Guest guest Posted January 9, 2005 Report Share Posted January 9, 2005 Nisargadatta , " ilikezen2004 " <ilikezen2004> wrote: > > > > What is the difference between pseudo-honesty and honesty? > pseudo-sadhana and sadhana? pseudo-enlightenment and enlightenment? > > now, what is the difference between pseudo-advaita and advaita? > > All I know is that the advaita Masters don't teach pseudo-advaita! > > It is up to you to choose the one you like, the one you want to > follow or understand. > > Pseudo persons like a lot pseudo-things, there are not real persons, > yet. they don't like real things, like real friendship, real Love, > real life, honesty etc. All they do is hide in their mind to avoid > to see that they are false. But they must understand that without > seeing that you are false (ego) you cannot become a real person. > Only real persons can understand advaita. The others deal only with > the Pseudo world all their life. > > Only true disciples become true Masters. > > Odysseus, The Pseudo world is the world of thought and its sticky emotions. Nothing wrong with the thought-world, but if that is the only level we are aware of, and even worse, if we believe that that is what we are and the only thing we can be, then we will never take the gigantic upward leap into trusting God. /AL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 9, 2005 Report Share Posted January 9, 2005 Baloney - ilikezen2004 Nisargadatta Sunday, January 09, 2005 10:57 PM Advaita What is the difference between pseudo-honesty and honesty? pseudo-sadhana and sadhana? pseudo-enlightenment and enlightenment? now, what is the difference between pseudo-advaita and advaita? All I know is that the advaita Masters don't teach pseudo-advaita! It is up to you to choose the one you like, the one you want to follow or understand. Pseudo persons like a lot pseudo-things, there are not real persons, yet. they don't like real things, like real friendship, real Love, real life, honesty etc. All they do is hide in their mind to avoid to see that they are false. But they must understand that without seeing that you are false (ego) you cannot become a real person. Only real persons can understand advaita. The others deal only with the Pseudo world all their life. Only true disciples become true Masters. Odysseus, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 9, 2005 Report Share Posted January 9, 2005 Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " ilikezen2004 " > <ilikezen2004> wrote: > > > > > > > > What is the difference between pseudo-honesty and honesty? > > pseudo-sadhana and sadhana? pseudo-enlightenment and enlightenment? > > > > now, what is the difference between pseudo-advaita and advaita? > > > > All I know is that the advaita Masters don't teach pseudo-advaita! > > > > It is up to you to choose the one you like, the one you want to > > follow or understand. > > > > Pseudo persons like a lot pseudo-things, there are not real persons, > > yet. they don't like real things, like real friendship, real Love, > > real life, honesty etc. All they do is hide in their mind to avoid > > to see that they are false. But they must understand that without > > seeing that you are false (ego) you cannot become a real person. > > Only real persons can understand advaita. The others deal only with > > the Pseudo world all their life. > > > > Only true disciples become true Masters. > > > > Odysseus, > > The Pseudo world is the world of thought and its sticky emotions. > Nothing wrong with the thought-world, but if that is the only level we > are aware of, and even worse, if we believe that that is what we are > and the only thing we can be, then we will never take the gigantic > upward leap into trusting God. > > /AL Can mind trust something that mind has made up? t. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 9, 2005 Report Share Posted January 9, 2005 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " ilikezen2004 " > > <ilikezen2004> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > What is the difference between pseudo-honesty and honesty? > > > pseudo-sadhana and sadhana? pseudo-enlightenment and enlightenment? > > > > > > now, what is the difference between pseudo-advaita and advaita? > > > > > > All I know is that the advaita Masters don't teach pseudo- advaita! > > > > > > It is up to you to choose the one you like, the one you want to > > > follow or understand. > > > > > > Pseudo persons like a lot pseudo-things, there are not real persons, > > > yet. they don't like real things, like real friendship, real Love, > > > real life, honesty etc. All they do is hide in their mind to avoid > > > to see that they are false. But they must understand that without > > > seeing that you are false (ego) you cannot become a real person. > > > Only real persons can understand advaita. The others deal only with > > > the Pseudo world all their life. > > > > > > Only true disciples become true Masters. > > > > > > Odysseus, > > > > The Pseudo world is the world of thought and its sticky emotions. > > Nothing wrong with the thought-world, but if that is the only level we > > are aware of, and even worse, if we believe that that is what we are > > and the only thing we can be, then we will never take the gigantic > > upward leap into trusting God. > > > > /AL > > > > Can mind trust something that mind has made up? > > t. ************************************ Odysseus: I like your answers Toom. ;0) Toombaru: Can mind trust something that mind has made up? Odysseus: Yes, big time!!! Love Odysseus, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 9, 2005 Report Share Posted January 9, 2005 Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " ilikezen2004 " > <ilikezen2004> wrote: > > > > > > > > What is the difference between pseudo-honesty and honesty? > > pseudo-sadhana and sadhana? pseudo-enlightenment and enlightenment? > > > > now, what is the difference between pseudo-advaita and advaita? > > > > All I know is that the advaita Masters don't teach pseudo- advaita! > > > > It is up to you to choose the one you like, the one you want to > > follow or understand. > > > > Pseudo persons like a lot pseudo-things, there are not real persons, > > yet. they don't like real things, like real friendship, real Love, > > real life, honesty etc. All they do is hide in their mind to avoid > > to see that they are false. But they must understand that without > > seeing that you are false (ego) you cannot become a real person. > > Only real persons can understand advaita. The others deal only with > > the Pseudo world all their life. > > > > Only true disciples become true Masters. > > > > Odysseus, > > The Pseudo world is the world of thought and its sticky emotions. > Nothing wrong