Guest guest Posted May 5, 2005 Report Share Posted May 5, 2005 Waves can know nothing of the ocean. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 5, 2005 Report Share Posted May 5, 2005 - toombaru2004 Nisargadatta Thursday, May 05, 2005 10:37 AM waves Waves can know nothing of the ocean. toombaru " waves " begin in the " ocean " and either dissipate in the ocean or break on the shore, knowing 'shore-ness' as much as........ wave....... ocean..........shore....... dissipate........ can know of 'themselves'......and each other........... a. ** If you do not wish to receive individual emails, to change your subscription, sign in with your ID and go to Edit My Groups: /mygroups?edit=1 Under the Message Delivery option, choose " No Email " for the Nisargadatta group and click on Save Changes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 5, 2005 Report Share Posted May 5, 2005 Waves can know nothing of the ocean. toombaru Why not? sai Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 5, 2005 Report Share Posted May 5, 2005 Nisargadatta , " sai " <tamborineman@t...> wrote: > Waves can know nothing of the ocean. > > toombaru > > Why not? > > sai Because they know themselves as waves. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 5, 2005 Report Share Posted May 5, 2005 Nisargadatta , " sai " <tamborineman@t...> wrote: > Waves can know nothing of the ocean. > > toombaru > > Why not? > > sai > Because the ocean is not in flux, but waves are. The action is _between_ the ocean and the waves, in that thin slice called creation. al. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 5, 2005 Report Share Posted May 5, 2005 > Waves can know nothing of the ocean. > > toombaru > > Why not? > > sai Because they know themselves as waves. toombaru You don't believe they are capable of knowing more...that their source is the ocean, and that's ultimately what they are? sai Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 5, 2005 Report Share Posted May 5, 2005 > Waves can know nothing of the ocean. > > toombaru > > Why not? > > sai > Because the ocean is not in flux, but waves are. The action is _between_ the ocean and the waves, in that thin slice called creation. al. But the wave is still " connected " ...is still the ocean. Isn't it? No matter whever it's in flux or not.. Just trying to understand you. sai Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 5, 2005 Report Share Posted May 5, 2005 Nisargadatta , " sai " <tamborineman@t...> wrote: > > > > Waves can know nothing of the ocean. > > > > toombaru > > > > Why not? > > > > sai > > > > > Because the ocean is not in flux, but waves are. The action is > _between_ the ocean and the waves, in that thin slice called creation. > > al. > > > But the wave is still " connected " ...is still the ocean. Isn't it? > No matter whever it's in flux or not.. > > Just trying to understand you. > > sai The attempt to understand........makes waves. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 5, 2005 Report Share Posted May 5, 2005 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > Waves can know nothing of the ocean. > > > > > > toombaru Wave *can* know what is essential. Wave is water. Ocean is water. Knowing That by which all else is as good as known. Durga Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 5, 2005 Report Share Posted May 5, 2005 Nisargadatta , " sai " <tamborineman@t...> wrote: > > > > Waves can know nothing of the ocean. > > > > toombaru > > > > Why not? > > > > sai > > > > > Because the ocean is not in flux, but waves are. The action is > _between_ the ocean and the waves, in that thin slice called creation. > > al. > > > But the wave is still " connected " ...is still the ocean. Isn't it? > No matter whever it's in flux or not.. > > Just trying to understand you. > > sai > > Yes, the ocean is a thing, an object, and the waves are objects too. Between the one object (the ocean) and the many objects (the waves) is the Connector. al. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 6, 2005 Report Share Posted May 6, 2005 Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > Nisargadatta , " sai " <tamborineman@t...> wrote: > > > > > > > Waves can know nothing of the ocean. > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > Why not? > > > > > > sai > > > > > > > > > Because the ocean is not in flux, but waves are. The action is > > _between_ the ocean and the waves, in that thin slice called > creation. > > > > al. > > > > > > But the wave is still " connected " ...is still the ocean. Isn't it? > > No matter whever it's in flux or not.. > > > > Just trying to understand you. > > > > sai > > > > > > > Yes, the ocean is a thing, an object, and the waves are objects too. > Between the one object (the ocean) and the many objects (the waves) > is the Connector. > > al. There is no such thing as an " ocean " . The term is an invention within mind.....It exists only within mind. " Ocean " is an adjective....not a noun. What is a wave? How far down in the " ocean does a wave go? Can it be separated from all the other waves? Can it be separated from the ocean? " Wave " is a description......not a thing. > > Between the one object (the ocean) and the many objects (the waves) > > is the Connector. No....they are the same......there are no lines....anywhere. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 6, 2005 Report Share Posted May 6, 2005 from another message board: http://.ferryfee.com/bluesky/leaf_bud.htm - toombaru2004 Nisargadatta Thursday, May 05, 2005 6:21 PM Re: w_aves Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > Nisargadatta , " sai " <tamborineman@t...