Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

All there is is Consciousness. (I think.)

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " devianandi " <polansky@m...>

wrote:

>

>> > P: Obviously, the phrase meaning depends on the context of the

> conversation

> > and the

> > background of the users. To a neurologist hearing it from a co-

> worker, it

> > would probably

> > mean consciousness is the primary brain function. Without it most

> higher

> > brain functions

> > such as thinking, talking, sensing and intelligent reacting to

the

> world are

> > gone.

> > To a nondual seeker it most likely means Consciousness as the

> creator of

> > everything.

> > The seeker naively reasons that because without consciousness the

> universe

> > vanish

> > for him, that this justifies his belief in consciousness as the

> ground of all

> > being. This

> > is just as silly as if he were to believe that the faculty of

sight

> is the

> > source of light.

> >

> >

> >

> > The phrase " Everything that is is Consciosness " is taken from the

> Yoga Vasistha. If people want to take it out of context and play

with

> it, so be it. If you really want to know the stated meaning, you

> might read the Yoga Vasistha (not a bad book).

> >

> > In the intro to " Be As You Are " , Godman says about Ramana

> Maharshi, " At the highest level that could be expressed in words he

> would say that consciousness alone exists " .

> >

> > richard

> >

> >

> >

>

> devi: the words God or Self or Supreme or Atman in this case can be

> used in that expression....Atman Alone Exists...Self Alone

> Exists..God Alone exists...Consciousness Alone Exists...at the

> Highest Level these are all the same meaning

>

> Everything is consciousness everything is Atman everthing is

Self...

> means the *stuff* everything is made of...

> a chair is consciousess on the physical plane the mind makes it

feel

> solid...but the solidity is mind made....not the reality...the

> realizty is that everything is made of *consciousness*>>

 

Speaking of which, I have been viewing the " I Am That I Am " DVD by

www.netinetifilms.com that has been mentioned here, and if I wait to

see the whole thing before giving those who are interested some

feedback it might take weeks or more.

 

I'm taking it in little bites. What I've seen so far is this:

 

Stephen Wolinsky takes 12 basic principles of the Niz's Advaita and

explains each concept while we see footage of Maharaj in action.

 

There are " experiential meditations " at the end, which I haven't

gotten to yet.

 

Wolinsky talks a lot about the One Substance from which all phenomena

appear to arise.

 

Acc. to the film, Maharaj's basis premise is " all you can teach is

understanding. The rest comes on its own. "

 

I give it 5 Stars but then again, I'm easy. I'm a sucker for

anything that tells me everything " is gonna be alright. "

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " garyfalk1943 " <falkgw@h...>

wrote:

>

>> Speaking of which, I have been viewing the " I Am That I Am " DVD

by

> www.netinetifilms.com that has been mentioned here, and if I wait

to

> see the whole thing before giving those who are interested some

> feedback it might take weeks or more.

>

> I'm taking it in little bites. What I've seen so far is this:

>

> Stephen Wolinsky takes 12 basic principles of the Niz's Advaita

and

> explains each concept while we see footage of Maharaj in action.

>

> There are " experiential meditations " at the end, which I haven't

> gotten to yet.

>

> Wolinsky talks a lot about the One Substance from which all

phenomena

> appear to arise.

>

> Acc. to the film, Maharaj's basis premise is " all you can teach is

> understanding. The rest comes on its own. "

>

> I give it 5 Stars but then again, I'm easy. I'm a sucker for

> anything that tells me everything " is gonna be alright. "

 

 

Golden: You can't teach understanding. Have you not learned

anything from reading Al's posts? hmmmmm? [wink]

Here's what happens when you try to teach understanding --> the

receiver attempts to translate it into intellect so it ends up as

a garbled bunch of intellect that has a bunch of very impressive

large words (forcing one to go to a dictionary to decipher such

intellectually impressive codes reinforcing the vain ego of the

poster) but inevitably amounts to a whole heap of insatiable mind

stuff.

Did you not " understand " my earlier message? ---> intellect

doesn't equal understand. You're trying to educate the intellect and

good luck there because due to it's programming it loops on an

insatiable cycle that twists back on itself. If it eventually

leads you to give up then great, however, I won't hold my breath on

that and I'll come back to y'all in 2 thousand millenia and you'll

all be rambling on about the same stuff because --> why? I told you

because it's insatiable. This is why those " who understand " rarely

bother beating there head teaching --> it's a waste of time for all

concerned. You've heard about wrestling with a pig haven't you?

Don't wrestle with a pig, it only makes the pig aggitated and gets

you muddy.

No, the karmic whip will teach and when they've sufficiently been

beaten to a pulp they may surrender enough to open to what was

always there --> understanding. Understanding cannot be taught to

the ego. The best the ego can do is try to intellectually evolve to

develope greater common sense in it's day to day choices and

procedures. But good luck there too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

> Nisargadatta , " garyfalk1943 " <falkgw@h...>

> wrote:

> >

> I give it 5 Stars but then again, I'm easy. I'm a sucker for

> anything that tells me everything " is gonna be alright. "

 

 

Golden: I would rephrase that to say, you're a sucker for anything

Nisagardatta tells you alright and your ego is a sucker for being

appeased with hope. You are in love with Nis to a fault b/c you have

trouble recognizing the same univeral ideas when they come from

other names and mouths and as a matter of fact, I suspect I could

type anything here and sign Nis name to it and you'd love it. But,

I could rearrange words to match Nis style and type my name to it

and it wouldn't hold the same clout for you. That's my observation

of Gary's acceptance level. That's fine by the way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...