Guest guest Posted December 26, 2005 Report Share Posted December 26, 2005 " billrishel " <illieusion Re: The Jar, the Ground, and the Unqualified State (was: The Mind and The Though However, the " condition " I called preoccupation can dissolve. How that happens is utterly mysterious. There is no recipe, there is no " how " . Nor is there a " why " or a " when " . This is an interesting topic, to me at least. I don't pretend to have the answer but I get glimpses of this 'process' that tells me it may not be as mysterious as many say. Clearly, Truth cannot be found in the illusion; cannot be found with mind anywhere. Since Truth is noticed within consciousness when mind gets out of the way, the destiny of mind would seem to be to learn how to get out of the way. This is, in effect, the entire spiritual process. We recognize that there's no independent volition in the human mind, and so whatever process might be going on is occurring automatically. Given that, we can notice that the mind doesn't get out of the way based on our human choices. Choice is an illusion. We don't choose what to believe. We don't choose to accept or surrender, and we don't choose to stop thinking. Pretending that we can choose these things is likely to prolong the 'process'. Since we can't choose to get out of the way, how does this actually come about? It seems to me that we learn to surrender struggle as it becomes clear through our experience that struggle sucks, isn't necessary and seems to bring on more struggle. There are many seeming levels of surrender/acceptance/allowing that each have their own context and content and come about through their own unique understandings that all seem to involve the mind along with our perception/experience. We believe only what seems to be true to us. Exploring and challenging our beliefs brings about more expansive understandings which can allow us to release some of our more constricting conceptualizations. The mind thinks because we believe we need to in order to fulfill our desires. As we slowly become convinced that the mind is the problem rather than the solution, we feel less and less need to think and therefore experience greater peace. The final step is releasing the mind all together, which contains our sense of individual self. One must love Truth more than life itself before this is likely to occur. Anyhoo, to me, that process doesn't seem all that mysterious. Phil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 27, 2005 Report Share Posted December 27, 2005 Nisargadatta , ADHHUB@A... wrote: > > > " billrishel " <illieusion@h...> > Re: The Jar, the Ground, and the Unqualified State (was: The Mind > and The Though > > However, the " condition " I called preoccupation > can dissolve. How that happens is utterly mysterious. > There is no recipe, there is no " how " . Nor is there > a " why " or a " when " . > > > > > This is an interesting topic, to me at least. I don't pretend to have the > answer but I get glimpses of this 'process' that tells me it may not be as > mysterious as many say. > > Clearly, Truth cannot be found in the illusion; cannot be found with mind > anywhere. Since Truth is noticed within consciousness when mind gets out of the > way, the destiny of mind would seem to be to learn how to get out of the > way. This is, in effect, the entire spiritual process. > > We recognize that there's no independent volition in the human mind, and so > whatever process might be going on is occurring automatically. Given that, we > can notice that the mind doesn't get out of the way based on our human > choices. Choice is an illusion. We don't choose what to believe. We don't choose to > accept or surrender, and we don't choose to stop thinking. Pretending that > we can choose these things is likely to prolong the 'process'. > > Since we can't choose to get out of the way, how does this actually come > about? It seems to me that we learn to surrender struggle as it becomes clear > through our experience that struggle sucks, isn't necessary and seems to bring > on more struggle. There are many seeming levels of > surrender/acceptance/allowing that each have their own context and content and come about through their > own unique understandings that all seem to involve the mind along with our > perception/experience. > > We believe only what seems to be true to us. Exploring and challenging our > beliefs brings about more expansive understandings which can allow us to > release some of our more constricting conceptualizations. > > The mind thinks because we believe we need to in order to fulfill our > desires. As we slowly become convinced that the mind is the problem rather than the > solution, we feel less and less need to think and therefore experience > greater peace. The final step is releasing the mind all together, which contains > our sense of individual self. One must love Truth more than life itself before > this is likely to occur. > > Anyhoo, to me, that process doesn't seem all that mysterious. > > Phil > > > >...maybe that process is as mysterious as the love one can feel.... the One love doesn't seem to be that mysterious.... to be inside this world-movie.....let one constantly move around..... fullfilling the play-role one is dreaming to have.....like all " others " ..... to step out of the world-movie.....let one finally enjoy the " whole " movie play.....without having any role to play...... then there is even the choice....to switch-on .....the movie....or switch-off the movie.... greetings Marc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 27, 2005 Report Share Posted December 27, 2005 > However, the " condition " I called preoccupation can > dissolve. How