Guest guest Posted October 28, 2004 Report Share Posted October 28, 2004 Hi Werner, you have catched my thoughts... :-)) You are writing: >Consciousness is it's content. There is no screen or pure >consciousness where the world is appaearing on or in. Very true, and you say it in a wonderful way. Maybe I should not add a word, but I would like to try one more time to share my thoughts about this. I see this " Consciousness " (or whatever it is called) as the non-duality state of truth. The fact that we interprete the same truth here as an endless number of duality-splitted phenomena is due to the way our receptive organs function. I feel this is such a simple fact that we tend to overlook it. No receptive organs - no duality! My problems with " Nada " : Provided Niz is not a fraud, he is speaking from the position of this " Conciousness " . He is talking as someone who has disappeared there but still has a link to his body and is able to give signs in the dualistic world. As strangely as this sounds, I have no better explanation. It seems from the way he is talking that he has a positive approach to anybody, who is willing to attain the same state. Why? Because it is the highest state a human being can reach, the natural state? Thats what I hear from the masters. It must have something to do with becoming " awake " ... in a sense that the mind cannot imagine. I dont believe it has anything to do with anything that the brain is ever capable to imagine. There are simply no words for it. And to call it " Nada " is as wrong as to call it " nothingness " , " deep sleep " , " dead " or even " Conciousness " . Those are all poor terms from the illusionary world of duality. The Vedas have noticed this problem, elaborated it and introduced the word " Shunyam " as a code. Finally it has to be accepted that the personality of " you " or " me " plays absolutely no role in this state of realization. It is simply out of the game. But no person can imagine that he would be able to experience something and at the same time would not exist. The possibility that it does not even exist in the first place is beyond anything thinkable. Any brain that is trying to build up theories in this realm is bound to end up in contradictions. So the best way is - regarding that state Nisargadatta is pointing at - to become silent. S. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 28, 2004 Report Share Posted October 28, 2004 Dear Stefan, Strange enough, I have edited my post " The trick " then deleted it and reposted the new text - and it hasn't appeared yet, it seems you have replied to the original text I am pleased that you liked that text and even had similar thoughts but if you didn't it would be ok too. You see, I more and more have difficulties with, hmm, lets say intellectual words lik " non-dual " etc. When writing this I am imagining having a non-dual breakfast with non-dual ham and eggs and that those eggs are " phenomenons experienced by a subject which can't experience itself " I have to admit I feel really odd now So I better have breakfast and enjoy it. I know it is profane by I prefer the latter procedure. I cannot discuss what Pete meant with " nada " I only can share how I see it: Imagine just moving a spoonful of ham to your mouth and when it reached your mouth - the ham is gone, the spoon is empty - nada. Similar: You are looking out of the window, hearing the traffic noises, watching your thoughts and feel your boody sitting on the chair, and suddenly you realize that there is no looker, no hearer, no sitter, no feeler, no thinker. Nothing changed, everything as it was before but no one there: Nada con carne. I can't explain it better and it sounds awful mysterious but it is the most obvious fact of the world: No one there ... Werner ........ here is the original text " The trick " ........... Some ideas: Ramana told that you are the screen, you are consciousness, Niz said this too to some visitors and his claim to seek and stay with one's " I am " has just the same task or goal. Balsekar often said that one is pure consciousness but with Balsekar I suspect that he indeed believed that, but I am not sure - maybe Balsekar here is tricky too. In reality what this guys were aiming at when trying to find " pure consciousness " was just to realize sooner or later that there is no consciousness, that there is no " I am " , there is no " I " . The existence of consiousness or the I am (which is the same) is an illusion which we erroneously take for our real self. Many seeker have the idea to get rid of the false self which is body/mind and find the real self which they believe is pure conscciousness. The point now is that these seeker never really practiced it, dived deeply into it to find this " Pure Consciousness " which they believe is conscious of itself. Therefore they never will find out that they just were tricked into a practice which will bring them to the realization that they don't exist, neither as body-mind, nor as an entity, nor as a screen nor as pure consciousness nor as I am. I like this expression of Pete " Nada con carne " , and this carne (meat) contains the brain one of its functions is to make objects conscious. And the thing is: Consciousness is it's content. There is no screen or pure consciousness where the world is appaearing on or in. Nada ... Werner Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@c...