The Absolute

[Guest guest]

ombhurbhuva wrote/Lewis wrote:

> Hi Lewis,

> Going back over the

> correspondence I find that you had a few

> attempts to get your meta theory about

> pre-used knowledge into the air with

> Odysseus. I don't intend to help you to

> prolong that. There was one point made

by

> Odysseus in contrast to your secular

> theory namely that in this sphere the

> power of the lineage and the guru made

> direct transmission of knowledge a

> possibility. That's a real thing and

it's

> pure grace.

>

> Michael

 

Meta theory? Secular theory? There are no

theories, Michael.

 

A theory is " a logical explanation or

model based on observation, facts

hypotheses, experimentation, and reasoning

that attempts to explain a

range of natural phenomena. " There was no

attempt to explain anything.

Just some simple statements about second

hand knowledge, third hand

knowledge etc. and that it can be

troublesome or not when used. Odysseus

questioned me, looking for clarification

and support of his view. I

answered his questions to his satisfaction

or so it seems.

 

The direct transmission of knowledge

through words needs no theory;

meta, secular, sacred or otherwise. Simple

hearing, reading, seeing and

otherwise experiencing and taking up that

heard, read, seen, and

experienced in all the ways that that is

possible is all that is

required. Knowledge transmitted through a

lineage of gurus makes no

difference in this. Such transmission can

be experienced in all the ways

that is done and inherited by anyone who

desires to do so. The type of

knowledge transmitted through such a

lineage is obvious. Transmission of

knowledge of many sorts is done through

lineages of various types. The

lineage of gurus and the specific

knowledge transmitted is one type of

many types of lineages existing.

 

Lewis

 

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

 

Hi Lewis,

Your temporrary assumption of the

simple declarative sentence makes it

easier to see your point. Normally your

method of obfuscation is like to that of

the squid viz.clouds of ink.

 

Let us spare the member the discussion of

what theory or theory laden might be. You

were offering the idea, view, speculation

that there is a degrading in a manner

unspecified of the quality of knowledge

the further you get from its origin or the

original speaker. Now keeping to a point

which would be of interest to the list

members; is that putting sacred knowledge

or that given by way of initiation by a

guru on the same level as cake recipies.

If different, how are they different.

 

I ask because you seem to think that they

are on the same footing viz.more

information.

" The direct transmission of knowledge

through words needs no theory;

meta, secular, sacred or otherwise. Simple

hearing, reading, seeing and

otherwise experiencing and taking up that

heard, read, seen, and

experienced in all the ways that that is

possible is all that is

required. Knowledge transmitted through a

lineage of gurus makes no

difference in this. " (Lewis)

 

Michael.

[Guest guest]

ombhurbhuva wrote:

ombhurbhuva wrote/Lewis wrote:

 

 

 

 

Michael: Hi Lewis,

Going back over the

correspondence I find that you had a few

attempts to get your meta theory about

pre-used knowledge into the air with

Odysseus. I don't intend to help you to

prolong that. There was one point made

 

by

 

Odysseus in contrast to your secular

theory namely that in this sphere the

power of the lineage and the guru made

direct transmission of knowledge a

possibility. That's a real thing and

 

it's

 

pure grace.

 

Michael

 

 

 

 

 

Lewis: Meta theory? Secular theory? There are no

theories, Michael.

 

A theory is " a logical explanation or

model based on observation, facts

hypotheses, experimentation, and reasoning

that attempts to explain a

range of natural phenomena. " There was no

attempt to explain anything.

Just some simple statements about second

hand knowledge, third hand

knowledge etc. and that it can be

troublesome or not when used. Odysseus

questioned me, looking for clarification

and support of his view. I

answered his questions to his satisfaction

or so it seems.

 

The direct transmission of knowledge

through words needs no theory;

meta, secular, sacred or otherwise. Simple

hearing, reading, seeing and

otherwise experiencing and taking up that

heard, read, seen, and

experienced in all the ways that that is

possible is all that is

required. Knowledge transmitted through a

lineage of gurus makes no

difference in this. Such transmission can

be experienced in all the ways

that is done and inherited by anyone who

desires to do so. The type of

knowledge transmitted through such a

lineage is obvious. Transmission of

knowledge of many sorts is done through

lineages of various types. The

lineage of gurus and the specific

knowledge transmitted is one type of

many types of lineages existing.

 

Lewis

 

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

 

 

 

 

Michael: Hi Lewis,

Your temporrary assumption of the

simple declarative sentence makes it

easier to see your point. Normally your

method of obfuscation is like to that of

the squid viz.clouds of ink.

 

 

Lewis: Is there obfuscation Michael?

 

 

Michael: Let us spare the member the discussion of

what theory or theory laden might be. You

were offering the idea, view, speculation

that there is a degrading in a manner

unspecified of the quality of knowledge

the further you get from its origin or the

original speaker.

 

 

Lewis: There was no mention or intention that there is a degrading.

There is change in knowledge from first hand to second hand to third

hand and so on, in terms of the concepts use, scriptures quoted,

experiences had and so on. Nisargadatta is not explaining his meaning,

others are. It is simple to see. Nisargadatta's words were presented.

Richard asked questions about them. Answers were given to them. The

answers were not uniform and in some cases different. The answers were

interpretations of what Nisargadatta said. Is there a degrading in this?

There is elucidation, elaboration and additional pointing so that His

words now have addenda. The addenda may represent exactly his meaning,

part of his meaning or none of his meaning. Sifting through the addenda

and coordinating meanings can be troublesome, difficult to deal with.

 

 

Michael: Now keeping to a point

which would be of interest to the list

members; is that putting sacred knowledge

or that given by way of initiation by a

guru on the same level as cake recipies.

If different, how are they different.

 

 

Lewis: It is obvious how they are different, Michael. A cake recipe is

for making a cake. " Sacred knowledge or that given by way of initiation

by a guru " is guidance, instruction and teaching for the realization of

Self, of Nirguna Brahman as is done in particular transmission lineages

such as the Navnath Sampradaya, Nisargadatta's lineage. There are other

lineages such as the eight found in Tibetan Buddhism: Nyingmapa lineage,

Atisha lineage (the Old and New Kadampa Schools), Sakyapa lineage,

Marpa Kagyu lineage, Shangpa Kagyu lineage, Phadampa Sangye and Machik

Lapdron lineage, Vajra Yoga lineage, and Orgyenpa Rinchenpal lineage.

These lineages transmit different knowledge through generations. The are

numerous other transmission lineages.

 

 

 

Michael: I ask because you seem to think that they

are on the same footing viz.more

information.

 

 

" The direct transmission of knowledge

through words needs no theory;

meta, secular, sacred or otherwise. Simple

hearing, reading, seeing and

otherwise experiencing and taking up that

heard, read, seen, and

experienced in all the ways that that is

possible is all that is

required. Knowledge transmitted through a

lineage of gurus makes no

difference in this. " (Lewis)

 

Michael.

 

 

Lewis: You can " take up " a cake recipe and make a cake " in all the ways

that that is possible. " You can " take up " " Sacred knowledge or that

given by way of initiation by a guru " and come to the realization of

True Self, of Nirguna Brahman " in all the ways that that is possible. "

The difference and differences are without doubt and obvious. No theory

is necessary for the " taking up. " There are different methods or

practices for the taking up. If one wants to make a single theory or

multiple theories of these methods and practices, how that is done or

how knowledge is taken up or theories about the methods and practices or

it how it should or should not be done they may. I do not.

 

Lewis