[NonDualPhil] From I Am That

[Guest guest]

P: Excellent, Wim, luminous! Thanks

 

On Jul 28, 2005, at 9:25 AM, Wim Borsboom wrote:

 

> Q: My difficulty is this. As I can see, every experience

> is its own reality. It is there – experienced. The moment

> I question it and ask to whom it happens, who is the observer

> and so on, the experience is over and all I can investigate

> is only the memory of it. I just cannot investigate the living

> moment – the now. My awareness is of the past, not of the

> present. When I am aware, I do not really live in the now,

> but only in the past. Can there really be an awareness

> of the present?

>

> M: What you are describing is not awareness at all, but

> only thinking about the experience. True awareness (samvid)

> is a state of pure witnessing, without the least attempt to

> do anything about the event witnessed. Your thoughts and

> feelings, words and actions may also be a part of the event;

> you watch all unconcerned in the full light of clarity and

> understanding. You understand precisely what is going on,

> because it does not affect you. It may seem to be an attitude

> of cold aloofness, but it is not really so. Once you are in it,

> you will find that you love what you see, whatever may be its

> nature. This choiceless love is the touchstone of awareness.

> If it is not there, you are merely interested –

> for some personal reasons.

>

> Q: As long as there are pain and pleasure, one is bound

> to be interested.

>

> M: And as long as one is conscious, there will be pain and

> pleasure. You cannot fight pain and pleasure on the level of

> consciousness. To go beyond them you must go beyond

> consciousness, which is possible only when you look at

> consciousness as something that happens to you and not in you,

> as something external, alien, superimposed. Then, suddenly you

> are free of consciousness, really alone, with nothing to intrude.

> And that is your true state. Consciousness is an itching rash

> that makes you scratch. Of course, you cannot step out of

> consciousness for the very idea of stepping out of consciousness

> is in consciousness. But if you learn to look at your

> consciousness as a sort of fever, personal and private, in

> which you are enclosed like a chick in its shell, out of this

> very attitude will come the crisis which will break its shell.

>

> Q: Buddha said that life is suffering.

>

> M: He must have meant that all consciousness is painful,

> which is obvious.

>

> Q: And does death offer delivery?

>

> M: One who believes himself as having been born is very much

> afraid of death. On the other hand, to him who knows himself

> truly, death is a happy event.

>

> Q: The Hindu tradition says that suffering is brought by destiny

> and destiny is merited. Look at the immense calamities, natural

> or man-made, floods and earthquakes, wars and revolutions.

> Can we dare to think that each suffers for his own sins, of

> which we can have no idea? The billions who suffer, are they

> all criminals justly punished?

>

> M: Must one suffer only for one's own sins? Are we really

> separate? In this vast ocean of life we suffer for the sins of

> others, and make others suffer for our sins. Of course, the

> law of balance rules supreme and accounts are squared in the

> end. But while life lasts, we affect each other deeply.

>

> Q: Yes, as the poet says: `No man is an island'.

>

> M: At the back of every experience is the Self and its interest

> in the experience. Call it desire, call it love –

> words do not matter.

>

> Q: Can I desire suffering? Can I deliberately ask for pain?

> Am I like a man who made for himself a downy bed hoping for

> a good night of sleep and then he is visited by a nightmare

> and he tosses and screams in his dream? Surely, it is not

> the love that produces nightmares.

>

> M: All suffering is caused by selfish isolation, by

> insularity and greed. When the cause of suffering is seen

> and removed, suffering ceases.

>

> Q: I may remove my causes of sorrow, but others will be

> left to suffer.

>

> M: To understand suffering, you must go beyond pain and

> pleasure. Your own desires and fears prevent you from

> understanding and thereby helping others. In reality there

> are no others, and by helping yourself you help everybody else.

> If you are serious about the sufferings of mankind, you must

> perfect the only means of help you have – yourself.

