Guest guest Posted February 27, 2006 Report Share Posted February 27, 2006 In a message dated 2/26/2006 6:11:42 PM Pacific Standard Time, toombaru writes: > The whole world is within. > > L.E: Where is this ' " within' " you write about? When there is an inside, is > there also an outside? Where is this outside that is not " the whole world? " > Where reside those who do not agree, are they inside or outside? > Word games. Just sounds in the air. Hoots, hollars and whistles. > > Larry Epston Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 27, 2006 Report Share Posted February 27, 2006 toombaru > writes: > > > The whole world is within. > > > > L.E: Where is this ' " within' " you write about? When there is an inside, is > > there also an outside? Where is this outside that is not " the whole world? " > > Where reside those who do not agree, are they inside or outside? > > Word games. Just sounds in the air. Hoots, hollars and whistles. > > > > Larry Epston Very good question Larry. Did you ever get an answer? Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 27, 2006 Report Share Posted February 27, 2006 Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn wrote: > > toombaru > > writes: > > > > > The whole world is within. > > > > > > L.E: Where is this ' " within' " you write about? When there is an > inside, is > > > there also an outside? Where is this outside that is not " the > whole world? " > > > Where reside those who do not agree, are they inside or outside? > > > Word games. Just sounds in the air. Hoots, hollars and whistles. > > > > > > Larry Epston > > Very good question Larry. > > Did you ever get an answer? > > Bill > This concept cannot be approached directly. Any intellectualization occurs from within ....and arises from....the milieu of the identified entity....the illusion of self.....the occlusion, The self looks out and sees what appears to be a world.....when in fact the perceived 'world' is merely the content of consciousness. The 'self' is also merely the content of consciousness.......looking for consciousness itself. If one thinks of his dream last night......all of those people......mountains....and animals appeared to be 'outside' of the dream hero.......and in a way.....they were. ..........but the whole drama swirls within the thought stream.........it is all electro-chemical mnemonics...........nothing is really happening. 'You' can never find your self within your own dream.....and yet........everything in your dream is you. Concepts cannot capture this............Understanding can. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 28, 2006 Report Share Posted February 28, 2006 In a message dated 2/27/2006 11:25:44 AM Pacific Standard Time, Nisargadatta writes: " billrishel " <illusyn Re: Is There an Inside, an Outside? toombaru > writes: > > > The whole world is within. > > > > L.E: Where is this ' " within' " you write about? When there is an inside, is > > there also an outside? Where is this outside that is not " the whole world? " > > Where reside those who do not agree, are they inside or outside? > > Word games. Just sounds in the air. Hoots, hollars and whistles. > > > > Larry Epston Very good question Larry. Did you ever get an answer? Bill Very simply, it means there isn't stuff going on inside consciousness that is somehow interacting with stuff goin on outside of consciousness. It's all happening within consciousness, just as our nightly dreams are all 'within'. I figured the questions were just an attempt to be disagreeable and didn't really need an answer. Phil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 28, 2006 Report Share Posted February 28, 2006 In a message dated 2/28/2006 1:45:16 AM Pacific Standard Time, ADHHUB writes: > Very simply, it means there isn't stuff going on inside consciousness that > > is somehow interacting with stuff goin on outside of consciousness. L.E: Where is this " outside of consciousness? " Is there an " outside of consciousness? " There is Life Itself which has no inside or outside. There is no way or possibility to be " outside of consciousness. " Larry Epston Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 28, 2006 Report Share Posted February 28, 2006 Phil: Very simply, it means there isn't stuff going on inside consciousness that is somehow interacting with stuff goin on outside of consciousness. It's all happening within consciousness, just as our nightly dreams are all 'within'. >>>>>>>> Interesting. I don't know this sense of " inside consciousness " . Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 28, 2006 Report Share Posted February 28, 2006 Nisargadatta , ADHHUB wrote: > > > In a message dated 2/27/2006 11:25:44 AM Pacific Standard Time, > Nisargadatta writes: > > " billrishel " <illusyn > Re: Is There an Inside, an Outside? > > toombaru > > writes: > > > > > The whole world is within. > > > > > > L.E: Where is this ' " within' " you write about? When there is an > inside, is > > > there also an outside? Where is this outside that is not " the > whole world? " > > > Where reside those who do not agree, are they inside or outside? > > > Word games. Just sounds in the air. Hoots, hollars and whistles. > > > > > > Larry Epston > > Very good question Larry. > > Did you ever get an answer? > > Bill > > > > > > Very simply, it means there isn't stuff going on inside consciousness that > is somehow interacting with stuff goin on outside of consciousness. It's all > happening within consciousness, just as our nightly dreams are all 'within'. > I figured the questions were just an attempt to be disagreeable and didn't > really need an answer. > > Phil > > > >Hi Phil, reading your words.....it reminds me statements like " all there is is consciousness " .... indeed, there are many who hide behind such statements.... often....great ego-minds are attached to such statements....because it make them look very intelligent....in declaring this if one were realy conscious about the above statement.....one surely would no more be trapped in the imaginations of the imaginary and separated others Marc Ps: the One consciousnouss make it possible that we communicate.... but this One consciousness is in no relation to any concepts and " mind-games " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 28, 2006 Report Share Posted February 28, 2006 Nisargadatta , epston wrote: > > In a message dated 2/28/2006 1:45:16 AM Pacific Standard Time, ADHHUB > writes: > > > Very simply, it means there isn't stuff going on inside consciousness that > > > > is somehow interacting with stuff goin on outside of consciousness. > > L.E: Where is this " outside of consciousness? " Is there an " outside of > consciousness? " There is Life Itself which has no inside or outside. > There is no way or possibility to be " outside of consciousness. " > > Larry Epston there is no way or possibility to be outside of consciousness, so neither inside. but Larry, what the hell is this Life Itself?!? are you selling me something? if it is the case, tell more about the item Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 28, 2006 Report Share Posted February 28, 2006 In a message dated 2/28/2006 2:53:09 AM Pacific Standard Time, Nisargadatta writes: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 09:53:32 -0000 " billrishel " <illusyn Re: Is There an Inside, an Outside? Phil: Very simply, it means there isn't stuff going on inside consciousness that is somehow interacting with stuff goin on outside of consciousness. It's all happening within consciousness, just as our nightly dreams are all 'within'. >>>>>>>> Interesting. I don't know this sense of " inside consciousness " . Bill I don't know of a sense of that either. It's an abstract concept. There's this concept that imagines this thing called consciousness that creates this stuff called physical matter. It's natural to mentally separate the consciousness from the matter, both physically and substantially. We can pretend that we never imagined things to be this way, but mind operates by separating and discriminating in order to conceptualize, so I'm quite certain we all had this concept at one time. Since the concept postulates an 'outside' to consciousness, where all this physical matter exists, the new improved version of the concept simply reminds the conceptualizer that all that seemingly physical stuff like planets and people and such is actually not lying outside of this consciousness doohickey but is literally consciousness itself, in the same way that your nightly dream characters are not outside of your mind. If your comments were just an attempt to be disagreeable, then please disregard the explanation. Phil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 28, 2006 Report Share Posted February 28, 2006 In a message dated 2/28/2006 2:53:09 AM Pacific Standard Time, Nisargadatta writes: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 10:02:20 -0000 " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33 Re: Is There an Inside, an Outside? Nisargadatta , ADHHUB wrote: > > > In a message dated 2/27/2006 11:25:44 AM Pacific Standard Time, > Nisargadatta writes: > > " billrishel " <illusyn > Re: Is There an Inside, an Outside? > > toombaru > > writes: > > > > > The whole world is within. > > > > > > L.E: Where is this ' " within' " you write about? When there is an > inside, is > > > there also an outside? Where is