Guest guest Posted February 7, 2005 Report Share Posted February 7, 2005 Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@c...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@c...> > wrote: > (me, about mind:) > >Is there anything wrong about it? > > (you) > >No. There can be nothing wrong in something that exists only as an > ides. > > Well, it is new to me that ideas cannot be called " right/wrong " ? I > thought this is how the mind functions, calling ideas " right/wrong " . > And your mind is obviously no exception. > > But I agree that the mind exists only as an idea. Like everything that > is given names. The question is only, WHO is having this idea then? > Or, WHAT is the mind in reality? > > > " We " are not independent of the " mind " . > > So: " we " are dependent on the mind. Does this mean " we " is an idea of > the mind? Whose idea is the mind then? > > >The " we " .....(I am) is the reselt of conceptualization.....not its > >source. > > Agreed for the " we " (I am not shure what you mean with " I am " ). > This brings up the question: WHO is conceptualizing the " we " , what IS > the source? > > >We are mind-stuff. > > > >Nothing can go beyond itself. > > You just have constituted that the mind and the " we " are ideas and > conceptualizations. So, certainly there must be something which is > having ideas and concepts. That is not certain at all, Stefan. Indeed, it is merely an assumption of and by thought. > It necessarily has to be beyond, or > something else than mind and also than " we " and it cannot be an idea > itself. Because, as you just said, nothing can be beyond itself. In > other words, nothing can be the result of its own conceptualization. > And there it goes, your mind dreaming the mind... being dreamed by the > mind... a fairy tale told by T. Thanks for sharing your fairy tale about the fairy tale told by T. Here is my fairy tale about S. -- D. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 8, 2005 Report Share Posted February 8, 2005 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@c...> > wrote: >>You just have constituted that the mind and the " we " are ideas and >>conceptualizations. So, certainly there must be something which is >>having ideas and concepts. > >That is not certain at all, Stefan. > >Indeed, it is merely an assumption of and by thought. If you want to stay on the ground of logic it is indeed certain, assumed we follow Toombarus condition. Conceptualization is an act of subject/object. The subject cannot be the same as the object, it is impossible. I emphasize this because, if we think thoughts to the end, we can come to a point where we simply have to give up. Whilst only half thought concepts of other concepts lead only to more concepts without ever reaching anywhere. It is the attempt of the mind to keep control and build a cosy nest, where it can lull the real being. >Here is my fairy tale about S. I am hearing? S. P.S. I give you a jewel of Nisargadatta " Fight with all the strength at your disposal against the idea that you are nameable and describable. You are not. Refuse to think of yourself in terms of this or that. There is no other way out of misery, which you have created for yourself through blind acceptance without investigation. Suffering is a call for enquiry, all pain needs investigation. Don't be lazy to think. " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 8, 2005 Report Share Posted February 8, 2005 Hi Stefan, As you might remember, you and me already had this discussion that the object is the subject ? If you just see the me or the ego as the subject then you are right that it is impossible that the subject is the object. But the subject is not just a part like the ego it is a totality of seeing, hearing, feeling, smelling, sensing, etc. Let me use an example: As far as I know you are a musician and you already had to learn when you are playing music you are hearing it totally different than the others listening to it. They even can feel bored or even in secret are praying that you might stop soon. What you seemingly are hearing in your music is your subjectivity and imagine a person being deaf won't hear it at all or a person suffering from tooth ache will hear it totally different another day when being free of that ache. You cannot separate the subject from the object which in my example was music. Werner Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@c...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@c...> > > wrote: > > >>You just have constituted that the mind and the " we " are ideas and > >>conceptualizations. So, certainly there must be something which is > >>having ideas and concepts. > > > >That is not certain at all, Stefan. > > > >Indeed, it is merely an assumption of and by thought. > > If you want to stay on the ground of logic it is indeed certain, > assumed we follow Toombarus condition. Conceptualization is an act of > subject/object. The subject cannot be the same as the object, it is > impossible. > > I emphasize this because, if we think thoughts to the end, we can come > to a point where we simply have to give up. Whilst only half thought > concepts of other concepts lead only to more concepts without ever > reaching anywhere. It is the attempt of the mind to keep control and > build a cosy nest, where it can lull the real being. > > >Here is my fairy tale about S. > > I am hearing? > > S. > > P.S. I give you a jewel of Nisargadatta > > " Fight with all the strength at your disposal against the idea that > you are nameable and describable. You are not. Refuse to think of > yourself in terms of this or that. There is no other way out of > misery, which you have created for yourself through blind acceptance > without investigation. Suffering is a call for enquiry, all pain > needs investigation. Don't be lazy to think. " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 8, 2005 Report Share Posted February 8, 2005 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> wrote: > > Hi Stefan, > > As you might remember, you and me already had this discussion that > the object is the subject ? If you just see the me or the ego as the > subject then you are right that it is impossible that the subject is > the object. > > But the subject is not just a part like the ego it is a totality of > seeing, hearing, feeling, smelling, sensing, etc. > > Let me use an example: > As far as I know you are a musician and you already had to learn when > you are playing music you are hearing it totally different than the > others listening to it. They even can feel bored or even in secret > are praying that you might stop soon. LOL > > What you seemingly are hearing in your music is your subjectivity and > imagine a person being deaf won't hear it at all or a person > suffering from tooth ache will hear it totally different another day > when being free of that ache. You cannot separate the subject from > the object which in my example was music. > > Werner > > > Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@c...> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@c...> > > > wrote: > > > > >>You just have constituted that the mind and the " we " are ideas and > > >>conceptualizations. So, certainly there must be something which is > > >>having ideas and concepts. > > > > > >That is not certain at all, Stefan. > > > > > >Indeed, it is merely an assumption of and by thought. > > > > If you want to stay on the ground of logic it is indeed certain, > > assumed we follow Toombarus condition. Conceptualization is an act > of > > subject/object. The subject cannot be the same as the object, it is > > impossible. > > > > I emphasize this because, if we think thoughts to the end, we can > come > > to a point where we simply have to give up. Whilst only half thought > > concepts of other concepts lead only to more concepts without ever > > reaching anywhere. It is the attempt of the mind to keep control and > > build a cosy nest, where it can lull the real being. > > > > >Here is my fairy tale about S. > > > > I am hearing? > > > > S. > > > > P.S. I give you a jewel of Nisargadatta > > > > " Fight with all the strength at your disposal against the idea that > > you are nameable and describable. You are not. Refuse to think of > > yourself in terms of this or that. There is no other way out of > > misery, which you have created for yourself through blind > acceptance > > without investigation. Suffering is a call for enquiry, all pain > > needs investigation. Don't be lazy to think. " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 8, 2005 Report Share Posted February 8, 2005 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> wrote: >What you seemingly are hearing in your music is your subjectivity and >imagine a person being deaf won't hear it at all or a person >suffering from tooth ache will hear it totally different another day >when being free of that ache. You cannot separate the subject from >the object which in my example was music. Very true. The subject and the object are interdependent, like two sides of a coin. When one arises the other arises, when one disappears the other disappears. But the object can never be the subject of itself. This is the very base of duality. Understanding this means understanding duality. And seeing the flaws in it can lead to approach reality. The mind likes to have its cosy corner in duality, that is the air it is breathing. One of its tricks is to talk about non-duality as it would be possible to talk about it in terms of duality (Toombarus). This is not possible. And I often wonder what we guys are talking about here. The only expression that still makes some sense to me is " let go " . Greetings a person called S., posting... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 8, 2005 Report Share Posted February 8, 2005 Stefan, That here is the subject and there is the object, or that both ar the sides of the same medal is logic. But that both are just the same is as we are experiencing it. You can never see an object as it is, you only can have the subjective view of it. When I write about the object being the subject then it is not logic but the way we are experíencing the world. When you listen to music then this music you are hearing IS already the subjective experiencing. The world you see IS already the subjective view. But in logical thinking subject and object are separated. But do you really experience the world through logical thinking or is the world rather a DIRECT view ? And in the direct view the object is the subject. Werner Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@c...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> > wrote: > > >What you seemingly are hearing in your music is your subjectivity > and > >imagine a person being deaf won't hear it at all or a person > >suffering from tooth ache will hear it totally different another day > >when being free of that ache. You cannot separate the subject from > >the object which in my example was music. > > Very true. > > The subject and the object are interdependent, like two sides of a > coin. When one arises the other arises, when one disappears the other > disappears. But the object can never be the subject of itself. This is > the very base of duality. Understanding this means understanding > duality. And seeing the flaws in it can lead to approach reality. > > The mind likes to have its cosy corner in duality, that is the air it > is breathing. One of its tricks is to talk about non-duality as it > would be possible to talk about it in terms of duality (Toombarus). > This is not possible. And I often wonder what we guys are talking > about here. > > The only expression that still makes some sense to me is " let go " . > > Greetings > a person called S., posting... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 8, 2005 Report Share Posted February 8, 2005 Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@c...