Guest guest Posted January 27, 2005 Report Share Posted January 27, 2005 Try to deconstruct the word 'is'. /AL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 2005 Report Share Posted January 27, 2005 Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > > Try to deconstruct the word 'is'. > > /AL Give us a sentence? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 2005 Report Share Posted January 27, 2005 Nisargadatta , " Eric Paroissien " <ericparoissien@g...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > Try to deconstruct the word 'is'. > > > > /AL > > Give us a sentence? What is the difference between something in flux and something final? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 2005 Report Share Posted January 27, 2005 Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Eric Paroissien " > <ericparoissien@g...> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > Try to deconstruct the word 'is'. > > > > > > /AL > > > > Give us a sentence? > > What is the difference between something in flux and something final? What is final? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 2005 Report Share Posted January 27, 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: > > > > > > > > Try to deconstruct the word 'is'. > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > Give us a sentence? > > > > What is the difference between something in flux and something final? > > What is final? The word 'final' indicates a mistaken notion of permanence for manifested objects. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 2005 Report Share Posted January 27, 2005 Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> 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: > > > > > > > > > > Try to deconstruct the word 'is'. > > > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > Give us a sentence? > > > > > > What is the difference between something in flux and something final? > > > > What is final? > > The word 'final' indicates a mistaken notion of permanence for > manifested objects. So you have your answer for the question above or do you wish to discuss it further? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 2005 Report Share Posted January 27, 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 , " Eric Paroissien " > > > > <ericparoissien@g...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Try to deconstruct the word 'is'. > > > > > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > > > Give us a sentence? > > > > > > > > What is the difference between something in flux and something > final? > > > > > > What is final? > > > > The word 'final' indicates a mistaken notion of permanence for > > manifested objects. > > So you have your answer for the question above or do you wish to > discuss it further? Yes, the word flux indicates a mistaken notion of impermanence for manifested objects. What then is the definition of a manifested object? A manifested object is a notion of separate existence, such as the word 'is'. And as such, the word 'is' can circularly be defined. /AL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 2005 Report Share Posted January 27, 2005 Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> 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 , " Eric Paroissien " > > > > > <ericparoissien@g...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Try to deconstruct the word 'is'. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > > > > > Give us a sentence? > > > > > > > > > > What is the difference between something in flux and something > > final? > > > > > > > > What is final? > > > > > > The word 'final' indicates a mistaken notion of permanence for > > > manifested objects. > > > > So you have your answer for the question above or do you wish to > > discuss it further? > > Yes, the word flux indicates a mistaken notion of impermanence for > manifested objects. What then is the definition of a manifested > object? A manifested object is a notion of separate existence, such as > the word 'is'. And as such, the word 'is' can circularly be defined. > > /AL If you keep tight on yourself what you mean by an object, why would objects exist beyond what you need of them? which is almost exactly the definition of object, exist/need/use/perceive/apartness, we have but a small quantity of attention/concentration available, there is nothing out there that calls for our attention more than our shot by shot tiny functioning on two, three objects at a time, the rest of the universe might or might not exist, no specialist is qualified but you to decide in this case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 2005 Report Share Posted January 27, 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 , " Eric Paroissien " > > > > <ericparoissien@g...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Eric Paroissien " > > > > > > <ericparoissien@g...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Try to deconstruct the word 'is'. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Give us a sentence? > > > > > > > > > > > > What is the difference between something in flux and something > > > final? > > > > > > > > > > What is final? > > > > > > > > The word 'final' indicates a mistaken notion of permanence for > > > > manifested objects. > > > > > > So you have your answer for the question above or do you wish to > > > discuss it further? > > > > Yes, the word flux indicates a mistaken notion of impermanence for > > manifested objects. What then is the definition of a manifested > > object? A manifested object is a notion of separate existence, such as > > the word 'is'. And as such, the word 'is' can circularly be defined. > > > > /AL > > If you keep tight on yourself what you mean by an object, why would > objects exist beyond what you need of them? which is almost exactly > the definition of object, exist/need/use/perceive/apartness, we have > but a small quantity of attention/concentration available, there is > nothing out there that calls for our attention more than our shot by > shot tiny functioning on two, three objects at a time, the rest of the > universe might or might not exist, no specialist is qualified but you > to decide in this case. The true view of objects is to see them as final _and_ in flux at the same time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 27, 2005 Report Share Posted January 27, 2005 Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> 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 , " Eric Paroissien " > > > > > <ericparoissien@g...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Eric Paroissien " > > > > > > > <ericparoissien@g...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Try to deconstruct the word 'is'. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Give us a sentence? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What is the difference between something in flux and something > > > > final? > > > > > > > > > > > > What is final? > > > > > > > > > > The word 'final' indicates a mistaken notion of permanence for > > > > > manifested objects. > > > > > > > > So you have your answer for the question above or do you wish to > > > > discuss it further? > > > > > > Yes, the word flux indicates a mistaken notion of impermanence for > > > manifested objects. What then is the definition of a manifested > > > object? A manifested object is a notion of separate existence, such as > > > the word 'is'. And as such, the word 'is' can circularly be defined. > > > > > > /AL > > > > If you keep tight on yourself what you mean by an object, why would > > objects exist beyond what you need of them? which is almost exactly > > the definition of object, exist/need/use/perceive/apartness, we have > > but a small quantity of attention/concentration available, there is > > nothing out there that calls for our attention more than our shot by > > shot tiny functioning on two, three objects at a time, the rest of the > > universe might or might not exist, no specialist is qualified but you > > to decide in this case. > > The true view of objects is to see them as final _and_ in flux at the > same time. And that's why the word 'is' can readily be circularly defined for it changes all the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 28, 2005 Report Share Posted January 28, 2005 Ther are no construct neither deconstruct for any word. The fact is not the " words " and yes perceptions that the words represents. The fact is not the " worlds " and yes perceptions that the worlds represents. The fact is not the " persons " and yes perceptions that the persons represents. The fact is not the " objects " and yes perceptions that the objects represents. Or rather all objects, forms, bodies etc. represents perceptions. The men are not bodies, mind or forms, the men are perceptions e consciousness of that perceptions. Then there are no men, no bodies, no forms; there are perceptions only. Nirgunananda - anders_lindman Nisargadatta Thursday, January 27, 2005 3:46 PM Fundamental deconstruction Try to deconstruct the word 'is'. /AL ** If you do not wish to receive individual emails, to change your subscription, sign in with your ID and go to Edit My Groups: /mygroups?edit=1 Under the Message Delivery option, choose " No Email " for the Nisargadatta group and click on Save Changes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 28, 2005 Report Share Posted January 28, 2005 Nisargadatta , " Nirgunananda " <nirgunananda@t...> wrote: > Ther are no construct neither deconstruct for any word. > The fact is not the " words " and yes perceptions that the words represents. > The fact is not the " worlds " and yes perceptions that the worlds represents. > The fact is not the " persons " and yes perceptions that the persons represents. > The fact is not the " objects " and yes perceptions that the objects represents. Or rather all objects, forms, bodies etc. represents perceptions. The men are not bodies, mind or forms, the men are perceptions e consciousness of that perceptions. Then there are no men, no bodies, no forms; there are perceptions only. Yes, perception is undeniable. However that perception can be in the form of suffering or true intelligence which is also peace, and in its pure form love. The goal in life is to bring balance to the 'force' of polar opposite. Pure love is the balance of all 'things'. Fear indicates conflict and a state of unbalance. /AL > > Nirgunananda > - > anders_lindman > Nisargadatta > Thursday, January 27, 2005 3:46 PM > Fundamental deconstruction > > > > Try to deconstruct the word 'is'. > > /AL > > > > > > ** > > If you do not wish to receive individual emails, to change your subscription, sign in with your ID and go to Edit My Groups: > > /mygroups?edit=1 > > Under the Message Delivery option, choose " No Email " for the Nisargadatta group and click on Save Changes. > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 28, 2005 Report Share Posted January 28, 2005 There are no goal, no direction, no balance in life, because in life there are no separation. The life is life. Within mind yes. The goal in mind is to bring balance to the " force " of polar opposite. Then love is the balance of all things because love is life, but love is not mind. Really fear indicates conflict and a state of unbalance within mind, not in life or in love. Nirgunananda - anders_lindman Nisargadatta Friday, January 28, 2005 2:16 PM Re: Fundamental deconstruction Nisargadatta , " Nirgunananda " <nirgunananda@t...