Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

Direct Awareness

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

<anders_lindman> wrote:

> Is it possible to be aware directly, without awareness first getting

> trapped in thought?

 

 

Yes,

 

I heard, that right after one wakes up and before the world arises in the

consciousness there is that moment.. of pure awareness without object..

 

Or in the gap between two thoughts.

 

There is Ramana's Self.. to be found in there..

 

Era

 

 

..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anders,

 

A similar important question:

 

Is it possible to bite into your own ellbow and suck your own dick at

the same time ?

 

Werner

 

 

Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

<anders_lindman> wrote:

> Is it possible to be aware directly, without awareness first getting

> trapped in thought?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

awareness is aware of thought as thought, an outpicturing of consciousness in

and of itself, a flowering and flowing of Being...

 

or not...

 

;-)

-

anders_lindman

Nisargadatta

Monday, October 03, 2005 9:10 AM

Direct Awareness

 

 

Is it possible to be aware directly, without awareness first getting

trapped in thought?

 

 

 

 

**

 

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.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nisargadatta , " Era " <n0ndual@w...> wrote:

> <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > Is it possible to be aware directly, without awareness first getting

> > trapped in thought?

>

>

> Yes,

>

> I heard, that right after one wakes up and before the world arises in

the consciousness there is that moment.. of pure awareness without

object..

>

> Or in the gap between two thoughts.

>

> There is Ramana's Self.. to be found in there..

>

> Era

 

sounds interesting...

awareness has nothing to do with thoughts....

 

Marc

>

>

> .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nisargadatta , " Anna Ruiz " <nli10u@c...> wrote:

> awareness is aware of thought as thought, an outpicturing of

consciousness in and of itself, a flowering and flowing of Being...

>

> or not...

>

> ;-)

 

 

Yeah, but J. Krishnamurti said that when awareness was trapped in

thought there was very little space. Only when thought was still could

awareness be spacious and free. (I don't know if he used the word

'awareness', but we can call it 'universal mind, or whatever).

 

al.

 

> -

> anders_lindman

> Nisargadatta

> Monday, October 03, 2005 9:10 AM

> Direct Awareness

>

>

> Is it possible to be aware directly, without awareness first getting

> trapped in thought?

>

>

>

>

> **

>

> 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.

>

>

>

>

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> wrote:

> Anders,

>

> A similar important question:

>

> Is it possible to bite into your own ellbow and suck your own dick at

> the same time ?

>

> Werner

 

 

But that would still be an action from thought. :) Can the mind be

spacious and free from thought?

 

al.

 

>

>

> Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > Is it possible to be aware directly, without awareness first getting

> > trapped in thought?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nisargadatta , " Era " <n0ndual@w...> wrote:

> <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > Is it possible to be aware directly, without awareness first getting

> > trapped in thought?

>

>

> Yes,

>

> I heard, that right after one wakes up and before the world arises

in the consciousness there is that moment.. of pure awareness without

object..

>

> Or in the gap between two thoughts.

>

> There is Ramana's Self.. to be found in there..

>

> Era

>

>

> .

 

 

J. Krishnamurti called it meditation, I think. Not meditation as in

some kind of practice or method, but a state of meditation. This state

is not without objects. As I understand it, meditation in this sense

is to be aware of all that is going on in a conflictless way.

 

al.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anders,

 

K. meant with awareness trapped in: " attention mainly directed to " .

For example if an itch is itching then awares is traped in that

itching.

 

But the whole question is of no practical importance as long a you

constantly are avoiding boredom by searching new food for thinking

instead of inquiring boredom itself.

 

Werner

 

 

Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

<anders_lindman> wrote:

> Nisargadatta , " Anna Ruiz " <nli10u@c...>

wrote:

> > awareness is aware of thought as thought, an outpicturing of

> consciousness in and of itself, a flowering and flowing of Being...

> >

> > or not...

> >

> > ;-)

>

>

> Yeah, but J. Krishnamurti said that when awareness was trapped in

> thought there was very little space. Only when thought was still

could

> awareness be spacious and free. (I don't know if he used the word

> 'awareness', but we can call it 'universal mind, or whatever).

>

> al.

>

> > -

> > anders_lindman

> > Nisargadatta

> > Monday, October 03, 2005 9:10 AM

> > Direct Awareness

> >

> >

> > Is it possible to be aware directly, without awareness first

getting

> > trapped in thought?

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > **

> >

> > 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.