> wrote: > > Hi Werner, > > you have catched my thoughts... :-)) > > You are writing: > > >Consciousness is it's content. There is no screen or pure > >consciousness where the world is appaearing on or in. > > Very true, and you say it in a wonderful way. > > Maybe I should not add a word, but I would like to try one more time > to share my thoughts about this. I see this " Consciousness " (or > whatever it is called) as the non-duality state of truth. The fact > that we interprete the same truth here as an endless number of > duality-splitted phenomena is due to the way our receptive organs > function. I feel this is such a simple fact that we tend to overlook > it. No receptive organs - no duality! > > My problems with " Nada " : Provided Niz is not a fraud, he is speaking > from the position of this " Conciousness " . He is talking as someone who > has disappeared there but still has a link to his body and is able to > give signs in the dualistic world. As strangely as this sounds, I have > no better explanation. > > It seems from the way he is talking that he has a positive approach to > anybody, who is willing to attain the same state. Why? Because it is > the highest state a human being can reach, the natural state? Thats > what I hear from the masters. It must have something to do with > becoming " awake " ... in a sense that the mind cannot imagine. I dont > believe it has anything to do with anything that the brain is ever > capable to imagine. There are simply no words for it. And to call it > " Nada " is as wrong as to call it " nothingness " , " deep sleep " , " dead " > or even " Conciousness " . Those are all poor terms from the illusionary > world of duality. The Vedas have noticed this problem, elaborated it > and introduced the word " Shunyam " as a code. > > Finally it has to be accepted that the personality of " you " or " me " > plays absolutely no role in this state of realization. It is simply > out of the game. But no person can imagine that he would be able to > experience something and at the same time would not exist. The > possibility that it does not even exist in the first place is beyond > anything thinkable. Any brain that is trying to build up theories in > this realm is bound to end up in contradictions. So the best way is - > regarding that state Nisargadatta is pointing at - to become silent. > > S. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 28, 2004 Report Share Posted October 28, 2004 > > Similar: You are looking out of the window, hearing the traffic > noises, watching your thoughts and feel your boody sitting on the > chair, and suddenly you realize that there is no looker, no hearer, > no sitter, no feeler, no thinker. Nothing changed, everything as it > was before but no one there: Nada con carne. > > I can't explain it better and it sounds awful mysterious but it is > the most obvious fact of the world: No one there ... > > Werner P: That's exactly it! Wonderful, is it not? Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 28, 2004 Report Share Posted October 28, 2004 Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <Pedsie2@a...> wrote: > > > > > > Similar: You are looking out of the window, hearing the traffic > > noises, watching your thoughts and feel your boody sitting on the > > chair, and suddenly you realize that there is no looker, no hearer, > > no sitter, no feeler, no thinker. Nothing changed, everything as it > > was before but no one there: Nada con carne. > > > > I can't explain it better and it sounds awful mysterious but it is > > the most obvious fact of the world: No one there ... > > > > Werner The apperception of " What is " ...is inversely proportional to the ability to express it. Aint that a bitch? t. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 28, 2004 Report Share Posted October 28, 2004 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> wrote: >Strange enough, I have edited my post " The trick " then deleted it and >reposted the new text - and it hasn't appeared yet, it seems you have >replied to the original text It was in my postbox, so I answered... :-) >I have to admit I feel really odd now So I >better have breakfast and enjoy it. I know it is profane by I prefer >the latter procedure. Yes, you are right... I mean, the egg is three dimensional and my mouth too. I often felt it is futile to philosophize about non-dimensional conciousness with a three dimensional keyboard! I dont yet have the courage to express myself as simply as you. I am always afraid to be misunderstood... there you can see it, my ego-egg! Tastes good. >Similar: You are looking out of the window, hearing the traffic >noises, watching your thoughts and feel your boody sitting on the >chair, and suddenly you