Is the sparkle of Now just fantasy? / Len and EVERYONE

April 27, 2006

<snip>

> > > ...and then the realization that this realization

> > > is a concept too ;-)

> > >

> > > Len

> > >

> >

> > it would seem to become an infinite regress...

> > but at some point the " bubble pops " ...

> >

> > and then what remains is just the sparkle of Now

> >

> > Bill

>

> No, then one comes back on earth, and real life starts.

> With all these annoying things one would rather not own ;-)

>

> Len

>

Then you are just speaking for yourself.

Is it possible to drive for over two hours from point

A to point B with no thought, with no memory left,

with no " residue " ?

I tell you it is.

Perhaps you will ask, " If there is no memory, how can

there be any memory that such even happened? "

There is just memory of the unbrokenness of that drive.

It is as if there were a long elastic bubble stretching

the two hours from A to B, and nothing separate within

that.

Krishnmurti talks of such things. For example, in

*Krishnamurti's Notebook* he writes:

Meditation, in the still hours of early morning,

with no car rattling by, was the unfolding of

beauty. It was not thought exploring with its

limited capacity nor the sensitivity of feeling; it

was not any outward or inward substance which was

expressing itself; it was not the movement of time,

for the brain was still. It was total negation of

everything known, not a reaction but a denial that

had no cause; it was a movement in complete freedom,

a movement that had no direction and dimension; in

that movement there was boundless energy whose very

essence was stillness. Its action was total inaction

and the essence of that inaction is freedom. There

was great bliss, a great ecstasy that perished at

the touch of thought.

Such pure emptiness may not be immediately available.

It may take decades of dwelling in silence for such

clarity to be realized. For some even a lifetime may

not suffice. But it *is* possible.

I would not ordinarily speak of this, but I cannot

let your absurd denials stand. When you say:

" No, then one comes back on earth, and real life starts.

With all these annoying things one would rather not own. "

you are apparently expressing your own experience. To

cynically claim that what is your experience is the height

of what is possible is not truth.

And I am not saying that attachments don't ever arise.

They do. But they become more and more infrequent. And

there can be great expanses of luminous awareness, of

" the sparkle of Now " .

And I am not the only one who will say this to you.

Ask Dan for example. It would be interesting to hear

what he has to say. And I know there are others on this

list that will say the same. I invite their comments.

Bill

April 27, 2006

Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn wrote:

>

> <snip>

>

> > > > ...and then the realization that this realization

> > > > is a concept too ;-)

> > > >

> > > > Len

> > > >

> > >

> > > it would seem to become an infinite regress...

> > > but at some point the " bubble pops " ...

> > >

> > > and then what remains is just the sparkle of Now

> > >

> > > Bill

> >

> > No, then one comes back on earth, and real life starts.

> > With all these annoying things one would rather not own ;-)

> >

> > Len

> >

>

> Then you are just speaking for yourself.

>

> Is it possible to drive for over two hours from point

> A to point B with no thought, with no memory left,

> with no " residue " ?

>

> I tell you it is.

>

> Perhaps you will ask, " If there is no memory, how can

> there be any memory that such even happened? "

>

> There is just memory of the unbrokenness of that drive.

> It is as if there were a long elastic bubble stretching

> the two hours from A to B, and nothing separate within

> that.

>

> Krishnmurti talks of such things. For example, in

> *Krishnamurti's Notebook* he writes:

>

> Meditation, in the still hours of early morning,

> with no car rattling by, was the unfolding of

> beauty. It was not thought exploring with its

> limited capacity nor the sensitivity of feeling; it

> was not any outward or inward substance which was

> expressing itself; it was not the movement of time,

> for the brain was still. It was total negation of

> everything known, not a reaction but a denial that

> had no cause; it was a movement in complete freedom,

> a movement that had no direction and dimension; in

> that movement there was boundless energy whose very

> essence was stillness. Its action was total inaction

> and the essence of that inaction is freedom. There

> was great bliss, a great ecstasy that perished at

> the touch of thought.

>

> Such pure emptiness may not be immediately available.

> It may take decades of dwelling in silence for such

> clarity to be realized. For some even a lifetime may

> not suffice. But it *is* possible.

>

> I would not ordinarily speak of this, but I cannot

> let your absurd denials stand. When you say:

> " No, then one comes back on earth, and real life starts.

> With all these annoying things one would rather not own. "

> you are apparently expressing your own experience. To

> cynically claim that what is your experience is the height

> of what is possible is not truth.