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> wrote:

> Anders,

>

> K. meant with awareness trapped in: " attention mainly directed to " .

> For example if an itch is itching then awares is traped in that

> itching.

>

> But the whole question is of no practical importance as long a you

> constantly are avoiding boredom by searching new food for thinking

> instead of inquiring boredom itself.

>

> Werner

 

 

Yes, negative states like boredom are probably caused by too much

attention on thinking. So my question is perhaps still relevant: Is it

possible to be aware directly, without awareness first getting trapped

in thought?

 

al.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

<anders_lindman> wrote:

> Nisargadatta , " Era " <n0ndual@w...> wrote:

> > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > > Is it possible to be aware directly, without awareness first

getting

> > > trapped in thought?

> >

> >

> > Yes,

> >

> > I heard, that right after one wakes up and before the world arises

> in the consciousness there is that moment.. of pure awareness

without

> object..

> >

> > Or in the gap between two thoughts.

> >

> > There is Ramana's Self.. to be found in there..

> >

> > Era

> >

> >

> > .

>

>

> J. Krishnamurti called it meditation, I think. Not meditation as in

> some kind of practice or method, but a state of meditation. This

state

> is not without objects. As I understand it, meditation in this sense

> is to be aware of all that is going on in a conflictless way.

>

> al.

 

....meditation is loosing body sense....

just like the state of deep sleep....

but meditation let one " experience " it in being awake....

 

a quite mind is necessary to meditate....to enter in meditation....

 

....the " world " appear in it's " conflicts " only....when there is no

meditation....no quite mind....

 

consciousness is transformed.....

attitudes change....

" views " change...

love is growing...

knowledge is becoming more pure....

 

....and all this happen...in awareness of a spiritual soul....

which " see " Oneness in all...

 

Oneness of all souls....

 

Regards

 

Marc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

-

anders_lindman

Nisargadatta

Monday, October 03, 2005 10:24 AM

Re: Direct Awareness

 

 

Nisargadatta , " Anna Ruiz " <nli10u@c...> wrote:

> awareness is aware of thought as thought, an outpicturing of

consciousness in and of itself, a flowering and flowing of Being...

>

> or not...

>

> ;-)

 

 

Yeah, but J. Krishnamurti said that when awareness was trapped in

thought there was very little space. Only when thought was still could

awareness be spacious and free. (I don't know if he used the word

'awareness', but we can call it 'universal mind, or whatever).

 

al.

 

 

No " yeah, but's " in awarenessor Universal Self/ my Beloved Friend. IMHO

 

everything is IS.

 

 

> -

> anders_lindman

> Nisargadatta

> Monday, October 03, 2005 9:10 AM

> Direct Awareness

>

>

> Is it possible to be aware directly, without awareness first getting

> trapped in thought?

>

>

>

>

> **

>

> 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.

>

>

>

>

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

-

anders_lindman

Nisargadatta

Monday, October 03, 2005 10:26 AM

Re: Direct Awareness

 

 

Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> wrote:

> Anders,

>

> A similar important question:

>

> Is it possible to bite into your own ellbow and suck your own dick at

> the same time ?

>

> Werner

 

 

But that would still be an action from thought. :) Can the mind be

spacious and free from thought?

 

al.

 

Damn it guys, it playing with your ***** and quit separating mind from

thought. Thoughts are things, ;-)

 

;-)

ar.

 

 

>

>

> Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > Is it possible to be aware directly, without awareness first getting

> > trapped in thought?

 

 

 

 

**

 

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.

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nisargadatta , " Anna Ruiz " <nli10u@c...> wrote:

>

> -

> anders_lindman

> Nisargadatta

> Monday, October 03, 2005 10:24 AM

> Re: Direct Awareness

>

>

> Nisargadatta , " Anna Ruiz " <nli10u@c...> wrote:

> > awareness is aware of thought as thought, an outpicturing of

> consciousness in and of itself, a flowering and flowing of Being...

> >

> > or not...

> >

> > ;-)

>

>

> Yeah, but J. Krishnamurti said that when awareness was trapped in

> thought there was very little space. Only when thought was still could

> awareness be spacious and free. (I don't know if he used the word

> 'awareness', but we can call it 'universal mind, or whatever).

>

> al.

>

>

> No " yeah, but's " in awarenessor Universal Self/ my Beloved

Friend. IMHO

>

> everything is IS.

