attaching importance to being in the now (((Leaving no residue

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002

wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> wrote:

> >

> > My impression is that you attach some importance to this " being in

> > > the now " , like you call it. As if it was better then " not being

> in

> > > the now " . Is this so?

> > >

> > > Len

> > >

> >

> > That is a *very good* question!

> >

> > For myself, being in the Now is my entire philosophy.

> > It has all boiled down to that. There used to be a lot

> > more complexity, but " being in the Now " is all that is

> > left. I guess a kind of process of " spiritual erosion " .

> >

> > I don't see a distinction between " being in the Now "

> > on the one hand, and " not being in the Now " on the other,

> > however.

> >

> > One of my favorite authors wrote: The choice is between

> > choice and no-choice. Being in the Now is the choice of

> > no-choice.

> >

> > Sometimes something is " up " ... something has happened

> > that has left a " residue " ...

> >

> > By now the reflex is pretty much automatic. If there is

> > any persistence of " state " , if there is something " hanging

> > around " then the reflex is to slow down, check it out,

> > zoom in, pay attention... along the lines we have been

> > discussing.

> >

> > I don't have a monitor that says, " Currently in the Now. "

> >

> > That doesn't even make sense. The very phrase (which I

> > admittedly use): being *in* the Now is self-contradictory

> > in a way. Now cannot be punctuated by an in/out.

> > [i'm open to suggestions for a replacement phrase!]

> >

> > Now, lately, meaning for the last year or so I suppose...

> > stuff doesn't come up much that I notice. It just

> > doesn't. And then there is just a sparkling presence

> > with no *distinctions in it*. Like right now. Yes there

> > is a laptop in front, but it *isn't a distinction*.

> > Can't explain how that is, but it is.

> >

> > So the choice of no-choice is simply to be present with

> > What Is. Sometimes stuff is coming up, uncomfortable

> > stuff. So I get to be fully present with that. Sometimes

> > stuff doesn't come up for what seems like a pretty long

> > time. But there has to be COMPLETE INDIFFERENCE to

> > whether stuff comes up or not. It's not about whether

> > stuff comes up or not.

> >

> > So to define Now (I'm going aha!), perhaps it really

> > comes down to that COMPLETE INDIFFERENCE to what comes

> > up.

> >

> > So yeah, when stuff isn't coming up for a long time

> > it really is kinda amazing. I'll want to talk about

> > it, but the messages tend to get criss-crossed.

> > Usually people don't know what the hell I'm talking

> > about. I'll say there's no sense of " space " , there's

> > no sense of " location " , there's not sense of inner/

> > outer... I'll say REALLY!

> >

> > [btw, isn't it interesting that all of those are

> > *geometric* distincions?]

> >

> > BUT, it doesn't matter about the " kinda amazing " .

> > It doesn't matter. All that matters is the

> > complete indifference.

>

>

>

> >And coming back to the notion

> > of truth again, you know that symbol for justice?

> > The figure holding the scales that is blindfolded?

> >

> > Complete indifference.

>

>

>

> :-) Yes.

> Just one remark, Bill.

> We must be careful not to make indifference to a goal.

> When some very painful stuff comes up, it's initilly impossible to be

> indifferent. And trying to be indiffrent anyway may lead to

> suppression of what is coming up.

>

> Len

>

 

good point Len

 

I mean " indifferent " as *descriptive*,

not as *prescriptive*, which is a huge

distinction.

 

Bill