this outside that is not " the > whole world? " > > > Where reside those who do not agree, are they inside or outside? > > > Word games. Just sounds in the air. Hoots, hollars and whistles. > > > > > > Larry Epston > > Very good question Larry. > > Did you ever get an answer? > > Bill > > > > > > Very simply, it means there isn't stuff going on inside consciousness that > is somehow interacting with stuff goin on outside of consciousness. It's all > happening within consciousness, just as our nightly dreams are all 'within'. > I figured the questions were just an attempt to be disagreeable and didn't > really need an answer. > > Phil > > > >Hi Phil, reading your words.....it reminds me statements like " all there is is consciousness " .... indeed, there are many who hide behind such statements.... often....great ego-minds are attached to such statements....because it make them look very intelligent....in declaring this if one were realy conscious about the above statement.....one surely would no more be trapped in the imaginations of the imaginary and separated others Marc Ps: the One consciousnouss make it possible that we communicate.... but this One consciousness is in no relation to any concepts and " mind-games " Welp, firstly, to me, if somebody repeats a concept that they conceptually comprehend, this doesn't imply to me that there's this huge ego monster that's pretending to be an intellectual genius. Hehe. It's juuuust a concept, dude. Secondly, I don't agree that one can't be " really conscious " of something but not be conscious of everything (That's how I interpret your comment, anyhoo.), and here I'm gonna give you some more ammunition for your judgmental perceptions. I've known that creation exists within consciousness long before I ever heard the concept. It seems I have the ability to look at pieces parts of All That Is and know these things to be so. I can then conceptualize what I know to be so. These concepts are not parroted ideas that sound cool, they are a conceptualized knowing. Now, before you grab the lanterns and pitchforks, this has no relationship to enlightenment. The reason this is so is that the totality of all that is, is a wholeness and does not consist of parts, and cannot be truly seen in parts. Also, this monstrous ego feat of intelligence is accomplished by ceasing the thoughts and admitting that mind/ego can never know anything that lies outside of mind. It's first necessary to admit that I know nothing, which I maintain. I've pleaded my ignorance before on this forum in the strongest terms I could find, and still you apparently don't believe me. But of course, this is your problem and not mine. Phil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 1, 2006 Report Share Posted March 1, 2006 In a message dated 2/28/2006 2:53:09 AM Pacific Standard Time, Nisargadatta writes: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 05:11:38 EST epston Re: Is There an Inside, an Outside? In a message dated 2/28/2006 1:45:16 AM Pacific Standard Time, ADHHUB writes: > Very simply, it means there isn't stuff going on inside consciousness that > > is somehow interacting with stuff goin on outside of consciousness. L.E: Where is this " outside of consciousness? " Is there an " outside of consciousness? " There is Life Itself which has no inside or outside. There is no way or possibility to be " outside of consciousness. " Larry Epston There is no outside of consciousness, which is why everything has to go on inside it. Hehe. That's what the concept is trying to say. Phil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 1, 2006 Report Share Posted March 1, 2006 Nisargadatta , ADHHUB wrote: > > > In a message dated 2/28/2006 2:53:09 AM Pacific Standard Time, > Nisargadatta writes: > > Tue, 28 Feb 2006 10:02:20 -0000 > " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33 > Re: Is There an Inside, an Outside? > > Nisargadatta , ADHHUB@ wrote: > > > > > > In a message dated 2/27/2006 11:25:44 AM Pacific Standard Time, > > Nisargadatta writes: > > > > " billrishel " <illusyn@> > > Re: Is There an Inside, an Outside? > > > > toombaru > > > writes: > > > > > > > The whole world is within. > > > > > > > > L.E: Where is this ' " within' " you write about? When there is > an > > inside, is > > > > there also an outside? Where is this outside that is not " the > > whole world? " > > > > Where reside those who do not agree, are they inside or > outside? > > > > Word games. Just sounds in the air. Hoots, hollars and > whistles. > > > > > > > > Larry Epston > > > > Very good question Larry. > > > > Did you ever get an answer? > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > Very simply, it means there