Guest guest Posted January 11, 2006 Report Share Posted January 11, 2006 In a message dated 1/11/2006 12:45:03 PM Pacific Standard Time, gdtige writes: I think Bill answered that question. I am the body concept is harmfull. That has so many impliciations. Patricia In the context of divinity, nothing at all is harmful. In the context of evolution, perfection reigns and there is also no harm. In the context of egos wanting to make evolution happen, there are many 'harmful' things, all of which ego is responsible for. The perception of need/desire, the use of thought to resolve the problem of desire, the belief in a separate self, the sense of doership, the lack of willingness and courage. All these things ca be seen as hurtful to the goal of awakening, including the idea that things are hurtful and that there is a goal. This is one of those questions that dissolves at any context other than the one in which we hurt each other verbally and physically in our daily lives. I doubt that Niz was speaking in that context. Phil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 11, 2006 Report Share Posted January 11, 2006 I think Bill answered that question. I am the body concept is harmfull. That has so many impliciations. Patricia --- ADHHUB a écrit : In a message dated 1/11/2006 11:19:54 AM Pacific Standard Time, nli10u writes: ----- Original Message ----- OConnor Patricia Nisargadatta Wednesday, January 11, 2006 9:55 AM harmfull I`ve been haunted by a question and still can`t get a straight answer. What is truly harmful? I remember reading an answer in Niz. book that was so simple, wish I could remember. I don`t have an answer yet. Help me with that, please. Patricia Hi Patricia: I would say this: Believing there is something truly harmful, makes it so. The 'lost innocence " of a soul, having eaten from the tree--- knowledge of good and evil, conclusively. Ana I agree. I'm trying to imagine in what context Niz would find something harmful. I'm curious about what he had to say. Phil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 11, 2006 Report Share Posted January 11, 2006 the body is the subject/object of incredible ecstasy when peace and light is restored in the body-mind-soul-spirit and this is called LOVE. not-two, Ana - OConnor Patricia Nisargadatta Wednesday, January 11, 2006 3:42 PM Re: Phil harmfull I think Bill answered that question. I am the body concept is harmfull. That has so many impliciations. Patricia --- ADHHUB a écrit : In a message dated 1/11/2006 11:19:54 AM Pacific Standard Time, nli10u writes: ----- Original Message ----- OConnor Patricia Nisargadatta Wednesday, January 11, 2006 9:55 AM harmfull I`ve been haunted by a question and still can`t get a straight answer. What is truly harmful? I remember reading an answer in Niz. book that was so simple, wish I could remember. I don`t have an answer yet. Help me with that, please. Patricia Hi Patricia: I would say this: Believing there is something truly harmful, makes it so. The 'lost innocence " of a soul, having eaten from the tree--- knowledge of good and evil, conclusively. Ana I agree. I'm trying to imagine in what context Niz would find something harmful. I'm curious about what he had to say. Phil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 12, 2006 Report Share Posted January 12, 2006 Nisargadatta , ADHHUB@A... wrote: > > > In a message dated 1/11/2006 12:45:03 PM Pacific Standard Time, > gdtige writes: > > I think Bill answered that question. I am the body > concept is harmfull. > That has so many impliciations. > Patricia > > > > In the context of divinity, nothing at all is harmful. In the context of > evolution, perfection reigns and there is also no harm. In the context of egos > wanting to make evolution happen, there are many 'harmful' things, all of which > ego is responsible for. > > The perception of need/desire, the use of thought to resolve the problem of > desire, the belief in a separate self, the sense of doership, the lack of > willingness and courage. All these things ca be seen as hurtful to the goal of > awakening, including the idea that things are hurtful and that there is a goal. > > This is one of those questions that dissolves at any context other than the > one in which we hurt each other verbally and physically in our daily lives. I > doubt that Niz was speaking in that context. > > Phil Nisargadatta spoke about harmful qualities in various situational contexts. From what I understand of his position on situational ethics, he says something like " Whatever prevents Self-knowledge is bad; whatever releases us from ignorance is good. " By Self-knowledge, in my understanding of the Master, he meant knowing <<all-is-as-it-is-and-all-as-is-is-all-there-is>> sorta thing. However he meant it, he seemed to always point their questions back on themselves, pushing the questioner to take a look inside of themselves for the answer. And, in my opinion, the Master's clue itself, if we follow it to its logical conclusion, leaves us in no doubt as to 'The Answer'. Thus, when we analyse the clue, we find the most reliable evidence for the only thing we can truly be sure of: 'I Am.' For if we ask ourselves what prevents our own Self-knowledge, we arrive at the logical conclusion that nothing binds us to ignorance so much as we do ourselves. In bondage to false ideas, ignorance, I bring myself