Guest guest Posted October 10, 2004 Report Share Posted October 10, 2004 > J:Through examining and investigating we can discover the state of no > concepts, no thought, a state free from constructs > which is not conceptual mind. One could call that " practice " . P: And many do call it practice, and think that's enough. And that was the point of my post below, that such intellectual understanding won't dismantle the reactive mechanisms of defense and attack. Won't lead to that point were thoughts gently fade, and original nature shines fore. On the contrary, mere understanding, sometimes, speed up and harden the thinking process, creating a different kind of delusion. The delusion, in which thoughts constantly reassure themselves of their non-existence. If the mind mistakes this assurance for liberation, it has fallen into an inescapable trap. Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2004 Report Share Posted October 10, 2004 Hi Pete, Let me tell you I really like what you wrote. It is always a pleasure to read you. What I am realizing is that you more recent tesxts of the last months are much more fluent, more soft than those I was used to see before. Those mostly gave me the feeling as if your were writing with needles pinned all over your body and mind. Do you have a new girl friend ? Werner Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <Pedsie2@a...> wrote: > > Most Advaita followers are against practice. > This is a philosophical stance. It derives > from applying faulty logic to their two basic > tenants: > 1)Not two > 2)No doer. > > The faulty logic, in my opinion, works like this: > There is no separate self; therefore, there are > no entities to do anything. So far so good, but > from that no entities conclusion, they leap to > negate doing per se. It doesn't follow that action > demands an entity that does the doing. Action just > happens. > > So, practice could happen without a doer. > Most mental states are preceded by a certain action: > Seeing, as we awake in the morning, is preceded by the > act of opening one's eyes. No one in their right > mind would call opening one's eyes, a practice. So > why should perception without thought be called a > 'practice'? > Why call being quiet and attentive, a practice > done by a doer? > This people elevate their faulty logic to dogma, and > become trap in their own ideas. Understanding certain > Advaita concepts is not enough, Perception must be > restored to its original purity. For this, attention > has to shift from thought to perception. Let's not > get ensnared by the idea that this shift is the > doing of an entity. > > Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2004 Report Share Posted October 10, 2004 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> wrote: > > Hi Pete, > > Let me tell you I really like what you wrote. It is always a pleasure > to read you. > > What I am realizing is that you more recent tesxts of the last months > are much more fluent, more soft than those I was used to see before. > Those mostly gave me the feeling as if your were writing with needles > pinned all over your body and mind. > > Do you have a new girl friend ? > > Werner > > Hi Werner, It's great to hear that your understanding is getting softer. I have no girl friend (my wife has me on a leach)I can still look, but can't run to them wagging my tail. How about you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2004 Report Share Posted October 10, 2004 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> wrote: > > Hi Pete, > > Let me tell you I really like what you wrote. It is always a pleasure > to read you. > > What I am realizing is that you more recent tesxts of the last months > are much more fluent, more soft than those I was used to see before. > Those mostly gave me the feeling as if your were writing with needles > pinned all over your body and mind. > > Do you have a new girl friend ? > > Werner > > > Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <Pedsie2@a...> wrote: > > > > Most Advaita followers are against practice. Practice.......any practice.....when perceived as being initiated by the assumed self...is less then useless in that it only adds to the illision of the self's realness Practice is designed to somehow improve the imagined conditions of a phantom. Only when it is realized that origin of the self's dilemma...is the result of the assumption of autonomy (and in truth does not exist at all) and that it is not correctable from within...is the loop broken...It cannot be broken from within... This realization cannot be initiated through any activity that is perceived as originating within the self. > > This is a philosophical stance. It derives > > from applying faulty logic to their two basic > > tenants: > > 1)Not two > > 2)No doer. All so called logic that originates from the assumption of autonomy is faulty....... All of the water downstream for a sewage plant is suspect. > > > > The faulty logic, in my opinion, works like this: ] Who...or what is this " my " that you refer to...but another result of faulty ligic........a temporary storehouse of conceptual memories? It can never be a judge of its own assumed conditions. > > There is no separate self; therefore, there are > > no entities to do anything. So far so good, but > > from that no entities conclusion, they