> wrote: > Ther are no construct neither deconstruct for any word. > The fact is not the " words " and yes perceptions that the words represents. > The fact is not the " worlds " and yes perceptions that the worlds represents. > The fact is not the " persons " and yes perceptions that the persons represents. > The fact is not the " objects " and yes perceptions that the objects represents. Or rather all objects, forms, bodies etc. represents perceptions. The men are not bodies, mind or forms, the men are perceptions e consciousness of that perceptions. Then there are no men, no bodies, no forms; there are perceptions only. Yes, perception is undeniable. However that perception can be in the form of suffering or true intelligence which is also peace, and in its pure form love. The goal in life is to bring balance to the 'force' of polar opposite. Pure love is the balance of all 'things'. Fear indicates conflict and a state of unbalance. /AL > > Nirgunananda > - > anders_lindman > Nisargadatta > Thursday, January 27, 2005 3:46 PM > Fundamental deconstruction > > > > Try to deconstruct the word 'is'. > > /AL > > > > > > ** > > If you do not wish to receive individual emails, to change your subscription, sign in with your ID and go to Edit My Groups: > > /mygroups?edit=1 > > Under the Message Delivery option, choose " No Email " for the Nisargadatta group and click on Save Changes. > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 28, 2005 Report Share Posted January 28, 2005 Nisargadatta , " Nirgunananda " <nirgunananda@t...> wrote: > There are no goal, no direction, no balance in life, because in life there are no separation. > The life is life. > Within mind yes. > The goal in mind is to bring balance to the " force " of polar opposite. Then love is the balance of all things because love is life, but love is not mind. Really fear indicates conflict and a state of unbalance within mind, not in life or in love. > > Nirgunananda But surely such conflict as manifested in the fragmented mind is an obstacle to peace? > > > - > anders_lindman > Nisargadatta > Friday, January 28, 2005 2:16 PM > Re: Fundamental deconstruction > > > > Nisargadatta , " Nirgunananda " > <nirgunananda@t...> wrote: > > Ther are no construct neither deconstruct for any word. > > The fact is not the " words " and yes perceptions that the words > represents. > > The fact is not the " worlds " and yes perceptions that the worlds > represents. > > The fact is not the " persons " and yes perceptions that the persons > represents. > > The fact is not the " objects " and yes perceptions that the objects > represents. Or rather all objects, forms, bodies etc. represents > perceptions. The men are not bodies, mind or forms, the men are > perceptions e consciousness of that perceptions. Then there are no > men, no bodies, no forms; there are perceptions only. > > Yes, perception is undeniable. However that perception can be in the > form of suffering or true intelligence which is also peace, and in its > pure form love. The goal in life is to bring balance to the 'force' of > polar opposite. Pure love is the balance of all 'things'. Fear > indicates conflict and a state of unbalance. > > /AL > > > > > Nirgunananda > > - > > anders_lindman > > Nisargadatta > > Thursday, January 27, 2005 3:46 PM > > Fundamental deconstruction > > > > > > > > Try to deconstruct the word 'is'. > > > > /AL > > > > > > > > > > > > ** > > > > If you do not wish to receive individual emails, to change your > subscription, sign in with your ID and go to Edit My Groups: > > > > /mygroups?edit=1 > > > > Under the Message Delivery option, choose " No Email " for the > Nisargadatta group and click on Save Changes. > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 28, 2005 Report Share Posted January 28, 2005 Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > > But surely such conflict as manifested in the fragmented mind is an > obstacle to peace? There can only be an obstacle for one, when something else exists apart from this one, to act as an obstacle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 28, 2005 Report Share Posted January 28, 2005 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > But surely such conflict as manifested in the fragmented mind is an > > obstacle to peace? > > There can only be an obstacle for one, when > something else exists apart from this one, to act as an obstacle. The illusion of separation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 28, 2005 Report Share Posted January 28, 2005 Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > But surely such conflict as manifested in the fragmented mind is an > > > obstacle to peace? > > > > There can only be an obstacle for one, when > > something else exists apart from this one, to act as an obstacle. > > The illusion of separation. If nothing is actually separated, then there is no obstacle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 29, 2005 Report Share Posted January 29, 2005 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > But surely such conflict as manifested in the fragmented mind > is an > > > > obstacle to peace? > > > > > > There can only be an obstacle for one, when > > > something else exists apart from this one, to act as an > obstacle. > > > > The illusion of separation. > > If nothing is actually separated, then there is no obstacle. The illusion of separation _is_ the obstacle. 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.