Guest guest Posted February 12, 2006 Report Share Posted February 12, 2006 Comments follow Maharaj: Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj: " As the Absolute, you were free from all concepts, including the primary concept " I Am " . You did not have this concept " I Am " in the course of the nine months in the womb. Understand this state of affairs; the concept " I Am " comes spontaneously and goes spontaneously. Amazingly, when it appears, it is accepted as real. All subsequent misconceptions arise from that feeling of reality in the " I Amness " . Why am I totally free? Because I have understood the unreality of that 'I Am'. " ~Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj from " Consciousness and the Absolute " As I Am, Epston interpretation: " As the Absolute, I Am free from all concepts, including the primary concept " I Am " . I did not have this concept " I Am " in the course of the nine months in the womb. Only after I was born and as I exist in the ordinary world do I have the concept " I Am. " Understand this state of affairs; the concept " I Am " comes spontaneously and goes spontaneously. When it goes spontaneously, I Am the absolute with no concept of " I Am. " When it comes spontaneously, I exist in the ordinary world with the concept of " I Am. " Amazingly, when it appears, it is accepted as real. Amazingly when it disappears It is accepted as unreal. All subsequent misconceptions arise from that feeling of reality in the " I Amness " . All subsequent misconceptions disappear when the condition of the absolute is realized. Why am I totally free? Because I have understood the unreality of that 'I Am' " when known from the state of absolute being, and the existence of the state of " I Am " in the midst of ordinary life. Larry Epston As I Am, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 12, 2006 Report Share Posted February 12, 2006 In a message dated 2/12/2006 1:30:12 PM Pacific Standard Time, s.petersilge writes: > Nisargadatta , epston wrote: > > >Why am I totally free? > >Because I have understood > >the unreality of that 'I Am' " L.E: From where does he understand " the unreality of that 'I AM?' If it is from the absolute, then he is not absolutely free. If it is from the everyday, then he is in the ordinary condition of " I Am' which he says is unreal. Which do you think it is from your realm of the unreal? Larry Epston Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 12, 2006 Report Share Posted February 12, 2006 Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj: " As the Absolute, you were free from all concepts, including the primary concept " I Am " . You did not have this concept " I Am " in the course of the nine months in the womb. Understand this state of affairs; the concept " I Am " comes spontaneously and goes spontaneously. Amazingly, when it appears, it is accepted as real. All subsequent misconceptions arise from that feeling of reality in the " I Amness " . Why am I totally free? Because I have understood the unreality of that 'I Am'. " ~Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj from " Consciousness and the Absolute " As I Am, M ---------- zie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 12, 2006 Report Share Posted February 12, 2006 Nisargadatta , epston wrote: >Why am I totally free? >Because I have understood >the unreality of that 'I Am' " >when known from the state of absolute being, >and the existence of the state of " I Am " >in the midst of ordinary life. > >Larry Epston well... who still depends on such states at least is not *absolutely* free... from that point of view... best wishes Stefan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 12, 2006 Report Share Posted February 12, 2006 > " As the Absolute, > I Am free from all concepts, > including the primary concept " I Am " . > > I did not have this concept " I Am " > in the course of the nine months > in the womb. > > Only after I was born and as I exist in the > ordinary world do I have the concept " I Am. " > > Understand this state of affairs; > the concept " I Am " > comes spontaneously and > goes spontaneously. > > When it goes spontaneously, > I Am the absolute with no concept of " I Am. " > When it comes spontaneously, > I exist in the ordinary world with the concept of " I Am. " > > Amazingly, when it appears, > it is accepted as real. > > Amazingly when it disappears > It is accepted as unreal. > > All subsequent misconceptions > arise from that feeling of reality > in the " I Amness " . > > All subsequent misconceptions > disappear when the condition of > the absolute is realized. > > Why am I totally free? > > Because I have understood > the unreality of that 'I Am' " > when known from the state of absolute being, > and the existence of the state of " I Am " > in the midst of ordinary life. > > Larry Epston > > > > > As I Am, ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 13, 2006 Report Share Posted February 13, 2006 In a message dated 2/12/2006 2:40:18 PM Pacific Standard Time, Nisargadatta writes: epston Re: Re: I Am In a message dated 2/12/2006 1:30:12 PM Pacific Standard Time, s.petersilge writes: > Nisargadatta , epston wrote: > > >Why am I totally free? > >Because I have understood > >the unreality of that 'I Am' " L.E: From where does he understand " the unreality of