Like the moment before falling asleep- > > > > A surrendering to fading, a blissful not caring, > > > > A slipping away. > > > > > > > > Pete > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it! > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 2, 2004 Report Share Posted February 2, 2004 Danananda wrote: > Self-enquiry? That's that stuff Ramana Maharshi & Beedie Baba & > Papaji & them guys were into. Who am I? I am. I. Etc. I done tracked > the " I " down. I know what I is. Here's what I aint solved: What's up > with this Big Self that Ramana & the Maharaj were talkin about? I > can't find it. I mean, I can see where they are gettin it from (it's > that ol time Hindu religion), but there aint no Big " I " in the Sky or > nothing like that, Pete. That's just another Narcissistic projection. > There is no self. No little one. No Big One. Unless you can show me > different, Seesaw. I'm countin on you to set me straight. Give me the > straight stuff. Don't water it down. I can handle it. > > The above question is most definitely open to comment from anyone > else who may possess some in-sight on the subject-object. Thank you > for your support. Peace out. Danananda. > The irony is that what is most simple is the most difficult to talk about. Ramana speaks of " Self " and Nisargaddata speaks of the " Absolute " . In both cases the term used does not really " refer to something " . In the same way the term " That " is used. Regarding " I " , whatever you say you know that I is, as far as I am concerned there is no such thing. It is a term used in speech, but there is nothing that corresponds to it. Ramana on the " I " : 14. If the first person, I, exists, then the second and third persons, you and he, will also exist. By enquiring into the nature of the I, the I perishes. With it 'you' and 'he' also perish. The resultant state, which shines as Absolute Being, is one's own natural state, the Self. Nisargadatta says essentially the same. The term Self is not one that I especially relate to. But that is just a matter of personal preference. The term " That " seems odd to me also. Indeed, the very use of any term seems odd to me. Perhaps this is what you are essentially driving at. But careful reading of Ramana and Nisargadatta shows that they don't have a particular " thing " in mind when they use those terms. It is simply what remains when all has fallen away. It can not really be spoken of because it is not an " it " . And yet speak of it we must, it would seem. Hence the connumdrum of speech around " it " . I have struggled to speak about this topic. Last night I jotted down: Absence is the only quality that can apply. When all is stripped away, only absence. At the moment that seems as close as I can come. And even that can be misleading, depending on the reader. As Ramana says, " It is not a void. " What I am interested in as far as lists such as this are concerned is learning how to talk about this kind of thing. There is much confusion around these topics, and there are those that are seeking to understand. And there is no " I " seeking to learn how to speak about these things either. What happens arises of its own accord. It is just the Nature at play within itself. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 3, 2004 Report Share Posted February 3, 2004 I couldn't have said it better my Self. When the " I " thought arises, it's shadow is the Self. Both are illusory, imaginary. Nothing ever happens. Can " you " dig it? Nisargadatta , " seesaw1us " <seesaw1us> wrote: > - > Yeap, No 'I' in the sky. It's all an attempt at ownership and > identification. Ego is bad, Self is good, they naively say. No matter > how subtle or grandiose any identification is a 'me.' So we must > throw out the baby, the bath water, and the washing basin too. > > There is only the Unknown. The unknown reflected in consciousness > sees itself as the 'other.' Once the illusory other is postulated, an > illusory self follows. They are inseparable. Once that's seen thrugh, > it's back to square one: The unknown can only be lived, it can't be > own, or known. And that's the itch that can't be scratched. > LOL > > Pete > > -- In Nisargadatta , " danananda2004 " > <danananda2004> wrote: > > Self-enquiry? That's that stuff Ramana Maharshi & Beedie Baba & > > Papaji & them guys were into. Who am I? I am. I. Etc. I done > tracked > > the " I " down. I know what I is. Here's what I aint solved: What's > up > > with this Big Self that Ramana & the Maharaj were talkin about? I > > can't find it. I mean, I can see where they are gettin it from > (it's > > that ol time Hindu religion), but there aint no Big " I " in the Sky > or > > nothing like that, Pete. That's just another Narcissistic > projection. > > There is no self. No little one. No Big One. Unless you can show me > > different, Seesaw. I'm countin on you to set me straight. Give me > the > > straight stuff. Don't water it down. I can handle it. > > > > The above question is most definitely