Guest guest Posted January 31, 2005 Report Share Posted January 31, 2005 Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > dan330033 wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > dan330033 wrote: > > > > > > > > Excellent quote, Werner. > > > > > > > > So many words have been said and written about this > > > > " silence. " > > > > > > > > So many urgings provided to hear, to listen. > > > > > > > > But it's the dying into it, as it, that none of > > > > the words, writings, practices, teachers can > > > > ever provide... and which is avoided by the fine > > > > talkers as well as the sincere practioners, just as its > > > > avoided by the ones who never even have a thought > > > > about this silent stillness but merely carry on with the > > > > social and personal strivings of everyday life. > > > > > > > > -- Dan > > > > > > Hi Dan, > > > > > > Do you experience this silence? Is it possible for you to speak of > > the > > > dying into the silence? Can you give us your experience of dying > > into > > > the silence? > > > > > > Lewis > > > > It's here, now, immediate, Lewis. > > > > Die into it, and you won't need anyone else > > to answer these questions for you. > > > > You'll know by being -- which is entirely > > different than knowing according to what > > someone else told you. > > > > -- Dan Hi Louis - > Hi Dan, > > What you have answered is known by all the traditions, books and > treatises and speeches on it, Tolle being a favorite at the moment. > > I understand the difficulty in talking about, Dan and I did not ask the > question for that answer. > > I asked the question about your experience of it and not a conception > about it, which is well known. There isn't a separable Dan experience of it. It is experiencing Dan, and Louis, and the little fruit flies buzzing around the fruit stand. Though any answer will be conceptual, and > barring all other issues about the limitations of language and concept, > it seems that there is no harm in relating what has been undergone > however it is conceived and expressed. There also is nothing to be added by providing such a story. There may be something wonderful > there and useful to others whatever that may be. What is " useful " is already fully present, and my story adds nothing to it. > Since it is apparent that such an experience exist for you in concept, It is? > I > wondered if you have the experience of it. Your wonderment is at your own conceptualizations, and has nothing to do with me and my experience. And whatever you construe from what I say, will still be your involvement with your conceptualization of my words. I wondered if you could > describe that experience, however limited by language and concept, so > that I could know Dan more. Knowing Dan more? Forget it, it will avail you nothing. Know the one who knows Dan, which available to you now, without Dan saying one word about it. And know that nothing Dan says will add any understanding for you -- not one iota. Nor will all the wise texts in a million universes add anything *here.* And if you had the experience of dying into > it, wondered if you could say what is your experience in that, how it > occurred, if that is possible, for " you. " Why? Do you think you will get something from that? You once asked me something similar, I responded about the loss of identity, and you didn't seem to me to have benefitted at all. It's just a game to play, it seems to me, the giving back and forth of " important experiences I had. " > You mentioned in your post that others, not the teachers, avoided saying > anything about it and so was moved to ask you about it and that perhaps > what others avoid, you would not. For me, it was a shattering of every sense of identity, time, the loss of any sense of moving into a future time, an inability to move away from this, as is, even one iota. > Now I wonder that if your current answer reflects your understanding and > experience than why did you post about others and what they avoid in > this matter if it does not matter as you say, that " You'll know by > being " ? Why ask " why? " Drink Bud Dry. > It also assumes that others have not died into it. You are assuming a lot about my assumptions, it seems. How could you > possibly know that? Perhaps, your understanding is precisely why it has > not been broached by others or perhaps no one has called for it. In any > case, since the answer was not to the question as posed, I await any > response you are moved to give. It seems called now and anything is welcome. So, here you have it. There is no " why " to it. -- Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 1, 2005 Report Share Posted February 1, 2005 dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> > wrote: > > > > > > dan330033 wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > dan330033 wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Excellent quote, Werner. > > > > > > > > > > So many words have been said and written about this > > > > > " silence. " > > > > > > > > > > So