that 'I AM?' If it is from the absolute, then he is not absolutely free. If it is from the everyday, then he is in the ordinary condition of " I Am' which he says is unreal. Which do you think it is from your realm of the unreal? Larry Epston Mayhaps it's a necessarily conceptualized interpretation of an absolute 'knowing' which understandably takes on the odor of I Amness which implies I Am not-ness, both of which are 'known' to be unreal. There's a paradox involved in asking a mind/ego to tell us about enlightenment, and yet another as soon as an answer is 'understood'. Phil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 13, 2006 Report Share Posted February 13, 2006 Nisargadatta , epston wrote: >L.E: From where does he understand " the unreality of that 'I AM?' >If it is from the absolute, then he is not absolutely free. >If it is from the everyday, then he is in the ordinary condition of " I >Am' which he says is unreal. Which do you think it is from your realm >of the unreal? the absolute is the everyday best wishes Stefan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 13, 2006 Report Share Posted February 13, 2006 On Feb 13, 2006, at 4:34 AM, Nisargadatta wrote: >> Nisargadatta , epston wrote: >> >>> Why am I totally free? >>> Because I have understood >>> the unreality of that 'I Am' " > > L.E: From where does he understand " the unreality of that 'I AM?' > If it is from the absolute, then he is not absolutely free. > If it is from the everyday, then he is in the ordinary condition of > " I Am' > which he says is unreal. > Which do you think it is from your realm of the unreal? > > Larry Epston > > > > > Mayhaps it's a necessarily conceptualized interpretation of an absolute > 'knowing' which understandably takes on the odor of I Amness which > implies I Am > not-ness, both of which are 'known' to be unreal. > > There's a paradox involved in asking a mind/ego to tell us about > enlightenment, and yet another as soon as an answer is 'understood'. > > Phil > P: All understandings and realizations happens to a brain. The absolute neither needs nor does understand anything. So in this sense all understandings are unreal, meaning transitory. All that knowing will disappear with death. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 14, 2006 Report Share Posted February 14, 2006 Why am I totally free? Because I have understood the unreality of that 'I Am'. " !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Bill Nisargadatta , Pete S <pedsie4 wrote: > > Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj: > > " As the Absolute, > you were free from all concepts, > including the primary concept " I Am " . > > You did not have this concept " I Am " > in the course of the nine months > in the womb. > > Understand this state of affairs; > the concept " I Am " > comes spontaneously and > goes spontaneously. > > Amazingly, when it appears, > it is accepted as real. > > All subsequent misconceptions > arise from that feeling of reality > in the " I Amness " . > > Why am I totally free? > > Because I have understood > the unreality of that 'I Am'. " > > ~Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj from > " Consciousness and the Absolute " > > > As I Am, > > M > ---------- > > zie > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 14, 2006 Report Share Posted February 14, 2006 In a message dated 2/13/2006 5:16:05 PM Pacific Standard Time, illusyn writes: > Why am I totally free? > > Because I have understood > the unreality of that 'I Am'. " > > !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! > > Bill L.E: Who is saying that, and where are they saying it from? Does the background speak, it the foreground real? Larry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 15, 2006 Report Share Posted February 15, 2006 Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn wrote: > > Why am I totally free? > > Because I have understood > the unreality of that 'I Am'. " > > !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! > > Bill Are you totally free, Bill, or do you just like this sentence? Len Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 15, 2006 Report Share Posted February 15, 2006 Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> wrote: > > > > > > Why am I totally free? > > > > Because I have understood > > the unreality of that 'I Am'. " > > > > !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! > > > > Bill > > > Are you totally free, Bill, or do you just like this sentence? > > Len >>>>>>>> What does " totally free " mean? Yes I like that sentence, and I like it because " I Am " *is* unreal, and because it is something that many don't get. So I like to see that pointed out so directly. The statement is from the " advanced " teachings of Nisargadatta. There are other teachings of his that seem to contradtict the statement. Those teachings are the elementary teachings. To see the advanced teaches consult *Prior to Consciousness* and *Consciousness and the Absolute*. For the elementary teachings consult *I Am That*. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 16, 2006 Report Share Posted February 16, 2006 Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Why am I totally free? > > > > > > Because I have understood > > > the unreality of that 'I Am'. " > > > > > > !