Guest guest Posted April 10, 2004 Report Share Posted April 10, 2004 Even though conventionally it is spoken as such, ............it is not that the psycho-somatic biological conditioned organism is sentient. Rather the psycho-somatic biological conditioned organism is a risen durational appearance.... ..... in sentience-ing. A durational appearance which dissipates in time. The rising, the duration and the ebbing of appearances..................all in the moment. The rising, the duration and the ebbing of sentience-ing..................also in the same moment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 10, 2004 Report Share Posted April 10, 2004 Nisargadatta , sandeep <sandeepc@b...> wrote: > Even though conventionally it is spoken as such, ............it is not that the psycho-somatic biological conditioned organism is sentient. > > Rather the psycho-somatic biological conditioned organism is a risen durational appearance.... > > .... in sentience-ing. > > A durational appearance which dissipates in time. > > The rising, the duration and the ebbing of appearances..................all in the moment. > > The rising, the duration and the ebbing of sentience- ing..................also in the same moment. > > e# Sandeep you are aware that your language is hard to follow, i have no idea if the uroboros snake biting its tail technique is the result of an effort or a mode of thinking that comes on you in a block. to answer your point: i must guess through various tools i have at hand (direct perception, or experience, or instinct,etc.) that you introduce sentience-ing in time in relation to perception that needs an object ... you mean time as the distance to the object ... that you want to help the reader collapse this distancing/sentience-ing. I have no physical (:-)) possibility to grasp the relationship between the arising of sentience in the moment and words like: psycho-somatic biological conditioned organism I dont see how this extends to that. maybe it's my brain :-) any way at least i got that from your message: sentience <--> arising time with my: perception <--> distance to the object/me separate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 10, 2004 Report Share Posted April 10, 2004 Hi Eric, - " ericparoissien " <msrhood <Nisargadatta > Saturday, April 10, 2004 02:24 PM Re: In the moment....... <SNIP> > e# Sandeep you are aware that your language is hard to follow, Is it? You need to remember, that not being native-English born, da lingo is a fuzzy one, mon.:-) > i have no idea if the uroboros snake biting its tail technique is the result > of an effort or a mode of thinking that comes on you in a block. > to answer your point: > i must guess through various tools i have at hand (direct perception, > or experience, or instinct,etc.) that you introduce sentience-ing in > time in relation to perception that needs an object ... you mean time > as the distance to the object ... that you want to help the reader > collapse this distancing/sentience-ing. There is no one to be helped to collapse the never happened distancing. So why the prattlings? Happens whenever the Cohiba cigars run out. > I have no physical (:-)) possibility to grasp the relationship > between the arising of sentience in the moment and words like: > psycho-somatic > biological > conditioned > organism Why? What else is the object that is popularly known as 'Eric " or whatever is your non-cyber name? > I dont see how this extends to that. Is your question on how would,........ apparently appearing so substantive objects,....... arise? The so substantive, so solidly real objects are, as now science validates, a specific coalescing, as a consequence of a specific mode of vibration. If you are moved to,....... have a look at: http://the-covenant.net/pou86.htm > maybe it's my brain :-) > any way at least i got that from your message: > sentience <--> arising time > with my: > perception <--> distance to the object/me separate Indeed . The advent of sentience is the simultaneous birth of the subject-object duality, of manifestation. For cognition of the " other " object, whether that object is your wife or the TGV from Garde du Lyon, ..... ........the object must be extended in dimension, ......... .............hence " distance " and ergo " space " , is born. Cognition, further needs manifestation to be extended in duration, ............hence " time " is born. Arising sentience is thus simultaneous advent of duality------->manifestation------------>the-space-time continuum in which manifestation arises. All simultaneous. Dissipated sentience, is the simultaneous disappearance of the entire hoopla. That which appears and disappears, can only be child of a barren woman, as the Beedi dude put it succinctly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 10, 2004 Report Share Posted April 10, 2004 Nisargadatta , sandeep <sandeepc@b...