that happens is utterly mysterious. There is > no recipe, there is no " how " . Nor is there a " why " or a > " when " . > >>>>>> > > This is an interesting topic, to me at least. I don't > pretend to have the answer but I get glimpses of this > 'process' that tells me it may not be as mysterious as many > say. > > Clearly, Truth cannot be found in the illusion; cannot be > found with mind anywhere. Since Truth is noticed within > consciousness when mind gets out of the way, the destiny of > mind would seem to be to learn how to get out of the way. > This is, in effect, the entire spiritual process. yes > We recognize that there's no independent volition in the > human mind, and so whatever process might be going on is > occurring automatically. Given that, we can notice that the > mind doesn't get out of the way based on our human choices. > Choice is an illusion. We don't choose what to believe. We > don't choose to accept or surrender, and we don't choose to > stop thinking. Pretending that we can choose these things is > likely to prolong the 'process'. Do we ever stop thinking? If you lose your car keys then it makes perfect sense to think what you did with them. What I think you are actually referring to is the end of thinking how to get out of the angst box. > Since we can't choose to get out of the way, how does this > actually come about? It seems to me that we learn to > surrender struggle as it becomes clear through our > experience that struggle sucks, isn't necessary and seems to > bring on more struggle. There are many seeming levels of > surrender/acceptance/allowing that each have their own > context and content and come about through their own unique > understandings that all seem to involve the mind along with > our perception/experience. > > We believe only what seems to be true to us. Exploring and > challenging our beliefs brings about more expansive > understandings which can allow us to release some of our > more constricting conceptualizations. > > The mind thinks because we believe we need to in order to > fulfill our desires. As we slowly become convinced that the > mind is the problem rather than the solution, we feel less > and less need to think and therefore experience greater > peace. The final step is releasing the mind all together, > which contains our sense of individual self. One must love > Truth more than life itself before this is likely to occur. > > Anyhoo, to me, that process doesn't seem all that > mysterious. Mysterious in the sense that it cannot be explained how, when, why it happens. It is a common reflex in many western cultures, certainly the US, to wonder " how? " in response to any perceived problem. If the angst box is a perceived problem, then how-to-get-out is a common/typical reflex. To say there is no " how " , that it is mysterious, is a way of saying to the mind: forgedaboutit! Bill > Phil > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 27, 2005 Report Share Posted December 27, 2005 Divine Message of His Holiness Shri Datta Swami Self-realisation is very easy because the Self is in every human being. There is no difficulty in search of Self, whereas there is lot of difficulty in search of Lord in human form (Brahma Jnana). There is no risk in the search of self because you are sure to reach the Self within your body; it is like searching money present in your house. But in the search of Lord in human form in this world, you may be misled and you are not sure that you can catch the human incarnation. Jealousy and egoism will not come in the way of reaching the self but these two are obstructions in the way of identifying the human incarnation. Ramanuja established the Brahma Jnana by introducing Lord Vishnu and Lord Krishna and Rama as His human incarnations. Ramanuja established devotion that is necessary for Nivrutti, whereas Sankara established justice in Pravrutti. After reaching the goal in Nivrutti the duty of devotee is to do service to the Lord without aspiring anything in return. Madhva established such service. Nivrutti means cutting all the worldly bonds and to have the strongest bond with the Lord. This is like getting cent per cent in the examination. Pravrutti is to reduce the extra strength of the worldly bonds so that justice is established in Pravrutti and thus the Lord is pleased. You are pleased with an outsider and you are pleased with your wife. There is difference in this. Same is the difference when the Lord is pleased with you in Pravrutti, when you follow the justice by reducing the extra strength of worldly bonds and when the Lord is pleased in Nivrutti when you cut all the worldly bonds for the sake of the Lord. However, everybody has equal possibility to reach Nivrutti though one in millions and in one birth out of millions of births can reach Nivrutti. Only one can get the gold medal in the class but every student can try since there is an equal possibility to achieve it. Therefore Nivrutti must be explained to all as goal. Let everybody try for Nivrutti so that at least he will succeed in Pravrutti. If everybody tries for gold medal by getting cent per cent, at least everybody will pass. If you teach Pravrutti only and keep it as goal, then everybody fails. If you keep 40 per cent pass mark as the goal, every student will fail. If you try to completely destroy the worldly bonds and try to have only one bond with the Lord, at least you will reduce the strength of worldly bonds and you have at least a thin bond with the Lord. This is the pass mark. The scriptures of Jainism and Buddhism preach only the ethical rules and living for justice without mentioning the name of God. In this level the fear that one gets in doing sins is only from courts and police. He will think to avoid these courts and police by bribe and thus he fails to succeed in Pravrutti. Since there is no mention of God, there is no question of pleasing God. If you see the scripture of Islam, it mentions God Allah and the eternal hell. At least the fear for the hell controls the sins. But the blind attraction in the worldly bonds is so intensive that it over comes this fear also, and so people are doing sins. If you see scripture of Bible and Geeta, Nivrutti is exposed very well. Bible says that you have to hate all these worldly bonds for the sake of Lord. Geeta emphasises the attraction towards the Lord. When this attraction to these worldly bonds is shifted to Lord, then only the establishment of justice in Pravrutti will be completely achieved. The policy of communism believes in distributing the accumulated wealth of some rich people. But this is not a permanent solution. The blind attraction of the rich man towards the worldly bonds is not removed. Then the rich man will feel discouraged and stop his talented work, which will reduces the production of wealth itself by the way of business and industries. If he himself realises and distributes his own wealth to all by the realisation of his family bonds, the solution is permanent. The rich man will continue his talented work in producing the wealth. Therefore propagation of spiritual knowledge will certainly establish the justice on this earth and the selfishness and corruption are removed with their roots and communism cannot achieve this because the selfishness and corruption will hide and find new ways to escape the attack from communism. Communism is one extreme end of ignorance and capitalism is another extreme end of the ignorance. The in between socialism is also based on the same ignorance which is on the middle part. These three policies are only temporary emotional attacks only without analysing the root of ignorance. Spiritual knowledge of Nivrutti will remove the ignorance completely with the root and establish the eternal justice on this earth. Of course, a very few can enter the inner circle of the Lord and also can succeed in Nivrutti. posted by: His servant at the lotus feet of shri datta swami www.universal-spirituality.org ADHHUB wrote: " billrishel " <illieusion Re: The Jar, the Ground, and the Unqualified State (was: The Mind and The Though However, the " condition " I called preoccupation can dissolve. How that happens is utterly mysterious. There is no recipe, there is no " how " . Nor is there a " why " or a " when " . This is an interesting topic, to me at least. I don't pretend to have the answer but I get glimpses of this 'process' that tells me it may not be as mysterious as many say. Clearly, Truth cannot be found in the illusion; cannot be found with mind anywhere. Since Truth is noticed within consciousness when mind gets out of the way, the destiny of mind would seem to be to learn how to get out of the way. This is, in effect, the entire spiritual process. We recognize that there's no independent volition in the human mind, and so whatever process might be going on is occurring automatically. Given that, we can notice that the mind doesn't get out of the way based on our human choices. Choice is an illusion. We don't choose what to believe. We don't choose to for Good - Make a difference this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 27, 2005 Report Share Posted December 27, 2005 Bill: Do we ever stop thinking? If you lose your car keys then it makes perfect sense to think what you did with them. What I think you are actually referring to is the end of thinking how to get out of the angst box. Phil: Agreed. Thinking, itself, is not the problem. When we believe that thinking causes Truth/enlightenment/freedom to occur, ego is locked in place, seeking something it can never find. If thinking is enjoyed, by all means enjoy it, but freedom is found only in the space between the thoughts. Bill: Mysterious in the sense that it cannot be explained how, when, why it happens. Phil: Well, I just made a rather crude attempt to describe how it happens. The why relates to another post about longing. I'm not seeing the mystery. At the same time, I (The illusory human) have no control over the events that must occur. The events are a creation of consciousness. " I " (as consciousness) do not choose the created events either, because there is no mind choosing. It all occurs quite spontaneously, but it need not be mysterious. Phil In a message dated 12/27/2005 1:53:46 AM Pacific Standard Time, Nisargadatta writes: " billrishel " <illieusion Re: Dis-illusion > However, the " condition " I called preoccupation can > dissolve. How that happens is utterly mysterious. There is > no recipe, there is no " how " . Nor is there a " why " or a > " when " . > >>>>>> > > This is an interesting topic, to me at least. I don't > pretend to have the answer but I get glimpses of this > 'process' that tells me it may not be as mysterious as many > say. > > Clearly, Truth cannot be found in the illusion; cannot be > found with mind anywhere. Since Truth is noticed within > consciousness when mind gets out of the way, the destiny of > mind would seem to be to learn how to get out of the way. > This is, in effect, the entire spiritual process. yes > We recognize that there's no independent volition in the > human mind, and so whatever process might be going on is > occurring automatically. Given that, we can notice that the > mind doesn't get out of the way based on our human choices. > Choice is an illusion. We don't choose what to believe. We > don't choose to accept or surrender, and we don't choose to > stop thinking. Pretending that we can choose these things is > likely to prolong the 'process'. Do we ever stop thinking? If you lose your car keys then it makes perfect sense to think what you did with them. What I think you are actually referring to is the end of thinking how to get out of the angst box. > Since we can't choose to get out of the way, how does this > actually come about? It seems to me that we learn to > surrender struggle as it becomes clear through our > experience that struggle sucks, isn't necessary and seems to > bring on more struggle. There are many seeming levels of > surrender/acceptance/allowing that each have their own > context and content and come about through their own unique > understandings that all seem to involve the mind along with > our perception/experience. > > We believe only what seems to be true to us. Exploring and > challenging our beliefs brings about more expansive > understandings which can allow us to release some of our > more constricting conceptualizations. > > The mind thinks because we believe we need to in order to > fulfill our desires. As we slowly become convinced that the > mind is the problem rather than the solution, we feel less > and less need to think and therefore experience greater > peace. The final step is releasing the mind all together, > which contains our sense of individual self. One must love > Truth more than life itself before this is likely to occur. > > Anyhoo, to me, that process doesn't seem all that > mysterious. Mysterious in the sense that it cannot be explained how, when, why it happens. It is a common reflex in many western cultures, certainly the US, to wonder " how? " in response to any perceived problem. If the angst box is a perceived problem, then how-to-get-out is a common/typical reflex. To say there is no " how " , that it is mysterious, is a way of saying to the mind: forgedaboutit! Bill > Phil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 28, 2005 Report Share Posted December 28, 2005 Hí Phil, May I add, there are no " events created in consciousness " . There are only appearances which are conscious. They are the two sides of the same coin, you either can call it consciouness or appearance. Consciousness IS its content. Werner Nisargadatta , ADHHUB@A... wrote: > > > Bill: Do we ever stop thinking? If you lose your car keys then > it makes perfect sense to think what you did with them. > What I think you are actually referring to is the end > of thinking how to get out of the angst box. > > > > Phil: Agreed. Thinking, itself, is not the problem. When we believe that > thinking causes Truth/enlightenment/freedom to occur, ego is locked in place, > seeking something it can never find. If thinking is enjoyed, by all means enjoy > it, but freedom is found only in the space between the thoughts. > > > > > Bill: Mysterious in the sense that it cannot be explained > how, when, why it happens. > > > > Phil: Well, I just made a rather crude attempt to describe how it happens. > The why relates to another post about longing. > I'm not seeing the mystery. At the same time, I (The illusory human) have no > control over the events that must occur. The events are a creation of > consciousness. " I " (as consciousness) do not choose the created events either, > because there is no mind choosing. It all occurs quite spontaneously, but it need > not be mysterious. > > Phil > > > > In a message dated 12/27/2005 1:53:46 AM Pacific Standard Time, > Nisargadatta writes: > > " billrishel " <illieusion@h...> > Re: Dis-illusion > > > However, the " condition " I called preoccupation can > > dissolve. How that happens is utterly mysterious. There is > > no recipe, there is no " how " . Nor is there a " why " or a > > " when " . > > >>>>>> > > > > This is an interesting topic, to me at least. I don't > > pretend to have the answer but I get glimpses of this > > 'process' that tells me it may not be as mysterious as many > > say. > > > > Clearly, Truth cannot be found in the illusion; cannot be > > found with mind anywhere. Since Truth is noticed within > > consciousness when mind gets out of the way, the destiny of > > mind would seem to be to learn how to get out of the way. > > This is, in effect, the entire spiritual process. > > yes > > > We recognize that there's no independent volition in the > > human mind, and so whatever process might be going on is > > occurring automatically. Given that, we can notice that the > > mind doesn't get out of the way based on our human choices. > > Choice is an illusion. We don't choose what to believe. We > > don't choose to accept or surrender, and we don't choose to > > stop thinking. Pretending that we can choose these things is > > likely to prolong the 'process'. > > Do we ever stop thinking? If you lose your car keys then > it makes perfect sense to think what you did with them. > What I think you are actually referring to is the end > of thinking how to get out of the angst box. > > > Since we can't choose to get out of the way, how does this > > actually come about? It seems to me that we learn to > > surrender struggle as it becomes clear through our > > experience that struggle sucks, isn't necessary and seems to > > bring on more struggle. There are many seeming levels of > > surrender/acceptance/allowing that each have their own > > context and content and come about through their own unique > > understandings that all seem to involve the mind along with > > our perception/experience. > > > > We believe only what seems to be true to us. Exploring and > > challenging our beliefs brings about more expansive > > understandings which can allow us to release some of our > > more constricting