with the thought-world, but if that is the only level we > are aware of, and even worse, if we believe that that is what we are > and the only thing we can be, then we will never take the gigantic > upward leap into trusting God. > > /AL *********************************** Bravo it takes guts to understand that, and apply it to our own life. Slowly one sees clearer and better. The war is not won, but at least one battle is! Odysseus, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 9, 2005 Report Share Posted January 9, 2005 Anders, There is just this body/mind with all its efforts, ambitions, conflicts, desires, pleasure and pain etc. And all this is the content of consciousness. > real things, like real friendship, real Love, > real life, honesty etc. are wishful day-dreaming and are just another content of consciousness. Werner Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " ilikezen2004 " > <ilikezen2004> wrote: > > > > > > > > What is the difference between pseudo-honesty and honesty? > > pseudo-sadhana and sadhana? pseudo-enlightenment and enlightenment? > > > > now, what is the difference between pseudo-advaita and advaita? > > > > All I know is that the advaita Masters don't teach pseudo-advaita! > > > > It is up to you to choose the one you like, the one you want to > > follow or understand. > > > > Pseudo persons like a lot pseudo-things, there are not real persons, > > yet. they don't like real things, like real friendship, real Love, > > real life, honesty etc. All they do is hide in their mind to avoid > > to see that they are false. But they must understand that without > > seeing that you are false (ego) you cannot become a real person. > > Only real persons can understand advaita. The others deal only with > > the Pseudo world all their life. > > > > Only true disciples become true Masters. > > > > Odysseus, > > The Pseudo world is the world of thought and its sticky emotions. > Nothing wrong with the thought-world, but if that is the only level we > are aware of, and even worse, if we believe that that is what we are > and the only thing we can be, then we will never take the gigantic > upward leap into trusting God. > > /AL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 10, 2005 Report Share Posted January 10, 2005 Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " ilikezen2004 " > <ilikezen2004> wrote: > > > > > > > > What is the difference between pseudo-honesty and honesty? > > pseudo-sadhana and sadhana? pseudo-enlightenment and enlightenment? > > > > now, what is the difference between pseudo-advaita and advaita? > > > > All I know is that the advaita Masters don't teach pseudo- advaita! > > > > It is up to you to choose the one you like, the one you want to > > follow or understand. > > > > Pseudo persons like a lot pseudo-things, there are not real persons, > > yet. they don't like real things, like real friendship, real Love, > > real life, honesty etc. All they do is hide in their mind to avoid > > to see that they are false. But they must understand that without > > seeing that you are false (ego) you cannot become a real person. > > Only real persons can understand advaita. The others deal only with > > the Pseudo world all their life. > > > > Only true disciples become true Masters. > > > > Odysseus, > > The Pseudo world is the world of thought and its sticky emotions. > Nothing wrong with the thought-world, but if that is the only level we > are aware of, and even worse, if we believe that that is what we are > and the only thing we can be, then we will never take the gigantic > upward leap into trusting God. > > /AL ************************ You know Al, rare is the person that take that gigantic step. You decide for yourself, love yourself first! Without loving yourself first, your love will be only pseudo-love to all. Imagine now the one who thinks Love is bullshit! Tell me how could this one believe in God? Most would spit on God's face instead of trusting him! Most like to spit, and what makes me laugh is that they " think " that God doesn't know it! When I spit in the air, it always comes back on my face! Odysseus, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 10, 2005 Report Share Posted January 10, 2005 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " ilikezen2004 " > > <ilikezen2004> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > What is the difference between pseudo-honesty and honesty? > > > pseudo-sadhana and sadhana? pseudo-enlightenment and enlightenment? > > > > > > now, what is the difference between pseudo-advaita and advaita? > > > > > > All I know is that the advaita Masters don't teach pseudo-advaita! > > > > > > It is up to you to choose the one you like, the one you want to > > > follow or understand. > > > > > > Pseudo persons like a lot pseudo-things, there are not real persons, > > > yet. they don't like real things, like real friendship, real Love, > > > real life, honesty etc. All they do is hide in their mind to avoid > > > to see that they are false. But they must understand that without > > > seeing that you are false (ego) you cannot become a real person. > > > Only real persons can understand advaita. The others deal only with > > > the Pseudo world all their life. > > > > > > Only true disciples become true Masters. > > > > > > Odysseus, > > > > The Pseudo world is the world of thought and its sticky emotions. > > Nothing wrong with the thought-world, but if that is the only level we > > are aware of, and even worse, if we believe that that is what we are > > and the only thing we can be, then we will never take the gigantic > > upward leap into trusting God. > > > > /AL > > > > Can mind trust something that mind has made up? > > > > t. We can begin to see that the thought-world is limiting us. In that seeing there may come a realization of something beyond mental constructs. We can begin to choose clarity of being in the present moment by becoming aware of how thoughts and emotions operate. /AL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 10, 2005 Report Share Posted January 10, 2005 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> wrote: > > Anders, > > There is just this body/mind with all its efforts, ambitions, > conflicts, desires, pleasure and pain etc. And all this is the > content of consciousness. > > > real things, like real friendship, real Love, > > real life, honesty etc. > > are wishful day-dreaming and are just another content of > consciousness. > > > Werner Werner, if I remember correct, you have seen J. Krishnamurti live. Did you detect or sense anything about him that is not usually found in us 'ordinary' people? /AL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 10, 2005 Report Share Posted January 10, 2005 Nisargadatta , " ilikezen2004 " <ilikezen2004> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " ilikezen2004 " > > <ilikezen2004> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > What is the difference between pseudo-honesty and honesty? > > > pseudo-sadhana and sadhana? pseudo-enlightenment and > enlightenment? > > > > > > now, what is the difference between pseudo-advaita and advaita? > > > > > > All I know is that the advaita Masters don't teach pseudo- > advaita! > > > > > > It is up to you to choose the one you like, the one you want to > > > follow or understand. > > > > > > Pseudo persons like a lot pseudo-things, there are not real > persons, > > > yet. they don't like real things, like real friendship, real > Love, > > > real life, honesty etc. All they do is hide in their mind to > avoid > > > to see that they are false. But they must understand that > without > > > seeing that you are false (ego) you cannot become a real person. > > > Only real persons can understand advaita. The others deal only > with > > > the Pseudo world all their life. > > > > > > Only true disciples become true Masters. > > > > > > Odysseus, > > > > The Pseudo world is the world of thought and its sticky emotions. > > Nothing wrong with the thought-world, but if that is the only > level we > > are aware of, and even worse, if we believe that that is what we > are > > and the only thing we can be, then we will never take the gigantic > > upward leap into trusting God. > > > > /AL > > ************************ > > You know Al, rare is the person that take that gigantic step. You > decide for yourself, love yourself first! Without loving yourself > first, your love will be only pseudo-love to all. Imagine now the > one who thinks Love is bullshit! Tell me how could this one believe > in God? > > Most would spit on God's face instead of trusting him! Most like to > spit, and what makes me laugh is that they " think " that God doesn't > know it! > > When I spit in the air, it always comes back on my face! > > Odysseus, Blind trust in God is very difficult for people living in thought, like me. Faith can perhaps come with awareness of the pseudo world as actually being a second-hand experience. Instead of taking the pseudo world as the only alternative, one can at least be open to the possibility of a higher intelligence that operates from oneself and at the same time operates from 'outside' oneself. Instead of me as a separate thought-machine trying to force myself through life, I can open up to the possibility of a functioning that works as a whole field including myself and the world. /AL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 10, 2005 Report Share Posted January 10, 2005 Hi Anders, Strange question, I was not expecting it Yes I was detecting something I never have seen in other human beings before: He was and acted in such a simple way that I always saw him just as being an animal. I remember years later when K already was dead seing an elephant behaving just the same way and I was srtuck and said to myself: Wow, Krishnamurti ! Werner Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> wrote: > > > > Anders, > > > > There is just this body/mind with all its efforts, ambitions, > > conflicts, desires, pleasure and pain etc. And all this is the > > content of consciousness. > > > > > real things, like real friendship, real Love, > > > real life, honesty etc. > > > > are wishful day-dreaming and are just another content of > > consciousness. > > > > > > Werner > > Werner, if I remember correct, you have seen J. Krishnamurti live. Did > you detect or sense anything about him that is not usually found in us > 'ordinary' people? > > /AL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 10, 2005 Report Share Posted January 10, 2005 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> wrote: > > Hi Anders, > > Strange question, I was not expecting it > > Yes I was detecting something I never have seen in other human beings > before: > > He was and acted in such a simple way that I always saw him just as > being an animal. I remember years later when K already was dead seing > an elephant behaving just the same way and I was srtuck and said to > myself: Wow, Krishnamurti ! > > Werner LOL! I can imagine that J. K. was acting from the level of intuition, just as Osho described it. First there is instinct (bodily functions such as the complex regulation of chemicals between and inside cells), then there is the intellect (the thinking process and emotions), and then there is intuition (direct knowing transcending thought). Both instinct and intuition act in unity with the whole. Osho said that the intellect is just a bridge to cross, but that most people stay on the bridge and even build a house there! /AL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 10, 2005 Report Share Posted January 10, 2005 Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> wrote: > > > > Hi Anders, > > > > Strange question, I was not expecting it > > > > Yes I was detecting something I never have seen in other human beings > > before: > > > > He was and acted in such a simple way that I always saw him just as > > being an animal. I remember years later when K already was dead seing > > an elephant behaving just the same way and I was srtuck and said to > > myself: Wow, Krishnamurti ! > > > > Werner > > LOL! > > I can imagine that J. K. was acting from the level of intuition, just > as Osho described it. First there is instinct (bodily functions such > as the complex regulation of chemicals between and inside cells), then > there is the intellect (the thinking process and emotions), and then > there is intuition (direct knowing transcending thought). Both > instinct and intuition act in unity with the whole. Osho said that the > intellect is just a bridge to cross, but that most people stay on the > bridge and even build a house there! > > /AL LOL! (i wanted to check how it feels to start a message with " LOL! " like you guys) Osho said everything and it's contrary, everyone found something interesting at every level in his teachings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 10, 2005 Report Share Posted January 10, 2005 Nisargadatta , " Eric Paroissien " <ericparoissien@g...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> wrote: > > > > > > Hi Anders, > > > > > > Strange question, I was not expecting it > > > > > > Yes I was detecting something I never have seen in other human beings > > > before: > > > > > > He was and acted in such a simple way that I always saw him just as > > > being an animal. I remember years later when K already was dead seing > > > an elephant behaving just the same way and I was srtuck and said to > > > myself: Wow, Krishnamurti ! > > > > > > Werner > > > > LOL! > > > > I can imagine that J. K. was acting from the level of intuition, just > > as Osho described it. First there is instinct (bodily functions such > > as the complex regulation of chemicals between and inside cells), then > > there is the intellect (the thinking process and emotions), and then > > there is intuition (direct knowing transcending thought). Both > > instinct and intuition act in unity with the whole. Osho said that the > > intellect is just a bridge to cross, but that most people stay on the > > bridge and even build a house there! > > > > /AL > > LOL! > (i wanted to check how it feels to start a message with " LOL! " like > you guys) > Osho said everything and it's contrary, everyone found something > interesting at every level in his teachings. Many spiritual teachers are very tricky. One has to listen with both mind and heart. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 11, 2005 Report Share Posted January 11, 2005 Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " ilikezen2004 " > > > <ilikezen2004> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What is the difference between pseudo-honesty and honesty? > > > > pseudo-sadhana and sadhana? pseudo-enlightenment and enlightenment? > > > > > > > > now, what is the difference between pseudo-advaita and advaita? > > > > > > > > All I know is that the advaita Masters don't teach pseudo-advaita! > > > > > > > > It is up to you to choose the one you like, the one you want to > > > > follow or understand. > > > > > > > > Pseudo persons like a lot pseudo-things, there are not real > persons, > > > > yet. they don't like real things, like real friendship, real Love, > > > > real life, honesty etc. All they do is hide in their mind to avoid > > > > to see that they are false. But they must understand that without > > > > seeing that you are false (ego) you cannot become a real person. > > > > Only real persons can understand advaita. The others deal only with > > > > the Pseudo world all their life. > > > > > > > > Only true disciples become true Masters. > > > > > > > > Odysseus, > > > > > > The Pseudo world is the world of thought and its sticky emotions. > > > Nothing wrong with the thought-world, but if that is the only level we > > > are aware of, and even worse, if we believe that that is what we are > > > and the only thing we can be, then we will never take the gigantic > > > upward leap into trusting God. > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > Can mind trust something that mind has made up? > > > > > > > > t. > > We can begin to see that the thought-world is limiting us. In that > seeing there may come a realization of something beyond mental > constructs. We can begin to choose clarity of being in the present > moment by becoming aware of how thoughts and emotions operate. > > /AL There is nothing to the " us " beyond thought. Thought doesn't even know what thought is. Clarity is not a choice. A creature whose totality is solely composed of thought...can never enter the " present moment. Thoughts and emotions can never figure themselves out.... The secrets of mind will never be found by the mind...... but everything else you said was pretty much right on. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 11, 2005 Report Share Posted January 11, 2005 Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Eric Paroissien " > <ericparoissien@g...> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> > wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi Anders, > > > > > > > > Strange question, I was not expecting it > > > > > > > > Yes I was detecting something I never have seen in other human > beings > > > > before: > > > > > > > > He was and acted in such a simple way that I always saw him just as > > > > being an animal. I remember years later when K already was dead > seing > > > > an elephant behaving just the same way and I was srtuck and said to > > > > myself: Wow, Krishnamurti ! > > > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > LOL! > > > > > > I can imagine that J. K. was acting from the level of intuition, just > > > as Osho described it. First there is instinct (bodily functions such > > > as the complex regulation of chemicals between and inside cells), then > > > there is the intellect (the thinking process and emotions), and then > > > there is intuition (direct knowing transcending thought). Both > > > instinct and intuition act in unity with the whole. Osho said that the > > > intellect is just a bridge to cross, but that most people stay on the > > > bridge and even build a house there! > > > > > > /AL > > > > LOL! > > (i wanted to check how it feels to start a message with " LOL! " like > > you guys) > > Osho said everything and it's contrary, everyone found something > > interesting at every level in his teachings. > > Many spiritual teachers are very tricky. One has to listen with both > mind and heart. Osho's main message is a good one: this is a con game don't fret over morality or decency. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 11, 2005 Report Share Posted January 11, 2005 Nisargadatta , " Eric Paroissien " <ericparoissien@g...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Eric Paroissien " > > <ericparoissien@g...> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hi Anders, > > > > > > > > > > Strange question, I was not expecting it > > > > > > > > > > Yes I was detecting something I never have seen in other human > > beings > > > > > before: > > > > > > > > > > He was and acted in such a simple way that I always saw him > just as > > > > > being an animal. I remember years later when K already was dead > > seing > > > > > an elephant behaving just the same way and I was srtuck and > said to > > > > > myself: Wow, Krishnamurti ! > > > > > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > LOL! > > > > > > > > I can imagine that J. K. was acting from the level of intuition, > just > > > > as Osho described it. First there is instinct (bodily functions such > > > > as the complex regulation of chemicals between and inside > cells), then > > > > there is the intellect (the thinking process and emotions), and then > > > > there is intuition (direct knowing transcending thought). Both > > > > instinct and intuition act in unity with the whole. Osho said > that the > > > > intellect is just a bridge to cross, but that most people stay > on the > > > > bridge and even build a house there! > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > LOL! > > > (i wanted to check how it feels to start a message with " LOL! " like > > > you guys) > > > Osho said everything and it's contrary, everyone found something > > > interesting at every level in his teachings. > > > > Many spiritual teachers are very tricky. One has to listen with both > > mind and heart. > > Osho's main message is a good one: > this is a con game don't fret over morality or decency. If you believe that they are pertinent.......you will worry about them. even if you try not to. t. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 11, 2005 Report Share Posted January 11, 2005 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Eric Paroissien " <ericparoissien@g...> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Eric Paroissien " > > > <ericparoissien@g...> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Anders, > > > > > > > > > > > > Strange question, I was not expecting it > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes I was detecting something I never have seen in other human > > > beings > > > > > > before: > > > > > > > > > > > > He was and acted in such a simple way that I always saw him > > just as > > > > > > being an animal. I remember years later when K already was dead > > > seing > > > > > > an elephant behaving just the same way and I was srtuck and > > said to > > > > > > myself: Wow, Krishnamurti ! > > > > > > > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > > > LOL! > > > > > > > > > > I can imagine that J. K. was acting from the level of intuition, > > just > > > > > as Osho described it. First there is instinct (bodily functions such > > > > > as the complex regulation of chemicals between and inside > > cells), then > > > > > there is the intellect (the thinking process and emotions), and then > > > > > there is intuition (direct knowing transcending thought). Both > > > > > instinct and intuition act in unity with the whole. Osho said > > that the > > > > > intellect is just a bridge to cross, but that most people stay > > on the > > > > > bridge and even build a house there! > > > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > LOL! > > > > (i wanted to check how it feels to start a message with " LOL! " like > > > > you guys) > > > > Osho said everything and it's contrary, everyone found something > > > > interesting at every level in his teachings. > > > > > > Many spiritual teachers are very tricky. One has to listen with both > > > mind and heart. > > > > Osho's main message is a good one: > > this is a con game don't fret over morality or decency. > > > If you believe that they are pertinent.......you will worry about them. > > even if you try not to. > > > t. You make it a rule to speak in general terms to no one in paticular and about nobody specifically and you end up a Toom buried in a Toom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 11, 2005 Report Share Posted January 11, 2005 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " ilikezen2004 " > > > > <ilikezen2004> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What is the difference between pseudo-honesty and honesty? > > > > > pseudo-sadhana and sadhana? pseudo-enlightenment and enlightenment? > > > > > > > > > > now, what is the difference between pseudo-advaita and advaita? > > > > > > > > > > All I know is that the advaita Masters don't teach pseudo-advaita! > > > > > > > > > > It is up to you to choose the one you like, the one you want to > > > > > follow or understand. > > > > > > > > > > Pseudo persons like a lot pseudo-things, there are not real > > persons, > > > > > yet. they don't like real things, like real friendship, real Love, > > > > > real life, honesty etc. All they do is hide in their mind to avoid > > > > > to see that they are false. But they must understand that without > > > > > seeing that you are false (ego) you cannot become a real person. > > > > > Only real persons can understand advaita. The others deal only with > > > > > the Pseudo world all their life. > > > > > > > > > > Only true disciples become true Masters. > > > > > > > > > > Odysseus, > > > > > > > > The Pseudo world is the world of thought and its sticky emotions. > > > > Nothing wrong with the thought-world, but if that is the only level we > > > > are aware of, and even worse, if we believe that that is what we are > > > > and the only thing we can be, then we will never take the gigantic > > > > upward leap into trusting God. > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > > > > > Can mind trust something that mind has made up? > > > > > > > > > > > > t. > > > > We can begin to see that the thought-world is limiting us. In that > > seeing there may come a realization of something beyond mental > > constructs. We can begin to choose clarity of being in the present > > moment by becoming aware of how thoughts and emotions operate. > > > > /AL > > > > There is nothing to the " us " beyond thought. > Thought doesn't even know what thought is. > Clarity is not a choice. > A creature whose totality is solely composed of thought...can never enter the " present moment. > Thoughts and emotions can never figure themselves out.... > The secrets of mind will never be found by the mind...... > > > > but everything else you said was pretty much right on. > > > > > > toombaru Clarity is perhaps not a choice, but maybe understanding the mind will bring clarity, and in that way there is an indirect choice being made (by the Totality). /AL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 11, 2005 Report Share Posted January 11, 2005 Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " ilikezen2004 " > > > > > <ilikezen2004> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What is the difference between pseudo-honesty and honesty? > > > > > > pseudo-sadhana and sadhana? pseudo-enlightenment and > enlightenment? > > > > > > > > > > > > now, what is the difference between pseudo-advaita and advaita? > > > > > > > > > > > > All I know is that the advaita Masters don't teach > pseudo-advaita! > > > > > > > > > > > > It is up to you to choose the one you like, the one you want to > > > > > > follow or understand. > > > > > > > > > > > > Pseudo persons like a lot pseudo-things, there are not real > > > persons, > > > > > > yet. they don't like real things, like real friendship, real > Love, > > > > > > real life, honesty etc. All they do is hide in their mind to > avoid > > > > > > to see that they are false. But they must understand that > without > > > > > > seeing that you are false (ego) you cannot become a real > person. > > > > > > Only real persons can understand advaita. The others deal > only with > > > > > > the Pseudo world all their life. > > > > > > > > > > > > Only true disciples become true Masters. > > > > > > > > > > > > Odysseus, > > > > > > > > > > The Pseudo world is the world of thought and its sticky emotions. > > > > > Nothing wrong with the thought-world, but if that is the only > level we > > > > > are aware of, and even worse, if we believe that that is what > we are > > > > > and the only thing we can be, then we will never take the gigantic > > > > > upward leap into trusting God. > > > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can mind trust something that mind has made up? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > t. > > > > > > We can begin to see that the thought-world is limiting us. In that > > > seeing there may come a realization of something beyond mental > > > constructs. We can begin to choose clarity of being in the present > > > moment by becoming aware of how thoughts and emotions operate. > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > There is nothing to the " us " beyond thought. > > Thought doesn't even know what thought is. > > Clarity is not a choice. > > A creature whose totality is solely composed of thought...can never > enter the " present moment. > > Thoughts and emotions can never figure themselves out.... > > The secrets of mind will never be found by the mind...... > > > > > > > > but everything else you said was pretty much right on. > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > Clarity is perhaps not a choice, but maybe understanding the mind will > bring clarity, and in that way there is an indirect choice being made > (by the Totality). > > /AL If the attempt to " understand " any " thing " (even the " thing " in which all " things " arise).......can bring " clarity " .......something should have happened by now. t. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 11, 2005 Report Share Posted January 11, 2005 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " ilikezen2004 " > > > > > > <ilikezen2004> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What is the difference between pseudo-honesty and honesty? > > > > > > > pseudo-sadhana and sadhana? pseudo-enlightenment and > > enlightenment? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > now, what is the difference between pseudo-advaita and advaita? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All I know is that the advaita Masters don't teach > > pseudo-advaita! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is up to you to choose the one you like, the one you want to > > > > > > > follow or understand. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pseudo persons like a lot pseudo-things, there are not real > > > > persons, > > > > > > > yet. they don't like real things, like real friendship, real > > Love, > > > > > > > real life, honesty etc. All they do is hide in their mind to > > avoid > > > > > > > to see that they are false. But they must understand that > > without > > > > > > > seeing that you are false (ego) you cannot become a real > > person. > > > > > > > Only real persons can understand advaita. The others deal > > only with > > > > > > > the Pseudo world all their life. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Only true disciples become true Masters. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Odysseus, > > > > > > > > > > > > The Pseudo world is the world of thought and its sticky emotions. > > > > > > Nothing wrong with the thought-world, but if that is the only > > level we > > > > > > are aware of, and even worse, if we believe that that is what > > we are > > > > > > and the only thing we can be, then we will never take the gigantic > > > > > > upward leap into trusting God. > > > > > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can mind trust something that mind has made up? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > t. > > > > > > > > We can begin to see that the thought-world is limiting us. In that > > > > seeing there may come a realization of something beyond mental > > > > constructs. We can begin to choose clarity of being in the present > > > > moment by becoming aware of how thoughts and emotions operate. > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > > > > > There is nothing to the " us " beyond thought. > > > Thought doesn't even know what thought is. > > > Clarity is not a choice. > > > A creature whose totality is solely composed of thought...can never > > enter the " present moment. > > > Thoughts and emotions can never figure themselves out.... > > > The secrets of mind will never be found by the mind...... > > > > > > > > > > > > but everything else you said was pretty much right on. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > Clarity is perhaps not a choice, but maybe understanding the mind will > > bring clarity, and in that way there is an indirect choice being made > > (by the Totality). > > > > /AL > > > > If the attempt to " understand " any " thing " (even the " thing " in which all " things " arise).......can bring " clarity " .......something should have happened by now. > > > t. I am talking about a total undertanding of the entire thought process. Normally when we speak of understanding we mean understanding related to separate concepts withing a context. We must see the whole thought process in a context-less way. Then we can begin to question the heavy package of emotions attached to thinking, and also the violent labelling we perform all day long in our daily life. For example, we think of some person, and SLAM! - we have smacked a label on that person in our mind. /AL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 12, 2005 Report Share Posted January 12, 2005 Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " > <cptc@w...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " ilikezen2004 " > > > > > > > <ilikezen2004> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What is the difference between pseudo-honesty and honesty? > > > > > > > > pseudo-sadhana and sadhana? pseudo-enlightenment and > > > enlightenment? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > now, what is the difference between pseudo-advaita and > advaita? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All I know is that the advaita Masters don't teach > > > pseudo-advaita! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is up to you to choose the one you like, the one you > want to > > > > > > > > follow or understand. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pseudo persons like a lot pseudo-things, there are not real > > > > > persons, > > > > > > > > yet. they don't like real things, like real friendship, real > > > Love, > > > > > > > > real life, honesty etc. All they do is hide in their mind to > > > avoid > > > > > > > > to see that they are false. But they must understand that > > > without > > > > > > > > seeing that you are false (ego) you cannot become a real > > > person. > > > > > > > > Only real persons can understand advaita. The others deal > > > only with > > > > > > > > the Pseudo world all their life. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Only true disciples become true Masters. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Odysseus, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Pseudo world is the world of thought and its sticky > emotions. > > > > > > > Nothing wrong with the thought-world, but if that is the only > > > level we > > > > > > > are aware of, and even worse, if we believe that that is what > > > we are > > > > > > > and the only thing we can be, then we will never take the > gigantic > > > > > > > upward leap into trusting God. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can mind trust something that mind has made up? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > t. > > > > > > > > > > We can begin to see that the thought-world is limiting us. In that > > > > > seeing there may come a realization of something beyond mental > > > > > constructs. We can begin to choose clarity of being in the present > > > > > moment by becoming aware of how thoughts and emotions operate. > > > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is nothing to the " us " beyond thought. > > > > Thought doesn't even know what thought is. > > > > Clarity is not a choice. > > > > A creature whose totality is solely composed of thought...can never > > > enter the " present moment. > > > > Thoughts and emotions can never figure themselves out.... > > > > The secrets of mind will never be found by the mind...... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but everything else you said was pretty much right on. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > Clarity is perhaps not a choice, but maybe understanding the mind will > > > bring clarity, and in that way there is an indirect choice being made > > > (by the Totality). > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > If the attempt to " understand " any " thing " (even the " thing " in > which all " things " arise).......can bring " clarity " .......something > should have happened by now. > > > > > > t. > > I am talking about a total undertanding of the entire thought process. > Normally when we speak of understanding we mean understanding related > to separate concepts withing a context. We must see the whole thought > process in a context-less way. Then we can begin to question the heavy > package of emotions attached to thinking, and also the violent > labelling we perform all day long in our daily life. For example, we > think of some person, and SLAM! - we have smacked a label on that > person in our mind. > > /AL That is the point. Why does thought...mind...mentation assume that it can see itself or ever understand itself? In order for something to " see " itself..it would have to be separate from itself..... t. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 12, 2005 Report Share Posted January 12, 2005 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " > <cptc@w...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " > > <cptc@w...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " ilikezen2004 " > > > > > > > > <ilikezen2004> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What is the difference between pseudo-honesty and > honesty? > > > > > > > > > pseudo-sadhana and sadhana? pseudo-enlightenment and > > > > enlightenment? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > now, what is the difference between pseudo-advaita > and > > advaita? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All I know is that the advaita Masters don't teach > > > > pseudo-advaita! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is up to you to choose the one you like, the one > you > > want to > > > > > > > > > follow or understand. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pseudo persons like a lot pseudo-things, there are > not real > > > > > > persons, > > > > > > > > > yet. they don't like real things, like real > friendship, real > > > > Love, > > > > > > > > > real life, honesty etc. All they do is hide in their > mind to > > > > avoid > > > > > > > > > to see that they are false. But they must understand > that > > > > without > > > > > > > > > seeing that you are false (ego) you cannot become a > real > > > > person. > > > > > > > > > Only real persons can understand advaita. The others > deal > > > > only with > > > > > > > > > the Pseudo world all their life. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Only true disciples become true Masters. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Odysseus, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Pseudo world is the world of thought and its sticky > > emotions. > > > > > > > > Nothing wrong with the thought-world, but if that is > the only > > > > level we > > > > > > > > are aware of, and even worse, if we believe that that > is what > > > > we are > > > > > > > > and the only thing we can be, then we will never take > the > > gigantic > > > > > > > > upward leap into trusting God. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can mind trust something that mind has made up? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > t. > > > > > > > > > > > > We can begin to see that the thought-world is limiting us. > In that > > > > > > seeing there may come a realization of something beyond > mental > > > > > > constructs. We can begin to choose clarity of being in the > present > > > > > > moment by becoming aware of how thoughts and emotions > operate. > > > > > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is nothing to the " us " beyond thought. > > > > > Thought doesn't even know what thought is. > > > > > Clarity is not a choice. > > > > > A creature whose totality is solely composed of > thought...can never > > > > enter the " present moment. > > > > > Thoughts and emotions can never figure themselves out.... > > > > > The secrets of mind will never be found by the mind...... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but everything else you said was pretty much right on. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > Clarity is perhaps not a choice, but maybe understanding the > mind will > > > > bring clarity, and in that way there is an indirect choice > being made > > > > (by the Totality). > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > > > > > If the attempt to " understand " any " thing " (even the " thing " in > > which all " things " arise).......can bring " clarity " .......something > > should have happened by now. > > > > > > > > > t. > > > > I am talking about a total undertanding of the entire thought > process. > > Normally when we speak of understanding we mean understanding > related > > to separate concepts withing a context. We must see the whole > thought > > process in a context-less way. Then we can begin to question the > heavy > > package of emotions attached to thinking, and also the violent > > labelling we perform all day long in our daily life. For example, > we > > think of some person, and SLAM! - we have smacked a label on that > > person in our mind. > > > > /AL > > > That is the point. > > Why does thought...mind...mentation assume that it can see itself > or ever understand itself? > > In order for something to " see " itself..it would have to be separate > from itself..... > > > t. " Not what the eyes can see, but that whereby the eyes can see, know that to be Brahman the eternal, and not what people here adore. Not what the mind thinks, but that whereby the mind can think, know that to be Brahman the eternal, and not what people here adore... " -- From the Upanishads (if I remember correctly). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 12, 2005 Report Share Posted January 12, 2005 Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " > > <cptc@w...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " > > > <cptc@w...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " ilikezen2004 " > > > > > > > > > <ilikezen2004> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What is the difference between pseudo-honesty and > > honesty? > > > > > > > > > > pseudo-sadhana and sadhana? pseudo-enlightenment and > > > > > enlightenment? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > now, what is the difference between pseudo- advaita > > and > > > advaita? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All I know is that the advaita Masters don't teach > > > > > pseudo-advaita! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is up to you to choose the one you like, the one > > you > > > want to > > > > > > > > > > follow or understand. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pseudo persons like a lot pseudo-things, there are > > not real > > > > > > > persons, > > > > > > > > > > yet. they don't like real things, like real > > friendship, real > > > > > Love, > > > > > > > > > > real life, honesty etc. All they do is hide in their > > mind to > > > > > avoid > > > > > > > > > > to see that they are false. But they must understand > > that > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > seeing that you are false (ego) you cannot become a > > real > > > > > person. > > > > > > > > > > Only real persons can understand advaita. The others > > deal > > > > > only with > > > > > > > > > > the Pseudo world all their life. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Only true disciples become true Masters. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Odysseus, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Pseudo world is the world of thought and its sticky > > > emotions. > > > > > > > > > Nothing wrong with the thought-world, but if that is > > the only > > > > > level we > > > > > > > > > are aware of, and even worse, if we believe that that > > is what > > > > > we are > > > > > > > > > and the only thing we can be, then we will never take > > the > > > gigantic > > > > > > > > > upward leap into trusting God. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can mind trust something that mind has made up? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > t. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We can begin to see that the thought-world is limiting us. > > In that > > > > > > > seeing there may come a realization of something beyond > > mental > > > > > > > constructs. We can begin to choose clarity of being in the > > present > > > > > > > moment by becoming aware of how thoughts and emotions > > operate. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is nothing to the " us " beyond thought. > > > > > > Thought doesn't even know what thought is. > > > > > > Clarity is not a choice. > > > > > > A creature whose totality is solely composed of > > thought...can never > > > > > enter the " present moment. > > > > > > Thoughts and emotions can never figure themselves out.... > > > > > > The secrets of mind will never be found by the mind...... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but everything else you said was pretty much right on. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > > Clarity is perhaps not a choice, but maybe understanding the > > mind will > > > > > bring clarity, and in that way there is an indirect choice > > being made > > > > > (by the Totality). > > > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If the attempt to " understand " any " thing " (even the " thing " in > > > which all " things " arise).......can bring " clarity " .......something > > > should have happened by now. > > > > > > > > > > > > t. > > > > > > I am talking about a total undertanding of the entire thought > > process. > > > Normally when we speak of understanding we mean understanding > > related > > > to separate concepts withing a context. We must see the whole > > thought > > > process in a context-less way. Then we can begin to question the > > heavy > > > package of emotions attached to thinking, and also the violent > > > labelling we perform all day long in our daily life. For example, > > we > > > think of some person, and SLAM! - we have smacked a label on that > > > person in our mind. > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > That is the point. > > > > Why does thought...mind...mentation assume that it can see itself > > or ever understand itself? > > > > In order for something to " see " itself..it would have to be separate > > from itself..... > > > > > > t. > > " Not what the eyes can see, but that whereby the eyes can see, know > that to be Brahman the eternal, and not what people here adore. Not > what the mind thinks, but that whereby the mind can think, know that > to be Brahman the eternal, and not what people here adore... " -- From > the Upanishads (if I remember correctly). Any understanding has to be of the particular under the aegis of the primate brain. Can you see the difficulty here? t. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 12, 2005 Report Share Posted January 12, 2005 Al: > > We can begin to see that the thought-world is limiting us. In that > > seeing there may come a realization of something beyond mental > > constructs. We can begin to choose clarity of being in the present > > moment by becoming aware of how thoughts and emotions operate. > > > > /AL ********************************************* :0) Smiless, Yes this is very good. This is self knowledge. It will bring you somewhere... Odysseus, P.S. and yes it is beyond the mental constructions. Beyond all the mind tricks and games. 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.