>

> And I am not saying that attachments don't ever arise.

> They do. But they become more and more infrequent. And

> there can be great expanses of luminous awareness, of

> " the sparkle of Now " .

>

> And I am not the only one who will say this to you.

> Ask Dan for example. It would be interesting to hear

> what he has to say. And I know there are others on this

> list that will say the same. I invite their comments.

>

> Bill

>

Hi Bill,

there is a recognition of what you share here

even if i do not feel Len's posting as an absurd denials

....maybe it was just the sparkle needed for this sharing to go

on...unbroken

love

April 27, 2006

Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba wrote:

>

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

> >

> > <snip>

> >

> > > > > ...and then the realization that this realization

> > > > > is a concept too ;-)

> > > > >

> > > > > Len

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > it would seem to become an infinite regress...

> > > > but at some point the " bubble pops " ...

> > > >

> > > > and then what remains is just the sparkle of Now

> > > >

> > > > Bill

> > >

> > > No, then one comes back on earth, and real life starts.

> > > With all these annoying things one would rather not own ;-)

> > >

> > > Len

> > >

> >

> > Then you are just speaking for yourself.

> >

> > Is it possible to drive for over two hours from point

> > A to point B with no thought, with no memory left,

> > with no " residue " ?

> >

> > I tell you it is.

> >

> > Perhaps you will ask, " If there is no memory, how can

> > there be any memory that such even happened? "

> >

> > There is just memory of the unbrokenness of that drive.

> > It is as if there were a long elastic bubble stretching

> > the two hours from A to B, and nothing separate within

> > that.

> >

> > Krishnmurti talks of such things. For example, in

> > *Krishnamurti's Notebook* he writes:

> >

> > Meditation, in the still hours of early morning,

> > with no car rattling by, was the unfolding of

> > beauty. It was not thought exploring with its

> > limited capacity nor the sensitivity of feeling; it

> > was not any outward or inward substance which was

> > expressing itself; it was not the movement of time,

> > for the brain was still. It was total negation of

> > everything known, not a reaction but a denial that

> > had no cause; it was a movement in complete freedom,

> > a movement that had no direction and dimension; in

> > that movement there was boundless energy whose very

> > essence was stillness. Its action was total inaction

> > and the essence of that inaction is freedom. There

> > was great bliss, a great ecstasy that perished at

> > the touch of thought.

> >

> > Such pure emptiness may not be immediately available.

> > It may take decades of dwelling in silence for such

> > clarity to be realized. For some even a lifetime may

> > not suffice. But it *is* possible.

> >

> > I would not ordinarily speak of this, but I cannot

> > let your absurd denials stand. When you say:

> > " No, then one comes back on earth, and real life starts.

> > With all these annoying things one would rather not own. "

> > you are apparently expressing your own experience. To

> > cynically claim that what is your experience is the height

> > of what is possible is not truth.

> >

> > And I am not saying that attachments don't ever arise.

> > They do. But they become more and more infrequent. And

> > there can be great expanses of luminous awareness, of

> > " the sparkle of Now " .

> >

> > And I am not the only one who will say this to you.

> > Ask Dan for example. It would be interesting to hear

> > what he has to say. And I know there are others on this

> > list that will say the same. I invite their comments.

> >

> > Bill

> >

>

> Hi Bill,

>

> there is a recognition of what you share here

> even if i do not feel Len's posting as an absurd denials

> ...maybe it was just the sparkle needed for this sharing to go

> on...unbroken

>

> love

>

some real heart there waaba, and thanks

Bill

April 27, 2006

Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn

wrote:

>

> <snip>

>

> > > > ...and then the realization that this realization

> > > > is a concept too ;-)

> > > >

> > > > Len

> > > >

> > >

> > > it would seem to become an infinite regress...

> > > but at some point the " bubble pops " ...

> > >

> > > and then what remains is just the sparkle of Now

> > >

> > > Bill

> >

> > No, then one comes back on earth, and real life starts.

> > With all these annoying things one would rather not own ;-)

> >

> > Len

> >

>

> Then you are just speaking for yourself.

>

> Is it possible to drive for over two hours from point

> A to point B with no thought, with no memory left,

> with no " residue " ?

>

> I tell you it is.

>

> Perhaps you will ask, " If there is no memory, how can

> there be any memory that such even happened? "

>

> There is just memory of the unbrokenness of that drive.

> It is as if there were a long elastic bubble stretching

> the two hours from A to B, and nothing separate within

> that.