conceptualizations. > > > > The mind thinks because we believe we need to in order to > > fulfill our desires. As we slowly become convinced that the > > mind is the problem rather than the solution, we feel less > > and less need to think and therefore experience greater > > peace. The final step is releasing the mind all together, > > which contains our sense of individual self. One must love > > Truth more than life itself before this is likely to occur. > > > > Anyhoo, to me, that process doesn't seem all that > > mysterious. > > Mysterious in the sense that it cannot be explained > how, when, why it happens. > > It is a common reflex in many western cultures, certainly > the US, to wonder " how? " in response to any perceived > problem. If the angst box is a perceived problem, then > how-to-get-out is a common/typical reflex. > > To say there is no " how " , that it is mysterious, is a > way of saying to the mind: forgedaboutit! > > Bill > > > Phil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 28, 2005 Report Share Posted December 28, 2005 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> wrote: > > Hí Phil, > > May I add, there are no " events created in consciousness " . There are > only appearances which are conscious. They are the two sides of the > same coin, you either can call it consciouness or appearance. > > Consciousness IS its content. > > Werner > > nice words Werner....thank you it's possible to compare the relation of " ocean " to " wave " .... of " wave " to " ocean " ..... but the truth always remain same......ocean and wave are of " water " ..... this " water " ....maybe, could be compared with your words " Consciousness IS its content " .......?.... only a thought.... Marc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 28, 2005 Report Share Posted December 28, 2005 Hi Marc, As you already have realized, so many seekers believe that consciousness is God, or the soul, or matter=consciousness, etc. In any case they see consciousness as a fix thing like a mirror which never changes and in which the world is created. And the worst of all those seekers identify themselves as being this consciousness. And just here the trouble starts, doesn't it ? Therefore also your metaphor seeing the ocean=water=consciousness is wrong, because consciousness doesn't exist. One also can't say consciousness is like a chameleon taking the color and shapes of its surrounding, because that would imply that consciousness exists as the chameleon does exist. The main point is that there is no such a thing as consciousness, there are only appearances which are consious. What we identify as consciousness is this endless flow of appearances. We are so conditioned to be believe in consciousness as kind of agency which takes the colours and shapes of any object, and that is a wrong concept. Therefore this statement " I am consciousness " is so often misunderstood. The real understanding starts with that consciousness is its content and without a content there is no consciousness. But that view also means constant death, the dying from moment to moment. Werner Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> wrote: > > > > Hí Phil, > > > > May I add, there are no " events created in consciousness " . There are > > only appearances which are conscious. They are the two sides of the > > same coin, you either can call it consciouness or appearance. > > > > Consciousness IS its content. > > > > Werner > > > > > nice words Werner....thank you > > it's possible to compare the relation of " ocean " to " wave " .... > of " wave " to " ocean " ..... > > but the truth always remain same......ocean and wave are of " water " ..... > > this " water " ....maybe, could be compared with your words " Consciousness > IS its content " .......?.... > > only a thought.... > > Marc > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 28, 2005 Report Share Posted December 28, 2005 Divine Message of His Holiness Shri Datta Swami The Advaita philosophers are the most dangerous people with the burning thirst to become the Lord. For this, they will immediately exploit any trace of gap in a statement. When you bring the similarity of spectatorship to realised soul and the Lord, they say that the Lord is also pure awareness like the realised soul who has become Atman. He will not stop here. Then he will say that the pure awareness is in him and therefore the Lord is in him. He will not stop here also. Then he will say that he has become the pure awareness (Atman) by limiting himself to it only and therefore he him self is the Lord. He flows like water under the mat. He is like the sugar disease, which attacks slowly, and silently all the vital organs. Finally if he realises the truth, it is only self-destruction. Therefore, in his interest only you have to arrest him in the first step itself. You should say that the Lord is spectator but due to this He need not be awareness at all. He can watch or wish even without being awareness. He can burn anything and he need not be the fire. He can do anything without being the logical source of such action. Veda says that He can run and He has no legs. He can catch and He has no hands (Apani pado…). This means the logic applicable to creation fails in the creator. According to the logic of creation one cannot run without legs and one cannot catch without hands. This logic applies to all the living beings because any living being is a part of creation only. The creator is not a part of creation like your self. He is the creator, which means that He is beyond the logic that can be applied to all the items of the creation. Veda says that the Lord is not the internal activities of the awareness (Antakaranams), not its external activities, not the awareness of itself and not the non-awareness (Inert)(Naantahprajnam, nabahihprajnam, naprajnam, nachaaprajnam…). This means that the Lord is not any item of the creation including awareness because awareness itself is the most subtle and finest item of the creation. posted by His Servant at the lotus feet of shri datta swami www.universal-spirituality.org Werner Woehr <wwoehr wrote: Hi Marc, As you already have realized, so many seekers believe that consciousness is God, or the soul, or matter=consciousness, etc. In any case they see consciousness as a fix thing like a mirror which never changes and in which the world is created. And the worst of all those seekers identify themselves as being this consciousness. And just here the trouble starts, doesn't it ? Therefore also your metaphor seeing the ocean=water=consciousness is wrong, because consciousness doesn't exist. One also can't say consciousness is like a chameleon taking the color and shapes of its sorrounding, because that would imply that consciousness exists as the chameleon does exist. The main point is that there is no such a thing as consciousness, there are only appearances which are consious. What we idenrtify as consciousness is this endless flow of appearances. We are so conditioned to be believe in consciousness as kind of agency which takes the colours and shapes of any object, and that is a wrong concept. Therefore this statement " I am consciousness " is so often misunderstood. The only real understanding starts with that consciousness is its content and without a content there is no consciousness. But that view also means constant death, the dying from moment to moment. Werner Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> wrote: > > > > Hí Phil, > > > > May I add, there are no " events created in consciousness " . There are > > only appearances which are conscious. They are the two sides of the > > same coin, you either can call it consciouness or appearance. > > > > Consciousness IS its content. > > > > Werner > > > > > nice words Werner....thank you > > it's possible to compare the relation of " ocean " to " wave " .... > of " wave " to " ocean " ..... > > but the truth always remain same......ocean and wave are of " water " ..... > > this " water " ....maybe, could be compared with your words " Consciousness > IS its content " .......?.... > > only a thought.... > > Marc > ** 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 December 28, 2005 Report Share Posted December 28, 2005 Forgive me Prakki Surya, your very first message is lacking, when you called the Lord, " HE " The rest of it goes downstream from there. Ana - prakki surya Nisargadatta Wednesday, December 28, 2005 6:15 AM Re: Re: Dis-illusion Divine Message of His Holiness Shri Datta Swami The Advaita philosophers are the most dangerous people with the burning thirst to become the Lord. For this, they will immediately exploit any trace of gap in a statement. When you bring the similarity of spectatorship to realised soul and the Lord, they say that the Lord is also pure awareness like the realised soul who has become Atman. He will not stop here. Then he will say that the pure awareness is in him and therefore the Lord is in him. He will not stop here also. Then he will say that he has become the pure awareness (Atman) by limiting himself to it only and therefore he him self is the Lord. He flows like water under the mat. He is like the sugar disease, which attacks slowly, and silently all the vital organs. Finally if he realises the truth, it is only self-destruction. Therefore, in his interest only you have to arrest him in the first step itself. You should say that the Lord is spectator but due to this He need not be awareness at all. He can watch or wish even without being awareness. He can burn anything and he need not be the fire. He can do anything without being the logical source of such action. Veda says that He can run and He has no legs. He can catch and He has no hands (Apani pado.). This means the logic applicable to creation fails in the creator. According to the logic of creation one cannot run without legs and one cannot catch without hands. This logic applies to all the living beings because any living being is a part of creation only. The creator is not a part of creation like your self. He is the creator, which means that He is beyond the logic that can be applied to all the items of the creation. Veda says that the Lord is not the internal activities of the awareness (Antakaranams), not its external activities, not the awareness of itself and not the non-awareness (Inert)(Naantahprajnam, nabahihprajnam, naprajnam, nachaaprajnam.). This means that the Lord is not any item of the creation including awareness because awareness itself is the most subtle and finest item of the creation. posted by His Servant at the lotus feet of shri datta swami www.universal-spirituality.org Werner Woehr <wwoehr wrote: Hi Marc, As you already have realized, so many seekers believe that consciousness is God, or the soul, or matter=consciousness, etc. In any case they see consciousness as a fix thing like a mirror which never changes and in which the world is created. And the worst of all those seekers identify themselves as being this consciousness. And just here the trouble starts, doesn't it ? Therefore also your metaphor seeing the ocean=water=consciousness is wrong, because consciousness doesn't exist. One also can't say consciousness is like a chameleon taking the color and shapes of its sorrounding, because that would imply that consciousness exists as the chameleon does exist. The main point is that there