Guest guest Posted March 9, 2006 Report Share Posted March 9, 2006 In a message dated 3/9/2006 6:00:57 AM Pacific Standard Time, Nisargadatta writes: Thu, 09 Mar 2006 09:46:09 -0000 " s_i_l_v_e_r1069 " <silver-1069 Silly ego game #3 (((Re: IPercpetion Without Thinking Nisargadatta , ADHHUB wrote: > > > In a message dated 3/8/2006 7:43:33 AM Pacific Standard Time, > Nisargadatta writes: > > Wed, 08 Mar 2006 14:36:16 -0000 > " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002 > Silly ego game #3 (((Re: IPercpetion Without Thinking > > > > Hi Bill, > > Convictions, opinions, thought-images all together with emotional > responses triggered by them, create an imaginary world, which could > be called illusory, although it causes a lot of real suffering, > conflicts, wars. > As long as you suffer because of it, calling it an illusion is > simply another illusory escape. As long as the ego dynamic operates, > calling it an illusion is a lie. Really seeing that it´s an ilusion, > is the end of the ego. > Ego, trying to escape suffering has found many ways, among which a > ways of belief that it isn´t real. This belief makes for a double > illusion. The activity of the ego takes place now and can be > observed now. Don´t call it real, don´t call it unreal, simply watch > it. If you deny and ignore it, it will remain underneath covered by > a belief in it´s illusory nature. > You only know that something was an illusion when it is gone, never > before. If you think you know it before, it´s simply the expression > of a belief which you cling to in order not to deal with the > discomfort which it brings. > Here´s something from K, whom you like I think: > > > " > The Cultivation of Detachment > > There is only attachment; there is no such thing as detachment. The > mind invents detachment as a reaction to the pain of attachment. > When you react to attachment by becoming " detached, " you are > attached to something else. So that whole process is one of > attachment. You are attached to your wife or your husband, to your > children, to ideas, to tradition, to authority, and so on; and your > reaction to that attachment is detachment. The cultivation of > detachment is the outcome of sorrow, pain. You want to escape from > the pain of attachment, and your escape is to find something to > which you think you can be attached. So there is only attachment, > and it is a stupid mind that cultivates detachment. All the books > say, " Be detached, " but what is the truth of the matter? If you > observe your own mind, you will see an extraordinary thing†" that > through cultivating detachment, your mind is becoming attached to > something else. " > > The Book of Life - March 8 > > Greetings, > > Len > > > > > Yessss! And that's the truth! Well said, including your words, Len. > > Phil ************* There we go. The Truth in a nutshell and Life goes on. That's why I say live life to it's fullest in whatever way makes you happy. Forget trying to detach yourself from it. It's futile. Know it all to be an illusion and then move on. Enjoy it! " Silver " Whew! I'm glad we finally got that settled. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 10, 2006 Report Share Posted March 10, 2006 Nisargadatta , ADHHUB wrote: > > > In a message dated 3/8/2006 8:10:10 PM Pacific Standard Time, > Nisargadatta writes: > > Thu, 09 Mar 2006 04:04:58 -0000 > " billrishel " <illusyn > Silly ego game #3 (((Re: IPercpetion Without Thinking > > Nisargadatta , ADHHUB@ wrote: > > > > > > In a message dated 3/8/2006 7:43:33 AM Pacific Standard Time, > > Nisargadatta writes: > > > > Wed, 08 Mar 2006 13:36:41 -0000 > > " billrishel " <illusyn@> > > Silly ego game #3 (((Re: IPercpetion Without Thinking > > > > Nisargadatta , ADHHUB@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > In a message dated 3/7/2006 5:32:52 PM Pacific Standard Time, > > > Nisargadatta writes: > > > > > > Tue, 07 Mar 2006 23:31:48 -0000 > > > " billrishel " <illusyn@> > > > Silly ego game #3 (((Re: IPercpetion Without Thinking > > > > > > Silly ego game #3 is where we learn to consistently bring ourselves > > to a > > > state of peace in meditation, and then believe that we've > accomplished > > > something > > > almost no human has ever been able to do before. Hehe. Since this > > has no > > > relationship to noticing the truth of our ego dynamics, those > dynamics > > > continue > > > all during our non-meditating time. In order to pretend that this > > > isn't so, we > > > elevate ourselves above others and project our thinkingness and > > struggle > > > onto them, all the while hiding behind the obscurity of our own > words > > > so that > > > nobody can be clear enough about what we're saying to really be > > able to > > > challenge us. > > > > > > ~~~~~ > > > B: > > > A couple of questions, Phil: > > > Do you consider the " ego " to actually exist, or to only > > > " appear " to exist? > > > > > > > > > > > > P: Thoughts. Do you imply that it can therefore be ignored? > > > > B: > > > > What needs to be *attended to* if everything happens > > of its own nature? When immersed in the Now there is > > no " problem " . > > > > A sign of " immersed in the Now " is *sparkle*/life. > > > > > > > > P: When " immersed in the Now " , is this the same as knowing who you ARE? > > > > > > > > P: But " noticing " as something that is a " self-observation " > > is not in the Now (my view) as it requires time to occur. > > > > P: It doesn't require time to notice. Noticing occurs > in the timeless moment of now, because it doesn't require > thought. It occurs as a flash of awareness. What requires > time is the getting the hell out of the way so that this can > occur. > > Phil > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > Noticing isn't noticing without a *recognition* > of what is noticed. That's more than one step > right there, therefore time. > > Bill > > > > Stop that, Bill! Hehe. > Lets see, there's the noticing, then there's the recognition of the > noticing, then there's the acknowledgment of the recognition of the noticing, then > there's the knowing of the acknowledging of the recognition of the noticing. > ~ > This is just more mental dissection and analysis. There is the noticing of > the truth. Whatever sort of menturbation you want to do with it after that is > your affair. > > Phil > So you are not talking about noticing *something*? You are talking about noticing without an object? If so that is a very unusual use of the term noticing. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 10, 2006 Report Share Posted March 10, 2006 In a message dated 3/9/2006 5:37:01 PM Pacific Standard Time, Nisargadatta writes: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 00:10:02 -0000 " billrishel " <illusyn Silly ego game #3 (((Re: IPercpetion Without Thinking Nisargadatta , ADHHUB wrote: > > > In a message dated 3/8/2006 8:10:10 PM Pacific Standard Time, > Nisargadatta writes: > > Thu, 09 Mar 2006 04:04:58 -0000 > " billrishel " <illusyn > Silly ego game #3 (((Re: IPercpetion Without Thinking > > Nisargadatta , ADHHUB@ wrote: > > > > > > In a message dated 3/8/2006 7:43:33 AM Pacific Standard Time, > > Nisargadatta writes: > > > > Wed, 08 Mar 2006 13:36:41 -0000 > > " billrishel " <illusyn@> > > Silly ego game #3 (((Re: IPercpetion Without Thinking > > > > Nisargadatta , ADHHUB@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > In a message dated 3/7/2006 5:32:52 PM Pacific Standard Time, > > > Nisargadatta writes: > > > > > > Tue, 07 Mar 2006 23:31:48 -0000 > > > " billrishel " <illusyn@> > > > Silly ego game #3 (((Re: IPercpetion Without Thinking > > > > > > Silly ego game #3 is where we learn to consistently bring ourselves > > to a > > > state of peace in meditation, and then believe that we've > accomplished > > > something > > > almost no human has ever been able to do before. Hehe. Since this > > has no > > > relationship to noticing the truth of our ego dynamics, those > dynamics > > > continue > > > all during our non-meditating time. In order to pretend that this > > > isn't so, we > > > elevate ourselves above others and project our thinkingness and > > struggle > > > onto them, all the while hiding behind the obscurity of our own > words > > > so that > > > nobody can be clear enough about what we're saying to really be > > able to > > > challenge us. > > > > > > ~~~~~ > > > B: > > > A couple of questions, Phil: > > > Do you consider the " ego " to actually exist, or to only > > > " appear " to exist? > > > > > > > > > > > > P: Thoughts. Do you imply that it can therefore be ignored? > > > > B: > > > > What needs to be *attended to* if everything happens > > of its own nature? When immersed in the Now there is > > no " problem " . > > > > A sign of " immersed in the Now " is *sparkle*/life. > > > > > > > > P: When " immersed in the Now " , is this the same as knowing who you ARE? > > > > > > > > P: But " noticing " as something that is a " self-observation " > > is not in the Now (my view) as it requires time to occur. > > > > P: It doesn't require time to notice. Noticing occurs > in the timeless moment of now, because it doesn't require > thought. It occurs as a flash of awareness. What requires > time is the getting the hell out of the way so that this can > occur. > > Phil > > >>>>>>>>>>>> > > Noticing isn't noticing without a *recognition* > of what is noticed. That's more than one step > right there, therefore time. > > Bill > > > > Stop that, Bill! Hehe. > Lets see, there's the noticing, then there's the recognition of the > noticing, then there's the acknowledgment of the recognition of the noticing, then > there's the knowing of the acknowledging of the recognition of the noticing. > ~ > This is just more mental dissection and analysis. There is the noticing of > the truth. Whatever sort of menturbation you want to do with it after that is > your affair. > > Phil > So you are not talking about noticing *something*? You are talking about noticing without an object? If so that is a very unusual use of the term noticing. Bill Yes, I mean a realization beyond mind/memory that arrives as a knowing. This is the only way realizations actually occur. Everything else is pure mentation. I use the term " noticing " because it is not a perception or thought or something that is 'done'. Sorry for the confusion. I thought we were talking about the same thing. Phil 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.