to the ultimate harm; in the liberation of Self-knowledge, to the ultimate good. Nisargadatta always tried to help the questioners to wake up from the hypnotic trances they had fallen into, the dream that the world exists as something separate from them, rather than IN them. " The dream of the world is IN you, not outside you " he would probably say. It is our task to find out what is false about our dream and what is true. No one else can tell you what you already know for yourself - you have to KNOW the dream as false before you can find out what is true. What is left when the dream is over? Does the picture on the movie screen continue after the projector has been turned off? Self-knowledge is good; ignorance is bad. That which leads to Truth is harmless; that which leads to ignorance, to mistaken and false ideas and perceptions, is harmful. " Silver " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 12, 2006 Report Share Posted January 12, 2006 In a message dated 1/12/2006 1:44:24 AM Pacific Standard Time, silver-1069 writes: > I think Bill answered that question. I am the body > concept is harmfull. > That has so many impliciations. > Patricia > > > > In the context of divinity, nothing at all is harmful. In the context of > evolution, perfection reigns and there is also no harm. In the context of egos > wanting to make evolution happen, there are many 'harmful' things, all of which > ego is responsible for. > > The perception of need/desire, the use of thought to resolve the problem of > desire, the belief in a separate self, the sense of doership, the lack of > willingness and courage. All these things ca be seen as hurtful to the goal of > awakening, including the idea that things are hurtful and that there is a goal. > > This is one of those questions that dissolves at any context other than the > one in which we hurt each other verbally and physically in our daily lives. I > doubt that Niz was speaking in that context. > > Phil Nisargadatta spoke about harmful qualities in various situational contexts. From what I understand of his position on situational ethics, he says something like " Whatever prevents Self-knowledge is bad; whatever releases us from ignorance is good. " By Self-knowledge, in my understanding of the Master, he meant knowing <<all-is-as-it-is-and-all-as-is-is-all-there-is>> sorta thing. However he meant it, he seemed to always point their questions back on themselves, pushing the questioner to take a look inside of themselves for the answer. And, in my opinion, the Master's clue itself, if we follow it to its logical conclusion, leaves us in no doubt as to 'The Answer'. Thus, when we analyse the clue, we find the most reliable evidence for the only thing we can truly be sure of: 'I Am.' For if we ask ourselves what prevents our own Self-knowledge, we arrive at the logical conclusion that nothing binds us to ignorance so much as we do ourselves. In bondage to false ideas, ignorance, I bring myself to the ultimate harm; in the liberation of Self-knowledge, to the ultimate good. Nisargadatta always tried to help the questioners to wake up from the hypnotic trances they had fallen into, the dream that the world exists as something separate from them, rather than IN them. " The dream of the world is IN you, not outside you " he would probably say. It is our task to find out what is false about our dream and what is true. No one else can tell you what you already know for yourself - you have to KNOW the dream as false before you can find out what is true. What is left when the dream is over? Does the picture on the movie screen continue after the projector has been turned off? Self-knowledge is good; ignorance is bad. That which leads to Truth is harmless; that which leads to ignorance, to mistaken and false ideas and perceptions, is harmful. " Silver " Yup, I'm down wit all dat. Phil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 12, 2006 Report Share Posted January 12, 2006 - ADHHUB Nisargadatta Thursday, January 12, 2006 3:20 PM Re: Phil harmfull In a message dated 1/12/2006 1:44:24 AM Pacific Standard Time, silver-1069 writes: > I think Bill answered that question. I am the body > concept is harmfull. > That has so many impliciations. > Patricia > > > > In the context of divinity, nothing at all is harmful. In the context of > evolution, perfection reigns and there is also no harm. In the context of egos > wanting to make evolution happen, there are many 'harmful' things, all of which > ego is responsible for. > > The perception of need/desire, the use of thought to resolve the problem of > desire, the belief in a separate self, the sense of doership, the lack of > willingness and courage. All these things ca be seen as hurtful to the goal of > awakening, including the idea that things are hurtful and that there is a goal. > > This is one of those questions that dissolves at any context other than the > one in which we hurt each other verbally and physically in our daily lives. I > doubt that Niz was speaking in that context. > > Phil Nisargadatta spoke about harmful qualities in various situational contexts. From what I understand of his position on situational ethics, he says something like " Whatever prevents Self-knowledge is bad; whatever releases us from ignorance is good. " By Self-knowledge, in my understanding of the Master, he meant knowing <<all-is-as-it-is-and-all-as-is-is-all-there-is>> sorta thing. However he meant it, he seemed to always point their questions back on themselves, pushing the questioner to take a look inside of themselves for the answer. And, in my opinion, the Master's clue itself, if we follow it to its logical conclusion, leaves us in no doubt as to 'The Answer'. Thus, when we analyse the clue, we find the most reliable evidence for the only thing we can truly be sure of: 'I Am.' For if we ask ourselves what prevents our own Self-knowledge, we arrive at the logical conclusion that nothing binds us to ignorance so much as we do ourselves. In bondage to false ideas, ignorance, I bring myself to the ultimate harm; in the liberation of Self-knowledge, to the ultimate good. Nisargadatta always tried to help the questioners to wake up from the hypnotic trances they had fallen into, the dream that the world exists as something separate from them, rather than IN them. " The dream of the world is IN you, not outside you " he would probably say. It is our task to find out what is false about our dream and what is true. No one else can tell you what you already know for yourself - you have to KNOW the dream as false before you can find out what is true. What is left when the dream is over? Does the picture on the movie screen continue after the projector has been turned off? Self-knowledge is good; ignorance is bad. That which leads to Truth is harmless; that which leads to ignorance, to mistaken and false ideas and perceptions, is harmful. " Silver " Yup, I'm down wit all dat. Phil It's almost an imperceptible shift of awareness, from seeing outside to self-and world being inside consciousness, aware. But what a difference this makes. Viva la difference!!! Ana Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 13, 2006 Report Share Posted January 13, 2006 Nisargadatta , " Anna Ruiz " <nli10u@c...> wrote: > > > - > ADHHUB@A... > Nisargadatta > Thursday, January 12, 2006 3:20 PM > Re: Phil harmfull > > > > In a message dated 1/12/2006 1:44:24 AM Pacific Standard Time, > silver-1069@h... writes: > > > I think Bill answered that question. I am the body > > concept is harmfull. > > That has so many impliciations. > > Patricia > > > > > > > > In the context of divinity, nothing at all is harmful. In the > context of > > evolution, perfection reigns and there is also no harm. In the > context of egos > > wanting to make evolution happen, there are many 'harmful' things, > all of which > > ego is responsible for. > > > > The perception of need/desire, the use of thought to resolve the > problem of > > desire, the belief in a separate self, the sense of doership, the > lack of > > willingness and courage. All these things ca be seen as hurtful to > the goal of > > awakening, including the idea that things are hurtful and that > there is a goal. > > > > This is one of those questions that dissolves at any context other > than the > > one in which we hurt each other verbally and physically in our > daily lives. I > > doubt that Niz was speaking in that context. > > > > Phil > > Nisargadatta spoke about harmful qualities in various situational > contexts. From what I understand of his position on situational > ethics, he says something like " Whatever prevents Self-knowledge is > bad; whatever releases us from ignorance is good. " > > By Self-knowledge, in my understanding of the Master, he meant > knowing <<all-is-as-it-is-and-all-as-is-is-all-there-is>> sorta > thing. However he meant it, he seemed to always point their > questions back on themselves, pushing the questioner to take a look > inside of themselves for the answer. And, in my opinion, the > Master's clue itself, if we follow it to its logical conclusion, > leaves us in no doubt as to 'The Answer'. > > Thus, when we analyse the clue, we find the most reliable evidence > for the only thing we can truly be sure of: 'I Am.' For if we ask > ourselves what prevents our own Self-knowledge, we arrive at the > logical conclusion that nothing binds us to ignorance so much as we > do ourselves. In bondage to false ideas, ignorance, I bring myself > to the ultimate harm; in the liberation of Self-knowledge, to the > ultimate good. > > Nisargadatta always tried to help the questioners to wake up from the > hypnotic trances they had fallen into, the dream that the world > exists as something separate from them, rather than IN them. " The > dream of the world is IN you, not outside you " he would probably > say. It is our task to find out what is false about our dream and > what is true. > > No one else can tell you what you already know for yourself - you > have to KNOW the dream as false before you can find out what is > true. What is left when the dream is over? Does the picture on the > movie screen continue after the projector has been turned off? > > Self-knowledge is good; ignorance is bad. That which leads to Truth > is harmless; that which leads to ignorance, to mistaken and false > ideas and perceptions, is harmful. > > " Silver " > > > > > Yup, I'm down wit all dat. > > Phil > > > It's almost an imperceptible shift of awareness, from seeing outside to > self-and world being inside consciousness, aware. But what a difference this makes. > > Viva la difference!!! > > Ana Makes it hard to drive sometimes. Hehe. " 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.