Guest guest Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 In a message dated 1/7/2006 3:16:03 AM Pacific Standard Time, silver-1069 writes: > When the dream of thought stopping ends, the dreamer wakes up to > BEING. One need not place any importance at all in the dream of > realization. > > " Silver " L.E: The dream of thought stopping can end only after it has begun, so the beginning of thought stopping is an essential component of its stopping. The dreamer cannot end thought stopping unless he begins the dream of thought stopping, and that is the importance and significance of the Whole, Because unless the though stopping takes place in the Whole, the thought stopper has no place to go, except in the Whole. Without a Whole, all of thought stopping continues to be a dream in which the thought stopper cannot stop dreaming of the Whole into which his thought stopping must be placed. Larry Epston www.epston.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 Nisargadatta , epston@a... wrote: > > In a message dated 1/7/2006 3:16:03 AM Pacific Standard Time, > silver-1069@h... writes: > > > When the dream of thought stopping ends, the dreamer wakes up to > > BEING. One need not place any importance at all in the dream of > > realization. > > > > " Silver " > > L.E: The dream of thought stopping can end only after it has begun, so the > beginning of thought stopping is an essential component of its stopping. The > dreamer cannot end thought stopping unless he begins the dream of thought > stopping, and that is the importance and significance of the Whole, Because unless > the though stopping takes place in the Whole, the thought stopper has no place > to go, except in the Whole. Without a Whole, all of thought stopping > continues to be a dream in which the thought stopper cannot stop dreaming of the > Whole into which his thought stopping must be placed. > > Larry Epston > www.epston.com Put it as you like, the essentiality of the dreamer, the dreaming and the dream becomes unessential as it dissolves into the natural state of Pure Being. " Silver " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 Hey Silver, If there is 'pure being' Can you tell me what is 'impure being' ? Werner Nisargadatta , " s_i_l_v_e_r1069 " <silver- 1069@h...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , epston@a... wrote: > > > > In a message dated 1/7/2006 3:16:03 AM Pacific Standard Time, > > silver-1069@h... writes: > > > > > When the dream of thought stopping ends, the dreamer wakes up to > > > BEING. One need not place any importance at all in the dream of > > > realization. > > > > > > " Silver " > > > > L.E: The dream of thought stopping can end only after it has > begun, so the > > beginning of thought stopping is an essential component of its > stopping. The > > dreamer cannot end thought stopping unless he begins the dream of > thought > > stopping, and that is the importance and significance of the Whole, > Because unless > > the though stopping takes place in the Whole, the thought stopper > has no place > > to go, except in the Whole. Without a Whole, all of thought > stopping > > continues to be a dream in which the thought stopper cannot stop > dreaming of the > > Whole into which his thought stopping must be placed. > > > > Larry Epston > > www.epston.com > > Put it as you like, the essentiality of the dreamer, the dreaming and > the dream becomes unessential as it dissolves into the natural state > of Pure Being. > > " Silver " > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 8, 2006 Report Share Posted January 8, 2006 Another state of mind? " Silver " Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> wrote: > > Hey Silver, > > If there is 'pure being' Can you tell me what is 'impure being' ? > > Werner > > > Nisargadatta , " s_i_l_v_e_r1069 " <silver- > 1069@h...> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , epston@a... wrote: > > > > > > In a message dated 1/7/2006 3:16:03 AM Pacific Standard Time, > > > silver-1069@h... writes: > > > > > > > When the dream of thought stopping ends, the dreamer wakes up > to > > > > BEING. One need not place any importance at all in the dream > of > > > > realization. > > > > > > > > " Silver " > > > > > > L.E: The dream of thought stopping can end only after it has > > begun, so the > > > beginning of thought stopping is an essential component of its > > stopping. The > > > dreamer cannot end thought stopping unless he begins the dream of > > thought > > > stopping, and that is the importance and significance of the > Whole, > > Because unless > > > the though stopping takes place in the Whole, the thought stopper > > has no place > > > to go, except in the Whole. Without a Whole, all of thought > > stopping > > > continues to be a dream in which the thought stopper cannot stop > > dreaming of the > > > Whole into which his thought stopping must be placed. > > > > > > Larry Epston > > > www.epston.com > > > > Put it as you like, the essentiality of the dreamer, the dreaming > and > > the dream becomes unessential as it dissolves into the natural > state > > of Pure Being. > > > > " Silver " > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 8, 2006 Report Share Posted January 8, 2006 In a message dated 1/7/2006 12:28:03 PM Pacific Standard Time, Nisargadatta writes: " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr Re: Stopper In The Whole Hey Silver, If there is 'pure being' Can you tell me what is 'impure being' ? Werner The whole idea of using the word " being " is to try to avoid a dualistic opposite, since there is no opposite. Of course, words are inherently dualistic. " Being " leads to the idea of 'not being', which is meaningless in the context of the absolute. Even " I AM " is dualistic. The term least susceptible to this distortion is " I " . It seems to me the whole point of being is 'being' missed here. There is no experiencer, foreground, background, underground, anywhere. As concepts go, being isn't that hard. There is not Truth and then something that experiences Truth. Self knows Self to BE Truth, to BE love, to BE joy, to BE peace. There is no experiencer. There is only the Self, and the knowing of that Self. There is nothing but the Self. What is it that is supposedly experiencing this? This is ego. Ego is an illusion. If you are experiencing Self, you identify yourself as ego. Keep going. Phil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 8, 2006 Report Share Posted January 8, 2006 Nisargadatta , ADHHUB@A... wrote: > > > In a message dated 1/7/2006 12:28:03 PM Pacific Standard Time, > Nisargadatta writes: > > " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> > Re: Stopper In The Whole > > Hey Silver, > > If there is 'pure being' Can you tell me what is 'impure being' ? > > Werner > > > > > The whole idea of using the word " being " is to try to avoid a dualistic > opposite, since there is no opposite. Of course, words are inherently dualistic. > " Being " leads to the idea of 'not being', which is meaningless in the context > of the absolute. Even " I AM " is dualistic. The term least susceptible to this > distortion is " I " . > > It seems to me the whole point of being is 'being' missed here. There is no > experiencer, foreground, background, underground, anywhere. As concepts go, > being isn't that hard. There is not Truth and then something that experiences > Truth. Self knows Self to BE Truth, to BE love, to BE joy, to BE peace. There > is no experiencer. There is only the Self, and the knowing of that Self. > There is nothing but the Self. What is it that is supposedly experiencing this? > This is ego. Ego is an illusion. If you are experiencing Self, you identify > yourself as ego. Keep going. > > Phil Yes, thanks Phil! The Self cannot experience Its own Self-evidence. And I find that when I speak or write about the <<Ineffable Self>>, and focus my attention on one of the aspects that I have imagined for It, zeroing in on the particular to the exclusion of the Universal - the Whole - , as I do, I, nevertheless, remain ever aware of the fact that I come perilously close to the edge of Nihilsm. Peering into Nihilism's dark abyss, my mind shutters in its dream and hurily retreats back the other way. I think my own Awareness saves me from falling in! " Silver " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 8, 2006 Report Share Posted January 8, 2006 In a message dated 1/8/2006 9:36:23 AM Pacific Standard Time, Nisargadatta writes: " s_i_l_v_e_r1069 " <silver-1069 Re: Stopper In The Whole Nisargadatta , ADHHUB@A... wrote: > > > In a message dated 1/7/2006 12:28:03 PM Pacific Standard Time, > Nisargadatta writes: > > " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> > Re: Stopper In The Whole > > Hey Silver, > > If there is 'pure being' Can you tell me what is 'impure being' ? > > Werner > > > > > The whole idea of using the word " being " is to try to avoid a dualistic > opposite, since there is no opposite. Of course, words are inherently dualistic. > " Being " leads to the idea of 'not being', which is meaningless in the context > of the absolute. Even " I AM " is dualistic. The term least susceptible to this > distortion is " I " . > > It seems to me the whole point of being is 'being' missed here. There is no > experiencer, foreground, background, underground, anywhere. As concepts go, > being isn't that hard. There is not Truth and then something that experiences > Truth. Self knows Self to BE Truth, to BE love, to BE joy, to BE peace. There > is no experiencer. There is only the Self, and the knowing of that Self. > There is nothing but the Self. What is it that is supposedly experiencing this? > This is ego. Ego is an illusion. If you are experiencing Self, you identify > yourself as ego. Keep going. > > Phil Yes, thanks Phil! The Self cannot experience Its own Self-evidence. And I find that when I speak or write about the <<Ineffable Self>>, and focus my attention on one of the aspects that I have imagined for It, zeroing in on the particular to the exclusion of the Universal - the Whole - , as I do, I, nevertheless, remain ever aware of the fact that I come perilously close to the edge of Nihilsm. Peering into Nihilism's dark abyss, my mind shutters in its dream and hurily retreats back the other way. I think my own Awareness saves me from falling in! " Silver " That abyss has become a familiar friend. For some time, now, I've been camped at the edge, with my sleeping bag and campfire, roasting weenies and, now and then taking a glimpse over the edge and saying, " Not yet. There must be a little more to learn first " . Heheeee. If it weren't so ludicrous, I'd probly find something to curse, though I don't know what. You know that you're supposed to fall in, don't you? Phil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 9, 2006 Report Share Posted January 9, 2006 Nisargadatta , ADHHUB@A... wrote: > > > In a message dated 1/8/2006 9:36:23 AM Pacific Standard Time, > Nisargadatta writes: > > " s_i_l_v_e_r1069 " <silver-1069@h...> > Re: Stopper In The Whole > > Nisargadatta , ADHHUB@A... wrote: > > > > > > In a message dated 1/7/2006 12:28:03 PM Pacific Standard Time, > > Nisargadatta writes: > > > > " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> > > Re: Stopper In The Whole > > > > Hey Silver, > > > > If there is 'pure being' Can you tell me what is 'impure being' ? > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > > > The whole idea of using the word " being " is to try to avoid a > dualistic > > opposite, since there is no opposite. Of course, words are > inherently dualistic. > > " Being " leads to the idea of 'not being', which is meaningless in > the context > > of the absolute. Even " I AM " is dualistic. The term least > susceptible to this > > distortion is " I " . > > > > It seems to me the whole point of being is 'being' missed here. > There is no > > experiencer, foreground, background, underground, anywhere. As > concepts go, > > being isn't that hard. There is not Truth and then something that > experiences > > Truth. Self knows Self to BE Truth, to BE love, to BE joy, to BE > peace. There > > is no experiencer. There is only the Self, and the knowing of that > Self. > > There is nothing but the Self. What is it that is supposedly > experiencing this? > > This is ego. Ego is an illusion. If you are experiencing Self, you > identify > > yourself as ego. Keep going. > > > > Phil > > Yes, thanks Phil! The Self cannot experience Its own Self- evidence. > > And I find that when I speak or write about the <<Ineffable Self>>, > and focus my attention on one of the aspects that I have imagined for > It, zeroing in on the particular to the exclusion of the Universal - > the Whole - , as I do, I, nevertheless, remain ever aware of the fact > that I come perilously close to the edge of Nihilsm. > > Peering into Nihilism's dark abyss, my mind shutters in its dream and > hurily retreats back the other way. I think my own Awareness saves > me from falling in! > > " Silver " > > > > > That abyss has become a familiar friend. For some time, now, I've been > camped at the edge, with my sleeping bag and campfire, roasting weenies and, now > and then taking a glimpse over the edge and saying, " Not yet. There must be a > little more to learn first " . Heheeee. If it weren't so ludicrous, I'd probly > find something to curse, though I don't know what. > > You know that you're supposed to fall in, don't you? > > Phil I know. Pass me a weiner, for Christ's sake. But I'm sittin' over THERE on THAT log, as FAR away from the edge as I can. But not TOO far away from the warmth of the fire. It's freezing out. " Silver " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 9, 2006 Report Share Posted January 9, 2006 In a message dated 1/9/2006 4:05:01 AM Pacific Standard Time, Nisargadatta writes: " s_i_l_v_e_r1069 " <silver-1069 Re: Stopper In The Whole Nisargadatta , ADHHUB@A... wrote: > > > In a message dated 1/8/2006 9:36:23 AM Pacific Standard Time, > Nisargadatta writes: > > " s_i_l_v_e_r1069 " <silver-1069@h...> > Re: Stopper In The Whole > > Nisargadatta , ADHHUB@A... wrote: > > > > > > In a message dated 1/7/2006 12:28:03 PM Pacific Standard Time, > > Nisargadatta writes: > > > > " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> > > Re: Stopper In The Whole > > > > Hey Silver, > > > > If there is 'pure being' Can you tell me what is 'impure being' ? > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > > > The whole idea of using the word " being " is to try to avoid a > dualistic > > opposite, since there is no opposite. Of course, words are > inherently dualistic. > > " Being " leads to the idea of 'not being', which is meaningless in > the context > > of the absolute. Even " I AM " is dualistic. The term least > susceptible to this > > distortion is " I " . > > > > It seems to me the whole point of being is 'being' missed here. > There is no > > experiencer, foreground, background, underground, anywhere. As > concepts go, > > being isn't that hard. There is not Truth and then something that > experiences > > Truth. Self knows Self to BE Truth, to BE love, to BE joy, to BE > peace. There > > is no experiencer. There is only the Self, and the knowing of that > Self. > > There is nothing but the Self. What is it that is supposedly > experiencing this? > > This is ego. Ego is an illusion. If you are experiencing Self, you > identify > > yourself as ego. Keep going. > > > > Phil > > Yes, thanks Phil! The Self cannot experience Its own Self- evidence. > > And I find that when I speak or write about the <<Ineffable Self>>, > and focus my attention on one of the aspects that I have imagined for > It, zeroing in on the particular to the exclusion of the Universal - > the Whole - , as I do, I, nevertheless, remain ever aware of the fact > that I come perilously close to the edge of Nihilsm. > > Peering into Nihilism's dark abyss, my mind shutters in its dream and > hurily retreats back the other way. I think my own Awareness saves > me from falling in! > > " Silver " > > > > > That abyss has become a familiar friend. For some time, now, I've been > camped at the edge, with my sleeping bag and campfire, roasting weenies and, now > and then taking a glimpse over the edge and saying, " Not yet. There must be a > little more to learn first " . Heheeee. If it weren't so ludicrous, I'd probly > find something to curse, though I don't know what. > > You know that you're supposed to fall in, don't you? > > Phil I know. Pass me a weiner, for Christ's sake. But I'm sittin' over THERE on THAT log, as FAR away from the edge as I can. But not TOO far away from the warmth of the fire. It's freezing out. " Silver " Hehe. Okay, heads up!.......... Actually, I've mentioned before (Shows how long I've been camped here) that I make sure my sleeping bag isn't so close to the edge that I accidentally roll off the edge in the middle of the night. ~ Phil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 10, 2006 Report Share Posted January 10, 2006 Nisargadatta , ADHHUB@A... wrote: > > > In a message dated 1/9/2006 4:05:01 AM Pacific Standard Time, > Nisargadatta writes: > > " s_i_l_v_e_r1069 " <silver-1069@h...> > Re: Stopper In The Whole > > Nisargadatta , ADHHUB@A... wrote: > > > > > > In a message dated 1/8/2006 9:36:23 AM Pacific Standard Time, > > Nisargadatta writes: > > > > " s_i_l_v_e_r1069 " <silver-1069@h...> > > Re: Stopper In The Whole > > > > Nisargadatta , ADHHUB@A... wrote: > > > > > > > > > In a message dated 1/7/2006 12:28:03 PM Pacific Standard Time, > > > Nisargadatta writes: > > > > > > " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> > > > Re: Stopper In The Whole > > > > > > Hey Silver, > > > > > > If there is 'pure being' Can you tell me what is 'impure > being' ? > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The whole idea of using the word " being " is to try to avoid a > > dualistic > > > opposite, since there is no opposite. Of course, words are > > inherently dualistic. > > > " Being " leads to the idea of 'not being', which is meaningless > in > > the context > > > of the absolute. Even " I AM " is dualistic. The term least > > susceptible to this > > > distortion is " I " . > > > > > > It seems to me the whole point of being is 'being' missed here. > > There is no > > > experiencer, foreground, background, underground, anywhere. As > > concepts go, > > > being isn't that hard. There is not Truth and then something > that > > experiences > > > Truth. Self knows Self to BE Truth, to BE love, to BE joy, to BE > > peace. There > > > is no experiencer. There is only the Self, and the knowing of > that > > Self. > > > There is nothing but the Self. What is it that is supposedly > > experiencing this? > > > This is ego. Ego is an illusion. If you are experiencing Self, > you > > identify > > > yourself as ego. Keep going. > > > > > > Phil > > > > Yes, thanks Phil! The Self cannot experience Its own Self- > evidence. > > > > And I find that when I speak or write about the <<Ineffable > Self>>, > > and focus my attention on one of the aspects that I have imagined > for > > It, zeroing in on the particular to the exclusion of the > Universal - > > the Whole - , as I do, I, nevertheless, remain ever aware of the > fact > > that I come perilously close to the edge of Nihilsm. > > > > Peering into Nihilism's dark abyss, my mind shutters in its dream > and > > hurily retreats back the other way. I think my own Awareness > saves > > me from falling in! > > > > " Silver " > > > > > > > > > > That abyss has become a familiar friend. For some time, now, I've > been > > camped at the edge, with my sleeping bag and campfire, roasting > weenies and, now > > and then taking a glimpse over the edge and saying, " Not yet. There > must be a > > little more to learn first " . Heheeee. If it weren't so ludicrous, > I'd probly > > find something to curse, though I don't know what. > > > > You know that you're supposed to fall in, don't you? > > > > Phil > > I know. Pass me a weiner, for Christ's sake. But I'm sittin' over > THERE on THAT log, as FAR away from the edge as I can. But not TOO > far away from the warmth of the fire. It's freezing out. > > " Silver " > > > > > Hehe. Okay, heads up!.......... > Actually, I've mentioned before (Shows how long I've been camped here) that > I make sure my sleeping bag isn't so close to the edge that I accidentally > roll off the edge in the middle of the night. ~ > > Phil :-) <--------- " Silver " 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.