Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

Osho Audio

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Some people talk about enlightenment and say that there is no

difference between enlightenment and the ordinary way of living, and

they may even believe they _are_ enlightened already by such

intellectual understanding. Or they simply say that there is no such

thing as enlightenment. How can they know that?

 

Check out:

 

http://www.osho-holics.com/osho/lectures%20-mp3/osho_mp3_lectures.htm

 

Where you will find a presentation of what enlightenment can be like.

Maybe Osho is pulling our legs in his description of his awakening,

but I get the feeling that what he talks about is the real stuff.

 

al.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

<anders_lindman> wrote:

>

> Some people talk about enlightenment and say that there is no

> difference between enlightenment and the ordinary way of living, and

> they may even believe they _are_ enlightened already by such

> intellectual understanding. Or they simply say that there is no such

> thing as enlightenment. How can they know that?

>

 

 

Who is there to be enlightened?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " fuzzie_wuz " <fuzzie_wuz> wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> <anders_lindman> wrote:

> >

> > Some people talk about enlightenment and say that there is no

> > difference between enlightenment and the ordinary way of living, and

> > they may even believe they _are_ enlightened already by such

> > intellectual understanding. Or they simply say that there is no such

> > thing as enlightenment. How can they know that?

> >

>

>

> Who is there to be enlightened?

 

Many sages say that enlightenment is a happening, an awakening into a

'higher' reality. When you are dreaming in your sleep, then you

believe you are the dream character (unless it is a lucid dream). But

when you wake up in the morning you can compare this " new " you with

the character you thought you were in the dream and it is easy to see

that the you who has woken up from the dream is more real than the

dreaming you. Similarly, enlightenment is a waking up from the

conceptualized sense of a separate " me " . That's at least what many

sages say.

 

I have an idea that the Self is One, but it is experiencing itself in

many forms, such as human beings. This one Self is not an object but a

timeless One Awareness shining in the now. When enlightenment happens

to one of its facets (such as a human being), it suddenly wakes up

from the dream of separation: " Wow, I thought I was a separate human

being having a separate life, what a friggin' nightmare! " :-)

 

al.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Hi Anders,

 

 

Similarly, enlightenment is a waking up from the conceptualized sense

of a separate " me " . That's at least what many sages say.

 

 

KA: Perhaps! I say to you, Anders, as a friend, you've gathered over

the years now a massive amount of knowledge about and around

enlightenment. Isn't it time to put " enligthenment " aside and live

truly?

 

 

I have an idea that the Self is One, but it is experiencing itself in

many forms, such as human beings. This one Self is not an object but a

timeless One Awareness shining in the now. When enlightenment happens

to one of its facets (such as a human being), it suddenly wakes up

from the dream of separation: " Wow, I thought I was a separate human

being having a separate life, what a friggin' nightmare! " :-)

 

 

KA:...and then, Anders? Would the dream of " Oneness " be anywise

different? As long as you expect it, it will not come and if you

loose all expectations neither. There is nothing Anders can do about

it. Besides, Anders, what could be actually so interesting in being

enlightened or being called enlightened?

 

cordially,

Kip Almazy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " kipalmazy " <kipalmazy> wrote:

>

> Hi Anders,

>

>

> Similarly, enlightenment is a waking up from the conceptualized sense

> of a separate " me " . That's at least what many sages say.

>

>

> KA: Perhaps! I say to you, Anders, as a friend, you've gathered over

> the years now a massive amount of knowledge about and around

> enlightenment. Isn't it time to put " enligthenment " aside and live

> truly?

>

>

> I have an idea that the Self is One, but it is experiencing itself in

> many forms, such as human beings. This one Self is not an object but a

> timeless One Awareness shining in the now. When enlightenment happens

> to one of its facets (such as a human being), it suddenly wakes up

> from the dream of separation: " Wow, I thought I was a separate human

> being having a separate life, what a friggin' nightmare! " :-)

>

>

> KA:...and then, Anders? Would the dream of " Oneness " be anywise

> different? As long as you expect it, it will not come and if you

> loose all expectations neither. There is nothing Anders can do about

> it. Besides, Anders, what could be actually so interesting in being

> enlightened or being called enlightened?