isn't stuff going on inside > consciousness that > > is somehow interacting with stuff goin on outside of consciousness. > It's all > > happening within consciousness, just as our nightly dreams are > all 'within'. > > I figured the questions were just an attempt to be disagreeable and > didn't > > really need an answer. > > > > Phil > > > > > > > >Hi Phil, > > reading your words.....it reminds me statements like " all there is is > consciousness " .... > > indeed, there are many who hide behind such statements.... > > often....great ego-minds are attached to such statements....because > it make them look very intelligent....in declaring this > > if one were realy conscious about the above statement.....one surely > would no more be trapped in the imaginations of the imaginary and > separated others > > Marc > > Ps: the One consciousnouss make it possible that we communicate.... > but this One consciousness is in no relation to any concepts > and " mind-games " > > > > Welp, firstly, to me, if somebody repeats a concept that they conceptually > comprehend, this doesn't imply to me that there's this huge ego monster that's > pretending to be an intellectual genius. Hehe. It's juuuust a concept, dude. > > Secondly, I don't agree that one can't be " really conscious " of something > but not be conscious of everything (That's how I interpret your comment, > anyhoo.), and here I'm gonna give you some more ammunition for your judgmental > perceptions. I've known that creation exists within consciousness long before I > ever heard the concept. It seems I have the ability to look at pieces parts of > All That Is and know these things to be so. I can then conceptualize what I > know to be so. These concepts are not parroted ideas that sound cool, they > are a conceptualized knowing. > > Now, before you grab the lanterns and pitchforks, this has no relationship > to enlightenment. The reason this is so is that the totality of all that is, is > a wholeness and does not consist of parts, and cannot be truly seen in > parts. Also, this monstrous ego feat of intelligence is accomplished by ceasing > the thoughts and admitting that mind/ego can never know anything that lies > outside of mind. It's first necessary to admit that I know nothing, which I > maintain. I've pleaded my ignorance before on this forum in the strongest terms I > could find, and still you apparently don't believe me. But of course, this is > your problem and not mine. > > Phil > > > >Hi Phil, i have no problem....with whatever your consciousness is....don't worry.... you write: " I've known that creation exists within consciousness long before I > ever heard the concept " ...... are you still sure that you have known the truth....before...? " creation " is a subject of mind.......only a mind can speculate about " creation " .....because " creation " is related to time and space... ok....i accept that one go from one concept to other....during lifetime......and i also accept that some concepts are effective.....for some duration of time..... so....i think that " creation exist within consciousness " ...is just a concept...like many others.... you write: It seems I have the ability to look at pieces parts of > All That Is and know these things to be so. I can then conceptualize what I > know to be so. These concepts are not parroted ideas that sound cool, they > are a conceptualized knowing. " for " who " are you attached to this " conceptualized knowing " ....except than to yourself.....this busy working mind (intellect) i think that one day....you will leave all this your concepts....because it's impossible to get liberation....with those attachments.... you write: " The reason this is so is that the totality of all that is, is > a wholeness and does not consist of parts, and cannot be truly seen in > parts. Also, this monstrous ego feat of intelligence is accomplished by ceasing > the thoughts and admitting that mind/ego can never know anything that lies > outside of mind. It's first necessary to admit that I know nothing, which I > maintain. good attitude.......wish you to accomplish whole of this path.... Marc Ps: some are sitting on the top of a mountain of concepts.... of books.....to have little better view...... but whenever there is " another one " appearing (trap).....on the need for a concept.....one loose little of this " created " mountain....in sharing helpfully some nice reached concepts.....and books.... giving up the wish to climb anywhere.....is giving birth to a mountain....a mountain of deep inner peace and liberation.... Marc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 1, 2006 Report Share Posted March 1, 2006 Nisargadatta , ADHHUB wrote: > > > In a