>

> Krishnmurti talks of such things. For example, in

> *Krishnamurti's Notebook* he writes:

>

> Meditation, in the still hours of early morning,

> with no car rattling by, was the unfolding of

> beauty. It was not thought exploring with its

> limited capacity nor the sensitivity of feeling; it

> was not any outward or inward substance which was

> expressing itself; it was not the movement of time,

> for the brain was still. It was total negation of

> everything known, not a reaction but a denial that

> had no cause; it was a movement in complete freedom,

> a movement that had no direction and dimension; in

> that movement there was boundless energy whose very

> essence was stillness. Its action was total inaction

> and the essence of that inaction is freedom. There

> was great bliss, a great ecstasy that perished at

> the touch of thought.

>

> Such pure emptiness may not be immediately available.

> It may take decades of dwelling in silence for such

> clarity to be realized. For some even a lifetime may

> not suffice. But it *is* possible.

>

> I would not ordinarily speak of this, but I cannot

> let your absurd denials stand. When you say:

> " No, then one comes back on earth, and real life starts.

> With all these annoying things one would rather not own. "

> you are apparently expressing your own experience. To

> cynically claim that what is your experience is the height

> of what is possible is not truth.

>

> And I am not saying that attachments don't ever arise.

> They do. But they become more and more infrequent. And

> there can be great expanses of luminous awareness, of

> " the sparkle of Now " .

>

> And I am not the only one who will say this to you.

> Ask Dan for example. It would be interesting to hear

> what he has to say. And I know there are others on this

> list that will say the same. I invite their comments.

>

> Bill

You think too much.

And in this thinking you lose awareness of reality, so to you it

seems that what you think is true. This is a common disease among

humans, the only difference between people is the content of the

thoughts they drown in.

You like thinking about peace, awareness, not caring, no ownership

etc... while some others are identyfied with money and success. But

basically there is no difference. I´m sure there are plenty of

others on this list who agree with you, because this list is full of

dreamers like you. It is not that you are in majority, that your

imagination becomes reality.

You are not interested in understanding, just faking it to feel good

about yourself and to spend your time in pleasurable way.

Len

April 27, 2006

Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002

wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@>

> wrote:

> >

> > <snip>

> >

> > > > > ...and then the realization that this realization

> > > > > is a concept too ;-)

> > > > >

> > > > > Len

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > it would seem to become an infinite regress...

> > > > but at some point the " bubble pops " ...

> > > >

> > > > and then what remains is just the sparkle of Now

> > > >

> > > > Bill

> > >

> > > No, then one comes back on earth, and real life starts.

> > > With all these annoying things one would rather not own ;-)

> > >

> > > Len

> > >

> >

> > Then you are just speaking for yourself.

> >

> > Is it possible to drive for over two hours from point

> > A to point B with no thought, with no memory left,

> > with no " residue " ?

> >

> > I tell you it is.

> >

> > Perhaps you will ask, " If there is no memory, how can

> > there be any memory that such even happened? "

> >

> > There is just memory of the unbrokenness of that drive.

> > It is as if there were a long elastic bubble stretching

> > the two hours from A to B, and nothing separate within

> > that.

> >

> > Krishnmurti talks of such things. For example, in

> > *Krishnamurti's Notebook* he writes:

> >

> > Meditation, in the still hours of early morning,

> > with no car rattling by, was the unfolding of

> > beauty. It was not thought exploring with its

> > limited capacity nor the sensitivity of feeling; it

> > was not any outward or inward substance which was

> > expressing itself; it was not the movement of time,

> > for the brain was still. It was total negation of

> > everything known, not a reaction but a denial that

> > had no cause; it was a movement in complete freedom,

> > a movement that had no direction and dimension; in

> > that movement there was boundless energy whose very

> > essence was stillness. Its action was total inaction

> > and the essence of that inaction is freedom. There

> > was great bliss, a great ecstasy that perished at

> > the touch of thought.

> >

> > Such pure emptiness may not be immediately available.

> > It may take decades of dwelling in silence for such

> > clarity to be realized. For some even a lifetime may

> > not suffice. But it *is* possible.

> >

> > I would not ordinarily speak of this, but I cannot

> > let your absurd denials stand. When you say:

> > " No, then one comes back on earth, and real life starts.

> > With all these annoying things one would rather not own. "

> > you are apparently expressing your own experience. To

> > cynically claim that what is your experience is the height

> > of what is possible is not truth.

> >

> > And I am not saying that attachments don't ever arise.

