Guest guest Posted January 10, 2006 Report Share Posted January 10, 2006 Dear Bill, I am very glad that you have found inner peace! I consider inner peace very important and I consider it first priority of every human to find and 'live' inner peace! For me there is no other realization or enlightenment. .... However, I don't consider 'personality' incompatible with... Realization [or inner peace]! Personality applies to something else... Inner peace applies to something else... and, both can go on perfectly well together! .... It is something like the Gold and the 'ornaments' that one can make out of Gold! The shape of the ornaments can change somewhat irrespective of the purity of the Gold... however, purity of the Gold might impact the real value of the ornament! Gold is the soul... its Purity... Inner Peace, Realization... personality is what applies to the body-mind and gets governed and controlled by genes, environment, food, friends, atmosphere and .... " Inner Peace " ! However... realization or 'inner peace' doesn't require... end of personality! Personality is embedded in the bodymind will end only when the bodymind does... Realization is simply untouched by it! However, personality can indeed be touched by Inner Peace as... outer starts reflecting Inner! .... Irrespective of what changes might have taken place in you internally... I find a somewhat 'consistent' 'personality' in you that comes across in your messages... now... as well as 1-2 years back! You can yourself read 10 consecutive messages of now, and 10 consecutive messages from one year back... and, see! Or, you can ask someone else if you want! However, I don't consider it a bad thing! regards, ac. [NNB] Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illieusion@h...> wrote: > > This seems to be my day for " fessing up " . > > re: > > I am looking for a man/person/poster/member > > with 'no-personality', on this list, Bill! > > > > > > Please let me know... > > if you know 'one'! > > After being pestered by a similar question on > another list, I finally reflected that well, > I could say a bit out that... > > The individual on the other list was asking about > enlightenment, name someone who has... etc. etc. > I don't like the term enlightenment. It is an > overloaded term that has come to mean basically > nothing. But I did finally determine that I > could say *something*, and this is what I wrote: > > I would define as a " turning point " (a point > of no return at that) as when the " seeking " has > utterly and finally come to an end. It is the > point at which there are no longer spiritual > " questions " , no longer a wondering. It is not > because there is " knowledge " , however. That is to > say, it is not on account of having " answers " to > the spiritual questions. Rather, such questions > have come to be seen as empty. > > Putting it in those terms, I will say that there > is no sense of such seeking on this end. Others > can speak for themselves. > > I would not call that enlightenment, and I shun > that term in general. But maybe one day I won't. > Who knows. [There *is* a sense of radiace imbuing > everything.] > > I don't really like the word realization either. > It is a better word than enlightenment, but again > is a word that means too many things to too many > people. > > But a very *good* word is Peace. Deep, deep peace. > > Which is natural given the ceasing of any seeking. > > And there *is* a realization in this sense: there is > a realization that whatever happens is not through > a " doer " . All is seen to happen of its own nature. > And for this very reason all is seen as " one " , > because there is no separation of different " parts " > that originate action. Everything is seen as > emerging of its own accord, simultaneously and > together. > > Something someone said recently on another [errr *this*] > list comes to mind here: > > An " I " without any sense of a " me " . > > > [silver: are you listening? ] > > That's kinda it. > > There's no feeling in the sense of " I feel this " . > That is impossible. Everything is moving too much > for that to be possible. The living moment is > so alive and sparkling. It will never stop for > any " me " having *a* feeling. > > My guess is that the living moment is totally > alive in everyone, but the consciousness apparently > gets stuck on feelings, ideas, various " personal " > baggage. The living moment is totally impersonal. > So if there is any " personal stuff " then the > consciousness can't keep up with the quickness > of Now. > > It is just in the last few weeks that a recognition > has dawned that personal feelings are no longer > possible. > > To some that will sound like a tragedy. But the real > tragedy is being stuck in a " personal space " . > > > ........ > > So ac, perhaps that addresses your question about > whatever it was you were asking > > > I will add that while there is a " turning point " > (my view) where seeking does cease, immersion in > the Now is progressive. It is an ever-deepening > process. > > So once the seeking stops the sense of doer is > no longer there. And with no doer there is no > sense of " this person " . *However*, the old feelings > will continue to arise for some time (perhaps). > They will be seen through fairly readily. But > the vivid intensity of Now takes a while to > come forth. > > And I repeat: no one *does* anything in all of > this. Any " doer " is only apparent. > > Something that fits here [thanks Larry!]: > > The sense of " doership " is a false > " overlay " on experience. Any sense of > doership is irrelevant. But it has an > impact because it mars the simple purity > of what is. > > > > > > Bill > 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.