message dated 2/28/2006 2:53:09 AM Pacific Standard Time, > Nisargadatta writes: > > Tue, 28 Feb 2006 09:53:32 -0000 > " billrishel " <illusyn > Re: Is There an Inside, an Outside? > > Phil: > Very simply, it means there isn't stuff going on inside > consciousness that is somehow interacting with stuff goin > on outside of consciousness. It's all happening within > consciousness, just as our nightly dreams are all > 'within'. > > >>>>>>>> > > Interesting. > I don't know this sense of " inside consciousness " . > > > Bill > > <<< I don't know of a sense of that either. It's an abstract concept. There's this concept that imagines this thing called consciousness that creates this stuff called physical matter. It's natural to mentally separate the consciousness from the matter, both physically and substantially. We can pretend that we never imagined things to be this way, but mind operates by separating and discriminating in order to conceptualize, so I'm quite certain we all had this concept at one time. >>> My interest is in what is direct, immediate. That something could be *conceived as such* is not meaningful to me -- at least as pertaining to nondualism. <<< Since the concept postulates an 'outside' to consciousness, >>> Sorry, but I don't care to join you in postulating as such. Postulations are useful in science, mathematics, and software engineering, but not -- in my view -- in discussing nondualism. And if I *were* to postulate nondualistically, I would postulate: there is no self. The end. <snip> <<< If your comments were just an attempt to be disagreeable, then please disregard the explanation. Phil >>> To attempt to be disagreeable is not something that would occur to me. Perhaps there are those that find pleasure in that? Would that be like finding gratification in " kicking the dog " ? Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 1, 2006 Report Share Posted March 1, 2006 Nisargadatta , ADHHUB wrote: > > > In a message dated 2/28/2006 2:53:09 AM Pacific Standard Time, > Nisargadatta writes: > > Tue, 28 Feb 2006 05:11:38 EST > epston > Re: Is There an Inside, an Outside? > > In a message dated 2/28/2006 1:45:16 AM Pacific Standard Time, > ADHHUB > writes: > > > Very simply, it means there isn't stuff going on inside consciousness that > > > > > is somehow interacting with stuff goin on outside of consciousness. > > L.E: Where is this " outside of consciousness? " Is there an " outside of > consciousness? " There is Life Itself which has no inside or outside. > There is no way or possibility to be " outside of consciousness. " > > Larry Epston > > > > There is no outside of consciousness, which is why everything has to go on > inside it. Hehe. > That's what the concept is trying to say. > > Phil Then a notion of inside/outside with respect to consciousness is essentially meaningless. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 2, 2006 Report Share Posted March 2, 2006 In a message dated 3/1/2006 3:27:17 AM Pacific Standard Time, Nisargadatta writes: Wed, 01 Mar 2006 08:22:27 -0000 " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33 Re: Is There an Inside, an Outside? " creation " is a subject of mind.......only a mind can speculate about " creation " .....because " creation " is related to time and space... One more time we must revisit the notion that words reflect concepts only. What will it require in order for you to be sufficiently convinced of this that you no longer need to repeat it? Much like Toom, you're not truly listening to what is being said. As long as you remain enclosed in your own limited mind to such an extent that you can't even comprehend what is being said, how do you ever expect to move beyond it? Below, I said, " It seems I have the ability to look at pieces parts of > All That Is and know these things to be so. I can then conceptualize what I > know to be so. " This means a knowing is conceptualized. If it were not, we could not be discussing it, eh? for " who " are you attached to this " conceptualized knowing " ....except than to yourself.....this busy working mind (intellect) i think that one day....you will leave all this your concepts....because it's impossible to get liberation....with those attachments.... Of course. Here's the problem, Marc. You are here.....posting......for what?........for whom?.......Why? You are here flapping your neurons just like the rest of us, just like Toom who pretends to not even exist. Is there the possibility that there is something your illusory mind needs to imagine to comprehend before your illusory ego will stop the damn illusory thoughts and nonvolitionally let go of the illusion? Do you see how silly it all is to pretend there are no