> wrote: > > > > > > > Waves can know nothing of the ocean. > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > Why not? > > > > > > sai > > > > > > > > > Because the ocean is not in flux, but waves are. The action is > > _between_ the ocean and the waves, in that thin slice called > creation. > > > > al. > > > > > > But the wave is still " connected " ...is still the ocean. Isn't it? > > No matter whever it's in flux or not.. > > > > Just trying to understand you. > > > > sai > > > > > > > Yes, the ocean is a thing, an object, and the waves are objects too. > Between the one object (the ocean) and the many objects (the waves) > is the Connector. > > al. There is no such thing as an " ocean " . The term is an invention within mind.....It exists only within mind. " Ocean " is an adjective....not a noun. What is a wave? How far down in the " ocean does a wave go? Can it be separated from all the other waves? Can it be separated from the ocean? " Wave " is a description......not a thing. > > Between the one object (the ocean) and the many objects (the waves) > > is the Connector. No....they are the same......there are no lines....anywhere. toombaru ** If you do not wish to receive individual emails, to change your subscription, sign in with your ID and go to Edit My Groups: /mygroups?edit=1 Under the Message Delivery option, choose " No Email " for the Nisargadatta group and click on Save Changes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 6, 2005 Report Share Posted May 6, 2005 > Because the ocean is not in flux, but waves are. The action is > _between_ the ocean and the waves, in that thin slice called creation. > > al. > > > But the wave is still " connected " ...is still the ocean. Isn't it? > No matter whever it's in flux or not.. > > Just trying to understand you. > > sai The attempt to understand........makes waves. toombaru ************ Hmm... Perhaps, but i'm not sure. Attempting to understand, by seeing the truth, has the power to dissipate waves doesn't it? But i'm not sure exactly where you're coming from toombaru.. sai Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 6, 2005 Report Share Posted May 6, 2005 Nisargadatta , " sai " <tamborineman@t...> wrote: > > Because the ocean is not in flux, but waves are. The action is > > _between_ the ocean and the waves, in that thin slice called creation. > > > > al. > > > > > > But the wave is still " connected " ...is still the ocean. Isn't it? > > No matter whever it's in flux or not.. > > > > Just trying to understand you. > > > > sai > > > The attempt to understand........makes waves. > > toombaru > > ************ > > > Hmm... > Perhaps, but i'm not sure. > > Attempting to understand, by seeing the truth, has the power to dissipate > waves doesn't it? > > But i'm not sure exactly where you're coming from toombaru.. > > sai You're not sure of anything.............are you sai? toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 6, 2005 Report Share Posted May 6, 2005 > The attempt to understand........makes waves. > > toombaru > > ************ > > > Hmm... > Perhaps, but i'm not sure. > > Attempting to understand, by seeing the truth, has the power to dissipate > waves doesn't it? > > But i'm not sure exactly where you're coming from toombaru.. > > sai You're not sure of anything.............are you sai? toombaru **************** I wouldn't say that toom. I'm new here and don't know you enough to know how you define certain words/concepts/truths.. " Seeing the truth about the false " dispells illusion. In the metaphor of the ocean and the wave...if the wave " sees " clearly, then it realises that it isn't a wave at all, but in fact the ocean itself. sai Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 6, 2005 Report Share Posted May 6, 2005 Nisargadatta , " sai " <tamborineman@t...> wrote: > > > > > The attempt to understand........makes waves. > > > > toombaru > > > > ************ > > > > > > Hmm... > > Perhaps, but i'm not sure. > > > > Attempting to understand, by seeing the truth, has the power to dissipate > > waves doesn't it? > > > > But i'm not sure exactly where you're coming from toombaru.. > > > > sai > > > > You're not sure of anything.............are you sai? > > toombaru > > > **************** > > I wouldn't say that toom. I'm new here and don't know you enough to know how > you define certain words/concepts/truths.. > > " Seeing the truth about the false " dispells illusion. > In the metaphor of the ocean and the wave...if the wave " sees " clearly, then > it realises that it isn't a wave at all, but in fact the ocean itself. > > sai If a wave has identified itself as a wave......It can never see the ocean. .....to do so.....would erase its separate 'waveness'. This is a very subtle point.........forever just beyond the identified entity's ability to grasp. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 6, 2005 Report Share Posted May 6, 2005 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > Nisargadatta , " sai " <tamborineman@t...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > The attempt to understand........makes waves. > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > ************ > > > > > > > > > Hmm... > > > Perhaps, but i'm not sure. > > > > > > Attempting to understand, by seeing the truth, has the power to dissipate > > > waves doesn't it? > > > > > > But i'm not sure exactly where you're coming from toombaru.. > > > > > > sai > > > > > > > > You're not sure of anything.............are you sai? > > > > toombaru > > > > > > **************** > > > > I wouldn't say that toom. I'm new here and don't know you enough to know how > > you define certain words/concepts/truths.. > > > > " Seeing the truth about the false " dispells illusion. > > In the metaphor of the ocean and the wave...if the wave " sees " clearly, then > > it realises that it isn't a wave at all, but in fact the