 

 

Ha! And in that ISness is included " yeah, but's " . ;-)

 

>

>

> > -

> > anders_lindman

> > Nisargadatta

> > Monday, October 03, 2005 9:10 AM

> > Direct Awareness

> >

> >

> > Is it possible to be aware directly, without awareness first

getting

> > trapped in thought?

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > **

> >

> > 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.

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 "

<dennis_travis33> wrote:

> Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > Nisargadatta , " Era " <n0ndual@w...> wrote:

> > > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > > > Is it possible to be aware directly, without awareness first

> getting

> > > > trapped in thought?

> > >

> > >

> > > Yes,

> > >

> > > I heard, that right after one wakes up and before the world arises

> > in the consciousness there is that moment.. of pure awareness

> without

> > object..

> > >

> > > Or in the gap between two thoughts.

> > >

> > > There is Ramana's Self.. to be found in there..

> > >

> > > Era

> > >

> > >

> > > .

> >

> >

> > J. Krishnamurti called it meditation, I think. Not meditation as in

> > some kind of practice or method, but a state of meditation. This

> state

> > is not without objects. As I understand it, meditation in this sense

> > is to be aware of all that is going on in a conflictless way.

> >

> > al.

>

> ...meditation is loosing body sense....

> just like the state of deep sleep....

> but meditation let one " experience " it in being awake....

>

> a quite mind is necessary to meditate....to enter in meditation....

>

> ...the " world " appear in it's " conflicts " only....when there is no

> meditation....no quite mind....

>

> consciousness is transformed.....

> attitudes change....

> " views " change...

> love is growing...

> knowledge is becoming more pure....

>

> ...and all this happen...in awareness of a spiritual soul....

> which " see " Oneness in all...

>

> Oneness of all souls....

>

> Regards

>

> Marc

 

 

JK used the word meditation in his own way. I don't think he meant

that in meditation one loses body sense or thinking. In meditation

thought is used when needed, but not all the time as in people's

usually state of being.

 

al.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

-

anders_lindman

Nisargadatta

Monday, October 03, 2005 11:52 AM

Re: Direct Awareness

 

 

Nisargadatta , " Anna Ruiz " <nli10u@c...> wrote:

>

> -

> anders_lindman

> Nisargadatta

> Monday, October 03, 2005 10:24 AM

> Re: Direct Awareness

>

>

> Nisargadatta , " Anna Ruiz " <nli10u@c...> wrote:

> > awareness is aware of thought as thought, an outpicturing of

> consciousness in and of itself, a flowering and flowing of Being...

> >

> > or not...

> >

> > ;-)

>

>

> Yeah, but J. Krishnamurti said that when awareness was trapped in

> thought there was very little space. Only when thought was still could

> awareness be spacious and free. (I don't know if he used the word

> 'awareness', but we can call it 'universal mind, or whatever).

>

> al.

>

>

> No " yeah, but's " in awarenessor Universal Self/ my Beloved

Friend. IMHO

>

> everything is IS.

 

 

Ha! And in that ISness is included " yeah, but's " . ;-)

 

gotcha i mean, me ;-)

 

 

 

>

>

> > -

> > anders_lindman

> > Nisargadatta

> > Monday, October 03, 2005 9:10 AM

> > Direct Awareness

> >

> >

> > Is it possible to be aware directly, without awareness first

getting

> > trapped in thought?

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > **

> >

> > 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.

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

<anders_lindman> wrote:

> Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...>

wrote:

> > Anders,

> >

> > K. meant with awareness trapped in: " attention mainly directed

to " .

> > For example if an itch is itching then awares is traped in that

> > itching.

> >

> > But the whole question is of no practical importance as long a

you

> > constantly are avoiding boredom by searching new food for

thinking

> > instead of inquiring boredom itself.

> >

> > Werner

>

>

> Yes, negative states like boredom are probably caused by too much

> attention on thinking. So my question is perhaps still relevant: Is

it

> possible to be aware directly, without awareness first getting

trapped

> in thought?

>

> al.

>========================

There is no " direct awareness " only the

Awareness that is the absence of thought, fiction, nothing.

 

The word " direct " only creates yet another thought, word,

duality, " indirect. "

 

Awareness is the absence of thoughts,

like the body and its universe

and everything else with name and form

 

" trapped " is like thinking and choosing, just is a word,

name, thought.