>

> ~ Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj, " I Am That "

 

[Guest guest]

Hi Pete,

 

See what Krishnamurti stated about consciousness:

 

OJAI 3RD TALK IN THE OAK GROVE 19TH APRIL, 1936

 

" ……..Most of us have an idea that the " I " is a separate being,

divine, something

that is enduring, becoming more and more perfect. I do not hold with

any of

this. Consciousness itself is the " I. " You cannot separate the " I "

process from

consciousness. There is no " I " that is accumulating experience, which

is apart

from experience itself. There is only this process, this energy which

is

creating its own limitations, through its own

self-sustained wants. When you discern that there is no " I " apart

from action,

that the actor is action itself, then gradually there comes a

completeness, an

unfathomable bliss………. "

 

 

 

Nisargadatta , Pete S <pedsie3@e...> wrote:

> P: Excellent, Wim, luminous! Thanks

>

> On Jul 28, 2005, at 9:25 AM, Wim Borsboom wrote:

>

> > Q: My difficulty is this. As I can see, every experience

> > is its own reality. It is there – experienced. The moment

> > I question it and ask to whom it happens, who is the observer

> > and so on, the experience is over and all I can investigate

> > is only the memory of it. I just cannot investigate the living

> > moment – the now. My awareness is of the past, not of the

> > present. When I am aware, I do not really live in the now,

> > but only in the past. Can there really be an awareness

> > of the present?

> >

> > M: What you are describing is not awareness at all, but

> > only thinking about the experience. True awareness (samvid)

> > is a state of pure witnessing, without the least attempt to

> > do anything about the event witnessed. Your thoughts and

> > feelings, words and actions may also be a part of the event;

> > you watch all unconcerned in the full light of clarity and

> > understanding. You understand precisely what is going on,

> > because it does not affect you. It may seem to be an attitude

> > of cold aloofness, but it is not really so. Once you are in it,

> > you will find that you love what you see, whatever may be its

> > nature. This choiceless love is the touchstone of awareness.

> > If it is not there, you are merely interested –

> > for some personal reasons.

> >

> > Q: As long as there are pain and pleasure, one is bound

> > to be interested.

> >

> > M: And as long as one is conscious, there will be pain and

> > pleasure. You cannot fight pain and pleasure on the level of

> > consciousness. To go beyond them you must go beyond

> > consciousness, which is possible only when you look at

> > consciousness as something that happens to you and not in you,

> > as something external, alien, superimposed. Then, suddenly you

> > are free of consciousness, really alone, with nothing to intrude.

> > And that is your true state. Consciousness is an itching rash

> > that makes you scratch. Of course, you cannot step out of

> > consciousness for the very idea of stepping out of consciousness

> > is in consciousness. But if you learn to look at your

> > consciousness as a sort of fever, personal and private, in

> > which you are enclosed like a chick in its shell, out of this

> > very attitude will come the crisis which will break its shell.

> >

> > Q: Buddha said that life is suffering.

> >

> > M: He must have meant that all consciousness is painful,

> > which is obvious.

> >

> > Q: And does death offer delivery?

> >

> > M: One who believes himself as having been born is very much

> > afraid of death. On the other hand, to him who knows himself

> > truly, death is a happy event.

> >

> > Q: The Hindu tradition says that suffering is brought by destiny

> > and destiny is merited. Look at the immense calamities, natural

> > or man-made, floods and earthquakes, wars and revolutions.

> > Can we dare to think that each suffers for his own sins, of

> > which we can have no idea? The billions who suffer, are they

> > all criminals justly punished?

> >

> > M: Must one suffer only for one's own sins? Are we really

> > separate? In this vast ocean of life we suffer for the sins of

> > others, and make others suffer for our sins. Of course, the

> > law of balance rules supreme and accounts are squared in the

> > end. But while life lasts, we affect each other deeply.

> >

> > Q: Yes, as the poet says: `No man is an island'.

> >

> > M: At the back of every experience is the Self and its interest

> > in the experience. Call it desire, call it love –

> > words do not matter.

> >

> > Q: Can I desire suffering? Can I deliberately ask for pain?

> > Am I like a man who made for himself a downy bed hoping for

> > a good night of sleep and then he is visited by a nightmare

> > and he tosses and screams in his dream? Surely, it is not

> > the love that produces nightmares.

> >

> > M: All suffering is caused by selfish isolation, by

> > insularity and greed. When the cause of suffering is seen

> > and removed, suffering ceases.

> >

> > Q: I may remove my causes of sorrow, but others will be

> > left to suffer.

> >

> > M: To understand suffering, you must go beyond pain and

> > pleasure. Your own desires and fears prevent you from

> > understanding and thereby helping others. In reality there

> > are no others, and by helping yourself you help everybody else.

> > If you are serious about the sufferings of mankind, you must

> > perfect the only means of help you have – yourself.

> >

> > ~ Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj, " I Am That "

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >