Guest guest Posted October 20, 2005 Report Share Posted October 20, 2005 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> wrote: > > AC, > > Who is that knower ? > > Can one know something which is totally new, or is knowing just > recalling the already known ? The already known is that which was > previously stored into memory. > > Isn't therefore the knower the already known ? Can there be a knower > without anything known ? > > Does a baby know the sky, the flowers and trees ? > > Werner Hi Werner, I think... Ramana describes it very succinctly. Let me just quote him and see if it answers your questions. If not... maybe, we can try to discuss it a little. With warm regards, ac. Ramana ======= ..... 10. Ordinary knowledge is always accompanied by ignorance, and ignorance by knowledge; the only true Knowledge is that by which one knows the Self through enquiring whose is the knowledge and ignorance. 11. Is it not, rather, ignorance to know all else without knowing oneself, the knower? As soon as one knows the Self, which is the substratum of knowledge and ignorance, knowledge and ignorance perish. 12. That alone is true Knowledge which is neither knowledge nor ignorance. What is known is not true Knowledge. Since the Self shines with nothing else to know or to make known, It alone is Knowledge. It is not a void. ..... 7. Although the world and knowledge thereof rise and set together it is by knowledge alone that the world is made apparent. That Perfection wherein the world and knowledge thereof rise and set, and which shines without rising and setting, is alone the Reality. ..... 9. The duality of subject and object and trinity of seer, sight, and seen can exist only if supported by the One. If one turns inward in search of that One Reality they fall away. Those who see this are those who see Wisdom. They are never in doubt. ...... D.: I don't know. M.: You know that you don't know. That knowing is Knowledge. ..... D.: What is that one thing, knowing which all doubts are solved? M: Know the doubter. If the doubter be held, the doubts will not arise. Here the doubter is transcendent. Again when the doubter. ceases to exist, there will be no doubts arising. From where will they arise? All are jnanis, jivanmuktas. Only they are not aware of the fact. Doubts must be uprooted. This means that the doubter must be uprooted. Here the doubter is the mind. ...... D.: Emerson says, " Soul answers soul by itself - not by description or words. " . M: Quite so. ,However much you learn, there will be no bonds to knowledge. You ignore the doubter but try to solve the doubts. On the other hand, hold on to the ...... Disciple: How is one to realize the Self? Maharshi: Whose Self? Find out. D. I don't know how. M. Just think over the question. WHO is it that says " I Don't Know? " WHO is the 'I' in your statement? What Is NOT Known? ...... D: However much I may try, I do not seem to catch the 'I'. It is not even clearly discernible. M: WHO is it that say that the 'I' is not discernible? Are there TWO 'I's in you that one is not discernible by the other? ....... D.: This 'I-thought' rises from me. But I do not know the Self. M: All these are only mental concepts. You are now identifying yourself with a wrong 'I', which is the 'I-thought'. This 'I-thought' rises and sinks, whereas the true significance of 'I' is beyond both. There cannot be a break in your being. You, who slept, are also now awake. There was not unhappiness in your deep sleep. Whereas it , exists now. What is it that has happened now so that this difference is experienced? There was no 'I-thought' in your sleep, whereas it is present now. The true 'I' is not apparent and the false 'I' is parading itself. This false 'I' is the obstacle to your right knowledge. Find out wherefrom this false 'I' arises. Then it will disappear. You will 'be only what you are - i.e., absolute Being. D.: How to do it? I have not succeeded so far. M: Search for the source of the 'I- thought'. That is all that one has to do. The universe exists on account of the 'I-thought'. If that ends there is an end of misery also. The false 'I' will end only when its source is sought. ..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 20, 2005 Report Share Posted October 20, 2005 Ac, What Ramana said isn't of any interest. Can't you answer my question using your own mind ? Werner Nisargadatta , " adithya_comming " <adithya_comming> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> > wrote: > > > > AC, > > > > Who is that knower ? > > > > Can one know something which is totally new, or is knowing just > > recalling the already known ? The already known is that which was > > previously stored into memory. > > > > Isn't therefore the knower the already known ? Can there be a > knower > > without anything known ? > > > > Does a baby know the sky, the flowers and trees ? > > > > Werner > > > Hi Werner, > > I think... Ramana describes it very > succinctly. Let me just quote him and > see if it answers your questions. > > If not... maybe, we can try to discuss > it a little. > > > With warm regards, > ac. > > > Ramana > ======= > > > .... > > > 10. Ordinary knowledge is always > accompanied by ignorance, and ignorance > by knowledge; the only true Knowledge > is that by which one knows the Self > through enquiring whose is the > knowledge and ignorance. > > > 11. Is it not, rather, ignorance to > know all else without knowing oneself, > the knower? As soon as one knows the > Self, which is the substratum of > knowledge and ignorance, knowledge and > ignorance perish. > > > > 12. That alone is true Knowledge which > is neither knowledge nor ignorance. > What is known is not true Knowledge. > Since the Self shines with nothing else > to know or to make known, It alone is > Knowledge. It is not a void. > > > .... > > > 7. Although the world and knowledge > thereof rise and set together it is by > knowledge alone that the world is made > apparent. That Perfection wherein the > world and knowledge thereof rise and > set, and which shines without rising > and setting, is alone the Reality. > > > .... > > > 9. The duality of subject and object > and trinity of seer, sight, and seen > can exist only if supported by the One. > If one turns inward in search of that > One Reality they fall away. Those who > see this are those who see Wisdom. They > are never in doubt. > > > ..... > > > D.: I don't know. > M.: You know that you don't know. That > knowing is Knowledge. > > .... > > > D.: What is that one thing, knowing > which all doubts are solved? > > M: Know the doubter. If the doubter be > held, the doubts will not arise. Here > the doubter is transcendent. Again when > the doubter. ceases to exist, there > will be no doubts arising. From where > will they arise? All are jnanis, > jivanmuktas. Only they are not aware of > the fact. Doubts must be uprooted. This > means that the doubter must be uprooted. > > Here the doubter is the mind. > > ..... > > > D.: Emerson says, " Soul answers soul > by itself - not by description or > words. " . > M: Quite so. ,However much you learn, > there will be no bonds to knowledge. > You ignore the doubter but try to solve > the doubts. On the other hand, hold on > to the > > ..... > > > Disciple: How is one to realize the > Self? > Maharshi: Whose Self? Find out. > > D. I don't know how. > M. Just think over the question. WHO > is it that says " I Don't Know? " WHO is > the 'I' in your statement? What Is NOT > Known? > > > ..... > > D: However much I may try, I do not > seem to catch the 'I'. It is not even > clearly discernible. > M: WHO is it that say that the 'I' is > not discernible? > Are there TWO 'I's in you that one is > not discernible by the other? > > ...... > > D.: This 'I-thought' rises from me. > But I do not know the Self. > M: All these are only mental concepts. > You are now identifying yourself with a > wrong 'I', which is the 'I-thought'. > This 'I-thought' rises and sinks, > whereas the true significance of 'I' is > beyond both. > > There cannot be a break in your being. > You, who slept, are also now awake. > There was not unhappiness in your deep > sleep. Whereas it , exists now. What is > it that has happened now so that this > difference is experienced? There was no > 'I-thought' in your sleep, whereas it > is present now. The true 'I' is not > apparent and the false 'I' is parading > itself. This false 'I' is the obstacle > to your right knowledge. Find out > wherefrom this false 'I' arises. Then > it will disappear. You will 'be only > what you are - i.e., absolute Being. > > D.: How to do it? I have not succeeded > so far. > > M: Search for the source of the 'I- > thought'. That is all that one has to > do. The universe exists on account of > the 'I-thought'. If that ends there is > an end of misery also. The false 'I' > will end only when its source is sought. > > .... > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 20, 2005 Report Share Posted October 20, 2005 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> wrote: > > Ac, > > What Ramana said isn't of any interest. > > Can't you answer my question using your own mind ? > > Werner Sure... I surely can [now, whether it is the answer that you like and agree with or not is something that I can really predict or control.] You are THAT... which Knows! You are THAT... which doesn't Know! Knowing and 'not knowing' is essentially SAME Thing! It is two ways of looking at the same thing, by... the same Thing [the mind]. .... The Silence, the Effortlessness, the No-Mind, the What Is [before emergence of the mind] neither claims to Know... not, it claims to 'not know'! In deep sleep, there is no knowledge, but, there is No Ignorance either! Knowledge and ignorance both belongs to the mind. Knowledge is 'always'... a partial knowledge. Ignorance too is a partial knowledge. At minimum it claims to 'know' that there is 'something' that... it doesn't know. ..... All the claims and 'efforts' belong to the ego and mind including the determination of whether it knows or not. The Self [source of the mind] is not concerned with any questions and answers. It neither asks nor answers. The effortlessness is Prior to [and Beyond] any knowledge and ignorance... Some called it perfection... Some called it Reality... Some simply called it effortlessness, Ease and Peace! ....That which also exists in Silence... that which exists in Deep Sleep! ..... I can't claim to know what a ... " child really knows " . I am Not a Child, I can't get into the mind of a child and I myself don't have much memory of what I really knew/thought when I was a small child. But, if we assume that a child operates from pure consciousness, ....intelligence that is prior to the mind and ego. Then, a child neither knows the sky... not it doesn't know the sky! In that state... it simply doesn't care... Sky IS... Child IS... Rainbow IS... the Dog IS.... ....and, that is More than Enough! But, when a child starts asking questions about " why the sky is blue " - it already has a working mind and it is just an 'Adult in Making'! With warm regards, ac. > > > Nisargadatta , " adithya_comming " > <adithya_comming> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> > > wrote: > > > > > > AC, > > > > > > Who is that knower ? > > > > > > Can one know something which is totally new, or is knowing just > > > recalling the already known ? The already known is that which was > > > previously stored into memory. > > > > > > Isn't therefore the knower the already known ? Can there be a > > knower > > > without anything known ? > > > > > > Does a baby know the sky, the flowers and trees ? > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > Hi Werner, > > > > I think... Ramana describes it very > > succinctly. Let me just quote him and > > see if it answers your questions. > > > > If not... maybe, we can try to discuss > > it a little. > > > > > > With warm regards, > > ac. > > > > > > Ramana > > ======= > > > > > > .... > > > > > > 10. Ordinary knowledge is always > > accompanied by ignorance, and ignorance > > by knowledge; the only true Knowledge > > is that by which one knows the Self > > through enquiring whose is the > > knowledge and ignorance. > > > > > > 11. Is it not, rather, ignorance to > > know all else without knowing oneself, > > the knower? As soon as one knows the > > Self, which is the substratum of > > knowledge and ignorance, knowledge and > > ignorance perish. > > > > > > > > 12. That alone is true Knowledge which > > is neither knowledge nor ignorance. > > What is known is not true Knowledge. > > Since the Self shines with nothing else > > to know or to make known, It alone is > > Knowledge. It is not a void. > > > > > > .... > > > > > > 7. Although the world and knowledge > > thereof rise and set together it is by > > knowledge alone that the world is made > > apparent. That Perfection wherein the > > world and knowledge thereof rise and > > set, and which shines without rising > > and setting, is alone the Reality. > > > > > > .... > > > > > > 9. The duality of subject and object > > and trinity of seer, sight, and seen > > can exist only if supported by the One. > > If one turns inward in search of that > > One Reality they fall away. Those who > > see this are those who see Wisdom. They > > are never in doubt. > > > > > > ..... > > > > > > D.: I don't know. > > M.: You know that you don't know. That > > knowing is Knowledge. > > > > .... > > > > > > D.: What is that one thing, knowing > > which all doubts are solved? > > > > M: Know the doubter. If the doubter be > > held, the doubts will not arise. Here > > the doubter is transcendent. Again when > > the doubter. ceases to exist, there > > will be no doubts arising. From where > > will they arise? All are jnanis, > > jivanmuktas. Only they are not aware of > > the fact. Doubts must be uprooted. This > > means that the doubter must be uprooted. > > > > Here the doubter is the mind. > > > > ..... > > > > > > D.: Emerson says, " Soul answers soul > > by itself - not by description or > > words. " . > > M: Quite so. ,However much you learn, > > there will be no bonds to knowledge. > > You ignore the doubter but try to solve > > the doubts. On the other hand, hold on > > to the > > > > ..... > > > > > > Disciple: How is one to realize the > > Self? > > Maharshi: Whose Self? Find out. > > > > D. I don't know how. > > M. Just think over the question. WHO > > is it that says " I Don't Know? " WHO is > > the 'I' in your statement? What Is NOT > > Known? > > > > > > ..... > > > > D: However much I may try, I do not > > seem to catch the 'I'. It is not even > > clearly discernible. > > M: WHO is it that say that the 'I' is > > not discernible? > > Are there TWO 'I's in you that one is > > not discernible by the other? > > > > ...... > > > > D.: This 'I-thought' rises from me. > > But I do not know the Self. > > M: All these are only mental concepts. > > You are now identifying yourself with a > > wrong 'I', which is the 'I-thought'. > > This 'I-thought' rises and sinks, > > whereas the true significance of 'I' is > > beyond both. > > > > There cannot be a break in your being. > > You, who slept, are also now awake. > > There was not unhappiness in your deep > > sleep. Whereas it , exists now. What is > > it that has happened now so that this > > difference is experienced? There was no > > 'I-thought' in your sleep, whereas it > > is present now. The true 'I' is not > > apparent and the false 'I' is parading > > itself. This false 'I' is the obstacle > > to your right knowledge. Find out > > wherefrom this false 'I' arises. Then > > it will disappear. You will 'be only > > what you are - i.e., absolute Being. > > > > D.: How to do it? I have not succeeded > > so far. > > > > M: Search for the source of the 'I- > > thought'. That is all that one has to > > do. The universe exists on account of > > the 'I-thought'. If that ends there is > > an end of misery also. The false 'I' > > will end only when its source is sought. > > > > .... > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 20, 2005 Report Share Posted October 20, 2005 AC, Well, sounds all very cryptic and mystical and VERY VERY " spiritual " . It gives you a real fine touch of mystification but I would call it just blabla ... The " deep sleep " thingy originating in Ramana was often repeated by his followers and admirers. But for me it is nonsense - it rather seems Ramana never really was in deep sleep and therefore got the impression that there is still awareness alive. The Self you mentioned, and I am sure you have read a lot about it and you can tell a lot of what you have read, but it too is just words and not the least worth to have it mentioned. The Self, God, Brahman, Awareness, the Absolute, THAT and THIS, etc, etc, are all romantic bubbles, not worth a cent. When you mind is quiet all those are gone and you are left alone with that you are. Werner Nisargadatta , " adithya_comming " <adithya_comming> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> > wrote: > > > > Ac, > > > > What Ramana said isn't of any interest. > > > > Can't you answer my question using your own mind ? > > > > Werner > > Sure... > > I surely can [now, whether it is the > answer that you like and agree with or > not is something that I can really > predict or control.] > > You are THAT... which Knows! > > You are THAT... which doesn't Know! > > > Knowing and 'not knowing' is > essentially SAME Thing! > > It is two ways of looking at the same > thing, by... the same Thing [the mind]. > > > ... > > > The Silence, the Effortlessness, the > No-Mind, the What Is [before emergence > of the mind] neither claims to Know... > not, it claims to 'not know'! > > In deep sleep, there is no knowledge, > but, there is No Ignorance either! > > Knowledge and ignorance both belongs > to the mind. > > Knowledge is 'always'... a partial > knowledge. > > Ignorance too is a partial knowledge. > At minimum it claims to 'know' that > there is 'something' that... it doesn't > know. > > .... > > > > > All the claims and 'efforts' belong to > the ego and mind including the > determination of whether it knows or not. > > The Self [source of the mind] is not > concerned with any questions and > answers. It neither asks nor answers. > > The effortlessness is Prior to [and > Beyond] any knowledge and ignorance... > > > Some called it perfection... > > Some called it Reality... > > > Some simply called it effortlessness, > Ease and Peace! > > ...That which also exists in > Silence... that which exists in Deep Sleep! > > > .... > > > I can't claim to know what a ... " child > really knows " . > > I am Not a Child, I can't get into the > mind of a child and I myself don't have > much memory of what I really > knew/thought when I was a small child. > > But, if we assume that a child > operates from pure consciousness, > ...intelligence that is prior to the > mind and ego. > > Then, a child neither knows the sky... > not it doesn't know the sky! > > In that state... it simply doesn't > care... > > Sky IS... > > Child IS... > > Rainbow IS... > > the Dog IS.... > > > ...and, that is More than Enough! > > > But, when a child starts asking > questions about " why the sky is blue " - > it already has a working mind and it is > just an 'Adult in Making'! > > > With warm regards, > ac. > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " adithya_comming " > > <adithya_comming> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " > <wwoehr@p...> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > AC, > > > > > > > > Who is that knower ? > > > > > > > > Can one know something which is totally new, or is knowing > just > > > > recalling the already known ? The already known is that which > was > > > > previously stored into memory. > > > > > > > > Isn't therefore the knower the already known ? Can there be a > > > knower > > > > without anything known ? > > > > > > > > Does a baby know the sky, the flowers and trees ? > > > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > > Hi Werner, > > > > > > I think... Ramana describes it very > > > succinctly. Let me just quote him and > > > see if it answers your questions. > > > > > > If not... maybe, we can try to discuss > > > it a little. > > > > > > > > > With warm regards, > > > ac. > > > > > > > > > Ramana > > > ======= > > > > > > > > > .... > > > > > > > > > 10. Ordinary knowledge is always > > > accompanied by ignorance, and ignorance > > > by knowledge; the only true Knowledge > > > is that by which one knows the Self > > > through enquiring whose is the > > > knowledge and ignorance. > > > > > > > > > 11. Is it not, rather, ignorance to > > > know all else without knowing oneself, > > > the knower? As soon as one knows the > > > Self, which is the substratum of > > > knowledge and ignorance, knowledge and > > > ignorance perish. > > > > > > > > > > > > 12. That alone is true Knowledge which > > > is neither knowledge nor ignorance. > > > What is known is not true Knowledge. > > > Since the Self shines with nothing else > > > to know or to make known, It alone is > > > Knowledge. It is not a void. > > > > > > > > > .... > > > > > > > > > 7. Although the world and knowledge > > > thereof rise and set together it is by > > > knowledge alone that the world is made > > > apparent. That Perfection wherein the > > > world and knowledge thereof rise and > > > set, and which shines without rising > > > and setting, is alone the Reality. > > > > > > > > > .... > > > > > > > > > 9. The duality of subject and object > > > and trinity of seer, sight, and seen > > > can exist only if supported by the One. > > > If one turns inward in search of that > > > One Reality they fall away. Those who > > > see this are those who see Wisdom. They > > > are never in doubt. > > > > > > > > > ..... > > > > > > > > > D.: I don't know. > > > M.: You know that you don't know. That > > > knowing is Knowledge. > > > > > > .... > > > > > > > > > D.: What is that one thing, knowing > > > which all doubts are solved? > > > > > > M: Know the doubter. If the doubter be > > > held, the doubts will not arise. Here > > > the doubter is transcendent. Again when > > > the doubter. ceases to exist, there > > > will be no doubts arising. From where > > > will they arise? All are jnanis, > > > jivanmuktas. Only they are not aware of > > > the fact. Doubts must be uprooted. This > > > means that the doubter must be uprooted. > > > > > > Here the doubter is the mind. > > > > > > ..... > > > > > > > > > D.: Emerson says, " Soul answers soul > > > by itself - not by description or > > > words. " . > > > M: Quite so. ,However much you learn, > > > there will be no bonds to knowledge. > > > You ignore the doubter but try to solve > > > the doubts. On the other hand, hold on > > > to the > > > > > > ..... > > > > > > > > > Disciple: How is one to realize the > > > Self? > > > Maharshi: Whose Self? Find out. > > > > > > D. I don't know how. > > > M. Just think over the question. WHO > > > is it that says " I Don't Know? " WHO is > > > the 'I' in your statement? What Is NOT > > > Known? > > > > > > > > > ..... > > > > > > D: However much I may try, I do not > > > seem to catch the 'I'. It is not even > > > clearly discernible. > > > M: WHO is it that say that the 'I' is > > > not discernible? > > > Are there TWO 'I's in you that one is > > > not discernible by the other? > > > > > > ...... > > > > > > D.: This 'I-thought' rises from me. > > > But I do not know the Self. > > > M: All these are only mental concepts. > > > You are now identifying yourself with a > > > wrong 'I', which is the 'I-thought'. > > > This 'I-thought' rises and sinks, > > > whereas the true significance of 'I' is > > > beyond both. > > > > > > There cannot be a break in your being. > > > You, who slept, are also now awake. > > > There was not unhappiness in your deep > > > sleep. Whereas it , exists now. What is > > > it that has happened now so that this > > > difference is experienced? There was no > > > 'I-thought' in your sleep, whereas it > > > is present now. The true 'I' is not > > > apparent and the false 'I' is parading > > > itself. This false 'I' is the obstacle > > > to your right knowledge. Find out > > > wherefrom this false 'I' arises. Then > > > it will disappear. You will 'be only > > > what you are - i.e., absolute Being. > > > > > > D.: How to do it? I have not succeeded > > > so far. > > > > > > M: Search for the source of the 'I- > > > thought'. That is all that one has to > > > do. The universe exists on account of > > > the 'I-thought'. If that ends there is > > > an end of misery also. The false 'I' > > > will end only when its source is sought. > > > > > > .... > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 20, 2005 Report Share Posted October 20, 2005 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> wrote: > > AC, > > Well, sounds all very cryptic and mystical and VERY VERY " spiritual " . > It gives you a real fine touch of mystification but I would call it > just blabla ... > > The " deep sleep " thingy originating in Ramana was often repeated by > his followers and admirers. But for me it is nonsense - it rather > seems Ramana never really was in deep sleep and therefore got the > impression that there is still awareness alive. > > The Self you mentioned, and I am sure you have read a lot about it > and you can tell a lot of what you have read, but it too is just > words and not the least worth to have it mentioned. > > The Self, God, Brahman, Awareness, the Absolute, THAT and THIS, etc, > etc, are all romantic bubbles, not worth a cent. > > When you mind is quiet all those are gone and you are left alone with > that you are. And, what is... THAT? > > Werner > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 20, 2005 Report Share Posted October 20, 2005 Strange question, AC, THAT is what you have read about it and with which you can impress others not that well read and literate as you are. Werner Nisargadatta , " adithya_comming " <adithya_comming> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> > wrote: > > > > AC, > > > > Well, sounds all very cryptic and mystical and VERY > VERY " spiritual " . > > It gives you a real fine touch of mystification but I would call > it > > just blabla ... > > > > The " deep sleep " thingy originating in Ramana was often repeated > by > > his followers and admirers. But for me it is nonsense - it rather > > seems Ramana never really was in deep sleep and therefore got the > > impression that there is still awareness alive. > > > > The Self you mentioned, and I am sure you have read a lot about it > > and you can tell a lot of what you have read, but it too is just > > words and not the least worth to have it mentioned. > > > > The Self, God, Brahman, Awareness, the Absolute, THAT and THIS, > etc, > > etc, are all romantic bubbles, not worth a cent. > > > > When you mind is quiet all those are gone and you are left alone > with > > that you are. > > > And, what is... THAT? > > > > > > > Werner > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 21, 2005 Report Share Posted October 21, 2005 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> wrote: > > Strange question, AC, > > THAT is what you have read about it and with which you can impress > others not that well read and literate as you are. > > Werner > And, you unfortunately are acting like IDIOT, Werner! [which, I am sure... is Not the first time]. First, you ask a question and then in place of countering the answer or points mentioned therein... you choose the easy and often-used route of terming it as " just words " , " hoopla " , 'blah blah'... 