> > They do. But they become more and more infrequent. And

> > there can be great expanses of luminous awareness, of

> > " the sparkle of Now " .

> >

> > And I am not the only one who will say this to you.

> > Ask Dan for example. It would be interesting to hear

> > what he has to say. And I know there are others on this

> > list that will say the same. I invite their comments.

> >

> > Bill

>

> You think too much.

> And in this thinking you lose awareness of reality, so to you it

> seems that what you think is true. This is a common disease among

> humans, the only difference between people is the content of the

> thoughts they drown in.

> You like thinking about peace, awareness, not caring, no ownership

> etc... while some others are identyfied with money and success. But

> basically there is no difference. I´m sure there are plenty of

> others on this list who agree with you, because this list is full

of

> dreamers like you. It is not that you are in majority, that your

> imagination becomes reality.

> You are not interested in understanding, just faking it to feel

good

> about yourself and to spend your time in pleasurable way.

>

> Len

>

Well gee Len. Thanks for your consultation services!

Errrr... didn't I mention no thanks!

And where are those hip boots when I really need them!

Bill

April 27, 2006

Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002

wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@>

> wrote:

> >

> > <snip>

> >

> > > > > ...and then the realization that this realization

> > > > > is a concept too ;-)

> > > > >

> > > > > Len

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > it would seem to become an infinite regress...

> > > > but at some point the " bubble pops " ...

> > > >

> > > > and then what remains is just the sparkle of Now

> > > >

> > > > Bill

> > >

> > > No, then one comes back on earth, and real life starts.

> > > With all these annoying things one would rather not own ;-)

> > >

> > > Len

> > >

> >

> > Then you are just speaking for yourself.

> >

> > Is it possible to drive for over two hours from point

> > A to point B with no thought, with no memory left,

> > with no " residue " ?

> >

> > I tell you it is.

> >

> > Perhaps you will ask, " If there is no memory, how can

> > there be any memory that such even happened? "

> >

> > There is just memory of the unbrokenness of that drive.

> > It is as if there were a long elastic bubble stretching

> > the two hours from A to B, and nothing separate within

> > that.

> >

> > Krishnmurti talks of such things. For example, in

> > *Krishnamurti's Notebook* he writes:

> >

> > Meditation, in the still hours of early morning,

> > with no car rattling by, was the unfolding of

> > beauty. It was not thought exploring with its

> > limited capacity nor the sensitivity of feeling; it

> > was not any outward or inward substance which was

> > expressing itself; it was not the movement of time,

> > for the brain was still. It was total negation of

> > everything known, not a reaction but a denial that

> > had no cause; it was a movement in complete freedom,

> > a movement that had no direction and dimension; in

> > that movement there was boundless energy whose very

> > essence was stillness. Its action was total inaction

> > and the essence of that inaction is freedom. There

> > was great bliss, a great ecstasy that perished at

> > the touch of thought.

> >

> > Such pure emptiness may not be immediately available.

> > It may take decades of dwelling in silence for such

> > clarity to be realized. For some even a lifetime may

> > not suffice. But it *is* possible.

> >

> > I would not ordinarily speak of this, but I cannot

> > let your absurd denials stand. When you say:

> > " No, then one comes back on earth, and real life starts.

> > With all these annoying things one would rather not own. "

> > you are apparently expressing your own experience. To

> > cynically claim that what is your experience is the height

> > of what is possible is not truth.

> >

> > And I am not saying that attachments don't ever arise.

> > They do. But they become more and more infrequent. And

> > there can be great expanses of luminous awareness, of

> > " the sparkle of Now " .

> >

> > And I am not the only one who will say this to you.

> > Ask Dan for example. It would be interesting to hear

> > what he has to say. And I know there are others on this

> > list that will say the same. I invite their comments.

> >

> > Bill

>

> You think too much.

> And in this thinking you lose awareness of reality, so to you it

> seems that what you think is true. This is a common disease among

> humans, the only difference between people is the content of the

> thoughts they drown in.

> You like thinking about peace, awareness, not caring, no ownership

> etc... while some others are identyfied with money and success. But

> basically there is no difference. I´m sure there are plenty of

> others on this list who agree with you, because this list is full

of

> dreamers like you. It is not that you are in majority, that your

> imagination becomes reality.

> You are not interested in understanding, just faking it to feel

good

> about yourself and to spend your time in pleasurable way.

>

> Len

>

oh! see what bubbles up from emptyness !

it seems hard if not impossible to lose awareness of reality since

awareness IS reality dear Len.