many urgings provided to hear, to listen. > > > > > > > > > > But it's the dying into it, as it, that none of > > > > > the words, writings, practices, teachers can > > > > > ever provide... and which is avoided by the fine > > > > > talkers as well as the sincere practioners, just as its > > > > > avoided by the ones who never even have a thought > > > > > about this silent stillness but merely carry on with the > > > > > social and personal strivings of everyday life. > > > > > > > > > > -- Dan > > > > > > > > Hi Dan, > > > > > > > > Do you experience this silence? Is it possible for you to > speak of > > > the > > > > dying into the silence? Can you give us your experience of > dying > > > into > > > > the silence? > > > > > > > > Lewis > > > > > > It's here, now, immediate, Lewis. > > > > > > Die into it, and you won't need anyone else > > > to answer these questions for you. > > > > > > You'll know by being -- which is entirely > > > different than knowing according to what > > > someone else told you. > > > > > > -- Dan > > Hi Louis - > > > Hi Dan, > > > > What you have answered is known by all the traditions, books and > > treatises and speeches on it, Tolle being a favorite at the moment. > > > > I understand the difficulty in talking about, Dan and I did not > ask the > > question for that answer. > > > > I asked the question about your experience of it and not a > conception > > about it, which is well known. > > There isn't a separable Dan experience of it. > > It is experiencing Dan, and Louis, and the little fruit > flies buzzing around the fruit stand. Yes. > > Though any answer will be conceptual, and > > barring all other issues about the limitations of language and > concept, > > it seems that there is no harm in relating what has been undergone > > however it is conceived and expressed. > > There also is nothing to be added by providing such a story. Yes, that is so, but hearing stories serves many possibilities, why limit. And if " you " feel moved or are not moved then that is how it is. > > > There may be something wonderful > > there and useful to others whatever that may be. > > What is " useful " is already fully present, and my story > adds nothing to it. Is that not for the other appearances to decide? But if you are not moved then silence is better. > > > Since it is apparent that such an experience exist for you in > concept, > > It is? You speak of it. Point to it, you do not know of it as a concept? > > > I > > wondered if you have the experience of it. > > Your wonderment is at your own conceptualizations, > and has nothing to do with me and my experience. No Dan, I simply want to hear your voice on it, your experience. I experience silence in my way. I need no conceptualization of it and make none. > > And whatever you construe from what I say, will still > be your involvement with your conceptualization of > my words. I will not construe anything without your help. I will listen to your words and then see if there is anything in them that match my experience and then if there is I will ask for clarification by telling you mine and ask you if it is similar and so on to see if we have similar experiences. If there is nothing similar, I will have nothing to say or I will ask more questions if your response calls my curiosity. if you find this objectionable, I will not pursue it. I like to share even if that sharing will never match precisely what you experience. I am not hunting. > > I wondered if you could > > describe that experience, however limited by language and concept, > so > > that I could know Dan more. > > Knowing Dan more? Forget it, it will avail you nothing. Why do you say that, Dan? Is it harmful or a waste to communicate? You drop in every now and then and communicate and something is learned as you do so. I am not trying to know " Dan the person, " for we know what that is. It is the condition that is sought, the response as it is, not " Dan the person. " > > Know the one who knows Dan, which available to you now, > without Dan saying one word about it. And know that > nothing Dan says will add any understanding for you -- > not one iota. Nor will all the wise texts in a million > universes add anything *here.* As it was said above, it is the condition that is sought, the response as it is, not " Dan the person. " What you really are is not unknown. > > And if you had the experience of dying into > > it, wondered if you could say what is your experience in that, how > it > > occurred, if that is possible, for " you. " > > Why? Do you think you will get something from that? > > You once asked me something similar, I responded about > the loss of identity, and you didn't seem to me to > have benefitted at all. > > It's just a game to play, it seems to me, the giving back > and forth of " important experiences I had. " How so? What is my identity? There is no secret as to that. It has been broadcast. I do not hide what I am. I am out, free to be the no thing I am. Do you see in the use of the personal pronoun " I " a person? There is no person or such a formation here. Why do you see me as a person? I do not see you as such. > > > You mentioned in your post that others, not the teachers, avoided > saying > > anything about it and so was moved to ask you about it and that > perhaps > > what others avoid, you would not. > > For me, it was a shattering of every sense of identity, > time, the loss of any sense of moving into a future time, > an inability to move away from this, as is, even one iota. Yes. That is my experience as it is but it was not a shattering for me It was like a gradual dissolve, with fits and starts, that were like trying to gulp air as I tried to stay above water but being unable to swim and going down and up until, it just went down unable to rise. > > > Now I wonder that if your current answer reflects your > understanding and > > experience than why did you post about others and what they avoid > in > > this matter if it does not matter as you say, that " You'll know by > > being " ? > > Why ask " why? " Drink Bud Dry. Ok. I will leave it as it is. > > > It also assumes that others have not died into it. > > You are assuming a lot about my assumptions, it seems. How so? > > How could you > > possibly know that? Perhaps, your understanding is precisely why > it has > > not been broached by others or perhaps no one has called for it. > In any > > case, since the answer was not to the question as posed, I await > any > > response you are moved to give. It seems called now and anything > is welcome. > > So, here you have it. > > There is no " why " to it. > > -- Dan I left a door for you, you have taken it and it is understood. Lewis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 1, 2005 Report Share Posted February 1, 2005 Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > > What is " useful " is already fully present, and my story > > adds nothing to it. > > Is that not for the other appearances to decide? No, it's not. > But if you are not > moved then silence is better. Silence, *this* silence, doesn't move. And yet, it speaks, movements are observed. > > > > > Since it is apparent that such an experience exist for you in > > concept, > > > > It is? > > You speak of it. Point to it, you do not know of it as a concept? Huh? > > > I > > > wondered if you have the experience of it. > > > > Your wonderment is at your own conceptualizations, > > and has nothing to do with me and my experience. > > > No Dan, I simply want to hear your voice on it, your experience. I > experience silence in my way. I need no conceptualization of it and make > none. There is none. > > And whatever you construe from what I say, will still > > be your involvement with your conceptualization of > > my words. > > I will not construe anything without your help. I will listen to your > words and then see if there is anything in them that match my experience This silence transcends experience. We can discuss, but what we discuss is not its fullness, its totality. Therefore, there is no matching of experience. This allness, stillness includes all experiences, as is. > > > I wondered if you could > > > describe that experience, however limited by language and concept, > > so > > > that I could know Dan more. > > > > Knowing Dan more? Forget it, it will avail you nothing. > > Why do you say that, Dan? Is it harmful or a waste to communicate? It depends on the communication. You > drop in every now and then and communicate and something is learned as > you do so. I am not trying to know " Dan the person, " for we know what > that is. It is the condition that is sought, the response as it is, not > " Dan the person. " Enjoying the give and take, open in the give and take. > > Know the one who knows Dan, which available to you now, > > without Dan saying one word about it. And know that > > nothing Dan says will add any understanding for you -- > > not one iota. Nor will all the wise texts in a million > > universes add anything *here.* > > > As it was said above, it is the condition that is sought, the response > as it is, not " Dan the person. " What you really are is not unknown. Wrong. The known is a circumscribed arena that depends on self-reflexive confirmation and validation. Therefore, the known is empty of any anchor. Each image leads to another image, each determination requires another. snip > How so? What is my identity? There is no secret as to that. It has been > broadcast. I do not hide what I am. I am out, free to be the no thing I > am. Do you see in the use of the personal pronoun " I " a person? There is > no person or such a formation here. Why do you see me as a person? I do > not see you as such. If you see anything, you're making an object. > > > It also assumes that others have not died into it. > > > > You are assuming a lot about my assumptions, it seems. > > > How so? That's for you to say, or not. > I left a door for you, you have taken it and it is understood. Okay, I'm glad you're satisfied, at least