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> > wrote: > > >What you seemingly are hearing in your music is your subjectivity > and > >imagine a person being deaf won't hear it at all or a person > >suffering from tooth ache will hear it totally different another day > >when being free of that ache. You cannot separate the subject from > >the object which in my example was music. > > Very true. > > The subject and the object are interdependent, like two sides of a > coin. When one arises the other arises, when one disappears the other > disappears. But the object can never be the subject of itself. This is > the very base of duality. Understanding this means understanding > duality. And seeing the flaws in it can lead to approach reality. > > The mind likes to have its cosy corner in duality, that is the air it > is breathing. One of its tricks is to talk about non-duality as it > would be possible to talk about it in terms of duality (Toombarus). > This is not possible. And I often wonder what we guys are talking > about here. ....because we have no choice........ > > The only expression that still makes some sense to me is " let go " . Let go of what? t. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 8, 2005 Report Share Posted February 8, 2005 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> wrote: > >Stefan, > >That here is the subject and there is the object, or that both ar the >sides of the same medal is logic. But that both are just the same is >as we are experiencing it. You can never see an object as it is, you >only can have the subjective view of it. >When I write about the object being the subject then it is not logic >but the way we are experíencing the world. When you listen to music >then this music you are hearing IS already the subjective >experiencing. The world you see IS already the subjective view. But >in logical thinking subject and object are separated. >But do you really experience the world through logical thinking or is >the world rather a DIRECT view ? And in the direct view the object is >the subject. Hi Werner. The problem is, what you are saying sounds true although it is against logic, as you said yourself in the first sentence. I agree with you: the way we are experiencing the world is utterly subjective, and thus, regarding the law of objectivity, unlogical. The question is: which conclusions do we draw facing those findings? Either we have to say: the " reality " is the world as we experience it and it is a 100% subjective world. There is nothing that " explains " it. No search is needed, lets take it as it is. This is the existencialistic way. And the way of quite some people on this list. The conclusion of the seeker is: the way we experience the world cannot be the reality, it is obviously a dream, illusionary. But still I cannot deny that I exist. So I have to go on and search for the truth, it must be found somewhere, outside my subjective perception. In the east there has been a tradition, going over thousands of years, bearing people who said: by consistently enquiring we have finally found this truth. Through letting go of everything which is false, the whole subjectivity, I have found that which is not false. What I found cannot be said with words. But it is worth searching it, it is good to be found. One of those people has been Nisargadatta. Greetings " S Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 8, 2005 Report Share Posted February 8, 2005 Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@c...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> > wrote: > > > >Stefan, > > > >That here is the subject and there is the object, or that both ar the > >sides of the same medal is logic. But that both are just the same is > >as we are experiencing it. You can never see an object as it is, you > >only can have the subjective view of it. > > >When I write about the object being the subject then it is not logic > >but the way we are experíencing the world. When you listen to > music > >then this music you are hearing IS already the subjective > >experiencing. The world you see IS already the subjective view. But > >in logical thinking subject and object are separated. > > >But do you really experience the world through logical thinking or is > >the world rather a DIRECT view ? And in the direct view the object > is > >the subject. > > Hi Werner. > > The problem is, what you are saying sounds true although it is against > logic, as you said yourself in the first sentence. I agree with you: > the way we are experiencing the world is utterly subjective, and thus, > regarding the law of objectivity, unlogical. > > The question is: which conclusions do we draw facing those findings? > Either we have to say: the " reality " is the world as we experience it > and it is a 100% subjective world. There is nothing that " explains " > it. No search is needed, lets take it as it is. This is the > existencialistic way. And the way of quite some people on this list. > > The conclusion of the seeker is: the way we experience the world > cannot be the reality, it is obviously a dream, illusionary. But still > I cannot deny that I exist. So I have to go on and search for the > truth, it must be found somewhere, outside my subjective perception. > > In the east there has been a tradition, going over thousands of years, > bearing people who said: by consistently enquiring we have finally > found this truth. Through letting go of everything which is false, the > whole subjectivity, I have found that which is not false. What I found > cannot be said with words. But it is worth searching it, it is good to > be found. > > One of those people has been Nisargadatta. Nope. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 8, 2005 Report Share Posted February 8, 2005 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@c...> wrote: >>And I often wonder what we guys are talking about here. > ...because we have no choice........ >>The only expression that still makes some sense to me is " let go " . >Let go of what? of choosing S " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 8, 2005 Report Share Posted February 8, 2005 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@c...> wrote: >>One of those people has been Nisargadatta. > Nope. Haha, of course! He has said every day that he has found it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 8, 2005 Report Share Posted February 8, 2005 Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@c...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@c...> > wrote: > > >>And I often wonder what we guys are talking about here. > > > ...because we have no choice........ > > >>The only expression that still makes some sense to me is " let go " . > > >Let go of what? > > of choosing > > S " You choose to let go of choosing? toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 8, 2005 Report Share Posted February 8, 2005 Hi Stefan, Don't bother, the world is not an illusion, it is real. But what we see as reality is only subjectivity. When it is cold outside and your fingers start freezing you cannot call this a dream or an illusion else your will lose your fingers - how stupid. You asked what are the consquences of knowing that the world is my subjective view ? Well, it means that there is no longer the tiniest bit of separation possible. You are the world. Werner Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@c...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> > wrote: > > > >Stefan, > > > >That here is the subject and there is the object, or that both ar the > >sides of the same medal is logic. But that both are just the same is > >as we are experiencing it. You can never see an object as it is, you > >only can have the subjective view of it. > > >When I write about the object being the subject then it is not logic > >but the way we are experíencing the world. When you listen to > music > >then this music you are hearing IS already the subjective > >experiencing. The world you see IS already the subjective view. But > >in logical thinking subject and object are separated. > > >But do you really experience the world through logical thinking or is > >the world rather a DIRECT view ? And in the direct view the object > is > >the subject. > > Hi Werner. > > The problem is, what you are saying sounds true although it is against > logic, as you said yourself in the first sentence. I agree with you: > the way we are experiencing the world is utterly subjective, and thus, > regarding the law of objectivity, unlogical. > > The question is: which conclusions do we draw facing those findings? > Either we have to say: the " reality " is the world as we experience it > and it is a 100% subjective world. There is nothing that " explains " > it. No search is needed, lets take it as it is. This is the > existencialistic way. And the way of quite some people on this list. > > The conclusion of the seeker is: the way we experience the world > cannot be the reality, it is obviously a dream, illusionary. But still > I cannot deny that I exist. So I have to go on and search for the > truth, it must be found somewhere, outside my subjective perception. > > In the east there has been a tradition, going over thousands of years, > bearing people who said: by consistently enquiring we have finally > found this truth. Through letting go of everything which is false, the > whole subjectivity, I have found that which is not false. What I found > cannot be said with words. But it is worth searching it, it is good to > be found. > > One of those people has been Nisargadatta. > > Greetings > " S Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 8, 2005 Report Share Posted February 8, 2005 Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@c...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@c...> > wrote: > > >>One of those people has been Nisargadatta. > > > Nope. > > Haha, of course! He has said every day that he has found it. Whenever one of Ramana's relatives would come into his fetid little room......Nisargadatta would put down his cigarette and piddle all over himself..... Does that tell you anything? Some folks....in the Mid-west...... still worship the radio that brings the word of God to them every sunday morning........ Can you imagine? toombaru .... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 8, 2005 Report Share Posted February 8, 2005 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> wrote: > >Hi Stefan, > >Don't bother, the world is not an illusion, it is real. But what we >see as reality is only subjectivity. When it is cold outside and >your >fingers start freezing you cannot call this a dream or an illusion >else your will lose your fingers - how stupid. > >You asked what are the consquences of knowing that the world is my >subjective view ? Well, it means that there is no longer the tiniest >bit of separation possible. You are the world. It is a pity that you dont show any interest in my point of view. For a moment I thought that you were opening up and show some willingness to communicate and match your view against mine. I thought we could learn from each other. Should I have known it better? You have once told me, that the whole world is in your head. It truly seems so... I have been coming half way across and described two different ways, for better understanding. Now you just repeat your way, like a stubborn donkey. This brings me to the third way, the way of the cowards. They repeat the same believe over and over, hoping that this way the believe becomes truth. Werner, who are you? You have the answer always at hand: the world. You make it appear very easy and yet you are avoiding the natural, taking the dream for real. You really like to dream! I wonder what interests you on Nisargadatta, who always emphasized that one truly is NOT the world, since it is certainly not real. Have you never wondered, why? Bye, Werner, sweet dreams... and yet I know that you have seen the reality once... you have felt your real self, trembling... which makes you restless now... S Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 8, 2005 Report Share Posted February 8, 2005 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@c...