This I know being not interested in the content of mind, not in any

understanding that comes after these sounds.

April 27, 2006

Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn wrote:

>

> <snip>

>

> > > > ...and then the realization that this realization

> > > > is a concept too ;-)

> > > >

> > > > Len

> > > >

> > >

> > > it would seem to become an infinite regress...

> > > but at some point the " bubble pops " ...

> > >

> > > and then what remains is just the sparkle of Now

> > >

> > > Bill

> >

> > No, then one comes back on earth, and real life starts.

> > With all these annoying things one would rather not own ;-)

> >

> > Len

> >

>

> Then you are just speaking for yourself.

>

> Is it possible to drive for over two hours from point

> A to point B with no thought, with no memory left,

> with no " residue " ?

>

> I tell you it is.

>

> Perhaps you will ask, " If there is no memory, how can

> there be any memory that such even happened? "

>

> There is just memory of the unbrokenness of that drive.

> It is as if there were a long elastic bubble stretching

> the two hours from A to B, and nothing separate within

> that.

>

> Krishnmurti talks of such things. For example, in

> *Krishnamurti's Notebook* he writes:

>

> Meditation, in the still hours of early morning,

> with no car rattling by, was the unfolding of

> beauty. It was not thought exploring with its

> limited capacity nor the sensitivity of feeling; it

> was not any outward or inward substance which was

> expressing itself; it was not the movement of time,

> for the brain was still. It was total negation of

> everything known, not a reaction but a denial that

> had no cause; it was a movement in complete freedom,

> a movement that had no direction and dimension; in

> that movement there was boundless energy whose very

> essence was stillness. Its action was total inaction

> and the essence of that inaction is freedom. There

> was great bliss, a great ecstasy that perished at

> the touch of thought.

>

> Such pure emptiness may not be immediately available.

> It may take decades of dwelling in silence for such

> clarity to be realized. For some even a lifetime may

> not suffice. But it *is* possible.

>

> I would not ordinarily speak of this, but I cannot

> let your absurd denials stand. When you say:

> " No, then one comes back on earth, and real life starts.

> With all these annoying things one would rather not own. "

> you are apparently expressing your own experience. To

> cynically claim that what is your experience is the height

> of what is possible is not truth.

>

> And I am not saying that attachments don't ever arise.

> They do. But they become more and more infrequent. And

> there can be great expanses of luminous awareness, of

> " the sparkle of Now " .

>

> And I am not the only one who will say this to you.

> Ask Dan for example. It would be interesting to hear

> what he has to say. And I know there are others on this

> list that will say the same. I invite their comments.

>

> Bill

>

Here.........there are times.......when time evaporates.

Edges disappear........hearts entertwine........and bliss kisses the

Face of God.

The more the openess is allowed......the more it flows.

It starts to see its self smiling back........from every-thing.

Every pool.......every ripple........every touch.

Standing........out here....alone....naked......in the

moon-light..........completely full.....and yet totally empty....

Watching these rippling words......flow back.... into themselves.

toombaru

April 27, 2006

Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote:

>

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

> >

> > <snip>

> >

> > > > > ...and then the realization that this realization

> > > > > is a concept too ;-)

> > > > >

> > > > > Len

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > it would seem to become an infinite regress...

> > > > but at some point the " bubble pops " ...

> > > >

> > > > and then what remains is just the sparkle of Now

> > > >

> > > > Bill

> > >

> > > No, then one comes back on earth, and real life starts.

> > > With all these annoying things one would rather not own ;-)

> > >

> > > Len

> > >

> >

> > Then you are just speaking for yourself.

> >

> > Is it possible to drive for over two hours from point

> > A to point B with no thought, with no memory left,

> > with no " residue " ?

> >

> > I tell you it is.

> >

> > Perhaps you will ask, " If there is no memory, how can

> > there be any memory that such even happened? "

> >

> > There is just memory of the unbrokenness of that drive.

> > It is as if there were a long elastic bubble stretching

> > the two hours from A to B, and nothing separate within

> > that.

> >

> > Krishnmurti talks of such things. For example, in

> > *Krishnamurti's Notebook* he writes:

> >

> > Meditation, in the still hours of early morning,

> > with no car rattling by, was the unfolding of

> > beauty. It was not thought exploring with its

> > limited capacity nor the sensitivity of feeling; it

> > was not any outward or inward substance which was

> > expressing itself; it was not the movement of time,

> > for the brain was still. It was total negation of

> > everything known, not a reaction but a denial that

> > had no cause; it was a movement in complete freedom,

> > a movement that had no direction and dimension; in

> > that movement there was boundless energy whose very

> > essence was stillness. Its action was total inaction

> > and the essence of that inaction is freedom. There

> > was great bliss, a great ecstasy that perished at

> > the touch of thought.