>

> cordially,

> Kip Almazy

 

Kip,

 

I believe enlightenment is an awakening to the truth. As we as

ordinary people live our lives, we frankly have no clue of what we

are, apart from consciousness and material observations. So the first

thing that would be interesting to know is _what_ we actually are as a

direct knowing, and not some mere conceptual ideas. The second thing

to notice, as illustrated by Osho's rendering of his spiritual

awakening, is the allurement of a higher state of being that allegedly

enlightenment entails. Few people believe that enlightenment, if there

is such a thing, brings with it an _increase_ of suffering and

separation. The possibility of enlightenment could be an indication of

that the way we live as ordinary human beings, seen from a relative

viewpoint of an enlightened sage, is _not_ to live truly, but rather a

form of being asleep.

 

al.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

> Nisargadatta , " fuzzie_wuz " <fuzzie_wuz>

wrote:

 

> > Who is there to be enlightened?

 

Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

<anders_lindman> wrote:

 

> When enlightenment happens

> to one of its facets (such as a human being), it suddenly wakes up

> from the dream of separation: " Wow, I thought I was a separate human

> being having a separate life, what a friggin' nightmare! " :-)

>

> al.

 

Who is it that wakes up?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

<anders_lindman> wrote:

 

>I believe enlightenment is an awakening to the truth.

 

The truth, Anders, is the state you are already in. Otherwise it would

not be truth. You seem to me like a fish that is swimming in the

ocean, asking for water. You are swimming in the water and say: " I

must be sleeping, I would like to wake up to realize that water " . But

really, you dont need to do anything to realize the water. You are

already in it.

 

>As we as ordinary people live our lives, we frankly have no clue of

what we are, apart from consciousness and material observations.

 

There is no need to have a clue of " what we are " ... because " we are " .

The enlightened one is the most ordinary being, he has stopped trying

to be extraordinary. He has accepted that everything is ordinary.

 

>So the first

>thing that would be interesting to know is _what_ we actually are as

>a direct knowing, and not some mere conceptual ideas.

 

You already are what you are. Your " direct knowing " is just another

conceptual idea, which is great! Just let it be what it is. There is

no need to fight anything. Osho clearly said it in his speech:

Enlightenement was not the result of the search. It was there when the

search ended. But not " he " ended the search. It ended by itself. What

can one do to end it if there is no one to end it?

 

>The possibility of enlightenment could be an indication of

>that the way we live as ordinary human beings, seen from a relative

>viewpoint of an enlightened sage, is _not_ to live truly, but rather

>a form of being asleep.

 

There is no way to " not " live truly. What you just experience: this is

truth.

 

You may call your unwillingness to accept all as it is " sleep " . But

you dont wake up from that sleep by denying it, by judging it as

something unworthy compared to an " awakened " state.

 

The state of " sleep " is part of truth. No need to waste any further

thought about it but also no need to fight any further thought about

it. Just accept, as is.

 

It is wonderful.

Stefan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " fuzzie_wuz " <fuzzie_wuz> wrote:

>

>

> > Nisargadatta , " fuzzie_wuz " <fuzzie_wuz>

> wrote:

>

> > > Who is there to be enlightened?

>

> Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> <anders_lindman> wrote:

>

> > When enlightenment happens

> > to one of its facets (such as a human being), it suddenly wakes up

> > from the dream of separation: " Wow, I thought I was a separate human

> > being having a separate life, what a friggin' nightmare! " :-)

> >

> > al.

>

> Who is it that wakes up?

 

The One Consciousness wakes up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@c...> wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> <anders_lindman> wrote:

>

> >I believe enlightenment is an awakening to the truth.

>

> The truth, Anders, is the state you are already in. Otherwise it would

> not be truth. You seem to me like a fish that is swimming in the

> ocean, asking for water. You are swimming in the water and say: " I

> must be sleeping, I would like to wake up to realize that water " . But

> really, you dont need to do anything to realize the water. You are

> already in it.

 

A person being asleep and having a dream may in that dream want to be

in his or her real body instead of being in the dream. If someone told

that person: but you _are_ already in your real body, would that help

the person who is dreaming?

 

>

> >As we as ordinary people live our lives, we frankly have no clue of

> what we are, apart from consciousness and material observations.

>

> There is no need to have a clue of " what we are " ... because " we are " .

> The enlightened one is the most ordinary being, he has stopped trying

> to be extraordinary. He has accepted that everything is ordinary.

