Another view of acceptance (no-me: Acceptance or Denial of What Isn't)

[Guest guest]

billrishel <illusyn wrote: Nisargadatta ,

" Adamson " <adamson wrote:

>

>

>

> It seems to me that " acceptance " is impossible to do. Now what do I

mean by that? Simply that whatever " it " is that " I " want

> to or should " accept " (for whatever reason such as reduce stress,

think it's a 'holy thing' to do, will make me enlightened,

> etc) is something attempted AFTER, or as a reaction to, what ALREADY

is the case. In other words, *I " and *it* are not-two.

> There's only the " fact " of " what is " . Then an imagined

splitting/differentiation takes places which posits the believed in

> assumption that there is a *me* separate from and over and again an

*other* or an *it* that this *me* ( " I " ) needs to or

> should accept in order to eliminate the stress, become enlightened,

etc. This effort or battle is about as effective as

> yelling at an echo to go away!

>

> To put it another way, when resistance is no more, when contraction

melts, so-called *acceptance* is, but then there is no

> *accepted* or *acceptor* either. There is simply openness or space.

>

> Michael

>

 

Yes, acceptance isn't *done*.

 

Acceptance is unconditional surrender to What Is.

 

And yes, acceptance means no-resistance.

 

When immersion in the Now is complete

acceptance is not an issue, cannot be

an issue.

 

 

Bill

 

 

....Just curious....here!

 

What happens when there is " What Is Not " ?

 

Isn't it true that there must not be either " Acceptance or Denial " in a concept

of Avaita? Isn't 'Acceptance' implying " Denial " . And acceptance must imply

'taking' instead of 'giving'? Since the avaitar concept, Taking or Giving are

not also Two.

 

For example, acceptance of what is given can put a recipient into a very

uncomfortable situation. For example, when a child is let playing with

poisonous snake. There must be conditional there implying that the snake is

dangerous. In this case, predisposition is needed. In this case, a gift must

be given!

 

When a giver and receiver are separated, then the situation cannot be

unconditional. What is given, must not be kept, like gifts, or presents, which

can only be given, not kept!! Since both giving and taking imply the same

thing.

 

For example, the gift of love, which cannot be kept. And the recipient cannot

and should not accept or denial this either.

 

Should a gift is denied, in this case, the owner of that gift must not be

satisfied. So he/she must neither accept or deny the consequences. Another

word, whatever the consequences of acceptance or denial of such " What Is or What

Isn't " , depends on one's own pre-disposition (Samsakara)!! And samsakara is

learned...based on Karma.

 

~no-me~

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

**

 

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.