attachments just because you know how to point to the attachments of others? Yer damn straight I'm attached to concepts, but the first day I showed up on this forum I said that I don't resist the questions. I plan to ask them and answer them until there are no more questions. If you believe that you can cease your thoughts by choosing to cease them, you are deluded and it's an ego trap. You're here to experience the illusion, Marc, and your ego will not change any of it. You can sit around and talk about how detached you are or you can finish what you came here to do with passion, and get on to the next adventure. Trust me on this: When it comes to God vs ego, God is going to win. Phil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 2, 2006 Report Share Posted March 2, 2006 In a message dated 3/1/2006 3:27:17 AM Pacific Standard Time, Nisargadatta writes: " billrishel " <illusyn Re: Is There an Inside, an Outside? Nisargadatta , ADHHUB wrote: > > > In a message dated 2/28/2006 2:53:09 AM Pacific Standard Time, > Nisargadatta writes: > > Tue, 28 Feb 2006 09:53:32 -0000 > " billrishel " <illusyn > Re: Is There an Inside, an Outside? > > Phil: > Very simply, it means there isn't stuff going on inside > consciousness that is somehow interacting with stuff goin > on outside of consciousness. It's all happening within > consciousness, just as our nightly dreams are all > 'within'. > > >>>>>>>> > > Interesting. > I don't know this sense of " inside consciousness " . > > > Bill > > <<< I don't know of a sense of that either. It's an abstract concept. There's this concept that imagines this thing called consciousness that creates this stuff called physical matter. It's natural to mentally separate the consciousness from the matter, both physically and substantially. We can pretend that we never imagined things to be this way, but mind operates by separating and discriminating in order to conceptualize, so I'm quite certain we all had this concept at one time. >>> My interest is in what is direct, immediate. That something could be *conceived as such* is not meaningful to me -- at least as pertaining to nondualism. <<< Since the concept postulates an 'outside' to consciousness, >>> Sorry, but I don't care to join you in postulating as such. Postulations are useful in science, mathematics, and software engineering, but not -- in my view -- in discussing nondualism. And if I *were* to postulate nondualistically, I would postulate: there is no self. The end. Why are you here? To discuss nondualistically? Do you know that's not possible? When you say " there is no self " , does this imply the potential that there could be a self? Does stating that there is no something imply that there also is something else in existence? Do you see the nondualistic rabbit hole you've crawled into? You were the one who expressed an interest in what I said. Now you say you have no interest in such things. You seem to be in a state of confusion, wouldn't you say? Phil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 2, 2006 Report Share Posted March 2, 2006 In a message dated 3/1/2006 3:27:17 AM Pacific Standard Time, Nisargadatta writes: Wed, 01 Mar 2006 11:26:07 -0000 " billrishel " <illusyn Re: Is There an Inside, an Outside? Nisargadatta , ADHHUB wrote: > > > In a message dated 2/28/2006 2:53:09 AM Pacific Standard Time, > Nisargadatta writes: > > Tue, 28 Feb 2006 05:11:38 EST > epston > Re: Is There an Inside, an Outside? > > In a message dated 2/28/2006 1:45:16 AM Pacific Standard Time, > ADHHUB > writes: > > > Very simply, it means there isn't stuff going on inside consciousness that > > > > > is somehow interacting with stuff goin on outside of consciousness. > > L.E: Where is this " outside of consciousness? " Is there an " outside of > consciousness? " There is Life Itself which has no inside or outside. > There is no way or possibility to be " outside of consciousness. " > > Larry Epston > > > > There is no outside of consciousness, which is why everything has to go on > inside it. Hehe. > That's what the concept is trying to say. > > Phil Then a notion of inside/outside with respect to consciousness is essentially meaningless. Bill As long as one believes there is something going on outside of consciousness, the concept is very meaningful. Phil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 2, 2006 Report Share Posted March 2, 2006 Nisargadatta , ADHHUB wrote: > > > In a message dated 3/1/2006 3:27:17 AM Pacific Standard Time, > Nisargadatta writes: > > Wed, 01 Mar 2006 08:22:27 -0000 > " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33 > Re: Is There an Inside, an Outside? > > > > > > " creation " is a subject of mind.......only a