> wrote: >You choose to let go of choosing? All we do as long we do is choose. Yet there is no free will. Hence I said, the only verbal expression that has some value for me is " let go " . S Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 8, 2005 Report Share Posted February 8, 2005 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@c...> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@c...> > > wrote: > > > > >>One of those people has been Nisargadatta. > > > > > Nope. > > > > Haha, of course! He has said every day that he has found it. > > > > Whenever one of Ramana's relatives would come into his fetid little room......Nisargadatta > would put down his cigarette and piddle all over himself..... > > > Does that tell you anything? > > > > > Some folks....in the Mid-west...... still worship the radio that brings the word of God to > them every sunday morning........ > > > Can you imagine? Poor T., you must be very jealous. Still, what has this to do, or is contradictive to what I have said? Nothing. Read the postings a little more careful if you really have to comment them. Or simply admit that you have nothing to contribute. S Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 8, 2005 Report Share Posted February 8, 2005 Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@c...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@c...> > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Stefan " > <s.petersilge@c...> > > > wrote: > > > > > > >>One of those people has been Nisargadatta. > > > > > > > Nope. > > > > > > Haha, of course! He has said every day that he has found it. > > > > > > > > Whenever one of Ramana's relatives would come into his fetid little > room......Nisargadatta > > would put down his cigarette and piddle all over himself..... > > > > > > Does that tell you anything? > > > > > > > > > > Some folks....in the Mid-west...... still worship the radio that > brings the word of God to > > them every sunday morning........ > > > > > > Can you imagine? > > Poor T., > you must be very jealous. Still, what has this to do, or is > contradictive to what I have said? Nothing. Read the postings a little > more careful if you really have to comment them. Or simply admit that > you have nothing to contribute. > > S If you insist on worshiping another human ....no one can stop you. If you believe that any human has more of the truth then you do ..........well that must be the case.....and will ......in all probability.................. continue to be the case. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 9, 2005 Report Share Posted February 9, 2005 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > Let go of letting go. > > > ............and if you can't do that....... > > > Let go of letting of letting go. You are maybe not aware, but I usually chose my words carefully. So, I repeat it again: I have said, the only useful verbal expression for me is " let go " . Maybe you can understand it now: " letting go " is nothing you can " do " . But it can stand there in an email... as an expression... until everything else has gone. S. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 9, 2005 Report Share Posted February 9, 2005 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: >If you insist on worshiping another human ....no one can stop you. > > >If you believe that any human has more of the truth then you do ...........well that must be >the case.....and will ......in all probability.................. continue to be the case. No, I dont insist. I worship nobody. My master has shown me my own truth. This was his gift to me. Sometimes humans mean something to humans, as you can even see on this email list. What about friendship... I just can see that you hate the idea of " master " ... well, this must be your rotten western conditioning. But it is only your concept that you are hating. Love and hate... S. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 9, 2005 Report Share Posted February 9, 2005 Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@c...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > > Let go of letting go. > > > > > > ............and if you can't do that....... > > > > > > Let go of letting of letting go. > > You are maybe not aware, but I usually chose my words carefully. No.....you don't. You don't choose " your " words at all. So, I > repeat it again: I have said, the only useful verbal expression for me > is " let go " . I know what you are saying......but it's silly to believe that you can let go of something that you don't even have. > > Maybe you can understand it now: " letting go " is nothing you can " do " . ....even if there were a you to do it...... > > But it can stand there in an email... as an expression... until > everything else has gone. > > S. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 9, 2005 Report Share Posted February 9, 2005 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: >You don't choose " your " words at all. Of course I do. My whole life is a chain of choices, and yours as well. You are proving it with every email. With every breath you take. I think, again you mix up " choice " and " free will " . >I know what you are saying......but it's silly to believe that you >can let go of something that you don't even have. It might be silly from inside of your selfmade worldview. In fact it is not more or less silly than everything else. Your world view is this of a boy in puberty, who looks at the world, tries to understand it but still has no experience of the hardware. In order to look like a grown up he has to timber a consistent philosophy, at any cost. The cost is, that it looks like that of a small boy who has not lived yet. And the cost is that the small boy does not live his life at all because he has to carry around this philosophy. Now you are obsessed with the expression " let go " and are unable to let go. For you this expression makes only sense in connection with real objects. The meaning of " let go " standing there as a principle, is frightening you so much, that you entangle yourself in another meaningless discussion. The only expression that still makes sense to me is " let go " . Every day is a new day, every moment life can look different. S. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 9, 2005 Report Share Posted February 9, 2005 Hi Stefan, If you love to name, what I call the subjective world, as a dream or as an illusion and unreal then it is fine with me. I have no problem with that. But when it comes to lose my fingers in the frost I am indeed a stubborn monkey, a coward - I don't want to let them go BTW, I am an artist, a painter, and since many years all my paintings and drawing are dealing with the illusion of reality. Since so long am used to that view. Werner Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@c...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> > wrote: > > > >Hi Stefan, > > > >Don't bother, the world is not an illusion, it is real. But what we > >see as reality is only subjectivity. When it is cold outside and > >your > >fingers start freezing you cannot call this a dream or an illusion > >else your will lose your fingers - how stupid. > > > >You asked what are the consquences of knowing that the world is my > >subjective view ? Well, it means that there is no longer the tiniest > >bit of separation possible. You are the world. > > It is a pity that you dont show any interest in my point of view. For > a moment I thought that you were opening up and show some willingness > to communicate and match your view against mine. I thought we could > learn from each other. Should I have known it better? You have once > told me, that the whole world is in your head. It truly seems so... > > I have been coming half way across and described two different ways, > for better understanding. Now you just repeat your way, like a > stubborn donkey. This brings me to the third way, the way of the > cowards. They repeat the same believe over and over, hoping that this > way the believe becomes truth. > > Werner, who are you? You have the answer always at hand: the world. > You make it appear very easy and yet you are avoiding the natural, > taking the dream for real. You really like to dream! I wonder what > interests you on Nisargadatta, who always emphasized that one truly is > NOT the world, since it is certainly not real. Have you never > wondered, why? > > Bye, Werner, sweet dreams... > and yet I know that you have seen the reality once... > you have felt your real self, trembling... > which makes you restless now... > > S Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 9, 2005 Report Share Posted February 9, 2005 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> wrote: > >Hi Stefan, > >If you love to name,what I call the subjective world, as a dream or >as an illusion and unreal then it is fine with me.I have no problem >with that. > >But when it comes to lose my fingers in the frost I am indeed a >stubborn monkey, a coward - I don't want to let them go > >BTW, I am an artist, a painter,and since many years all my paintings >and drawing are dealing with the illusion of reality. Since so long >am used to that view. > >Werner Ha, Werner, you are up already! When I sent you my posting I found yours... so, what shall I say? Yes, I like to name the subjective world an illusion, a dream. But I dont stop there. I inquire who or what is dreaming that dream. And I have seen, that there is somebody who is dreaming. He can be found, and those who deny him, simply dont want to look for him. They are sitting in a room with blinded eyes telling everybody: " there is no door, just dont look and you will see that I am right " . Haha! I will go to the beach now, the sun is shining. Greetings S. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 9, 2005 Report Share Posted February 9, 2005 Ok, Stefan, You are going further to inquire who is dreaming the dream. Have you already found it ? Then tell me who is the seeker or the inquirer and who is the finder ? You wrote: They are sitting in a room with blinded eyes telling everybody: " there is no door, just dont look and you will see that I am right " . Haha! Why bothering about others ? And why is their way of living so laughable ? Why do you compare yourself with others, could it be that you are defining yourself through others ? If yes, then you are the coward, then you are the one who is fearing to live undefined. Werner Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@c...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> > wrote: > > > >Hi Stefan, > > > >If you love to name,what I call the subjective world, as a dream or > >as an illusion and unreal then it is fine with me.I have no problem > >with that. > > > >But when it comes to lose my fingers in the frost I am indeed a > >stubborn monkey, a coward - I don't want to let them go > > > >BTW, I am an artist, a painter,and since many years all my paintings > >and drawing are dealing with the illusion of reality. Since so long > >am used to that view. > > > >Werner > > Ha, Werner, you are up already! When I sent you my posting I found > yours... > > so, what shall I say? Yes, I like to name the subjective world an > illusion, a dream. But I dont stop there. I inquire who or what is > dreaming that dream. And I have seen, that there is somebody who is > dreaming. > > He can be found, and those who deny him, simply dont want to look for > him. > > They are sitting in a room with blinded eyes telling everybody: " there > is no door, just dont look and you will see that I am right " . Haha! > > I will go to the beach now, the sun is shining. > > Greetings > S. 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.