Guest guest Posted July 18, 2005 Report Share Posted July 18, 2005 --- Pete S <pedsie3 wrote: > The love of " me " and the knowledge > of its perishability is the cross from > which " we " hang. Can that love die? > Can " we " fully accept not to be a " me " ? " > " Ah that's the question! To accept > the ultimate equation: To be = not to be. > > Pete To be = not to be. Not to be = to be. " Meness " in that " thing " sense of it fully maintained as something or nothing, existing or nonexisting. The ultimate equation for the infinite never ending circle of concern or fixation with existence and nonexistence of this or that. Can this ever be stepped out of? Lewis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 18, 2005 Report Share Posted July 18, 2005 Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > --- Pete S <pedsie3@e...> wrote: > > > The love of " me " and the knowledge > > of its perishability is the cross from > > which " we " hang. Can that love die? > > Can " we " fully accept not to be a " me " ? " > > " Ah that's the question! To accept > > the ultimate equation: To be = not to be. > > > > Pete > > > > > To be = not to be. > Not to be = to be. > > " Meness " in that " thing " sense of it fully maintained as something or > nothing, existing or nonexisting. > > The ultimate equation for the infinite never ending circle of > concern or fixation with existence and nonexistence of this or that. > > Can this ever be stepped out of? > > Lewis not as long as there is attachment to a " me " which does the " stepping out " . joe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 18, 2005 Report Share Posted July 18, 2005 --- Pete S <pedsie3 wrote: > > The love of " me " and the knowledge > > of its perishability is the cross from > > which " we " hang. Can that love die? > > Can " we " fully accept not to be a " me " ? " > > " Ah that's the question! To accept > > the ultimate equation: To be = not to be. > > > > Pete > > to me or not to me? Is that the question? To be = not to be. Not to be = to be. " Meness " in that " thing " sense of it fully maintained as something or nothing, existing or nonexisting. The ultimate equation for the infinite never ending of circle of concern or fixation with existence and nonexistence of this or that. Can you ever step out of it? Lewis P: Stepping out is not the problem. Coming to terms with its vacuousness, accepting its perishability is the end of existential anxiety. L: What is the " me " you speak of? It is experienced as " some thing " since " some one " or " some thing " must accept " its " perishability, I suppose, but " it " really is vacuous. (Vacuous \Vac " u*ous\, a. [L. vacuus.] Empty; void Empty = holding or containing nothing, having nothing in it Void = the state of nonexistence, nothingness, nullity So for " you " " me " is a " thing " an existent ( " its " ) that is taken for " some thing " by " some one " or " some thing " as existing and that " it " in fact is misperceived because " it " is really vacuous, empty, void, nothing, nonexistent, a nullity, nothingness. And since and " its " perishability is not fully accepted but sensed existential anxiety is present. I am not what I believe or imagine I am. I am not. Ooooooh! The issue: A perceived " some thing " that is really " misperceived " and is really a " nothing " is a root of a " problem. " When this misperceiving is broken into, cracked a bit, and true perception occurs and the something thought to be some thing is briefly perceived as " nothing " the condition for existential anxiety arises. True perception is that " me " is " nothing. " This is an insight. When it is taken as an existent, Me is nothing, it is an error. Thus: To be = not to be However, existential anxiety continues in seeing and trying to, waiting to, accepting, realizing, attaining, whatever, the perishability of " some thing, " " me " that is " nothing " really at all and, hence, nonperishable in the first place. I try to see, find, uncover, investigate and then try to eliminate, accept to perish, die to, worry over, apply tactics to this falsely perceived " me, " that others see and work on as well and so forth in an endless round of trying to accept the perishability of this incredibly deceptive " me. " Well somehow it has to get done, accepted as nothing. (by who/what?). Thus in making these efforts that lead to accept the perishability of a nothing, we get: Not to be = to be. (I try.....not to be.) A circle of eixsitential anxiety unbroken. To be = not to be. Not to be = to be. " Stepping out " is clearly seeing the circle and ending the drive to do that which is not possible, for example: 1. To be " me " as a " thing " an existent - or 2. To not be " me, " a " nothing, " a nonexistent. " - To die to self, to die, to eliminate ego and so on. Both are becoming things, " some thing " and " nothing. " Why do either? If we clearly drop the inveterate assumptions of existence and nonexistence of things, appearances are seen clearly and faced squarely as what is without making it over into this or that existing or nonexisting thing. We face what is as is. Holding on to these assumptions does nothing to change what is. They are unnecessary to go on in life. Assuming the existence or nonexistence of any thing makes no difference to what appears as it goes moment by moment. We simply deal with what appears to us. How we learn to deal with what appears is another matter. Trying to die to self or eliminate ego, elimiate " me " is one of the best ways for " me " to stay " alive " as something becoming nothing at the same time. Lewis 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.