 

That is my idea of fake enlightenment. As long as we are experiencing

ourself as separate human beings with separate lives we have not

awakened. Intellectual understanding is not enlightenment. The

thinking mind is very clever. Watch it closely.

 

>

> >So the first

> >thing that would be interesting to know is _what_ we actually are as

> >a direct knowing, and not some mere conceptual ideas.

>

> You already are what you are. Your " direct knowing " is just another

> conceptual idea, which is great! Just let it be what it is. There is

> no need to fight anything. Osho clearly said it in his speech:

> Enlightenement was not the result of the search. It was there when the

> search ended. But not " he " ended the search. It ended by itself. What

> can one do to end it if there is no one to end it?

 

To say to oneself that one is powerless is only to fool oneself.

 

>

> >The possibility of enlightenment could be an indication of

> >that the way we live as ordinary human beings, seen from a relative

> >viewpoint of an enlightened sage, is _not_ to live truly, but rather

> >a form of being asleep.

>

> There is no way to " not " live truly. What you just experience: this is

> truth.

>

> You may call your unwillingness to accept all as it is " sleep " . But

> you dont wake up from that sleep by denying it, by judging it as

> something unworthy compared to an " awakened " state.

>

> The state of " sleep " is part of truth. No need to waste any further

> thought about it but also no need to fight any further thought about

> it. Just accept, as is.

>

> It is wonderful.

> Stefan

 

Wouldn't acceptance also mean aceeptance of trying to find

enlightenment? And can true acceptance really be an act of will? Do

you really want to accept suffering? Isn't that to double-fool

oneself? If there is true acceptance, is there really any question of

accepting or not accepting?

 

al.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@c...>

wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> <anders_lindman> wrote:

>

> >I believe enlightenment is an awakening to the truth.

>

> The truth, Anders, is the state you are already in. Otherwise it

would

> not be truth. You seem to me like a fish that is swimming in the

> ocean, asking for water. You are swimming in the water and say: " I

> must be sleeping, I would like to wake up to realize that water " .

But

> really, you dont need to do anything to realize the water. You are

> already in it.

>

> >As we as ordinary people live our lives, we frankly have no clue

of

> what we are, apart from consciousness and material observations.

>

> There is no need to have a clue of " what we are " ... because " we

are " .

> The enlightened one is the most ordinary being, he has stopped

trying

> to be extraordinary. He has accepted that everything is ordinary.

>

> >So the first

> >thing that would be interesting to know is _what_ we actually are

as

> >a direct knowing, and not some mere conceptual ideas.

>

> You already are what you are. Your " direct knowing " is just another

> conceptual idea, which is great! Just let it be what it is. There

is

> no need to fight anything. Osho clearly said it in his speech:

> Enlightenement was not the result of the search. It was there when

the

> search ended. But not " he " ended the search. It ended by itself.

What

> can one do to end it if there is no one to end it?

>

> >The possibility of enlightenment could be an indication of

> >that the way we live as ordinary human beings, seen from a

relative

> >viewpoint of an enlightened sage, is _not_ to live truly, but

rather

> >a form of being asleep.

>

> There is no way to " not " live truly. What you just experience:

this is

> truth.

>

> You may call your unwillingness to accept all as it is " sleep " . But

> you dont wake up from that sleep by denying it, by judging it as

> something unworthy compared to an " awakened " state.

>

> The state of " sleep " is part of truth. No need to waste any further

> thought about it but also no need to fight any further thought

about

> it. Just accept, as is.

>

> It is wonderful.

> Stefan

 

 

sam: very well said Stefan. And then comes the realization that

there was *nothing* to accept. Brings it all back to the beginning

in a way doesn't it? Now there is a *knowing* that there is nothing

to accept (having gone over acceptance to find there's nothing to

accept) so the fight/seeking ends. Either the role played ends or

carries on -- with a twist.

I don't have the way with words as you do and not the ability to

describe the undescribable but you have managed to make it simple

in this response to Al. And you didn't even have to threaten to beat

him up to do it or use 5 varieties of curse words? LOL. Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

<anders_lindman> wrote:

>

> Some people talk about enlightenment and say that there is no

> difference between enlightenment and the ordinary way of living, and

> they may even believe they _are_ enlightened already by such

> intellectual understanding. Or they simply say that there is no such

> thing as enlightenment. How can they know that?

