Guest guest Posted March 30, 2006 Report Share Posted March 30, 2006 > > > once really seen it simply " drops " . > > > > > > if there is a struggle, a " waging against " , > > > then there has not been a true seeing. > > > > > > there is nothing to be " done " . > > > it is only evermore actute, crystal clear > > > attention > > > as if attention begets attention > > > > > > someone may feel some persistent animosity, > > > for example. OK, even if they " own " that, > > > it doesn't just go away perhaps. I understand > > > that. > > > > > > but that is because it is a very " deep " > > > animosity, perhaps an accumulation of > > > many layers... > > > so the elements of that must be " seen " > > > one by one... it can take time > > > > > > Yes. Can I ask you: what are the layers made off? > > Have you observed them? > > No. Which is why I said " perhaps " . Was speaking > metaphorically. > > And as I went on to say, it doesn't matter if > there is an " accumulation " (be it layers or > whatever) or not. What is significant is what > is " up " right now. What is significant is facing > that or not. I remember being struck by Krishnamurti > saying that the moment presents a *challenge*. > The challenge is to be really present in the > face of the moment. > > > > > > > > but as each element arises, it *can* be seen > > > through when attention is complete > > > > > > in the Now there is only *this particular > > > that is arising* to face... and in facing > > > that there is freedom from that > > > > > > one is never " done " anyway > > > > > > so in each moment > > > dealing completely, profoundly, thoroughly > > > with the challenge that presents itself > > > is already completely in the Now > > > > > > notice that? > > > that the very *facing of* whatever arises > > > is already completely in Now > > > > > > whether it simply " dissolves " or not is > > > besides the point > > > > > > If it doesn´t dissolve, it´s not in " now " as you > say. The memories > > are still blurring perception. > > > > Len > > > > yeah... I am seeing that talking about " dissolving " > or not is getting away from the important point of > actually facing whatever is " up " . To talk about > dissolving can suggest a process of " becoming " , > a desire to " dissolve " and be free rather than > actually being-with-whatever. > > That was the point I was getting at when I said: > > > that the very *facing of* whatever arises > > > is already completely in Now > > Bill> > > > ... " but that is because it is a very " deep " > > > animosity, perhaps an accumulation of > > > many layers... > > > so the elements of that must be " seen " > > > one by one... it can take time " .. > It also takes a lot of energy. Be watchfull of how you > spend your energie. And vigilant, energie goes in a > closed circle and doesn`t waste > > ................................................ > I enjoy each one of those posts about being completely > in the Now > ....and from Now on...to Eternity. > Can`t stop at the Now Bill. > > Thank-you..((((Bill))) You are a real pal!! > > > Patricia It is good to hear the words coming out of here make sense to somebody at least sometimes. And frankly I am especially pleased to hear it makes sense to you at times... maybe because you seem to be open... many seem to use words more as sheilds than as means for revelation it is perhaps subtle, but very simple... where there is *heart* there is truth when I first came back to the list I remember a post where you asked about " I am " (in the context of how Nisargadatta talked about it I believe). I had something to say about that, but I didn't because it was a lot to say, and wasn't up to that at the time. but I haven't forgotten do stay tuned Bill 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.