is no such a thing as consciousness, there are only appearances which are consious. What we idenrtify as consciousness is this endless flow of appearances. We are so conditioned to be believe in consciousness as kind of agency which takes the colours and shapes of any object, and that is a wrong concept. Therefore this statement " I am consciousness " is so often misunderstood. The only real understanding starts with that consciousness is its content and without a content there is no consciousness. But that view also means constant death, the dying from moment to moment. Werner Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> wrote: > > > > Hí Phil, > > > > May I add, there are no " events created in consciousness " . There are > > only appearances which are conscious. They are the two sides of the > > same coin, you either can call it consciouness or appearance. > > > > Consciousness IS its content. > > > > Werner > > > > > nice words Werner....thank you > > it's possible to compare the relation of " ocean " to " wave " .... > of " wave " to " ocean " ..... > > but the truth always remain same......ocean and wave are of " water " ..... > > this " water " ....maybe, could be compared with your words " Consciousness > IS its content " .......?.... > > only a thought.... > > Marc > ** 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 December 28, 2005 Report Share Posted December 28, 2005 boom! thank you werner, really beautifull. Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> wrote: > > Hi Marc, > > As you already have realized, so many seekers believe that > consciousness is God, or the soul, or matter=consciousness, etc. In > any case they see consciousness as a fix thing like a mirror which > never changes and in which the world is created. And the worst of all > those seekers identify themselves as being this consciousness. And > just here the trouble starts, doesn't it ? > > Therefore also your metaphor seeing the ocean=water=consciousness is > wrong, because consciousness doesn't exist. One also can't say > consciousness is like a chameleon taking the color and shapes of its > surrounding, because that would imply that consciousness exists as > the chameleon does exist. > > The main point is that there is no such a thing as consciousness, > there are only appearances which are consious. > > What we identify as consciousness is this endless flow of > appearances. We are so conditioned to be believe in consciousness as > kind of agency which takes the colours and shapes of any object, and > that is a wrong concept. > > Therefore this statement " I am consciousness " is so often > misunderstood. The real understanding starts with that > consciousness is its content and without a content there is no > consciousness. But that view also means constant death, the dying > from moment to moment. > > Werner > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > <dennis_travis33> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> > wrote: > > > > > > Hí Phil, > > > > > > May I add, there are no " events created in consciousness " . There > are > > > only appearances which are conscious. They are the two sides of > the > > > same coin, you either can call it consciouness or appearance. > > > > > > Consciousness IS its content. > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > nice words Werner....thank you > > > > it's possible to compare the relation of " ocean " to " wave " .... > > of " wave " to " ocean " ..... > > > > but the truth always remain same......ocean and wave are > of " water " ..... > > > > this " water " ....maybe, could be compared with your > words " Consciousness > > IS its content " .......?.... > > > > only a thought.... > > > > Marc > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 28, 2005 Report Share Posted December 28, 2005 hi marc, nice to read you. i remember a time in which i confused birth with life... and just there the trouble started!!! love Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> > wrote: > > > > Hi Marc, > > > > As you already have realized, so many seekers believe that > > consciousness is God, or the soul, or matter=consciousness, etc. In > > any case they see consciousness as a fix thing like a mirror which > > never changes and in which the world is created. And the worst of > all > > those seekers identify themselves as being this consciousness. And > > just here the trouble starts, doesn't it ? > > > > Therefore also your metaphor seeing the ocean=water=consciousness is > > wrong, because consciousness doesn't exist. One also can't say > > consciousness is like a chameleon taking the color and shapes of its > > surrounding, because that would imply that consciousness exists as > > the chameleon does exist. > > > > The main point is that there is no such a thing as consciousness, > > there are only appearances which are consious. > > > > What we identify as consciousness is this endless flow of > > appearances. We are so conditioned to be believe in consciousness as > > kind of agency which takes the colours and shapes of any object, and > > that is a wrong concept. > > > > Therefore this statement " I am consciousness " is so often > > misunderstood. The real understanding starts with that > > consciousness is its content and without a content there is no > > consciousness. But that view also means constant death, the dying > > from moment to moment. > > > > Werner > > > > > Hi Werner, > > yes....would be little " easy " to just " be consciousness " ..... > > i agree that consciousness is always in relation with a content....or > that " consciousness Is the content " .... > > the " endless flow of appearences " couldn't appear without > consciousness..... > > but sure....this does not mean that consciousness and so also this > appearences are " real " ......means, that they would > be " permanent " ...... > > the nature of appearences is that they " come and go " ..... > > to be " aware " of this " unreal " appearing things......has maybe > nothing to do with " being consciousness " ....or whatever illusions > > in awareness...... " nothing ever happen for real " ...... > > nothing is realy " created " .....except in the consciousness of a > confused mind > > same with birth and death....which only exist as long > as " concepts " ......as there is no awareness of truth > > Marc > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 28, 2005 Report Share Posted December 28, 2005 Hmm, Marc, What a pity, you spoilt it some way. You wrote: the " endless flow of appearences " couldn't appear without consciousness No, no, Marc - this endless flow IS consciousness. Consciousness doesnt't exist. And because you are consciousness you also don't exist. That is the whole point. But you are those appearances which endlessly change, which is a endless dying and your are that endless coming and going. That's why Niz called consciousness a fever Werner The tooic we discuss here is no reality or illusion. It is that consciousness is its content and that without content there is no consicousness. Werner Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> > wrote: > > > > Hi Marc, > > > > As you already have realized, so many seekers believe that > > consciousness is God, or the soul, or matter=consciousness, etc. In > > any case they see consciousness as a fix thing like a mirror which > > never changes and in which the world is created. And the worst of > all > > those seekers identify themselves as being this consciousness. And > > just here the trouble starts, doesn't it ? > > > > Therefore also your metaphor seeing the ocean=water=consciousness is > > wrong, because consciousness doesn't exist. One also can't say > > consciousness is like a chameleon taking the color and shapes of its > > surrounding, because that would imply that consciousness exists as > > the chameleon does exist. > > > > The main point is that there is no such a thing as consciousness, > > there are only appearances which are consious. > > > > What we identify as consciousness is this endless flow of > > appearances. We are so conditioned to be believe in consciousness as > > kind of agency which takes the colours and shapes of any object, and > > that is a wrong concept. > > > > Therefore this statement " I am consciousness " is so often > > misunderstood. The real understanding starts with that > > consciousness is its content and without a content there is no > > consciousness. But that view also means constant death, the dying > > from moment to moment. > > > > Werner > > > > > Hi Werner, > > yes....would be little " easy " to just " be consciousness " ..... > > i agree that consciousness is always in relation with a content....or > that " consciousness Is the content " .... > > the " endless flow of appearences " couldn't appear without > consciousness..... > > but sure....this does not mean that consciousness and so also this > appearences are " real " ......means, that they would > be " permanent " ...... > > the nature of appearences is that they " come and go " ..... > > to be " aware " of this " unreal " appearing things......has maybe > nothing to do with " being consciousness " ....or whatever illusions > > in awareness...... " nothing ever happen for real " ...... > > nothing is realy " created " .....except in the consciousness of a > confused mind > > same with birth and death....which only exist as long > as " concepts " ......as there is no awareness of truth > > Marc > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 28, 2005 Report Share Posted December 28, 2005 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> wrote: > > Hmm, Marc, > > What a pity, you spoilt it some way. > > You wrote: > the " endless flow of appearences " couldn't appear without > consciousness > > No, no, Marc - this endless flow IS consciousness. > > Consciousness doesnt't exist. And because you are consciousness you > also don't exist. That is the whole point. > > But you are those appearances which endlessly change, which is a > endless dying and your are that endless coming and going. > > That's why Niz called consciousness a fever > > Werner > > > The tooic we discuss here is no reality or illusion. It is that > consciousness is its content and that without content there is no > consicousness. > > Werner > > > Hi Werner, yes...maybe i expressed it not so clear...... but i agree with you that what is called " consciousness " .....always change and so...that we " are " not this permanent change....even if one dream to be this permanent change this also enclude, for sure, " Werner " and " Marc " and all other " waves " Marc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 29, 2005 Report Share Posted December 29, 2005 In a message dated 12/28/2005 6:30:49 AM Pacific Standard Time, Nisargadatta writes: " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr Re: Dis-illusion Hí Phil, May I add, there are no " events created in consciousness " . There are only appearances which are conscious. They are the two sides of the same coin, you either can call it consciouness or appearance. Consciousness IS its content. Werner Yes, there are only perceived events and nothing is actually occurring. This is how it must be when it is all contained within consciousness. Much the same way no events actually occur in our nightly dreams. Phil 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.