 

-- just more BS that thoughts need to chase each other

until Laughter ends the chase with the thought, death.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nisargadatta , " Gene Polotas " <semmin@e...> wrote:

> Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...>

> wrote:

> > > Anders,

> > >

> > > K. meant with awareness trapped in: " attention mainly directed

> to " .

> > > For example if an itch is itching then awares is traped in that

> > > itching.

> > >

> > > But the whole question is of no practical importance as long a

> you

> > > constantly are avoiding boredom by searching new food for

> thinking

> > > instead of inquiring boredom itself.

> > >

> > > Werner

> >

> >

> > Yes, negative states like boredom are probably caused by too much

> > attention on thinking. So my question is perhaps still relevant: Is

> it

> > possible to be aware directly, without awareness first getting

> trapped

> > in thought?

> >

> > al.

> >========================

> There is no " direct awareness " only the

> Awareness that is the absence of thought, fiction, nothing.

>

> The word " direct " only creates yet another thought, word,

> duality, " indirect. "

>

> Awareness is the absence of thoughts,

> like the body and its universe

> and everything else with name and form

>

> " trapped " is like thinking and choosing, just is a word,

> name, thought.

>

> -- just more BS that thoughts need to chase each other

> until Laughter ends the chase with the thought, death.

 

 

I see what you mean. J. Krishnamurti said that awareness could use

thought, knowledge and memory. But first one must enter that state.

Otherwise one would just keep on going round and round in thought, as

you say. K said that an " insight " is needed into the whole structure

of thought.

 

al.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

<anders_lindman> wrote:

> Nisargadatta , " Gene Polotas " <semmin@e...>

wrote:

> > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr "

<wwoehr@p...>

> > wrote:

> > > > Anders,

> > > >

> > > > K. meant with awareness trapped in: " attention mainly

directed

> > to " .

> > > > For example if an itch is itching then awares is traped in

that

> > > > itching.

> > > >

> > > > But the whole question is of no practical importance as long

a

> > you

> > > > constantly are avoiding boredom by searching new food for

> > thinking

> > > > instead of inquiring boredom itself.

> > > >

> > > > Werner

> > >

> > >

> > > Yes, negative states like boredom are probably caused by too

much

> > > attention on thinking. So my question is perhaps still

relevant: Is

> > it

> > > possible to be aware directly, without awareness first getting

> > trapped

> > > in thought?

> > >

> > > al.

> > >========================

> > There is no " direct awareness " only the

> > Awareness that is the absence of thought, fiction, nothing.

> >

> > The word " direct " only creates yet another thought, word,

> > duality, " indirect. "

> >

> > Awareness is the absence of thoughts,

> > like the body and its universe

> > and everything else with name and form

> >

> > " trapped " is like thinking and choosing, just is a word,

> > name, thought.

> >

> > -- just more BS that thoughts need to chase each other

> > until Laughter ends the chase with the thought, death.

>

>

> I see what you mean. J. Krishnamurti said that awareness could use

> thought, knowledge and memory. But first one must enter that state.

> Otherwise one would just keep on going round and round in thought,

as

> you say. K said that an " insight " is needed into the whole structure

> of thought.

>

> al.

>==========================

I learned the language

from them that used it

so I suppose they should know.

 

LOVE

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nisargadatta , " Gene Polotas " <semmin@e...> wrote:

> Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > Nisargadatta , " Gene Polotas " <semmin@e...>

> wrote:

> > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr "

> <wwoehr@p...>

> > > wrote:

> > > > > Anders,

> > > > >

> > > > > K. meant with awareness trapped in: " attention mainly

> directed

> > > to " .

> > > > > For example if an itch is itching then awares is traped in

> that

> > > > > itching.

> > > > >

> > > > > But the whole question is of no practical importance as long

> a

> > > you

> > > > > constantly are avoiding boredom by searching new food for

> > > thinking

> > > > > instead of inquiring boredom itself.

> > > > >

> > > > > Werner

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Yes, negative states like boredom are probably caused by too

> much

> > > > attention on thinking. So my question is perhaps still

> relevant: Is

> > > it

> > > > possible to be aware directly, without awareness first getting

> > > trapped

> > > > in thought?

> > > >

> > > > al.

> > > >========================

> > > There is no " direct awareness " only the

> > > Awareness that is the absence of thought, fiction, nothing.

> > >

> > > The word " direct " only creates yet another thought, word,

> > > duality, " indirect. "

> > >

> > > Awareness is the absence of thoughts,

> > > like the body and its universe

> > > and everything else with name and form

> > >

> > > " trapped " is like thinking and choosing, just is a word,

> > > name, thought.

