Guest guest Posted April 26, 2006 Report Share Posted April 26, 2006 Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " > <lissbon2002@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Arvind " > <adithya_comming@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > > > > > > > - Once you reach the state of 'no > > > > > > > thought', you see the *ground* on which > > > > > > > thoughts *grow*! This is the SPACE > > > > > > > where you have power to truly see, > > > > > > > observe, select and cultivate thoughts! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This SPACE is also known as Pure > > > > > > > Awareness, Consciousness... it is also > > > > > > > known as Peace! Until we reach that > > > > > > > SPACE... our effort is best directed > > > > > > > only to reach this space rather than > > > > > > > trying to stop thoughts! Surrender is a > > > > > > > great way to reach that Space! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - As long as we remain in *touch* with > > > > > > this Space, we have Power! [inner Peace > > > > > > is our Power!]! Once we lose touch with > > > > > > this Space, we are powerless again and > > > > > > we tend to become increasingly more > > > > > > submerged [in thoughts] and > > > > > > increasingly more powerless! Surrender > > > > > > ['no effort'] is again the way that can > > > > > > get us *in touch* with Inner Peace! > > > > > > > > > > > > - When we remain *rooted* in Peace, we > > > > > > remain __At Home__, we remain in the > > > > > > position of our Power and the things, > > > > > > events lose their heaviness! They lose > > > > > > their heaviness because we realize that > > > > > > we *already* have that which matters > > > > > > Most... we have Peace! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, chaining yourself down to the root of Peace with a > heavy > > > iron > > > > > chain seems to be the best way to ensure the ownership of > Peace. > > > > > No insurance needed. Think of the money you save :-) > > > > > > > > > > Len > > > > > > > > > > > > > whereas, on the other hand, if no chain at all... > > > > > > > > what would you call that? > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > Freedom. > > > > > > Len > > > > > > > ) > > > > pretty direct way of putting it! > > > > and I call that Now > > > > Bill > > > > There is a difference between no chains because the nature of chains > in understood, and no chains, because the awareness of chains is > lacking ;-) The latter is not freedom, but a concept. > > Len > yes... that makes sense. it is interesting to consider how understanding in the sense you use it here is different from a concept. It is like the difference between an insight and a thought. In the case of insight or understanding it is not " one thing " but a comprehension of a complex of relationships. In CAD software programs a complex graphic model can be defined. A " view " is a particular rendition of the model on the screen. The model itself cannot be seen in its entirety (unless very simple) in a single view. Taking that as a metaphor, a thought or concept corresponds to a view. And understanding or insight corresponds to a comprehension of the complex relationships of the model. Understanding is dimensionally is of a higher order than a concept. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 27, 2006 Report Share Posted April 27, 2006 Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " > > <lissbon2002@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Arvind " > > <adithya_comming@> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - Once you reach the state of 'no > > > > > > > > thought', you see the *ground* on which > > > > > > > > thoughts *grow*! This is the SPACE > > > > > > > > where you have power to truly see, > > > > > > > > observe, select and cultivate thoughts! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This SPACE is also known as Pure > > > > > > > > Awareness, Consciousness... it is also > > > > > > > > known as Peace! Until we reach that > > > > > > > > SPACE... our effort is best directed > > > > > > > > only to reach this space rather than > > > > > > > > trying to stop thoughts! Surrender is a > > > > > > > > great way to reach that Space! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - As long as we remain in *touch* with > > > > > > > this Space, we have Power! [inner Peace > > > > > > > is our Power!]! Once we lose touch with > > > > > > > this Space, we are powerless again and > > > > > > > we tend to become increasingly more > > > > > > > submerged [in thoughts] and > > > > > > > increasingly more powerless! Surrender > > > > > > > ['no effort'] is again the way that can > > > > > > > get us *in touch* with Inner Peace! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - When we remain *rooted* in Peace, we > > > > > > > remain __At Home__, we remain in the > > > > > > > position of our Power and the things, > > > > > > > events lose their heaviness! They lose > > > > > > > their heaviness because we realize that > > > > > > > we *already* have that which matters > > > > > > > Most... we have Peace! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, chaining yourself down to the root of Peace with a > > heavy > > > > iron > > > > > > chain seems to be the best way to ensure the ownership of > > Peace. > > > > > > No insurance needed. Think of the money you save :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > Len > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > whereas, on the other hand, if no chain at all... > > > > > > > > > > what would you call that? > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > Freedom. > > > > > > > > Len > > > > > > > > > > ) > > > > > > pretty direct way of putting it! > > > > > > and I call that Now > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > There is a difference between no chains because the nature of chains > > in understood, and no chains, because the awareness of chains is > > lacking ;-) The latter is not freedom, but a concept. > > > > Len > > > > yes... that makes sense. > > it is interesting to consider how understanding > in the sense you use it here is different from > a concept. It is like the difference between an > insight and a thought. > > In the case of insight or understanding it is > not " one thing " but a comprehension of a complex > of relationships. > > In CAD software programs a complex graphic model > can be defined. A " view " is a particular rendition > of the model on the screen. The model itself cannot > be seen in its entirety (unless very simple) in a > single view. > > Taking that as a metaphor, a thought or concept > corresponds to a view. And understanding or insight > corresponds to a comprehension of the complex > relationships of the model. > > Understanding is dimensionally is of a higher order > than a concept. > > Bill And in the area I´m talking about, it is the only understanding possible. Because the concepts cannot give one even a partial insight in what can only be understood non conceptually and as a whole. Len Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 27, 2006 Report Share Posted April 27, 2006 Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " > <lissbon2002@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " > > > <lissbon2002@> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Arvind " > > > <adithya_comming@> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - Once you reach the state of 'no > > > > > > > > > thought', you see the *ground* on which > > > > > > > > > thoughts *grow*! This is the SPACE > > > > > > > > > where you have power to truly see, > > > > > > > > > observe, select and cultivate thoughts! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This SPACE is also known as Pure > > > > > > > > > Awareness, Consciousness... it is also > > > > > > > > > known as Peace! Until we reach that > > > > > > > > > SPACE... our effort is best directed > > > > > > > > > only to reach this space rather than > > > > > > > > > trying to stop thoughts! Surrender is a > > > > > > > > > great way to reach that Space! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - As long as we remain in *touch* with > > > > > > > > this Space, we have Power! [inner Peace > > > > > > > > is our Power!]! Once we lose touch with > > > > > > > > this Space, we are powerless again and > > > > > > > > we tend to become increasingly more > > > > > > > > submerged [in thoughts] and > > > > > > > > increasingly more powerless! Surrender > > > > > > > > ['no effort'] is again the way that can > > > > > > > > get us *in touch* with Inner Peace! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - When we remain *rooted* in Peace, we > > > > > > > > remain __At Home__, we remain in the > > > > > > > > position of our Power and the things, > > > > > > > > events lose their heaviness! They lose > > > > > > > > their heaviness because we realize that > > > > > > > > we *already* have that which matters > > > > > > > > Most... we have Peace! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, chaining yourself down to the root of Peace with a > > > heavy > > > > > iron > > > > > > > chain seems to be the best way to ensure the ownership > of > > > Peace. > > > > > > > No insurance needed. Think of the money you save :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Len > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > whereas, on the other hand, if no chain at all... > > > > > > > > > > > > what would you call that? > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Freedom. > > > > > > > > > > Len > > > > > > > > > > > > > ) > > > > > > > > pretty direct way of putting it! > > > > > > > > and I call that Now > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > There is a difference between no chains because the nature of > chains > > > in understood, and no chains, because the awareness of chains is > > > lacking ;-) The latter is not freedom, but a concept. > > > > > > Len > > > > > > > yes... that makes sense. > > > > it is interesting to consider how understanding > > in the sense you use it here is different from > > a concept. It is like the difference between an > > insight and a thought. > > > > In the case of insight or understanding it is > > not " one thing " but a comprehension of a complex > > of relationships. > > > > In CAD software programs a complex graphic model > > can be defined. A " view " is a particular rendition > > of the model on the