mind can speculate > about " creation " .....because " creation " is related to time and > space... > > > One more time we must revisit the notion that words reflect concepts only. > What will it require in order for you to be sufficiently convinced of this that > you no longer need to repeat it? Much like Toom, you're not truly listening > to what is being said. As long as you remain enclosed in your own limited > mind to such an extent that you can't even comprehend what is being said, how do > you ever expect to move beyond it? i move behind....don't worry....and therefore, i don't need to answer this your fantastic question.....you wouldn't understand > > Do you see how silly it all is to pretend > there are no attachments just because you know how to point to the attachments > of others? Yer damn straight I'm attached to concepts, but the first day I > showed up on this forum I said that I don't resist the questions. I plan to > ask them and answer them until there are no more questions. If you believe that > you can cease your thoughts by choosing to cease them, you are deluded and > it's an ego trap. yes...thats what is greatest " dillemma " in here.....some ego mind have a mountain of attachements to be detached.... sure...they can't be detached " just like that " ....you are right but this still don't change the fact...that attachments need to be detached.....whenever....however......thats an individual problem......everybody is concerned of him/herself thoughts can't cease when there is a mountain of ego....you are right...... and it's also sure that there is no theories and concept existing....to get out of this misery....except an inner path.....a path of delusion.....and delusion....and delusion...... this take time.....i never told that this wouldn't take time.... You're here to experience the illusion, Marc, and your ego > will not change any of it. You can sit around and talk about how detached you > are or you can finish what you came here to do with passion, and get on to the > next adventure. Trust me on this: When it comes to God vs ego, God is going > to win. yes....i'm on a path of detachments.....at least i admit that i am on such path...... and yes....i feel endless peace ....deep peace....more and more...... because of this detachments...... i have no " passion " ....except to just be.....mySelf.....more and more...... wherever....and however.....here....or there you tell me about God...... i know where to find God.....i can assure you that God is not very far..... i trust in God, yes.....because i know God therefore i trust God within you....Phil......but thats all the trust " you " ....can expect from " me " .... Marc > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 4, 2006 Report Share Posted March 4, 2006 In a message dated 3/3/2006 11:35:42 PM Pacific Standard Time, Nisargadatta writes: Sat, 04 Mar 2006 04:24:00 -0000 " billrishel " <illusyn Re: Is There an Inside, an Outside? > > There is no outside of consciousness, which is why everything has to > go on > > inside it. Hehe. > > That's what the concept is trying to say. > > > > Phil > > Then a notion of inside/outside with respect to consciousness > is essentially meaningless. > > Bill > > > > As long as one believes there is something going on outside of > consciousness, the concept is very meaningful. > > Phil > And if one does not? Bill Then it is already clear, and is of little interest, but this doesn't cause the concept to suddenly be meaningless. Hehe. Phil Phil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 4, 2006 Report Share Posted March 4, 2006 Nisargadatta , ADHHUB wrote: > > > In a message dated 3/1/2006 3:27:17 AM Pacific Standard Time, > Nisargadatta writes: > > Wed, 01 Mar 2006 11:26:07 -0000 > " billrishel " <illusyn > Re: Is There an Inside, an Outside? > > Nisargadatta , ADHHUB@ wrote: > > > > > > In a message dated 2/28/2006 2:53:09 AM Pacific Standard Time, > > Nisargadatta writes: > > > > Tue, 28 Feb 2006 05:11:38 EST > > epston@ > > Re: Is There an Inside, an Outside? > > > > In a message dated 2/28/2006 1:45:16 AM Pacific Standard Time, > > ADHHUB@ > > writes: > > > > > Very simply, it means there isn't stuff going on inside > consciousness that > > > > > > > > is somehow interacting with stuff goin on outside of consciousness. > > > > L.E: Where is this " outside of consciousness? " Is there an > " outside of > > consciousness? " There is Life Itself which has no inside or outside. > > There is no way or possibility to be " outside of consciousness. " > > > > Larry Epston > > > > > > > > There is no outside of consciousness, which is why everything has to > go on > > inside it. Hehe. > > That's what the concept is trying to say. > > > > Phil > > Then a notion of inside/outside with respect to consciousness > is essentially meaningless. > > Bill > > > > As long as one believes there is something going on outside of > consciousness, the concept is very meaningful. > > Phil > And if one does not? Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 5, 2006 Report Share Posted March 5, 2006 The best course of action is to remain silent. Try whatever you may to find about the consiousness you will not succeed..There are various levels of consiousness.. Physical consiousness - 5 elements giving life force Cosmic Consiousness - beyond these 5 elements (one can only experience through silence and breath control) Universal consiousness - The Absolute unmanifested..one can merge with the absolute by remaing silent and by tapas. To attain this level one must have a GURU..who can guide us..Its like a Rocket going out for a journey to another planet. Rgds Raj Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 5, 2006 Report Share Posted March 5, 2006 Nisargadatta , " Raj " <rajrick707 wrote: > > The best course of action is to remain silent. That's like telling the wind to remain still. > Try whatever you may to find about the consiousness you will not > succeed.. True. There are various levels of consiousness.. Not true. > > Physical consiousness - 5 elements giving life force > Cosmic Consiousness - beyond these 5 elements (one can only experience > through silence and breath control) > Universal consiousness - The Absolute unmanifested..one can merge with > the absolute by remaing silent and by tapas. Baloney. > > To attain this level one must have a GURU.. His name is Sat. who can guide us..Its like > a Rocket going out for a journey to another planet. There are no other planets. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 5, 2006 Report Share Posted March 5, 2006 To attain this level one must have a GURU >egads! rajer dodger, how'd you come up with this?< - Raj Nisargadatta Sunday, March 05, 2006 11:49 AM Re: Is There an Inside, an Outside? The best course of action is to remain silent. Try whatever you may to find about the consiousness you will not succeed..There are various levels of consiousness.. Physical consiousness - 5 elements giving life force Cosmic Consiousness - beyond these 5 elements (one can only experience through silence and breath control) Universal consiousness - The Absolute unmanifested..one can merge with the absolute by remaing silent and by tapas. To attain this level one must have a GURU..who can guide us..Its like a Rocket going out for a journey to another planet. Rgds Raj ** 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 March 5, 2006 Report Share Posted March 5, 2006 Nisargadatta , " Fred " <thejman wrote: > > To attain this level one must have a GURU > > >egads! rajer dodger, how'd you come up with this?< isn't it clear? raj thinks to be the guru. > > > - > Raj > Nisargadatta > Sunday, March 05, 2006 11:49 AM > Re: Is There an Inside, an Outside? > > > The best course of action is to remain silent. > Try whatever you may to find about the consiousness you will not > succeed..There are various levels of consiousness.. > > Physical consiousness - 5 elements giving life force > Cosmic Consiousness - beyond these 5 elements (one can only experience > through silence and breath control) > Universal consiousness - The Absolute unmanifested..one can merge with > the absolute by remaing silent and by tapas. > > To attain this level one must have a GURU..who can guide us..Its like > a Rocket going out for a journey to another planet. > > Rgds > Raj ** > > 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 March 5, 2006 Report Share Posted March 5, 2006 (lol) - toombaru2006 Nisargadatta Sunday, March 05, 2006 12:04 PM Re: Is There an Inside, an Outside? Nisargadatta , " Raj " <rajrick707 wrote: > > The best course of action is to remain silent. That's like telling the wind to remain still. > Try whatever you may to find about the consiousness you will not > succeed.. True. There are various levels of consiousness.. Not true. > > Physical consiousness - 5 elements giving life force > Cosmic Consiousness - beyond these 5 elements (one can only experience > through silence and breath control) > Universal consiousness - The Absolute unmanifested..one can merge with > the absolute by remaing silent and by tapas. Baloney. > > To attain this level one must have a GURU.. His name is Sat. who can guide us..Its like > a Rocket going out for a journey to another planet. There are no other planets. toombaru ** 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...
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.