>

> Check out:

>

> http://www.osho-holics.com/osho/lectures%20-mp3/osho_mp3_lectures.htm

>

> Where you will find a presentation of what enlightenment can be like.

> Maybe Osho is pulling our legs in his description of his awakening,

> but I get the feeling that what he talks about is the real stuff.

>

> al.

 

sam: If your idea of enlightenment is fear then Osho's your man. He

kept a loaded gun with him out of fear of his enemies and also tucked

away in one of his many, many expensive cars he drove in. If material

wealth is a sign of enlightenment then this man had it in spades.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

<anders_lindman> wrote:

 

>A person being asleep and having a dream may in that dream want to be

>in his or her real body instead of being in the dream. If someone

told that person: but you _are_ already in your real body, would that

>help the person who is dreaming?

 

What makes you think that the one in a dream is *not* in his real

body?

 

>As long as we are experiencing

>ourself as separate human beings with separate lives we have not

>awakened. Intellectual understanding is not enlightenment. The

>thinking mind is very clever. Watch it closely.

 

It is your idea that something that you experience is " wrong " which

creates the problem. Not the experience itself is the problem. Your

experience is perfect. The experiencing will reveal the truth if you

let it truly happen. You just maintain the idea that it is wrong. Thus

you focus on ideas instead of the experiencing itself.

 

>>But not " he " ended the search. It ended by itself. What

>>can one do to end it if there is no one to end it?

>

>To say to oneself that one is powerless is only to fool oneself.

 

I was just citing this lecture from Osho you were refering to.

 

>Wouldn't acceptance also mean acceptance of trying to find

>enlightenment?

 

Yes.

 

>And can true acceptance really be an act of will?

 

No.

 

>Do you really want to accept suffering?

 

There is no choice.

 

>Isn't that to double-fool oneself?

 

No, its how things are.

 

>If there is true acceptance, is there really any question of

>accepting or not accepting?

 

You are right, Anders. There is not even this question.

 

All the best

Stefan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " sam_t_7 " <sam_t_7> wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> <anders_lindman> wrote:

> >

> > Some people talk about enlightenment and say that there is no

> > difference between enlightenment and the ordinary way of living, and

> > they may even believe they _are_ enlightened already by such

> > intellectual understanding. Or they simply say that there is no such

> > thing as enlightenment. How can they know that?

> >

> > Check out:

> >

> > http://www.osho-holics.com/osho/lectures%20-mp3/osho_mp3_lectures.htm

> >

> > Where you will find a presentation of what enlightenment can be like.

> > Maybe Osho is pulling our legs in his description of his awakening,

> > but I get the feeling that what he talks about is the real stuff.

> >

> > al.

>

> sam: If your idea of enlightenment is fear then Osho's your man. He

> kept a loaded gun with him out of fear of his enemies and also tucked

> away in one of his many, many expensive cars he drove in. If material

> wealth is a sign of enlightenment then this man had it in spades.

 

A desire to protect oneself is still a desire. Osho said that in an

enlightened being there is no desire, no fear. Maybe he was just a

clever and mentally disturbed sect leader. One should not blindly

follow a leader or spiritual ideas. Rational thinking should not be

left behind. Science and spirituality must go hand in hand.

 

al.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@c...> wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> <anders_lindman> wrote:

>

> >A person being asleep and having a dream may in that dream want to be

> >in his or her real body instead of being in the dream. If someone

> told that person: but you _are_ already in your real body, would that

> >help the person who is dreaming?

>

> What makes you think that the one in a dream is *not* in his real

> body?

 

A person dreaming _is_ in the body but has no awareness of having a

body, of sleeping in a bed. The person dreaming believes he or she

atually is the dream character. It is only on waking up that the dream

is recognized as being a dream. Sages are adamant on pointing out that

there is no separation between people and that there is only One Self.

An ordinary person has no awareness of this One Self, and so can in a

sense be said to be asleep. Telling an ordinary person: " Do you know

that there is only One Self " could eventually lead to an awakening,

but until that actually becomes a reality for the person, he or she is

still asleep.

 

>

> >As long as we are experiencing

> >ourself as separate human beings with separate lives we have not

> >awakened. Intellectual understanding is not enlightenment. The

> >thinking mind is very clever. Watch it closely.