> > >

> > > -- just more BS that thoughts need to chase each other

> > > until Laughter ends the chase with the thought, death.

> >

> >

> > I see what you mean. J. Krishnamurti said that awareness could use

> > thought, knowledge and memory. But first one must enter that state.

> > Otherwise one would just keep on going round and round in thought,

> as

> > you say. K said that an " insight " is needed into the whole structure

> > of thought.

> >

> > al.

> >==========================

> I learned the language

> from them that used it

> so I suppose they should know.

>

> LOVE

 

 

I have found a way to look at the whole structure of thought (I think

:) First recognize that you are aware in the present moment. Your

awareness is completely motionless in relation to the present moment.

Thoughts, on the other hand, are motionless in relation to the present

moment only in the extent in which they are " held " in awareness. Even

a " stream of thougts " must as a whole be held in awareness in order to

be " seen " in relation to the context of memory to give the whole

stream a coherent meaning.

 

Direct introspective observation reveals that this " holding " of

thouhts in awareness requires effort. This means that it requires a

subtle struggle to hold thoughts in awareness, while awareness itself

seems to be effortless, and maybe we could even say that awareness IS

the present moment. So awareness is probably effortless, while

thoughts require effort. This insight should make it possible for the

mind to rest effortlessly in awareness, while thoughts, the whole

structure and holding mechanism of thought, just melt away.

 

How about that for a new kind of meditation?! :)))

 

al.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

<anders_lindman> wrote:

> Nisargadatta , " Gene Polotas " <semmin@e...>

wrote:

> > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > > Nisargadatta , " Gene Polotas "

<semmin@e...>

> > wrote:

> > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > > > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > > > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr "

> > <wwoehr@p...>

> > > > wrote:

> > > > > > Anders,

> > > > > >

> > > > > > K. meant with awareness trapped in: " attention mainly

> > directed

> > > > to " .

> > > > > > For example if an itch is itching then awares is traped

in

> > that

> > > > > > itching.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > But the whole question is of no practical importance as

long

> > a

> > > > you

> > > > > > constantly are avoiding boredom by searching new food for

> > > > thinking

> > > > > > instead of inquiring boredom itself.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Werner

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Yes, negative states like boredom are probably caused by

too

> > much

> > > > > attention on thinking. So my question is perhaps still

> > relevant: Is

> > > > it

> > > > > possible to be aware directly, without awareness first

getting

> > > > trapped

> > > > > in thought?

> > > > >

> > > > > al.

> > > > >========================

> > > > There is no " direct awareness " only the

> > > > Awareness that is the absence of thought, fiction, nothing.

> > > >

> > > > The word " direct " only creates yet another thought, word,

> > > > duality, " indirect. "

> > > >

> > > > Awareness is the absence of thoughts,

> > > > like the body and its universe

> > > > and everything else with name and form

> > > >

> > > > " trapped " is like thinking and choosing, just is a word,

> > > > name, thought.

> > > >

> > > > -- just more BS that thoughts need to chase each other

> > > > until Laughter ends the chase with the thought, death.

> > >

> > >

> > > I see what you mean. J. Krishnamurti said that awareness could

use

> > > thought, knowledge and memory. But first one must enter that

state.

> > > Otherwise one would just keep on going round and round in

thought,

> > as

> > > you say. K said that an " insight " is needed into the whole

structure

> > > of thought.

> > >

> > > al.

> > >==========================

> > I learned the language

> > from them that used it

> > so I suppose they should know.

> >

> > LOVE

>

>

> I have found a way to look at the whole structure of thought (I

think

> :) First recognize that you are aware in the present moment. Your

> awareness is completely motionless in relation to the present

moment.

> Thoughts, on the other hand, are motionless in relation to the

present

> moment only in the extent in which they are " held " in awareness.

Even

> a " stream of thougts " must as a whole be held in awareness in order

to

> be " seen " in relation to the context of memory to give the whole

> stream a coherent meaning.

>

> Direct introspective observation reveals that this " holding " of

> thouhts in awareness requires effort. This means that it requires a

> subtle struggle to hold thoughts in awareness, while awareness

itself

> seems to be effortless, and maybe we could even say that awareness

IS

> the present moment. So awareness is probably effortless, while

> thoughts require effort. This insight should make it possible for

the

> mind to rest effortlessly in awareness, while thoughts, the whole

> structure and holding mechanism of thought, just melt away.