realize that there is no looker, no hearer, >no sitter, no feeler, no thinker. Nothing changed, everything as it >was before but no one there: Nada con carne. Everything is still there. I know this very well. Sometimes for a moment it is like I am expanding and become everything or everything is inside of me... and then there is simply nobody. Then everything simply " is " . But I have never read this out of Petes words? They emphasize that there is " nothing " . You are saying there is " nobody " . My own experience is: yes, there is finally nothing, but this is at the same time everything. Because there is nobody in between. Please, Werner... those are words... words... I dont know how to speak. I am so tired of words. Greetings Stefan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 28, 2004 Report Share Posted October 28, 2004 Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@c...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> > wrote: > > >Strange enough, I have edited my post " The trick " then deleted it and > >reposted the new text - and it hasn't appeared yet, it seems you have > >replied to the original text > > It was in my postbox, so I answered... :-) > > >I have to admit I feel really odd now So I > >better have breakfast and enjoy it. I know it is profane by I prefer > >the latter procedure. > > Yes, you are right... I mean, the egg is three dimensional and my > mouth too. I often felt it is futile to philosophize about > non-dimensional conciousness with a three dimensional keyboard! I dont > yet have the courage to express myself as simply as you. I am always > afraid to be misunderstood... there you can see it, my ego-egg! Tastes > good. > > >Similar: You are looking out of the window, hearing the traffic > >noises, watching your thoughts and feel your boody sitting on the > >chair, and suddenly you realize that there is no looker, no hearer, > >no sitter, no feeler, no thinker. Nothing changed, everything as it > >was before but no one there: Nada con carne. > > Everything is still there. I know this very well. Sometimes for a > moment it is like I am expanding and become everything or everything > is inside of me... and then there is simply nobody. Then everything > simply " is " . > > But I have never read this out of Petes words? P: Could it be that you read only what you wanted to read? 'What is' is pure light, invisible in itself like a nothingness to the mind, a mind is like a colored glass. If your mind is a red glass, and mine is a blue glass, when I say, 'That is blue' you would say wrong. But 'That' is neither. It has no qualities which the mind can perceive, therefore is 'Nothing' which doesn't mean that is not there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 28, 2004 Report Share Posted October 28, 2004 Hi Stefan, Really nice what you wrote and I can identify with it: " Yes, you are right... I mean, the egg is three dimensional and my mouth too. I often felt it is futile to philosophize about non-dimensional conciousness with a three dimensional keyboard! I dont yet have the courage to express myself as simply as you. I am always afraid to be misunderstood... there you can see it, my ego-egg! Tastes good " . I think that this fear not to be understood has its origin in the need to belong to or in other words in the fear to be an outsider. This is my own experience, maybe it is your's too. When watching one's thought one can see how much of daily thinking has as the main topic one's atractiveness. These thoughts just are strategies to be attractive, because: The attractive one gets shelter within the group, the unattractive one gets kicked into the garbage can. To be attractive is a survival strategy. There is nothing you can do about it besides accepting it. Werner Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@c...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> > wrote: > > >Strange enough, I have edited my post " The trick " then deleted it and > >reposted the new text - and it hasn't appeared yet, it seems you have > >replied to the original text > > It was in my postbox, so I answered... :-) > > >I have to admit I feel really odd now So I > >better have breakfast and enjoy it. I know it is profane by I prefer > >the latter procedure. > > Yes, you are right... I mean, the egg is three dimensional and my > mouth too. I often felt it is futile to philosophize about > non-dimensional conciousness with a three dimensional keyboard! I dont > yet have the courage to express myself as simply as you. I am always > afraid to be misunderstood... there you can see it, my ego-egg! Tastes > good. > > >Similar: You are looking out of the window, hearing the traffic > >noises, watching your thoughts and feel your boody sitting on the > >chair, and suddenly you realize that there is no looker, no hearer, > >no sitter, no feeler, no thinker. Nothing changed, everything as it > >was before but no one there: Nada con carne. > > Everything is still there. I know this very well. Sometimes for a > moment it is like I am expanding and become everything or everything > is inside of me... and then there is simply nobody. Then everything > simply " is " . > > But I have never read this out of Petes words? They emphasize that > there is " nothing " . You are saying there is " nobody " . My own > experience is: yes, there is finally nothing, but this is at the same > time everything. Because there is nobody in between. Please, Werner... > those are words... words... I dont know how to speak. I am so tired of > words. > > Greetings > Stefan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 28, 2004 Report Share Posted October 28, 2004 Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <Pedsie2@a...