open to comment from anyone > > else who may possess some in-sight on the subject-object. Thank you > > for your support. Peace out. Danananda. > > > > Nisargadatta , " seesaw1us " <seesaw1us> > > wrote: > > > What do you mean by inquring, Dana? If you don't mind my > inquiring. > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " danananda2004 " > > > <danananda2004> wrote: > > > > I can dig it, Pete. Me, too. I been doin nothing for a long > time. > > > > That's why when I found these advaita dudes on the Web, I was > > like, > > > > whoa, these are my kinda people. I sit & do nothing for hours > (I > > > used > > > > to be into Zen). Now, that I've picked up on " self-inquiry " , > > doing > > > > nothing just gets better & better (nothing gets " better & > > better " ? > > > > who'd a thunk it?). Thanks for the cool pome. Later... > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , pete seesaw > <seesaw1us> > > > > wrote: > > > > > Doing nothing is my thing. > > > > > Doing nothing, is being no thing- > > > > > Being as snow falling on water, > > > > > Like a river entering the sea. > > > > > Like the moment before falling asleep- > > > > > A surrendering to fading, a blissful not caring, > > > > > A slipping away. > > > > > > > > > > Pete > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > SiteBuilder - Free web site building tool. Try it! > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 3, 2004 Report Share Posted February 3, 2004 Nisargadatta , " Bill Rishel " <plexus@x> wrote: > Danananda wrote: > > Self-enquiry? That's that stuff Ramana Maharshi & Beedie Baba & > > Papaji & them guys were into. Who am I? I am. I. Etc. I done tracked > > the " I " down. I know what I is. Here's what I aint solved: What's up > > with this Big Self that Ramana & the Maharaj were talkin about? I > > can't find it. I mean, I can see where they are gettin it from (it's > > that ol time Hindu religion), but there aint no Big " I " in the Sky or > > nothing like that, Pete. That's just another Narcissistic projection. > > There is no self. No little one. No Big One. Unless you can show me > > different, Seesaw. I'm countin on you to set me straight. Give me the > > straight stuff. Don't water it down. I can handle it. > > > > The above question is most definitely open to comment from anyone > > else who may possess some in-sight on the subject-object. Thank you > > for your support. Peace out. Danananda. > > > > The irony is that what is most simple is the most difficult to talk > about. > > Ramana speaks of " Self " and Nisargaddata speaks of the " Absolute " . > In both cases the term used does not really " refer to something " . > In the same way the term " That " is used. > > Regarding " I " , whatever you say you know that I is, as far as > I am concerned there is no such thing. It is a term used in > speech, but there is nothing that corresponds to it. > > Ramana on the " I " : > > 14. If the first person, I, exists, then the second and third > persons, you and he, will also exist. By enquiring into the > nature of the I, the I perishes. With it 'you' and 'he' also > perish. The resultant state, which shines as Absolute Being, > is one's own natural state, the Self. > > Nisargadatta says essentially the same. > > The term Self is not one that I especially relate to. But that is > just a matter of personal preference. The term " That " seems odd > to me also. Indeed, the very use of any term seems odd to me. > Perhaps this is what you are essentially driving at. But careful > reading of Ramana and Nisargadatta shows that they don't have > a particular " thing " in mind when they use those terms. It is > simply what remains when all has fallen away. It can not really > be spoken of because it is not an " it " . And yet speak of it we > must, it would seem. Hence the connumdrum of speech around " it " . > > I have struggled to speak about this topic. Last night I jotted > down: > > Absence is the only quality that can apply. > When all is stripped away, only absence. > > At the moment that seems as close as I can come. And even that > can be misleading, depending on the reader. As Ramana says, > " It is not a void. " > > What I am interested in as far as lists such as this are > concerned is learning how to talk about this kind of thing. > There is much confusion around these topics, and there are > those that are seeking to understand. > > And there is no " I " seeking to learn how to speak about > these things either. What happens arises of its own accord. > It is just the Nature at play within itself. > > > Bill I hear THAT, my brother. It goes back to the old saw: " The Tao that can be spoken is not the Tao. " THAT is an oldie but a goodie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 3, 2004 Report Share Posted February 3, 2004 > When the " I " thought arises, it's shadow is the Self. Both are > illusory, imaginary. Nothing ever happens. Can " you " dig it? : ) 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.