Guest guest Posted April 4, 2006 Report Share Posted April 4, 2006 --- billrishel <illusyn a écrit : 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 I do have a hard time with <complete indifference.> I rather like <no-reaction> or neutrality, but am not sure that is what you mean..?. Lately, I corrolate <being in the now> more and more with the sense of I amness that Niz calls our attention to: I AM is also the Now : or an open window toward.... what is and won`t be known. One doesn`t crawl thru that window, But invites. Patricia ** 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 April 4, 2006 Report Share Posted April 4, 2006 Nisargadatta , OConnor Patricia <gdtige wrote: > > > --- billrishel <illusyn a écrit : > > > > 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 > > I do have a hard time with <complete indifference.> > I rather like <no-reaction> or neutrality, but am not > sure that is what you mean..?. > Lately, I corrolate <being in the now> more and more > with the sense of I amness that Niz calls our > attention to: > I AM is also the Now : > or an open window toward.... > what is and won`t be known. > One doesn`t crawl thru that window, > But invites. > > Patricia The reaction is there, Patricia, whether you like it or not. No use in striving for neutrality, this is suppression of what already is there. But you have the freedom not to act on your reaction and to observe instead. Len 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.