>

> How about that for a new kind of meditation?! :)))

>

> al.

>========================

If the words make you LAUGH

then you are Awake: you are not the words but the Laughter.

-- laughs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nisargadatta , " Gene Polotas " <semmin@e...> wrote:

> Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > Nisargadatta , " Gene Polotas " <semmin@e...>

> wrote:

> > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > > > Nisargadatta , " Gene Polotas "

> <semmin@e...>

> > > wrote:

> > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr "

> > > <wwoehr@p...>

> > > > > wrote:

> > > > > > > Anders,

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > K. meant with awareness trapped in: " attention mainly

> > > directed

> > > > > to " .

> > > > > > > For example if an itch is itching then awares is traped

> in

> > > that

> > > > > > > itching.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > But the whole question is of no practical importance as

> long

> > > a

> > > > > you

> > > > > > > constantly are avoiding boredom by searching new food for

> > > > > thinking

> > > > > > > instead of inquiring boredom itself.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Werner

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Yes, negative states like boredom are probably caused by

> too

> > > much

> > > > > > attention on thinking. So my question is perhaps still

> > > relevant: Is

> > > > > it

> > > > > > possible to be aware directly, without awareness first

> getting

> > > > > trapped

> > > > > > in thought?

> > > > > >

> > > > > > al.

> > > > > >========================

> > > > > There is no " direct awareness " only the

> > > > > Awareness that is the absence of thought, fiction, nothing.

> > > > >

> > > > > The word " direct " only creates yet another thought, word,

> > > > > duality, " indirect. "

> > > > >

> > > > > Awareness is the absence of thoughts,

> > > > > like the body and its universe

> > > > > and everything else with name and form

> > > > >

> > > > > " trapped " is like thinking and choosing, just is a word,

> > > > > name, thought.

> > > > >

> > > > > -- just more BS that thoughts need to chase each other

> > > > > until Laughter ends the chase with the thought, death.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > I see what you mean. J. Krishnamurti said that awareness could

> use

> > > > thought, knowledge and memory. But first one must enter that

> state.

> > > > Otherwise one would just keep on going round and round in

> thought,

> > > as

> > > > you say. K said that an " insight " is needed into the whole

> structure

> > > > of thought.

> > > >

> > > > al.

> > > >==========================

> > > I learned the language

> > > from them that used it

> > > so I suppose they should know.

> > >

> > > LOVE

> >

> >

> > I have found a way to look at the whole structure of thought (I

> think

> > :) First recognize that you are aware in the present moment. Your

> > awareness is completely motionless in relation to the present

> moment.

> > Thoughts, on the other hand, are motionless in relation to the

> present

> > moment only in the extent in which they are " held " in awareness.

> Even

> > a " stream of thougts " must as a whole be held in awareness in order

> to

> > be " seen " in relation to the context of memory to give the whole

> > stream a coherent meaning.

> >

> > Direct introspective observation reveals that this " holding " of

> > thouhts in awareness requires effort. This means that it requires a

> > subtle struggle to hold thoughts in awareness, while awareness

> itself

> > seems to be effortless, and maybe we could even say that awareness

> IS

> > the present moment. So awareness is probably effortless, while

> > thoughts require effort. This insight should make it possible for

> the

> > mind to rest effortlessly in awareness, while thoughts, the whole

> > structure and holding mechanism of thought, just melt away.

> >

> > How about that for a new kind of meditation?! :)))

> >

> > al.

> >========================

> If the words make you LAUGH

> then you are Awake: you are not the words but the Laughter.

> -- laughs

 

 

Hmm... Ok. :) Although I must admit that I take the words I wrote a

little bit serious. I will practice this method myself for a while and

see if it will give the effect I want. Just imagine melting down the

whole thought-structure! That's the whole ego and all the attached

emotions and memories and so on in a single meltdown. If it works, I

can write a book about this method and make a lot of dollare$. Hehe.

:)))) The title of the book could be: " Mental Meltdown " , ... maybe

not. that sounds like a severe psychological disorder or something.

How about: " Thinking Down " ... nope, sounds like a depression. I know:

" Thoughtless Mind " ... arrrgh! too much psychopath connotation. Well,

anyway, first I have to see if the method really works...

 

al.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

<anders_lindman> wrote:

> Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 "

> <dennis_travis33> wrote:

> > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > > Nisargadatta , " Era " <n0ndual@w...> wrote:

> > > > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > > > > Is it possible to be aware directly, without awareness

first

> > getting

> > > > > trapped in thought?