> >

> > Such pure emptiness may not be immediately available.

> > It may take decades of dwelling in silence for such

> > clarity to be realized. For some even a lifetime may

> > not suffice. But it *is* possible.

> >

> > I would not ordinarily speak of this, but I cannot

> > let your absurd denials stand. When you say:

> > " No, then one comes back on earth, and real life starts.

> > With all these annoying things one would rather not own. "

> > you are apparently expressing your own experience. To

> > cynically claim that what is your experience is the height

> > of what is possible is not truth.

> >

> > And I am not saying that attachments don't ever arise.

> > They do. But they become more and more infrequent. And

> > there can be great expanses of luminous awareness, of

> > " the sparkle of Now " .

> >

> > And I am not the only one who will say this to you.

> > Ask Dan for example. It would be interesting to hear

> > what he has to say. And I know there are others on this

> > list that will say the same. I invite their comments.

> >

> > Bill

> >

>

> Here.........there are times.......when time evaporates.

>

> Edges disappear........hearts entertwine........and bliss kisses the

>

> Face of God.

>

> The more the openess is allowed......the more it flows.

>

> It starts to see its self smiling back........from every-thing.

>

> Every pool.......every ripple........every touch.

>

> Standing........out here....alone....naked......in the

>

> moon-light..........completely full.....and yet totally empty....

>

> Watching these rippling words......flow back.... into themselves.

>

> toombaru

>

magnificent...

now I see what waaba meant... about a bit of

shining pushing the discourse to a new level.

a little bit of grit...

helped create a pearl.

Bill

April 29, 2006

In a message dated 4/27/2006 9:10:02 AM Pacific Daylight Time,

Nisargadatta writes:

Thu, 27 Apr 2006 14:04:37 -0000

" billrishel " <illusyn

Re: Is the " sparkle of Now " just fantasy? / Len and EVERYONE

Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002

wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@>

> wrote:

> >

> > <snip>

> >

> > > > > ...and then the realization that this realization

> > > > > is a concept too ;-)

> > > > >

> > > > > Len

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > it would seem to become an infinite regress...

> > > > but at some point the " bubble pops " ...

> > > >

> > > > and then what remains is just the sparkle of Now

> > > >

> > > > Bill

> > >

> > > No, then one comes back on earth, and real life starts.

> > > With all these annoying things one would rather not own ;-)

> > >

> > > Len

> > >

> >

> > Then you are just speaking for yourself.

> >

> > Is it possible to drive for over two hours from point

> > A to point B with no thought, with no memory left,

> > with no " residue " ?

> >

> > I tell you it is.

> >

> > Perhaps you will ask, " If there is no memory, how can

> > there be any memory that such even happened? "

> >

> > There is just memory of the unbrokenness of that drive.

> > It is as if there were a long elastic bubble stretching

> > the two hours from A to B, and nothing separate within

> > that.

> >

> > Krishnmurti talks of such things. For example, in

> > *Krishnamurti's Notebook* he writes:

> >

> > Meditation, in the still hours of early morning,

> > with no car rattling by, was the unfolding of

> > beauty. It was not thought exploring with its

> > limited capacity nor the sensitivity of feeling; it

> > was not any outward or inward substance which was

> > expressing itself; it was not the movement of time,

> > for the brain was still. It was total negation of

> > everything known, not a reaction but a denial that

> > had no cause; it was a movement in complete freedom,

> > a movement that had no direction and dimension; in

> > that movement there was boundless energy whose very

> > essence was stillness. Its action was total inaction

> > and the essence of that inaction is freedom. There

> > was great bliss, a great ecstasy that perished at

> > the touch of thought.

> >

> > Such pure emptiness may not be immediately available.

> > It may take decades of dwelling in silence for such

> > clarity to be realized. For some even a lifetime may

> > not suffice. But it *is* possible.

> >

> > I would not ordinarily speak of this, but I cannot

> > let your absurd denials stand. When you say:

> > " No, then one comes back on earth, and real life starts.

> > With all these annoying things one would rather not own. "

> > you are apparently expressing your own experience. To

> > cynically claim that what is your experience is the height

> > of what is possible is not truth.

> >

> > And I am not saying that attachments don't ever arise.