leap to > > negate doing per se. It doesn't follow that action > > demands an entity that does the doing. Action just > > happens. Action happens.....perception happens within an entity. > > > > So, practice could happen without a doer. Practice requires a locus in which to occur.....when this locus becomes self identified....and assumes autonomy....the hoopla begins. > > Most mental states are preceded by a certain action: > > Seeing, as we awake in the morning, is preceded by the > > act of opening one's eyes. No one in their right > > mind would call opening one's eyes, a practice. So > > why should perception without thought be called a > > 'practice'? > > Why call being quiet and attentive, a practice > > done by a doer? > > This people elevate their faulty logic to dogma, and > > become trap in their own ideas. Understanding certain > > Advaita concepts is not enough, Perception must be > > restored to its original purity. For this, attention > > has to shift from thought to perception. Let's not > > get ensnared by the idea that this shift is the > > doing of an entity. > > > > Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2004 Report Share Posted October 10, 2004 Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <Pedsie2@a...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> > wrote: > > > > Hi Pete, > > > > Let me tell you I really like what you wrote. It is always a > pleasure > > to read you. > > > > What I am realizing is that you more recent tesxts of the last > months > > are much more fluent, more soft than those I was used to see > before. > > Those mostly gave me the feeling as if your were writing with > needles > > pinned all over your body and mind. > > > > Do you have a new girl friend ? > > > > Werner > > > > > Hi Werner, > It's great to hear that your understanding is getting softer. > Its always comforting to hear nice things about our self.... > I have no girl friend ( " You " have nothing.) > (my wife ( " She " is not " your " wife.) >has me on a leach) (The only leash.....is self imposed) >I can still look, (Looking can happen through the assumed you) > but can't run to them wagging my tail. (Its not even your tail) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2004 Report Share Posted October 10, 2004 Hi Pete, My post wasn't meant sarcastic or even as an attack. I just wanted to bring what you wrote down to a more practical view. You wrote: > It's great to hear that your understanding is getting softer. Yeah, but I am still blind and projecting (which I tend to call analysis) When it comes to wagging my tail I rather prefer to lead a peaceful life Hope you are fine ... Werner Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <Pedsie2@a...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> > wrote: > > > > Hi Pete, > > > > Let me tell you I really like what you wrote. It is always a > pleasure > > to read you. > > > > What I am realizing is that you more recent tesxts of the last > months > > are much more fluent, more soft than those I was used to see > before. > > Those mostly gave me the feeling as if your were writing with > needles > > pinned all over your body and mind. > > > > Do you have a new girl friend ? > > > > Werner > > > > > Hi Werner, > It's great to hear that your understanding is getting softer. > > I have no girl friend (my wife has me on a leach)I can still look, > but can't run to them wagging my tail. How about you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2004 Report Share Posted October 10, 2004 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> wrote: > > Hi Pete, > > My post wasn't meant sarcastic or even as an attack. I just wanted to > bring what you wrote down to a more practical view. > > You wrote: > > It's great to hear that your understanding is getting softer. > > Yeah, but I am still blind and projecting (which I tend to call > analysis) > > When it comes to wagging my tail I rather prefer to lead a peaceful > life > > Hope you are fine ... Werner Your comment wasn't taken as negative. I was just pointing out that what I write has not changed that much, so maybe your understanding has. Am I right in assuming you live alone, have few friends? Please, always count me as a friend, Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 10, 2004 Report Share Posted October 10, 2004 Hi Pete, Fine that you haven't seen my comment as negative. To answer your question: Yes I am living alone and have few friends. Werner Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <Pedsie2@a...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> > wrote: > > > > Hi Pete, > > > > My post wasn't meant sarcastic or even as an attack. I just wanted > to > > bring what you wrote down to a more practical view. > > > > You wrote: > > > It's great to hear that your understanding is getting softer. > > > > Yeah, but I am still blind and projecting (which I tend to call > > analysis) > > > > When it comes to wagging my tail I rather prefer to lead a peaceful > > life > > > > Hope you are fine ... Werner > > Your comment wasn't taken as negative. I was just pointing out > that what I write has not changed that much, so maybe your > understanding has. Am I right in assuming you live alone, > have few friends? > Please, always count me as a friend, > > Pete 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.