'what someone has read'. Doing that is of course, very convenient and it requires NO intelligence! In fact, you don't even need to read any message or any word... to respond in this way. You can pretty much say that about anything you want - without even having to read any of IT! .... You mention... >> " When you mind is quiet all those are gone and you are left alone with that you are. " Is not Self just a 'word' used to describe... " what you really are " , Werner! Kind of like a 'sort hand' notation in place of writing... " what, you really are " each Time? That's what is meant by the question, dear Werner? ..... > > Nisargadatta , " adithya_comming " > <adithya_comming> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> > > wrote: > > > > > > AC, > > > > > > Well, sounds all very cryptic and mystical and VERY > > VERY " spiritual " . > > > It gives you a real fine touch of mystification but I would call > > it > > > just blabla ... > > > > > > The " deep sleep " thingy originating in Ramana was often repeated > > by > > > his followers and admirers. But for me it is nonsense - it rather > > > seems Ramana never really was in deep sleep and therefore got the > > > impression that there is still awareness alive. > > > > > > The Self you mentioned, and I am sure you have read a lot about > it > > > and you can tell a lot of what you have read, but it too is just > > > words and not the least worth to have it mentioned. > > > > > > The Self, God, Brahman, Awareness, the Absolute, THAT and THIS, > > etc, > > > etc, are all romantic bubbles, not worth a cent. > > > > > > When you mind is quiet all those are gone and you are left alone > > with > > > that you are. > > > > > > And, what is... THAT? > > > > > > > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 21, 2005 Report Share Posted October 21, 2005 LOL, Thanks AC, for getting a real life. Now we have got a comman base to communicate on. All other is just bragging and self-importance, isn't it ? And there from one has to start and not from all those spiritual crap one uses to decorate one's self-image. Here we are, welcome. Werner Nisargadatta , " adithya_comming " <adithya_comming> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> > wrote: > > > > Strange question, AC, > > > > THAT is what you have read about it and with which you can impress > > others not that well read and literate as you are. > > > > Werner > > > > And, you unfortunately are acting like > IDIOT, Werner! [which, I am sure... is > Not the first time]. > > First, you ask a question and then in > place of countering the answer or > points mentioned therein... you choose > the easy and often-used route of > terming it as " just words " , " hoopla " , > 'blah blah'... 'what someone has read'. > Doing that is of course, very > convenient and it requires NO > intelligence! > > In fact, you don't even > need to read any message or any word... > to respond in this way. You can pretty > much say that about anything you want - > without even having to read any of IT! > > > ... > > > You mention... > > >> " When you mind is quiet all those > are gone and you are left alone > with that you are. " > > > Is not Self just a 'word' used to > describe... " what you really are " , > Werner! > > Kind of like a 'sort hand' > notation in place of writing... " what, > you really are " each Time? > > > That's what is meant by the question, > dear Werner? > > > .... > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " adithya_comming " > > <adithya_comming> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " > <wwoehr@p...> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > AC, > > > > > > > > Well, sounds all very cryptic and mystical and VERY > > > VERY " spiritual " . > > > > It gives you a real fine touch of mystification but I would > call > > > it > > > > just blabla ... > > > > > > > > The " deep sleep " thingy originating in Ramana was often > repeated > > > by > > > > his followers and admirers. But for me it is nonsense - it > rather > > > > seems Ramana never really was in deep sleep and therefore got > the > > > > impression that there is still awareness alive. > > > > > > > > The Self you mentioned, and I am sure you have read a lot > about > > it > > > > and you can tell a lot of what you have read, but it too is > just > > > > words and not the least worth to have it mentioned. > > > > > > > > The Self, God, Brahman, Awareness, the Absolute, THAT and > THIS, > > > etc, > > > > etc, are all romantic bubbles, not worth a cent. > > > > > > > > When you mind is quiet all those are gone and you are left > alone > > > with > > > > that you are. > > > > > > > > > And, what is... THAT? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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.