>

> It is your idea that something that you experience is " wrong " which

> creates the problem. Not the experience itself is the problem. Your

> experience is perfect. The experiencing will reveal the truth if you

> let it truly happen. You just maintain the idea that it is wrong. Thus

> you focus on ideas instead of the experiencing itself.

 

I believe there is only One Self, but that is only a belief. If and

when I realize this, then I will be awake. Maybe the idea of a One

Self is only a false idea, and then I am seeking an awakening that is

not possible in reality. It is very frustrating to not know if

awakening to the One Self is possible or not.

 

>

> >>But not " he " ended the search. It ended by itself. What

> >>can one do to end it if there is no one to end it?

> >

> >To say to oneself that one is powerless is only to fool oneself.

>

> I was just citing this lecture from Osho you were refering to.

>

> >Wouldn't acceptance also mean acceptance of trying to find

> >enlightenment?

>

> Yes.

>

> >And can true acceptance really be an act of will?

>

> No.

>

> >Do you really want to accept suffering?

>

> There is no choice.

 

Are you sure?

 

>

> >Isn't that to double-fool oneself?

>

> No, its how things are.

 

How about your free will?

 

>

> >If there is true acceptance, is there really any question of

> >accepting or not accepting?

>

> You are right, Anders. There is not even this question.

>

> All the best

> Stefan

 

My idea of true acceptance is not what for example Wayne Liquorman and

Ramesh Balsekar say is true acceptance. I will never accept suffering.

I think.

 

al.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

<anders_lindman> wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " sam_t_7 " <sam_t_7>

wrote:

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > >

> > > Some people talk about enlightenment and say that there is no

> > > difference between enlightenment and the ordinary way of

living, and

> > > they may even believe they _are_ enlightened already by such

> > > intellectual understanding. Or they simply say that there is

no such

> > > thing as enlightenment. How can they know that?

> > >

> > > Check out:

> > >

> > > http://www.osho-holics.com/osho/lectures%20-

mp3/osho_mp3_lectures.htm

> > >

> > > Where you will find a presentation of what enlightenment can

be like.

> > > Maybe Osho is pulling our legs in his description of his

awakening,

> > > but I get the feeling that what he talks about is the real

stuff.

> > >

> > > al.

> >

> > sam: If your idea of enlightenment is fear then Osho's your

man. He

> > kept a loaded gun with him out of fear of his enemies and also

tucked

> > away in one of his many, many expensive cars he drove in. If

material

> > wealth is a sign of enlightenment then this man had it in spades.

>

> A desire to protect oneself is still a desire. Osho said that in an

> enlightened being there is no desire, no fear. Maybe he was just a

> clever and mentally disturbed sect leader. One should not blindly

> follow a leader or spiritual ideas. Rational thinking should not be

> left behind. Science and spirituality must go hand in hand.

>

> al.

 

sam: I was looking through google to find some articles I had read

on Osho's latter years, when he became highly entrenched in riches

and cars, guns for protection and intense sexual escapades. The

story goes that he did not start out that way but certainly ended

that way. I couldn't find the particular website and gave up

looking after about 10 mins. I'm sure if you hunt awhile you can

find this information on Osho. It's *good* not to blindly follow

a leader or spiritual ideas; his cult was entrenched in the biggest

bio-terrorist election campaign in the U.S.A. history (Oregon).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

> > > Nisargadatta , " fuzzie_wuz " <fuzzie_wuz>

> > wrote:

> >

> > Who is it that wakes up?

 

 

> > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> >

 

> The One Consciousness wakes up.

 

 

The One Consciousness is sleeping? If so, shouldn't it be called the

One Unconsciousness? Where is this One Consciousness that needs waking

up?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " fuzzie_wuz " <fuzzie_wuz> wrote:

>

>

>

> > > > Nisargadatta , " fuzzie_wuz "

<fuzzie_wuz>

> > > wrote:

> > >

> > > Who is it that wakes up?

>

>

> > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > >

>

> > The One Consciousness wakes up.

>

>

> The One Consciousness is sleeping? If so, shouldn't it be called the

> One Unconsciousness? Where is this One Consciousness that needs waking

> up?