> wrote: > Hi Eric, > > - > " ericparoissien " <msrhood@a...> > <Nisargadatta > > Saturday, April 10, 2004 02:24 PM > Re: In the moment....... > > > <SNIP> > > > > e# Sandeep you are aware that your language is hard to follow, > > Is it? > > You need to remember, that not being native-English born, da lingo is a > fuzzy one, mon.:-) > i don't remember if you live in the Mississipi or in Bombay, there's been a confusion in memory, doesn't matter. your english is tiptop i guess you were born in it, i cannot produce quality english but i can recognize it in a little portion of the english tongue natives. > > > i have no idea if the uroboros snake biting its tail technique is the > result > > of an effort or a mode of thinking that comes on you in a block. > > to answer your point: > > i must guess through various tools i have at hand (direct perception, > > or experience, or instinct,etc.) that you introduce sentience-ing in > > time in relation to perception that needs an object ... you mean time > > as the distance to the object ... that you want to help the reader > > collapse this distancing/sentience-ing. > > > There is no one to be helped to collapse the never happened distancing. > > So why the prattlings? to keep the machine going for fear of rust. > > Happens whenever the Cohiba cigars run out. > e# i have a great admiration for the small Cuban against the silly big bull. ViVa FIdel! > > > I have no physical (:-)) possibility to grasp the relationship > > between the arising of sentience in the moment and words like: > > psycho-somatic > > biological > > conditioned > > organism > > > Why? > > What else is the object that is popularly known as 'Eric " or whatever is > your non-cyber name? e# the name is Eric Paroissien i'm in the book but the address just changed in Paris: 01.46.36.86.37 you thought i was some celebrity hiding behind a pseudoname? he he, John Malkovitch incognito in Paris in a cyber cafe " je vous tres parler bien francais " a fun guy to be in his skin actually. (or Woody Allen) > > I dont see how this extends to that. > > Is your question on how would,........ apparently appearing so substantive > objects,....... arise? > > The so substantive, so solidly real objects are, as now science validates, a > specific coalescing, as a consequence of a specific mode of vibration. e# ok Sandeep, and then the next science will validate an other view at my ignorance, do you think my ignorance will be defined more and more accurately or is it the absence of ignorance that undergoes (or produces) the definition? (it is not a question) > > If you are moved to,....... have a look at: > > http://the-covenant.net/pou86.htm e# i'll go, last time you gave me " the-covenant.net " i went there and had this great 'push' with the idea " science cannot manage to find a me inside the brain " ... of course as i am telling you repeatedly on the net (and by telepathy) the whole brain science lingo is sacred cow dust, and i have more respect for you because you so stubbornly (and unperturbed) push these 'interesting' ideas than because these ideas are 'interesting'. > > > > maybe it's my brain :-) > > any way at least i got that from your message: > > sentience <--> arising time > > with my: > > perception <--> distance to the object/me separate > > Indeed . > > The advent of sentience is the simultaneous birth of the subject- object > duality, of manifestation. > > For cognition of the " other " object, whether that object is your wife or the > TGV from Garde du Lyon, ..... > > .......the object must be extended in dimension, ......... > > ............hence " distance " and ergo " space " , is born. e# i have no idea why this is all so obvious to me to the point that most things you say i could say myself (they told you i'm arrogant too) but in clumsier expressions, and still be stuck with this sense of being stuck in the stucking of my wife's stockings. > Cognition, further needs manifestation to be extended in duration, > ...........hence " time " is born. > > Arising sentience is thus simultaneous advent of > duality------->manifestation------------>the-space-time continuum in which > manifestation arises. > > All simultaneous. e# this is practically how i see it. > > Dissipated sentience, is the simultaneous disappearance of the entire > hoopla. e# this i don't get, 'dissipation'?? i don't mind to die (no one else seems to mind around if i would, my wife would cry for 655hours then stop.) > That which appears and disappears, can only be child of a barren woman, as > the Beedi dude put it succinctly. e# teaching among the fumes and the public toilet scent in front of his shabby place. some impressions stick. maybe this all means that the verb does not do it for me possible the world reveals better through vibrations than language. " Ssssank heaveen for