screen. The model itself cannot > > be seen in its entirety (unless very simple) in a > > single view. > > > > Taking that as a metaphor, a thought or concept > > corresponds to a view. And understanding or insight > > corresponds to a comprehension of the complex > > relationships of the model. > > > > Understanding is dimensionally is of a higher order > > than a concept. > > > > Bill > > > > And in the area I´m talking about, it is the only understanding > possible. > Because the concepts cannot give one even a partial insight in what > can only be understood non conceptually and as a whole. > > Len > " partial insight " is oxymoron Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 27, 2006 Report Share Posted April 27, 2006 Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " > > <lissbon2002@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " > <illusyn@> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " > > > > <lissbon2002@> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Arvind " > > > > <adithya_comming@> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - Once you reach the state of 'no > > > > > > > > > > thought', you see the *ground* on which > > > > > > > > > > thoughts *grow*! This is the SPACE > > > > > > > > > > where you have power to truly see, > > > > > > > > > > observe, select and cultivate thoughts! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This SPACE is also known as Pure > > > > > > > > > > Awareness, Consciousness... it is also > > > > > > > > > > known as Peace! Until we reach that > > > > > > > > > > SPACE... our effort is best directed > > > > > > > > > > only to reach this space rather than > > > > > > > > > > trying to stop thoughts! Surrender is a > > > > > > > > > > great way to reach that Space! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - As long as we remain in *touch* with > > > > > > > > > this Space, we have Power! [inner Peace > > > > > > > > > is our Power!]! Once we lose touch with > > > > > > > > > this Space, we are powerless again and > > > > > > > > > we tend to become increasingly more > > > > > > > > > submerged [in thoughts] and > > > > > > > > > increasingly more powerless! Surrender > > > > > > > > > ['no effort'] is again the way that can > > > > > > > > > get us *in touch* with Inner Peace! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - When we remain *rooted* in Peace, we > > > > > > > > > remain __At Home__, we remain in the > > > > > > > > > position of our Power and the things, > > > > > > > > > events lose their heaviness! They lose > > > > > > > > > their heaviness because we realize that > > > > > > > > > we *already* have that which matters > > > > > > > > > Most... we have Peace! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, chaining yourself down to the root of Peace with a > > > > heavy > > > > > > iron > > > > > > > > chain seems to be the best way to ensure the ownership > > of > > > > Peace. > > > > > > > > No insurance needed. Think of the money you save :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Len > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > whereas, on the other hand, if no chain at all... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > what would you call that? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Freedom. > > > > > > > > > > > > Len > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ) > > > > > > > > > > pretty direct way of putting it! > > > > > > > > > > and I call that Now > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is a difference between no chains because the nature of > > chains > > > > in understood, and no chains, because the awareness of chains > is > > > > lacking ;-) The latter is not freedom, but a concept. > > > > > > > > Len > > > > > > > > > > yes... that makes sense. > > > > > > it is interesting to consider how understanding > > > in the sense you use it here is different from > > > a concept. It is like the difference between an > > > insight and a thought. > > > > > > In the case of insight or understanding it is > > > not " one thing " but a comprehension of a complex > > > of relationships. > > > > > > In CAD software programs a complex graphic model > > > can be defined. A " view " is a particular rendition > > > of the model on the screen. The model itself cannot > > > be seen in its entirety (unless very simple) in a > > > single view. > > > > > > Taking that as a metaphor, a thought or concept > > > corresponds to a view. And understanding or insight > > > corresponds to a comprehension of the complex > > > relationships of the model. > > > > > > Understanding is dimensionally is of a higher order > > > than a concept. > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > And in the area I´m talking about, it is the only understanding > > possible. > > Because the concepts cannot give one even a partial insight in what > > can only be understood non conceptually and as a whole. > > > > Len > > > > " partial insight " is oxymoron > > Bill Partial insight is possible in the area of thought. It is inside this area that knowledge can be gradually accumulated. But one cannot gradually understand the fact that image is not reality. Either you see it or