 

When are asleep and dreaming we are not unconscious, yet we are then

unaware that a higher form of being exists, namely the everyday woken

up state. Similarly, in our everyday woken up state we are unaware of

any higher forms of being. We may read about sages who claim the have

reached higher forms of awareness, but unless we ourself are in that

higher state we will never know it, only know about it, only have

ideas about it. A higher state knows lower states, but a lower state

cannot know higher states, only know _about_ higher states, which is

not the same as direct knowing.

 

The physical universe consists of objects made up of separate

particles. Each particle is a result of the collapse of a quantum

mechanical wave function. So we have a lot of wave functions

collapsing going on, but all wave functions acts within the same

reality so they cannot be really separate from each other. There must

exist some other function that connects the separate wave functions

into a cohesive whole. Existence is one. The universe is one. If the

universe was two, then there must exist something that connects these

two parts, or else they would not be within the same existence.

 

Therefore all is one. We can call it the One Consciousness, or

whatever, but all is one; the One and the Many. It is this Oneness

that wakes up to itself.

 

al.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

If all is one, as you say, then, there is no separate, individual

self. If there is no separate, individual self, then, there is no one

to wake up or to know anything. There's nothing to do because there's

no one there to do anything. It simply is what it is. Nothing more.

 

 

 

> > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > > > <anders_lindman> wrote:

 

> When are asleep and dreaming we are not unconscious, yet we are then

> unaware that a higher form of being exists, namely the everyday woken

> up state. Similarly, in our everyday woken up state we are unaware of

> any higher forms of being. We may read about sages who claim the have

> reached higher forms of awareness, but unless we ourself are in that

> higher state we will never know it, only know about it, only have

> ideas about it. A higher state knows lower states, but a lower state

> cannot know higher states, only know _about_ higher states, which is

> not the same as direct knowing.

>

> The physical universe consists of objects made up of separate

> particles. Each particle is a result of the collapse of a quantum

> mechanical wave function. So we have a lot of wave functions

> collapsing going on, but all wave functions acts within the same

> reality so they cannot be really separate from each other. There must

> exist some other function that connects the separate wave functions

> into a cohesive whole. Existence is one. The universe is one. If the

> universe was two, then there must exist something that connects these

> two parts, or else they would not be within the same existence.

>

> Therefore all is one. We can call it the One Consciousness, or

> whatever, but all is one; the One and the Many. It is this Oneness

> that wakes up to itself.

>

> al.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " fuzzie_wuz " <fuzzie_wuz> wrote:

>

> If all is one, as you say, then, there is no separate, individual

> self. If there is no separate, individual self, then, there is no one

> to wake up or to know anything. There's nothing to do because there's

> no one there to do anything. It simply is what it is. Nothing more.

 

 

But this Oneness is new all the time, it takes new directions in each

moment, and we are not separate from it. With our free will we take

new directions, and that is the same thing as Oneness taking new

directions. Maybe we can even wake ourselves up to higher levels of

existence.

 

To speculate a bit; maybe the next step in evolution is to wake up as

planet consciousness, to wake up as Gaia (Mother Earth). Then we wake

up and realize that we are the whole planet and not just a separate

human being. Carl Jung talked about the collective unconscious. Maybe

what he noticed was the embryo of the collective _conscious_ which

will wake up somewhere in the future. :-)

 

al.

 

>

>

>

> > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote:

>

> > When are asleep and dreaming we are not unconscious, yet we are then

> > unaware that a higher form of being exists, namely the everyday woken

> > up state. Similarly, in our everyday woken up state we are unaware of

> > any higher forms of being. We may read about sages who claim the have

> > reached higher forms of awareness, but unless we ourself are in that

> > higher state we will never know it, only know about it, only have

> > ideas about it. A higher state knows lower states, but a lower state

> > cannot know higher states, only know _about_ higher states, which is

> > not the same as direct knowing.

> >

> > The physical universe consists of objects made up of separate

> > particles. Each particle is a result of the collapse of a quantum

> > mechanical wave function. So we have a lot of wave functions

> > collapsing going on, but all wave functions acts within the same

> > reality so they cannot be really separate from each other. There must

> > exist some other function that connects the separate wave functions

> > into a cohesive whole. Existence is one. The universe is one. If the

> > universe was two, then there must exist something that connects these

> > two parts, or else they would not be within the same existence.

> >

> > Therefore all is one. We can call it the One Consciousness, or

> > whatever, but all is one; the One and the Many. It is this Oneness

> > that wakes up to itself.

> >

> > al.

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...