ocean itself. > > > > sai > > > > If a wave has identified itself as a wave......It can never see the ocean. > > ....to do so.....would erase its separate 'waveness'. > > > > This is a very subtle point.........forever just beyond the identified entity's ability to grasp. > > >.....because the " things " that it has identified its self as......... are conceptual .............relational......abstractions. > > > toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 6, 2005 Report Share Posted May 6, 2005 > " Seeing the truth about the false " dispells illusion. > In the metaphor of the ocean and the wave...if the wave " sees " clearly, then > it realises that it isn't a wave at all, but in fact the ocean itself. > > sai If a wave has identified itself as a wave......It can never see the ocean. ......to do so.....would erase its separate 'waveness'. Hmm, i think we're saying the same thing aren't we? While the wave has identified itself as just a wave, then that is all it sees " It has faulty vision. If/when it " sees " clearly, the fault in the vision is " seen " ..and as you put it: it's separate waveness is erased. sai This is a very subtle point.........forever just beyond the identified entity's ability to grasp. toombaru ** If you do not wish to receive individual emails, to change your subscription sign in with your ID and go to Edit My Groups: /mygroups?edit=1 Under the Message Delivery option, choose " No Email " for the Nisargadatta group and click on Save Changes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 6, 2005 Report Share Posted May 6, 2005 Nisargadatta , " sai " <tamborineman@t...> wrote: > > > > " Seeing the truth about the false " dispells illusion. > > In the metaphor of the ocean and the wave...if the wave " sees " clearly, > then > > it realises that it isn't a wave at all, but in fact the ocean itself. > > > > sai > > > > If a wave has identified itself as a wave......It can never see the ocean. > > .....to do so.....would erase its separate 'waveness'. > > > Hmm, i think we're saying the same thing aren't we? > > While the wave has identified itself as just a wave, then that is all it > sees " > It has faulty vision. > If/when it " sees " clearly, the fault in the vision is " seen " ..and as you put > it: it's separate waveness is erased. > > > sai > No...........The " wave " has no separate existential reality....It does not possess faulty vision......it is the result of faulty vision. If the vision is corrected...the wave is no more. (It never was) LOL toombaru > > > This is a very subtle point.........forever just beyond the identified > entity's ability to grasp. > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > ** > > If you do not wish to receive individual emails, to change your subscription > sign in with your ID and go to Edit My Groups: > > /mygroups?edit=1 > > Under the Message Delivery option, choose " No Email " for the Nisargadatta > group and click on Save Changes. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 6, 2005 Report Share Posted May 6, 2005 ---- toombaru2004 05/06/05 03:48:50 Nisargadatta Re: waves Nisargadatta , " sai " <tamborineman@t...> wrote: > > > > " Seeing the truth about the false " dispells illusion. > > In the metaphor of the ocean and the wave...if the wave " sees " clearly, > then > > it realises that it isn't a wave at all, but in fact the ocean itself. > > > > sai > > > > If a wave has identified itself as a wave......It can never see the ocean. > > .....to do so.....would erase its separate 'waveness'. > > > Hmm, i think we're saying the same thing aren't we? > > While the wave has identified itself as just a wave, then that is all it > sees " > It has faulty vision. > If/when it " sees " clearly, the fault in the vision is " seen " ..and as you put > it: it's separate waveness is erased. > > > sai > I should be sleeping - it's late here!(4.33am) I will answer tomorrow toom - thanks sai No...........The " wave " has no separate existential reality....It does not possess faulty vision......it is the result of faulty vision. If the vision is corrected...the wave is no more. (It never was) LOL toombaru > > > This is a very subtle point.........forever just beyond the identified > entity's ability to grasp. > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > ** > > If you do not wish to receive individual emails, to change your subscription > sign in with your ID and go to Edit My Groups: > > /mygroups?edit=1 > > Under the Message Delivery option, choose " No Email " for the Nisargadatta > group and click on Save Changes. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 6, 2005 Report Share Posted May 6, 2005 Nisargadatta , " sai " <tamborineman@t...> wrote: > > > ---- > > toombaru2004 > 05/06/05 03:48:50 > Nisargadatta > Re: waves > > Nisargadatta , " sai " <tamborineman@t...> wrote: > > > > > > > " Seeing the truth about the false " dispells illusion. > > > In the metaphor of the ocean and the wave...if the wave " sees " clearly, > > then > > > it realises that it isn't a wave at all, but in fact the ocean itself. > > > > > > sai > > > > > > > > If a wave has identified itself as a wave......It can never see the ocean. > > > > .....to do so.....would erase its separate 'waveness'. > > > > > > Hmm, i think we're saying the same thing aren't we? > > > > While the wave has identified itself as just a wave, then that is all it > > sees " > > It has faulty vision. > > If/when it " sees " clearly, the fault in the vision is " seen " ..and as you > put > > it: it's separate waveness is erased. > > > > > > sai > > > > I should be sleeping - it's late here!(4.33am) > > I will answer tomorrow toom - thanks > > sai > > Sweet dreams.....:-) toombaru 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.