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > Are you totally free, Bill, or do you just like this sentence? > > > > Len > >>>>>>>> > What does " totally free " mean? You wrote it so I guess you know? > Yes I like that sentence, and I > like it because " I Am " *is* unreal, > and because it is something that > many don't get. So I like to see > that pointed out so directly. Is " I am " unreal to you or do you just like the thought that " I am " is unreal? Len > The statement is from the " advanced " > teachings of Nisargadatta. There are > other teachings of his that seem to > contradtict the statement. Those > teachings are the elementary teachings. > > To see the advanced teaches consult > *Prior to Consciousness* and > *Consciousness and the Absolute*. > > For the elementary teachings consult > *I Am That*. > > > Bill > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 16, 2006 Report Share Posted February 16, 2006 Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why am I totally free? > > > > > > > > Because I have understood > > > > the unreality of that 'I Am'. " > > > > > > > > !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > Are you totally free, Bill, or do you just like this sentence? > > > > > > Len > > >>>>>>>> > > > > What does " totally free " mean? > > > > You wrote it so I guess you know? Those were Nisargadatta's words. > > > Yes I like that sentence, and I > > like it because " I Am " *is* unreal, > > and because it is something that > > many don't get. So I like to see > > that pointed out so directly. > > > > Is " I am " unreal to you or do you just like the thought that " I am " > is unreal? > > Len >>>>>>> " I am " is a meaningless expression to me. I mean that as used in the " metaphysical " sense. I have no problem with saying, " I am ready to eat, " and such. It seems to me that " I " is just a personal pronoun and that there is no metaphysical entity that corresponds to it. What about you Len? Bill > > > The statement is from the " advanced " > > teachings of Nisargadatta. There are > > other teachings of his that seem to > > contradtict the statement. Those > > teachings are the elementary teachings. > > > > To see the advanced teaches consult > > *Prior to Consciousness* and > > *Consciousness and the Absolute*. > > > > For the elementary teachings consult > > *I Am That*. > > > > > > Bill > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 16, 2006 Report Share Posted February 16, 2006 Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > > wrote: > > > > > Why am I totally free? > > > > > > > > > > Because I have understood > > > > > the unreality of that 'I Am'. " > > > > > > > > > > !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > Are you totally free, Bill, or do you just like this sentence? > > > What does " totally free " mean? > > You wrote it so I guess you know? > Those were Nisargadatta's words. And why do you repeat them? > > > Yes I like that sentence, and I > > > like it because " I Am " *is* unreal, > > > and because it is something that > > > many don't get. So I like to see > > > that pointed out so directly. > > > > > > > > Is " I am " unreal to you or do you just like the thought that " I am " > > is unreal? > > > > Len > " I am " is a meaningless expression to me. > I mean that as used in the " metaphysical " > sense. I have no problem with saying, > " I am ready to eat, " and such. > > It seems to me that " I " is just a personal > pronoun and that there is no metaphysical > entity that corresponds to it. > > What about you Len? > > > Bill " I " is a sheaf of thoughts and connected reactions. It sometimes seems more real than some other times. So I´m not totally free ;-) Len Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 16, 2006 Report Share Posted February 16, 2006 Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " > <lissbon2002@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Why am I totally free? > > > > > > > > > > > > Because I have understood > > > > > > the unreality of that 'I Am'. " > > > > > > > > > > > > !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > Are you totally free, Bill, or do you just like this > sentence? > > > > > > > What does " totally free " mean? > > > You wrote it so I guess you know? > > > > > > Those were Nisargadatta's words. > > > > > And why do you repeat them? > Pete posted the words. I applauded them. That's it. end of discussion. Bill > > > > > Yes I like that sentence, and I > > > > like it because " I Am " *is* unreal, > > > > and because it is something that > > > > many don't get. So I like to see > > > > that pointed out so directly. > > > > > > > > > > > > Is " I am " unreal to you or do you just like the thought that " I > am " > > > is unreal? > > > > > > Len > > > > > > " I am " is a meaningless expression to me. > > I mean that as used in the " metaphysical " > > sense. I have no problem with saying, > > " I am ready to eat, " and such. > > > > It seems to me that " I " is just a personal > > pronoun and that there is no metaphysical > > entity that corresponds to it. > > > > What about you Len? > > > > > > Bill > > > > > " I " is a sheaf of thoughts and connected reactions. > It sometimes seems more real than some other times. > So I´m not totally free ;-) > > Len > 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.