not. Len Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 27, 2006 Report Share Posted April 27, 2006 Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " > <lissbon2002@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " > > > <lissbon2002@> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " > > <illusyn@> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " > > > > > <lissbon2002@> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Arvind " > > > > > <adithya_comming@> > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - Once you reach the state of 'no > > > > > > > > > > > thought', you see the *ground* on which > > > > > > > > > > > thoughts *grow*! This is the SPACE > > > > > > > > > > > where you have power to truly see, > > > > > > > > > > > observe, select and cultivate thoughts! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This SPACE is also known as Pure > > > > > > > > > > > Awareness, Consciousness... it is also > > > > > > > > > > > known as Peace! Until we reach that > > > > > > > > > > > SPACE... our effort is best directed > > > > > > > > > > > only to reach this space rather than > > > > > > > > > > > trying to stop thoughts! Surrender is a > > > > > > > > > > > great way to reach that Space! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - As long as we remain in *touch* with > > > > > > > > > > this Space, we have Power! [inner Peace > > > > > > > > > > is our Power!]! Once we lose touch with > > > > > > > > > > this Space, we are powerless again and > > > > > > > > > > we tend to become increasingly more > > > > > > > > > > submerged [in thoughts] and > > > > > > > > > > increasingly more powerless! Surrender > > > > > > > > > > ['no effort'] is again the way that can > > > > > > > > > > get us *in touch* with Inner Peace! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - When we remain *rooted* in Peace, we > > > > > > > > > > remain __At Home__, we remain in the > > > > > > > > > > position of our Power and the things, > > > > > > > > > > events lose their heaviness! They lose > > > > > > > > > > their heaviness because we realize that > > > > > > > > > > we *already* have that which matters > > > > > > > > > > Most... we have Peace! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, chaining yourself down to the root of Peace > with a > > > > > heavy > > > > > > > iron > > > > > > > > > chain seems to be the best way to ensure the > ownership > > > of > > > > > Peace. > > > > > > > > > No insurance needed. Think of the money you save :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Len > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > whereas, on the other hand, if no chain at all... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > what would you call that? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Freedom. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Len > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ) > > > > > > > > > > > > pretty direct way of putting it! > > > > > > > > > > > > and I call that Now > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is a difference between no chains because the nature > of > > > chains > > > > > in understood, and no chains, because the awareness of > chains > > is > > > > > lacking ;-) The latter is not freedom, but a concept. > > > > > > > > > > Len > > > > > > > > > > > > > yes... that makes sense. > > > > > > > > it is interesting to consider how understanding > > > > in the sense you use it here is different from > > > > a concept. It is like the difference between an > > > > insight and a thought. > > > > > > > > In the case of insight or understanding it is > > > > not " one thing " but a comprehension of a complex > > > > of relationships. > > > > > > > > In CAD software programs a complex graphic model > > > > can be defined. A " view " is a particular rendition > > > > of the model on the screen. The model itself cannot > > > > be seen in its entirety (unless very simple) in a > > > > single view. > > > > > > > > Taking that as a metaphor, a thought or concept > > > > corresponds to a view. And understanding or insight > > > > corresponds to a comprehension of the complex > > > > relationships of the model. > > > > > > > > Understanding is dimensionally is of a higher order > > > > than a concept. > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > And in the area I´m talking about, it is the only understanding > > > possible. > > > Because the concepts cannot give one even a partial insight in > what > > > can only be understood non conceptually and as a whole. > > > > > > Len > > > > > > > " partial insight " is oxymoron > > > > Bill > > > > Partial insight is possible in the area of thought. > It is inside this area that knowledge can be gradually accumulated. > But one cannot gradually understand the fact that image is not > reality. Either you see it or not. > > Len > Then your notion of insight is diffent than mine. As I use the term and insight is a sudden recognition of an entire complex of relationships. And I apply that in areas such as mathematics or software design as well as in human experience. A sign of insight is that it is startling. Something can't be *partially startling*. 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.