liteul gerrlz! " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 10, 2004 Report Share Posted April 10, 2004 - " ericparoissien " <msrhood <Nisargadatta > Saturday, April 10, 2004 10:42 PM Re: In the moment....... > e# i'll go, last time you gave me " the-covenant.net " i went there and > had this great 'push' with the idea " science cannot manage to find a > me inside the brain " ... of course as i am telling you repeatedly on > the net (and by telepathy) the whole brain science lingo is sacred > cow dust, and i have more respect for you because you so stubbornly > (and unperturbed) push these 'interesting' ideas than because these > ideas are 'interesting'. Fine. > > > > > > > maybe it's my brain :-) > > > any way at least i got that from your message: > > > sentience <--> arising time > > > with my: > > > perception <--> distance to the object/me separate > > > > Indeed . > > > > The advent of sentience is the simultaneous birth of the subject- > object > > duality, of manifestation. > > > > For cognition of the " other " object, whether that object is your > wife or the > > TGV from Garde du Lyon, ..... > > > > .......the object must be extended in dimension, ......... > > > > ............hence " distance " and ergo " space " , is born. > > e# i have no idea why this is all so obvious to me to the point that > most things you say i could say myself (they told you i'm arrogant > too) but in clumsier expressions, and still be stuck with this sense > of being stuck in the stucking of my wife's stockings. LOL If you say so, it must be so true for Eric. > > > Cognition, further needs manifestation to be extended in duration, > > ...........hence " time " is born. > > > > Arising sentience is thus simultaneous advent of > > duality------->manifestation------------>the-space-time continuum > in which > > manifestation arises. > > > > All simultaneous. > > e# this is practically how i see it. > > > > Dissipated sentience, is the simultaneous disappearance of the > entire > > hoopla. > > e# this i don't get, 'dissipation'?? i don't mind to die (no one else > seems to mind around if i would, my wife would cry for 655hours then > stop.) That much, eh? You say " i don't mind to die " Were you ever born that you don't mind to die? > > > That which appears and disappears, can only be child of a barren > woman, as > > the Beedi dude put it succinctly. > > e# teaching among the fumes and the public toilet scent in front of > his shabby place. some impressions stick. Did you ever visit Kherwadi Lane? > > maybe this all means that the verb does not do it for me possible the > world reveals better through vibrations than language. What on earth do you mean to say out there? Remember to keep it simple, please. > > " Ssssank heaveen for liteul gerrlz! " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 10, 2004 Report Share Posted April 10, 2004 I like this. You have introduced the notion of " sentience-ing " as an abstraction more suited for an " in the moment orientation " than that of a " being " . And for me it works. " Sentience-ing " as a term is a little awkward, but the denotation is accurate. So yes there are " waves " in sentience-ing, " arisings " and " ebbings " ... and really... even those are illusion. Against a background of no-change is the ebb-and-flow, the appearance of change. It seems the no-change is the truth, the reality, but how could it be known without the appearance of change? I seems that *consciousness* of no-change is possible only with the appearance of change. Hence illusion is essential to consciousness. Bill - sandeep Nisargadatta Friday, April 09, 2004 11:05 PM In the moment....... Even though conventionally it is spoken as such, ............it is not that the psycho-somatic biological conditioned organism is sentient. Rather the psycho-somatic biological conditioned organism is a risen durational appearance.... ..... in sentience-ing. A durational appearance which dissipates in time. The rising, the duration and the ebbing of appearances..................all in the moment. The rising, the duration and the ebbing of sentience-ing..................also in the same moment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 10, 2004 Report Share Posted April 10, 2004 Nisargadatta , sandeep <sandeepc@b...> wrote: > > Did you ever visit Kherwadi Lane? e# no no it's in some thick book i keep by the door to block it when i carry the grocery. > > > > > maybe this all means that the verb does not do it for me possible the > > world reveals better through vibrations than language. > > > What on earth do you mean to say out there? > Remember to keep it simple, please. e# AMOF (as a matter of fact) reading it again i have no idea what i meant then. sorry > > > > > > > > " Ssssank heaveen for liteul gerrlz! " > > > > 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.