Guest guest Posted April 29, 2005 Report Share Posted April 29, 2005 Dear Lewis, Perhaps, you think humans are far too different from each other than they really are ! At the level of matter we know things are Not that different. Hydrogen behaves like Hydrogen not like ....this Hydrogen and that Hydrogen ! So does Oxygen, Nitrogen, Carbon and slightly more complex things like CO2, Water and Petroleum. A metal reacts with an acid in quite consistent way and with other matters too ! In humans too, we see much of the same phenomenon: --- that's how anti-depressant works. They change the 'mood' of humans. ---- that is how alcohol works. ---- that is how drugs work --- that's how medicine works. Further, wee see poison kills humans. Co2 and CO can be dangerous in vast quantity. Laughing gas make them laugh and tear gas makes them cry. ---- Hormones have quite consistent impact. ---- so does Viagra ! Further, we are 'beginning' to see that Deep Sleep, Meditation, Alertness, worry in fact have their own set of chemicals, hormones, internal signals ....as well as external manifestations like --- theta, alpha, delta waves. They are even 'beginning' to be able to send electro magnetic signals to brain and produce what is commonly known as --- " God experience " , " Out of body experience " , " feeling of emptiness' in quite consistent way. Quite consistent impact of chemicals including drugs, alcohols, poison, hormones on human is already well known and easily verifiable. Regarding other matters known as 'spiritual' - Not only humans have been reporting quite consistent results of meditation, no being, realization, enlightenment as well as ...deep ego, fear, greed, jealousy, passion. Now, in fact, we are also 'beginning' to measure and verify them externally as it results in different waves and other Patterns ! [ NNB ] Nisargadatta , " Lewis Burgess " <lbb10@c...> wrote: > Nisargadatta , " adithya_comming " > <adithya_comming> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Lewis Burgess " <lbb10@c...> > > wrote: > > > Nisargadatta , " adithya_comming " > > > <adithya_comming> wrote: > > > > Thanks, Lewis! > > > > > > > > I was looking for some simple, > > > > straight-forward answers. > > > > > > They were provided. > > > > > > > > > > > But, what I got looks like a `avoidance', > > > > hiding or play of words to me. > > > > > > The answers were answers not play, hiding or avoidance. > > > > > > > > > > > But, it is possible that you have some reasons to do that. > > > > > > > > > > No reasons. > > > > > > > > > > It is also possible that you are answering in completely > > > > straightforward terms but I am not able to get it. > > > > > > > > > That may be so. > > > > > > > > > > Mirage and other terms without explaining what is > > > > that you are calling mirage doesn't tell me much. > > > > > > It is simple. It tells it all. Receive it in mouna. Wait. > > > > > > > > > > So, let me try again: > > > > > > > > >>They ( Ramana and others ) twirl as they > > > > are and repeat one sentence thousands of times in > > > > different ways. All of what they say > > > > is simply one sentence – " an > > > > UNATTAINABLE dream " > > > > > > > > What is that " UNATTAINABLE dream " > > > > that they repeat thousand times, Lewis. > > > > > > > > Could you please elaborate it. > > > > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > Some notes on it will suffice. > > > > > > AC you read and quote Tolle and Ramana. Can you not see it? You can > > > find the sentence that defines all that is said and then see clearly > > > what it is; the central defining assumption each one holds from > > which > > > all their words and thoughts emerge and are formed. Their words are > > > formed and are consistent and not formless and non-descriptive > > because > > > they present a formulated belief, a formed structure, a world of > > their > > > own making, in words, based in their individual experiences. It is > > > their " world, " their reality, only. > > > > > > How is it that one individual's reality becomes the reality for all? > > > Can you tell me how an apple I eat tastes by watching and listening? > > > Can my description of how an apple tastes give you the taste > > > experienced by my appearance? You will never know my experience as > > it > > > is. You can only imagine it. > > > > > > Maybe, you are making it sound far too complicated than it is. > > > > We say: > > > > ----- Sky is blue. > > > > ocean is blue, > > clouds are white, > > rainbow has seven colors, > > > > ---- Honey is sweet, > > > > Lemon sour, > > mangoes, strawberries are delicious, > > > > rotten milk tastes ...yucky. > > > > > > ---- flute hears good, > > > > so does violin, sitar or sound of a bird, > > > > But, the sound scratching metal hears bad. > > > > ---- love feels warm, > > > > Anger and jealously like burning, > > passion hot ! > > > > ---- When cut it bleeds and hurts, > > > > When touched slowly, gently it tickles. > > > > > > We talk all That, > > > > ...and, believe it an not Most people GET it ! > > > > > > ...and, I have NEVER heard even one person > > attempting to eat the printed paper with mango > > printed on it and hoping to taste ...mango ! > > > > Or trying to hear music out of printed paper, > > because it has word violin printed on it. > > > > You miss the the metaphor and interpret it as a purely physical