> > They do. But they become more and more infrequent. And

> > there can be great expanses of luminous awareness, of

> > " the sparkle of Now " .

> >

> > And I am not the only one who will say this to you.

> > Ask Dan for example. It would be interesting to hear

> > what he has to say. And I know there are others on this

> > list that will say the same. I invite their comments.

> >

> > Bill

>

> You think too much.

> And in this thinking you lose awareness of reality, so to you it

> seems that what you think is true. This is a common disease among

> humans, the only difference between people is the content of the

> thoughts they drown in.

> You like thinking about peace, awareness, not caring, no ownership

> etc... while some others are identyfied with money and success. But

> basically there is no difference. I´m sure there are plenty of

> others on this list who agree with you, because this list is full

of

> dreamers like you. It is not that you are in majority, that your

> imagination becomes reality.

> You are not interested in understanding, just faking it to feel

good

> about yourself and to spend your time in pleasurable way.

>

> Len

>

Well gee Len. Thanks for your consultation services!

Errrr... didn't I mention no thanks!

And where are those hip boots when I really need them!

Bill

Yes, thanks, Len. That's very much the way I see Bill as well. There are

times when experiences are related and it can be delightful, but other times the

mind invents games for it's own delight. I have a reputation as a deep

thinker that is gratefully changing, and it seems I no longer have the patience

to

attempt to follow such thought streams that arrive at the same place they

began and leave me wondering why the adventure took place at all.

(There's no judgment here, Bill, I only mean to say you have been of help to

me.)

Phil

April 29, 2006

In a message dated 4/27/2006 9:10:02 AM Pacific Daylight Time,

Nisargadatta writes:

Thu, 27 Apr 2006 14:25:04 -0000

" toombaru2006 " <lastrain

Re: Is the " sparkle of Now " just fantasy? / Len and EVERYONE

Here.........there are times.......when time evaporates.

Edges disappear........hearts entertwine........and bliss kisses the

Face of God.

The more the openess is allowed......the more it flows.

It starts to see its self smiling back........from every-thing.

Every pool.......every ripple........every touch.

Standing........out here....alone....naked......in the

moon-light..........completely full.....and yet totally empty....

Watching these rippling words......flow back.... into themselves.

toombaru

Very nice.

April 29, 2006

In a message dated 4/27/2006 9:10:02 AM Pacific Daylight Time,

Nisargadatta writes:

Thu, 27 Apr 2006 16:05:29 -0000

" billrishel " <illusyn

Re: Is the " sparkle of Now " just fantasy? / Len and EVERYONE

Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote:

>

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

> >

> > <snip>

> >

> > > > > ...and then the realization that this realization

> > > > > is a concept too ;-)

> > > > >

> > > > > Len

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > it would seem to become an infinite regress...

> > > > but at some point the " bubble pops " ...

> > > >

> > > > and then what remains is just the sparkle of Now

> > > >

> > > > Bill

> > >

> > > No, then one comes back on earth, and real life starts.

> > > With all these annoying things one would rather not own ;-)

> > >

> > > Len

> > >

> >

> > Then you are just speaking for yourself.

> >

> > Is it possible to drive for over two hours from point

> > A to point B with no thought, with no memory left,

> > with no " residue " ?

> >

> > I tell you it is.

> >

> > Perhaps you will ask, " If there is no memory, how can

> > there be any memory that such even happened? "

> >

> > There is just memory of the unbrokenness of that drive.

> > It is as if there were a long elastic bubble stretching

> > the two hours from A to B, and nothing separate within

> > that.

> >

> > Krishnmurti talks of such things. For example, in

> > *Krishnamurti's Notebook* he writes:

> >

> > Meditation, in the still hours of early morning,

> > with no car rattling by, was the unfolding of

> > beauty. It was not thought exploring with its

> > limited capacity nor the sensitivity of feeling; it

> > was not any outward or inward substance which was

> > expressing itself; it was not the movement of time,

> > for the brain was still. It was total negation of

> > everything known, not a reaction but a denial that

> > had no cause; it was a movement in complete freedom,

> > a movement that had no direction and dimension; in

> > that movement there was boundless energy whose very

> > essence was stillness. Its action was total inaction

> > and the essence of that inaction is freedom. There

> > was great bliss, a great ecstasy that perished at

> > the touch of thought.

> >

> > Such pure emptiness may not be immediately available.

> > It may take decades of dwelling in silence for such

> > clarity to be realized. For some even a lifetime may

> > not suffice. But it *is* possible.