> wrote: >P: Could it be that you read only what you wanted to read? 'What is' >is pure light... Oh, Pete, you are writing so many things... how could I ever work through them? One day pure light, another day deep sleep... Aura... test mode... I just give up. S. P.S.: did it never occur to you that I was simply interested in your view and that I had asked my questions to understand you better? Dont answer, it is o.k. ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 28, 2004 Report Share Posted October 28, 2004 Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@c...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <Pedsie2@a...> wrote: > > >P: Could it be that you read only what you wanted to read? 'What is' > >is pure light... > > Oh, Pete, you are writing so many things... how could I ever work > through them? One day pure light, another day deep sleep... Aura... > test mode... I just give up. > S. > > P.S.: did it never occur to you that I was simply interested in your > view and that I had asked my questions to understand you better? Dont > answer, it is o.k. ... P: Yes, I say many things to make you really sick of words. Because I know you lie when you say you are sick of words, at least not your words. You love your words and use plenty of them. But if you are sick of mine, that's a start. So you have my permission not to answer this, or any of my posts on any subject. Let's see how sick of words you are! I do readilly admit words are my favorite hobby. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 28, 2004 Report Share Posted October 28, 2004 Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@c...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> > wrote: > > >Strange enough, I have edited my post " The trick " then deleted it and > >reposted the new text - and it hasn't appeared yet, it seems you have > >replied to the original text > > It was in my postbox, so I answered... :-) > > >I have to admit I feel really odd now So I > >better have breakfast and enjoy it. I know it is profane by I prefer > >the latter procedure. > > Yes, you are right... I mean, the egg is three dimensional and my > mouth too. I often felt it is futile to philosophize about > non-dimensional conciousness with a three dimensional keyboard! I dont > yet have the courage to express myself as simply as you. I am always > afraid to be misunderstood... there you can see it, my ego-egg! Tastes > good. > > >Similar: You are looking out of the window, hearing the traffic > >noises, watching your thoughts and feel your boody sitting on the > >chair, and suddenly you realize that there is no looker, no hearer, > >no sitter, no feeler, no thinker. Nothing changed, everything as it > >was before but no one there: Nada con carne. > > Everything is still there. I know this very well. Sometimes for a > moment it is like I am expanding and become everything or everything > is inside of me... and then there is simply nobody. Then everything > simply " is " . > > But I have never read this out of Petes words? They emphasize that > there is " nothing " . You are saying there is " nobody " . My own > experience is: yes, there is finally nothing, but this is at the same > time everything. Because there is nobody in between. Please, Werner... > those are words... words... I dont know how to speak. I am so tired of > words. > > Greetings > Stefan devi: in a commentary (taminis) of patangilis yoga sutras, that baba hari dass taught a class from, the goal of liberation is to separate the Purusha (the Seer) from Prakriti (the Seen)....when that happens the Purusha is seen in its natural state...that is liberation Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 29, 2004 Report Share Posted October 29, 2004 " cerosoul " <Pedsie2@a...> wrote: > > Similar: You are looking out of the window, hearing the traffic > > noises, watching your thoughts and feel your boody sitting on the > > chair, and suddenly you realize that there is no looker, no hearer, > > no sitter, no feeler, no thinker. Nothing changed, everything as it > > was before but no one there: Nada con carne. > > > > I can't explain it better and it sounds awful mysterious but it is > > the most obvious fact of the world: No one there ... > > > > Werner > > P: That's exactly it! Wonderful, is it not? > > Pete yeah, it is ! I can hear that trafic noise.. he he e 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.