event > unrelated to trying to " eat " Ramana's or Tolle experience through > their words. > > Intersubjectivity is dialogic and imagined. What is " gotten " is simply > imagined to be the same as what others " got. " Your examples are yours. > Not mine. Clouds are white to you. Clouds are variegated to me given > all the types and conditions seen and experienced. The same goes for > all the other examples. I have spent much time on the Atlantic Ocean > deep see fishing it appears green to me, turqoise in the Caribbean, > never saw blue, what shade of blue..... > > > > > > > > So Lewis, I think, your concerns might be > > out of place ! > > > Just a response to your probes. If you think it is out of place, it is > so. If it does not suit your taste, it does not. You see and eat what > you want to. You know what you like. If you do not like the taste, > don't eat it. If it is yucky to you, it is yucky. No more will be > served. That expression will not alter what is cooked and served. Your > reaction is observed and noted: > > " Oh it is not tasty to him. His palate likes a different taste, a > simple one, mangoes and strawberries. Let me see, well, I have nothing > like that for him here. He says he does not like the food served, he > ordered something different. Well, this is the cuisine served here. It > is clearly on the menu. There are plenty of other restaurants, he can > go to a different restaurant that serves simple fare, for a simple > palate. Let's see, how long will he stay complaining about the food? > If he continues, I will politely show him the door. Let's wait and see.. > > > > > I think, people understand it just Fine ! > > > More appropriately is that we imagine we understand just fine. Those > examples above are equivalent to what was immediately written below. > " Telling about it helps a little to get something done. " People take > it for granted that others " get it " " got it " or that they " get it " > " got it. " They imagine, believe, and assume understandings. Sometimes > they get together and dialogically adjust and fix their language so it > matches. In any case, when they get close to it and examine it, they > find otherwise. The conditions on this list and elsewhere demonstrate > exactly this observation. > > For example, you did not see a metaphor when presented and interpreted > it as " an physcial scenr/event. " You ask questions get answers and do > not understand the answers. How is that? One word or expression does > not always mean the same. One time before, I asked you what is in your > wallet and you told me what it was in it down to the penny and credit > cards. That was not asked. You answered in that way. I said nothing. > That simplicity is understandable. A simple mind. A gift to be simple > a gift to be free. > > It does not mean I or anyone need twirl as you do. I twirl this way, > " blah, blah, blah. blah, blah and blah blah blah " and do as I am and I > am free. Others twirl differently and are free. > > We do as we are. No help in that. None needed. > > > > >Telling about it helps a little to get > > > soemthing done. Nothing more. What would you experience after > > eating > > > an apple, if you saw individuals buying and eating printed > > > descriptions of apples, trying to imagine the taste, chewing the > > paper > > > and saying it tastes good and feels good? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Just the term " UNATTAINABLE dream " > > > > doesn't tell me anything other than that > > > > they talk about something that is `dream' > > > > and further that it is ... " UNATTAINABLE " . > > > > > > > > > > That is clear enough. Find what they talk about, the central > > defining > > > assumption. Examine it without belief. Know that they present only > > one > > > version, their version of the universe and its contents. See it for > > > what it is. > > > > > > > > > > Also, if it is UNATTAINABLE ( for everyone) > > > > then, Why do they keep doing it? > > > > > > > > > In this as in everything, my answer is not yours. Ask your self or > > > Self. There will appear an answer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [NNB] > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lewis Burgess " <lbb10@c...> > > > > wrote: > > > > > Nisargadatta , " adithya_comming " > > > > > <adithya_comming> wrote: > > > > > > > ------ Do you think Ramana, Tolle, > > > > > > > Katie has / had same and equal > > > > > > > occurrences of losing in thoughts and > > > > > > > concepts ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lewis: > > > > > > >>>Who or what knows that? One only > > > > > > imagines about what one cannot > > > > > > possibly know. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, Lewis ! > > > > > > > > > > > > Let us see if we can use this reality / > > > > > > possibility at other places too ! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If Not, can it then be said that they > > > > > > > were twirling ...just like 'everybody' > > > > > > > else ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > > > > ac. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lewis: > > > > > > >>>They twirl as they are and repeat one > > > > > > sentence thousands of times in > > > > > > different ways. All of what they say > > > > > > is simply one sentence – " an > > > > > > UNATTAINABLE dream " > > > > > > > > > > > > How do you know it is – " an > > > > > > UNATTAINABLE dream " , Lewis ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can one drink the water of a mirage? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is it UNATTAINABLE to you or do you mean > > > > > > it is UNATTAINABLE to each and everybody ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can one drink the water of a mirage? > > > > > Can anyone drink the water of a mirage? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you know it or > > > > > > are you imagining it in stating it in way that > > > > > > might sound like a " known truth " ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is clearly apparent. > > > > > > > > > > Can you drink the water of a mirage? > > > > > Can anyone drink the water of a mirage? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>that sustained them > > > > > > and that keeps " hope " alive in > > > > > > others who haven't the FOGGIEST. > > > > > > > > > > > > How do you know it is – > > > > > > " others who haven't the FOGGIEST " , Lewis ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Can one find and drink the water of a mirage? > > > > > Are there others who cannot even find the water of a mirage or > > see > > > > the > > > > > mirage itself yet imagine they see what is not? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is it FOGGIEST to you > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is futile to drink the water of a mirage to quench thirst. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > or do you mean it is FOGGIEST to each and everybody ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is futile for anyone to drink the water of a mirage to > > quench > > > > thirst. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you know that it is FOGGIEST to `others' or > > > > > > are you imagining it in stating it in way that > > > > > > might sound like a " known truth " ? > > > > > > > > > > It is clearly apparent. > > > > > > > > > > Can you drink the water of a mirage? > > > > > Can anyone drink the water of a mirage? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. What is the state of attainment of > > > > > > > knowledge? > > > > > > > IT IS FIRM AND EFFORTLESS ABIDANCE IN > > > > > > > THE SELF in which the mind which has > > > > > > > become one with the Self > > > > > > > does not subsequently emerge again at > > > > > > > any time. > > > > > > > > > > > > ..... > > > > > > > > > > > > .... > > > > > > > > > > > > > Or, let me ask in a 'politically' and > > > > > > > 'spiritually' INCORRECT way: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---- Where are You ??? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lewis: > > > > > > > > > > > > >>The question is nonsensical. You > > > > > > already know the answer. Why ask? > > > > > > > > > > > > How do you know that you ALREADY > > > > > > know the answer that you might give ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From mouna. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Or, are you just imagining it ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No imagination. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think, I don't and that's one > > > > > > reason for why I asked. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Follow Ramanas words. It may help. > > > > > He speaks of a way to mouna. > > > > > There are other ways. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Love, > > > > > > > > > > Lewis > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > With warm regards, > > > > > > ac. > > > > > > > > > > > > [NNNB] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Are you in steady abidance in Self or > > > > > > > do you keep losing in thoughts and > > > > > > > concepts ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lewis: > > > > > > > > > > > > >>There are none not two (you and Self). > > > > > > So there is no " who " or " what " > > > > > > lost in thoughts and concepts. > > > > > > Thoughts and concepts are toys to play > > > > > > with, tools to be used. Nothing more. > > > > > > And it makes no difference, for > > > > > > it is done as it is. Assuming > > > > > > otherwise betrays ignorance of others. > > > > > > To play or use does not mean lost. > > > > > > > > > > > > And if you are an " object I " or the > > > > > > " Self, " then you are toy or a tool > > > > > > that is self or other played or worked > > > > > > with. Toys and tools are picked > > > > > > up and put down as it goes as one > > > > > > observes in children and > > > > > > craftspeople. Are you a toy a tool, do > > > > > > you play with your Self, do you > > > > > > work with your Self as others here do > > > > > > by asserting that that is beyond > > > > > > assertion? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 29, 2005 Report Share Posted April 29, 2005 Nisargadatta , " adithya_comming " <adithya_comming> wrote: Dear Lewis, Perhaps, you think humans are far too different from each other than they really are ! At the level of matter we know things are Not that different. Hydrogen behaves like Hydrogen not like ....this Hydrogen and that Hydrogen ! So does Oxygen, Nitrogen, Carbon and slightly more complex things like CO2, Water and Petroleum. A metal reacts with an acid in quite consistent way and with other matters too ! In humans too, we see much of the same phenomenon: --- that's how anti-depressant works. They change the 'mood' of humans. ---- that is how alcohol works. ---- that is how drugs work --- that's how medicine works. Further, wee see poison kills humans. Co2 and CO can be dangerous in vast quantity. Laughing gas make them laugh and tear gas makes them cry. ---- Hormones have quite consistent impact. ---- so does Viagra ! Further, we are 'beginning' to see that Deep Sleep, Meditation, Alertness, worry in fact have their own set of chemicals, hormones, internal signals ....as well as external manifestations like --- theta, alpha, delta waves. They are even 'beginning' to be able to send electro magnetic signals to brain and produce what is commonly known as --- " God experience " , " Out of body experience " , " feeling of emptiness' in quite consistent way. Quite consistent impact of chemicals including drugs, alcohols, poison, hormones on human is already well known and easily verifiable. Regarding other matters known as 'spiritual' - Not only humans have been reporting quite consistent results of meditation, no being, realization, enlightenment as well as ...deep ego, fear, greed, jealousy, passion. Now, in fact, we are also 'beginning' to measure and verify them externally as it results in different waves and other Patterns ! Lewis: Ok. As you describe and believe so it is. If I jump off a 15 story building there is a splat. Why? Gravity? What is gravity? " Gravity is the weakest of the four fundamental forces at the level of elementary particles. Gravitation is the observed effect of the force of attraction between objects that contain either mass or energy. " That is a description. There is no explanation of how it occurs. No one has a definitive answer. Descriptions. Equations. Speculations. Theories. No ultimate truth. No absolute precision. Only approximations. The splitting of self-defined measurements infinitely. The same goes for all those examples above. No thing to believe in. Just use it to get something done. Here is a paragraph on the " beliefs " of physicist from an article in Wikipedia on gravity. They " believe " since there is no definitive proof or explanation for the simple phenomena of splatting and other droppings and for most, beliefs helps them go on searching. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity. Brackets are mine. " It is strongly [believed] that three of the four fundamental forces (the strong nuclear force, the weak weak nuclear force, and the electromagnetic force) are manifestations of a [single, more fundamental force.] Combining gravity with these forces of quantum mechanics to create a [theory of quantum gravity] is currently an important topic of research amongst physicists. General relativity is essentially a geometric [theory of gravity.] Quantum mechanics relies on interactions between particles, but general relativity requires no particles in its [explanation?] of gravity. Scientists have [theorized] about the [graviton] (a particle that transmits the force gravity) for years, but [have been frustrated in their attempts to find a consistent quantum theory for it.] Many [believe] that string theory holds a great deal of promise to unify general relativity and quantum mechanics, but this promise has [yet to be realized.] It [never can be] for obvious reasons [if] Einstein's theory is true, due to the non-existence of " gravitational attraction " (explained in the above section " Einstein's Theory of Gravity " ) It is believed because there is no " proof. " Just hoped in ideas. Such beliefs are held by those involved even though believing is unnecessary. Perhaps, if some of them did not believe that there is an answer, a graviton, they would make no effort to seek an answer to make more stories of it. Perhaps, without belief in a " single more fundamental force " they would not look for the theorized " graviton " and not make a theory of the theorized object. Sounds familiar? (Do not mistake this as being anti-knowldege.) In any case, the scientific knowledge gained is descriptive, using specialized vocabulary and equations and is useful. It is never truly " explanatory in a causal manner " and it is always an approximation couched in a theory. All are descriptions, stories that can or cannot be used to do something. Is " spiritual knowledge " the same? As for the differences and similarities in the appearances, they are as large or small as one wishes to make them. Describe it, say it and it is so for the sayer, not necessarily so for others. All the appearances can be made one or be made many, or both, or neither or whatever one or group of ones wishes to construct them as. From the " hare's horn " to the " graviton " spanning all the universes constructed by imagination. It is all the same work done by the imagination or if you prefer the " mind. " How it is used is the same also. It is case by case, use by use....and the outcomes if you care to notice them are case by case. In fires, some people jump out of windows from the same floor. All fall. Some survive, some do not. Explain it. One can believe or not or both or neither or whatever you want about whatever appears or doesn't, happens or doesn't happen. If one likes the " oneness " thing, stick to it. It may serve well as it is. 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.