Guest guest Posted February 15, 2005 Report Share Posted February 15, 2005 Lewis, This quote by SNM should help explain what I'm talking about. " I live in a world of realities, while yours is of imaginings. Your world is personal, private, unshareable, intimately your own. Nobody can enter it, see as you see, hear as you hear, feel your emotions and think your thoughts. In your world you are truly alone, enclosed in your ever-changing dream, which you take for life. My world is an open world, common to all, accessible to all. In my world there is community, insight, love, real quality; the individual is the total, the totality - in the individual. All are on and One is all. " - Sri Nisargadatta Maharaja from " I Am That " , page 17 Sounds like he is saying here that anything but enlightement is personal. From my experience there is a continium of the personal. The state of paranoia, for me, is on the extreme end of the personal. One exists in a very personal version of the shared reality. As foreign as enlightenment might be for some the other extreme might be equally as foreign. Like the experience of enlightenment it is equally hard to communicate the experience of paranoia to someone who has never had the experience as such. As for sanity who is to judge? We're all insane until we're not living in our personal reality. Shawn Nisargadatta , " Lewis Burgess " <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Shawn " <shawnregan> wrote: > > > > Is Paranoia the opposite of awakened? They seem in opposite > > directions. Paranoid is intensely insanely narrowly focused in a > > supremely subjective physical reality. Paranoia is suprapersonal where > > enlightenment is impersonal. > > > > Shawn > > Hi Shawn, > > I am curious. What is awakened to you Shawn? What is impersonal to > you? If paranoia is a form of insanity, does that mean awakened or > enlightenment may be a form of sanity or another form of insanity? > > Lewis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 15, 2005 Report Share Posted February 15, 2005 Shawn wrote: > > Lewis, > > This quote by SNM should help explain what I'm talking about. > > " I live in a world of realities, while yours is of imaginings. Your > world is personal, private, unshareable, intimately your own. Nobody > can enter it, see as you see, hear as you hear, feel your emotions and > think your thoughts. In your world you are truly alone, enclosed in > your ever-changing dream, which you take for life. My world is an open > world, common to all, accessible to all. In my world there is > community, insight, love, real quality; the individual is the total, > the totality - in the individual. All are on and One is all. " - Sri > Nisargadatta Maharaja from " I Am That " , page 17 > > Sounds like he is saying here that anything but enlightement is > personal. From my experience there is a continium of the personal. The > state of paranoia, for me, is on the extreme end of the personal. One > exists in a very personal version of the shared reality. As foreign as > enlightenment might be for some the other extreme might be equally as > foreign. Like the experience of enlightenment it is equally hard to > communicate the experience of paranoia to someone who has never had > the experience as such. > > As for sanity who is to judge? We're all insane until we're not living > in our personal reality. > > Shawn Thank you Shawn for that answer. I take it that awakened means " My world is an open world, common to all, accessible to all. In my world there is community, insight, love, real quality; the individual is the total, the totality - in the individual. All are on and One is all. " If this is so, this is first definition of enlightenment that I have seen and I thank you for it. One additional question. In your first note below, you refer to enlightenment as impersonal. The description given by Nisargadatta sounds personal. Do you know of some passages that Nisargadatta speaks of the impersonal? I have yet to read " I AM That and I am unfamiliar with his notions of impersonality or if he has them. Lewis > Nisargadatta , " Lewis Burgess " <lbb10@c...> wrote: > >>Nisargadatta , " Shawn " <shawnregan> wrote: >> >>>Is Paranoia the opposite of awakened? They seem in opposite >>>directions. Paranoid is intensely insanely narrowly focused in a >>>supremely subjective physical reality. Paranoia is suprapersonal where >>>enlightenment is impersonal. >>> >>>Shawn >> >>Hi Shawn, >> >>I am curious. What is awakened to you Shawn? What is impersonal to >>you? If paranoia is a form of insanity, does that mean awakened or >>enlightenment may be a form of sanity or another form of insanity? >> >>Lewis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 15, 2005 Report Share Posted February 15, 2005 " The personal needs a base, a body to identify oneself with, just as a colour needs a surface to appear on. The seeing of the colour is independent of the colour - it is the same whatever the colour. One needs an eye to see a colour. The colours are many, the eye is single. The personal is like the light in the colour and in the eye, yet simple, single, indivisible and unperceivable, except in it's manifestations. Not unknowable, but unperceivable, un-objectival, inseparable. Neither material nor mental, neither objective nor subjective, it is the root of matter and the source of consciousness. Beyond mere living and dying, it is the all-inclusive, all-exclusive Life, in which birth is death and death is birth. " " The sense of identity will remain, but no longer identification with a particular body. Being - awareness - love will shine in full splendour. Liberation is never of the person, it is always from the person. " " Awareness with an object we call witnessing. When there is also self-identification with the object, caused by desire or fear, such a state is called a person. In reality there is only one state; when distorted by self-identification it is called a person, when coloured with the sense of being, it is the witness; when colourless and limitless, it is called the Supreme. " Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > Shawn wrote: > > > > Lewis, > > > > This quote by SNM should help explain what I'm talking about. > > > > " I live in a world of realities, while yours is of imaginings. Your > > world is personal, private, unshareable, intimately your own. Nobody > > can enter it, see as you see, hear as you hear, feel your emotions and > > think your thoughts. In your world you are truly alone, enclosed in > > your ever-changing dream, which you take for life. My world is an open > > world, common to all, accessible to all. In my world there is > > community, insight, love, real quality; the individual is the total, > > the totality - in the individual. All are on and One is all. " - Sri > > Nisargadatta Maharaja from " I Am That " , page 17 > > > > Sounds like he is saying here that anything but enlightement is > > personal. From my experience there is a continium of the personal. The > > state of paranoia, for me, is on the extreme end of the personal. One > > exists in a very personal version of the shared reality. As foreign as > > enlightenment might be for some the other extreme might be equally as > > foreign. Like the experience of enlightenment it is equally hard to > > communicate the experience of paranoia to someone who has never had > > the experience as such. > > > > As for sanity who is to judge? We're all insane until we're not living > > in our personal reality. > > > > Shawn > > > Thank you Shawn for that answer. I take it that awakened means " My world > is an open world, common to all, accessible to all. In my world there is > community, insight, love, real quality; the individual is the total, > the totality - in the individual. All are on and One is all. " > > If this is so, this is first definition of enlightenment that I have > seen and I thank you for it. One additional question. In your first note > below, you refer to enlightenment as impersonal. The description given > by Nisargadatta sounds personal. Do you know of some passages that > Nisargadatta speaks of the impersonal? I have yet to read " I AM That > and I am unfamiliar with his notions of impersonality or if he has them. > > Lewis > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lewis Burgess " <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > >>Nisargadatta , " Shawn " <shawnregan> wrote: > >> > >>>Is Paranoia the opposite of awakened? They seem in opposite > >>>directions. Paranoid is intensely insanely narrowly focused in a > >>>supremely subjective physical reality. Paranoia is suprapersonal where > >>>enlightenment is impersonal. > >>> > >>>Shawn > >> > >>Hi Shawn, > >> > >>I am curious. What is awakened to you Shawn? What is impersonal to > >>you? If paranoia is a form of insanity, does that mean awakened or > >>enlightenment may be a form of sanity or another form of insanity? > >> > >>Lewis > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 15, 2005 Report Share Posted February 15, 2005 Shawn wrote: > > " The personal needs a base, a body to identify oneself with, just as a > colour needs a surface to appear on. The seeing of the colour is > independent of the colour - it is the same whatever the colour. One > needs an eye to see a colour. The colours are many, the eye is single. > The personal is like the light in the colour and in the eye, yet > simple, single, indivisible and unperceivable, except in it's > manifestations. Not unknowable, but unperceivable, un-objectival, > inseparable. Neither material nor mental, neither objective nor > subjective, it is the root of matter and the source of consciousness. > Beyond mere living and dying, it is the all-inclusive, all-exclusive > Life, in which birth is death and death is birth. " > > " The sense of identity will remain, but no longer identification with > a particular body. Being - awareness - love will shine in full > splendour. Liberation is never of the person, it is always from the > person. " > > " Awareness with an object we call witnessing. When there is also > self-identification with the object, caused by desire or fear, such a > state is called a person. In reality there is only one state; when > distorted by self-identification it is called a person, when coloured > with the sense of being, it is the witness; when colourless and > limitless, it is called the Supreme. " > Dear Shawn, Thank you very much for your kind service. This says it clearly and it is understood. Thank you. Yours, Lewis > > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > >> >>Shawn wrote: >> >>>Lewis, >>> >>>This quote by SNM should help explain what I'm talking about. >>> >>> " I live in a world of realities, while yours is of imaginings. Your >>>world is personal, private, unshareable, intimately your own. Nobody >>>can enter it, see as you see, hear as you hear, feel your emotions and >>>think your thoughts. In your world you are truly alone, enclosed in >>>your ever-changing dream, which you take for life. My world is an open >>>world, common to all, accessible to all. In my world there is >>>community, insight, love, real quality; the individual is the total, >>>the totality - in the individual. All are on and One is all. " - Sri >>>Nisargadatta Maharaja from " I Am That " , page 17 >>> >>>Sounds like he is saying here that anything but enlightement is >>>personal. From my experience there is a continium of the personal. The >>>state of paranoia, for me, is on the extreme end of the personal. One >>>exists in a very personal version of the shared reality. As foreign as >>>enlightenment might be for some the other extreme might be equally as >>>foreign. Like the experience of enlightenment it is equally hard to >>>communicate the experience of paranoia to someone who has never had >>>the experience as such. >>> >>>As for sanity who is to judge? We're all insane until we're not living >>>in our personal reality. >>> >>>Shawn >> >> >>Thank you Shawn for that answer. I take it that awakened means " My > > world > >>is an open world, common to all, accessible to all. In my world there is >>community, insight, love, real quality; the individual is the total, >>the totality - in the individual. All are on and One is all. " >> >>If this is so, this is first definition of enlightenment that I have >>seen and I thank you for it. One additional question. In your first > > note > >>below, you refer to enlightenment as impersonal. The description given >>by Nisargadatta sounds personal. Do you know of some passages that >>Nisargadatta speaks of the impersonal? I have yet to read " I AM That >>and I am unfamiliar with his notions of impersonality or if he has them. >> >>Lewis >> >> >> >> >>>Nisargadatta , " Lewis Burgess " <lbb10@c...> > > wrote: > >>>>Nisargadatta , " Shawn " <shawnregan> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>>Is Paranoia the opposite of awakened? They seem in opposite >>>>>directions. Paranoid is intensely insanely narrowly focused in a >>>>>supremely subjective physical reality. Paranoia is suprapersonal > > where > >>>>>enlightenment is impersonal. >>>>> >>>>>Shawn >>>> >>>>Hi Shawn, >>>> >>>>I am curious. What is awakened to you Shawn? What is impersonal to >>>>you? If paranoia is a form of insanity, does that mean awakened or >>>>enlightenment may be a form of sanity or another form of insanity? >>>> >>>>Lewis >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> 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.