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Yes,

> > > >

> > > > I heard, that right after one wakes up and before the world

arises

> > > in the consciousness there is that moment.. of pure awareness

> > without

> > > object..

> > > >

> > > > Or in the gap between two thoughts.

> > > >

> > > > There is Ramana's Self.. to be found in there..

> > > >

> > > > Era

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > .

> > >

> > >

> > > J. Krishnamurti called it meditation, I think. Not meditation

as in

> > > some kind of practice or method, but a state of meditation.

This

> > state

> > > is not without objects. As I understand it, meditation in this

sense

> > > is to be aware of all that is going on in a conflictless way.

> > >

> > > al.

> >

> > ...meditation is loosing body sense....

> > just like the state of deep sleep....

> > but meditation let one " experience " it in being awake....

> >

> > a quite mind is necessary to meditate....to enter in

meditation....

> >

> > ...the " world " appear in it's " conflicts " only....when there is

no

> > meditation....no quite mind....

> >

> > consciousness is transformed.....

> > attitudes change....

> > " views " change...

> > love is growing...

> > knowledge is becoming more pure....

> >

> > ...and all this happen...in awareness of a spiritual soul....

> > which " see " Oneness in all...

> >

> > Oneness of all souls....

> >

> > Regards

> >

> > Marc

>

>

> JK used the word meditation in his own way. I don't think he meant

> that in meditation one loses body sense or thinking. In meditation

> thought is used when needed, but not all the time as in people's

> usually state of being.

>

> al.

 

....seem that there are many different " views " about " meditation " ...

i believe that (nearly) all have in common...that there have to be a

quite mind....to meditate

a restless mind (thoughts) can't realy enter in meditation....

 

yes....meditation is not an " usual state of being " ....i agree

 

your definition let me think about a kind of " meditative state of

mind " .....

 

i remember one definition of Osho about meditation:

" meditation is a (very) quick waking up "

 

this " waking up " description concerning meditation is, i believe, an

interesting point of view

 

indead...it's necessary to " pass " all the sense organs and related

(dream-world) perceptions....means detach from even body and (ego)

mind.....to just Be....what one Is

 

after a deep meditation...sometimes....it's even difficult to talk

few words.....the mind is completely absorbed in

Consciousness.....and nothing anymore else...and even no thoughts at

all

 

the effect of " meditation " go deep....maybe it could be compared with

a " cleaning of (individual) soul "

 

if your soul is " clean " .....means no more " individual " ....

filled up with light and love......constantly....and

permanent.....means realized

then sure....meditation techniques are not necessary

 

wish a good " cleaning up " ....:)

 

 

Regards and love

 

Marc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anders,

 

JK never said such nonsense. It is your personal trip that awareness

is the active entity, that you are awareness. And you don't want to

let go that crap.

 

And so you only read what you want to see and the result is that you

thoroughly misunderstood JK.

 

Same with meditation:

 

For JK meditation is something one IS and not someting one DOES in

order to reach a desired result like a quiet mind.

 

Werner

 

 

Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

<anders_lindman> wrote:

>

> I see what you mean. J. Krishnamurti said that awareness could use

> thought, knowledge and memory. But first one must enter that state.

> Otherwise one would just keep on going round and round in thought,

as

> you say. K said that an " insight " is needed into the whole structure

> of thought.

>

> al.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

exactly W,

 

I Am is the meditation, a life-long

projection....

 

;-)

ar

-

Werner Woehr

Nisargadatta

Tuesday, October 04, 2005 5:20 AM

Re: Direct Awareness

 

 

Anders,

 

JK never said such nonsense. It is your personal trip that awareness

is the active entity, that you are awareness. And you don't want to

let go that crap.

 

And so you only read what you want to see and the result is that you

thoroughly misunderstood JK.

 

Same with meditation:

 

For JK meditation is something one IS and not someting one DOES in

order to reach a desired result like a quiet mind.

 

Werner

 

 

Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

<anders_lindman> wrote:

>

> I see what you mean. J. Krishnamurti said that awareness could use

> thought, knowledge and memory. But first one must enter that state.

> Otherwise one would just keep on going round and round in thought,

as

> you say. K said that an " insight " is needed into the whole structure

> of thought.

>

> al.

 

 

 

 

**

 

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.

 

 

 

 

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...