for now. And, I'm not adverse to sharing stories -- I've shared mine in depth once or twice. It just hasn't seemed that worthwhile to me, because it makes it seem like there's a focus on " me and my experience " which is far from the truth. Be well -- -- Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 1, 2005 Report Share Posted February 1, 2005 dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> > wrote: > > > > > > > What is " useful " is already fully present, and my story > > > adds nothing to it. > > > > Is that not for the other appearances to decide? > > No, it's not. > > > But if you are not > > moved then silence is better. > > Silence, *this* silence, doesn't move. And yet, it > speaks, movements are observed. Silence referred to was to not posting or speaking. > > > > > > > Since it is apparent that such an experience exist for you in > > > concept, > > > > > > It is? > > > > You speak of it. Point to it, you do not know of it as a concept? > > Huh? You speak of silence, mention silence, it is a concept is it not? > > > > > I > > > > wondered if you have the experience of it. > > > > > > Your wonderment is at your own conceptualizations, > > > and has nothing to do with me and my experience. > > > > > > No Dan, I simply want to hear your voice on it, your experience. I > > experience silence in my way. I need no conceptualization of it > and make > > none. > > There is none. > > > > And whatever you construe from what I say, will still > > > be your involvement with your conceptualization of > > > my words. > > > > I will not construe anything without your help. I will listen to > your > > words and then see if there is anything in them that match my > experience > > This silence transcends experience. We can discuss, but what > we discuss is not its fullness, its totality. > > Therefore, there is no matching of experience. > > This allness, stillness includes all experiences, as is. Yes. That is so. There is no precision in matching. Yet, there is a reason to share. There is a reason not to share. There is a reason to share and not to share. There is a reason to neither share nor not share. You have responded as if there is only one answer. You respond as you did, as you are. So be it. > > > > > > I wondered if you could > > > > describe that experience, however limited by language and > concept, > > > so > > > > that I could know Dan more. > > > > > > Knowing Dan more? Forget it, it will avail you nothing. > > > > Why do you say that, Dan? Is it harmful or a waste to communicate? > > It depends on the communication. > > You > > drop in every now and then and communicate and something is > learned as > > you do so. I am not trying to know " Dan the person, " for we know > what > > that is. It is the condition that is sought, the response as it > is, not > > " Dan the person. " > > Enjoying the give and take, open in the give and take. What else is there here or in life? > > > > Know the one who knows Dan, which available to you now, > > > without Dan saying one word about it. And know that > > > nothing Dan says will add any understanding for you -- > > > not one iota. Nor will all the wise texts in a million > > > universes add anything *here.* > > > > > > As it was said above, it is the condition that is sought, the > response > > as it is, not " Dan the person. " What you really are is not unknown. > > Wrong. The known is a circumscribed arena that depends on > self-reflexive confirmation and validation. Therefore, > the known is empty of any anchor. Each image leads to > another image, each determination requires another. There is that " known " as you say and there is that " known " that is direct without conceptualization. Which known is used above? A question suffices to reveal it. > > snip > > > How so? What is my identity? There is no secret as to that. It has > been > > broadcast. I do not hide what I am. I am out, free to be the no > thing I > > am. Do you see in the use of the personal pronoun " I " a person? > There is > > no person or such a formation here. Why do you see me as a person? > I do > > not see you as such. > > If you see anything, you're making an object. You snip it out and so I ask again are you making an identity where there is none? Are you making an object? > > > > > It also assumes that others have not died into it. > > > > > > You are assuming a lot about my assumptions, it seems. > > > > > > How so? > > That's for you to say, or not. The question is dodged. > > > I left a door for you, you have taken it and it is understood. > > Okay, I'm glad you're satisfied, at least for now. Not looking for satisfaction, Dan. And there is no end to me and you, my lovely. > > And, I'm not adverse to sharing stories -- I've shared mine > in depth once or twice. It just hasn't seemed that worthwhile > to me, because it makes it seem like there's a focus on > " me and my experience " which is far from the truth. > > Be well -- > > -- Dan What is there to lose? To protect? To worry over? To think if it is worthwhile. For a dead person there is no fear, no self-consciousness, no concern, no anything about how other appearances try to focus, imagine, distort, enhance, add, subtract, multiply, divide, up end, destroy, etc. " one's " appearance in words. Such appearances are a coat offered for someone to try on to wear, to see if it fits, if not it may be returned. Or it can be ripped apart or torn to shreds, spit upon, mocked, laughed at. It can be misunderstood, taken wrongly, twisted into something else, remade, stolen, embellished. Or it can worn for a while and then when worn out discarded. Or can be too small or too large or the colors are not right or there is confusion over what to do with it..... Giving it is a lesson and all the responses, whatever they may be are lessons. Is this not one, one reason we are here, to learn our lessons from each and everyone? In any case, it is an object. It is poured from our being and it is not us. So it needs no defense. It does need to be cherished or protected. There is no need to be attached to it. It is from us, but not us once it leaves and sits here in this digital list. We need not retrieve it or save it from harm. It has no life other than what is poured into it or attached to it. Let others respond to it as they are. Some will benefit, some will not, some will not even look at it, some will scoff, some will fly, some will weep, some will struggle....We experience it and do with it as we are and there is no thing we can do about how what is shared will be taken or used and whatever happens our lessons lie there for us to drink without hesitation so that we may know if that death is and what we are in the moment. Lewis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 1, 2005 Report Share Posted February 1, 2005 Hi Louis - > > You speak of it. Point to it, you do not know of it as a concept? > > > > Huh? Listen. Hear it? > > Enjoying the give and take, open in the give and take. > > What else is there here or in life? What can't be taken nor given. > > The known is a circumscribed arena that depends on > > self-reflexive confirmation and validation. Therefore, > > the known is empty of any anchor. Each image leads to > > another image, each determination requires another. > > > There is that " known " as you say and there is that " known " that is > direct without conceptualization. Which known is used above? A question > suffices to reveal it. Here is the unknown. > You snip it out and so I ask again are you making an identity where > there is none? Are you making an object? This unknown is not an object. > > That's for you to say, or not. > > The question is dodged. Only if you thought you threw it at something. > Not looking for satisfaction, Dan. And there is no end to me and you, my > lovely. Not caught by the me and you. > What is there to lose? To protect? To worry over? To think if it is > worthwhile. You sure write a lot of words for someone who doesn't care if it's worthwhile. So many thoughts, seemingly one after the other, forming logical sequences. Seemingly. -- Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 1, 2005 Report Share Posted February 1, 2005 dan330033 wrote: > > Hi Louis - > > > > You speak of it. Point to it, you do not know of it as a > concept? > > > > > > Huh? > > Listen. Hear it? The ringing? The continuos ringing? > > > > Enjoying the give and take, open in the give and take. > > > > What else is there here or in life? > > What can't be taken nor given. Yes. > > > > The known is a circumscribed arena that depends on > > > self-reflexive confirmation and validation. Therefore, > > > the known is empty of any anchor. Each image leads to > > > another image, each determination requires another. > > > > > > There is that " known " as you say and there is that " known " that is > > direct without conceptualization. Which known is used above? A > question > > suffices to reveal it. > > Here is the unknown. Yes. > > > You snip it out and so I ask again are you making an identity > where > > there is none? Are you making an object? > > This unknown is not an object. You are running on another track that elides your other moment, but yes. > > > > That's for you to say, or not. > > > > The question is dodged. > > Only if you thought you threw it at something. Yes. > > > Not looking for satisfaction, Dan. And there is no end to me and > you, my > > lovely. > > Not caught by the me and you. Yes. It is the way it is. > > > What is there to lose? To protect? To worry over? To think if it > is > > worthwhile. > > You sure write a lot of words for someone who doesn't care > if it's worthwhile. Caring is a concept alien to this appearance Dan. There is no holding up or putting it down. Leave it conventional reality to be thrown about. I thought perhaps you could come out in the open and speak freely. > > So many thoughts, seemingly one after the other, forming > logical sequences. > > Seemingly. > > -- Dan Yes. Seemingly. 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.