> >

> > I would not ordinarily speak of this, but I cannot

> > let your absurd denials stand. When you say:

> > " No, then one comes back on earth, and real life starts.

> > With all these annoying things one would rather not own. "

> > you are apparently expressing your own experience. To

> > cynically claim that what is your experience is the height

> > of what is possible is not truth.

> >

> > And I am not saying that attachments don't ever arise.

> > They do. But they become more and more infrequent. And

> > there can be great expanses of luminous awareness, of

> > " the sparkle of Now " .

> >

> > And I am not the only one who will say this to you.

> > Ask Dan for example. It would be interesting to hear

> > what he has to say. And I know there are others on this

> > list that will say the same. I invite their comments.

> >

> > Bill

> >

>

> Here.........there are times.......when time evaporates.

>

> Edges disappear........hearts entertwine........and bliss kisses the

>

> Face of God.

>

> The more the openess is allowed......the more it flows.

>

> It starts to see its self smiling back........from every-thing.

>

> Every pool.......every ripple........every touch.

>

> Standing........out here....alone....naked......in the

>

> moon-light..........completely full.....and yet totally empty....

>

> Watching these rippling words......flow back.... into themselves.

>

> toombaru

>

magnificent...

now I see what waaba meant... about a bit of

shining pushing the discourse to a new level.

a little bit of grit...

helped create a pearl.

Bill

Yes, it did, but truth is not seen by ego just in it's beauty and wonder. It

could be so but for it's ignorance, but what is it that transforms such

ignorance, the pearl or the sword? The " bit of grit' has purpose, as you

suggest,

and can be embraced as well. In this embrace, there is no grit, just more

pearl.

Phil

April 29, 2006

Nisargadatta , ADHHUB wrote:

>

> In a message dated 4/27/2006 9:10:02 AM Pacific Daylight Time,

> Nisargadatta writes:

>

> Thu, 27 Apr 2006 14:04:37 -0000

> " billrishel " <illusyn

> Re: Is the " sparkle of Now " just fantasy? / Len and

EVERYONE

>

> Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@>

> wrote:

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@>

> > wrote:

> > >

> > > <snip>

> > >

> > > > > > ...and then the realization that this realization

> > > > > > is a concept too ;-)

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Len

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > it would seem to become an infinite regress...

> > > > > but at some point the " bubble pops " ...

> > > > >

> > > > > and then what remains is just the sparkle of Now

> > > > >

> > > > > Bill

> > > >

> > > > No, then one comes back on earth, and real life starts.

> > > > With all these annoying things one would rather not own ;-)

> > > >

> > > > Len

> > > >

> > >

> > > Then you are just speaking for yourself.

> > >

> > > Is it possible to drive for over two hours from point

> > > A to point B with no thought, with no memory left,

> > > with no " residue " ?

> > >

> > > I tell you it is.

> > >

> > > Perhaps you will ask, " If there is no memory, how can

> > > there be any memory that such even happened? "

> > >

> > > There is just memory of the unbrokenness of that drive.

> > > It is as if there were a long elastic bubble stretching

> > > the two hours from A to B, and nothing separate within

> > > that.

> > >

> > > Krishnmurti talks of such things. For example, in

> > > *Krishnamurti's Notebook* he writes:

> > >

> > > Meditation, in the still hours of early morning,

> > > with no car rattling by, was the unfolding of

> > > beauty. It was not thought exploring with its

> > > limited capacity nor the sensitivity of feeling; it

> > > was not any outward or inward substance which was

> > > expressing itself; it was not the movement of time,

> > > for the brain was still. It was total negation of

> > > everything known, not a reaction but a denial that

> > > had no cause; it was a movement in complete freedom,

> > > a movement that had no direction and dimension; in

> > > that movement there was boundless energy whose very

> > > essence was stillness. Its action was total inaction

> > > and the essence of that inaction is freedom. There

> > > was great bliss, a great ecstasy that perished at

> > > the touch of thought.

> > >

> > > Such pure emptiness may not be immediately available.

> > > It may take decades of dwelling in silence for such

> > > clarity to be realized. For some even a lifetime may

> > > not suffice. But it *is* possible.

> > >

> > > I would not ordinarily speak of this, but I cannot

> > > let your absurd denials stand. When you say:

> > > " No, then one comes back on earth, and real life starts.

> > > With all these annoying things one would rather not own. "

> > > you are apparently expressing your own experience. To

> > > cynically claim that what is your experience is the height

> > > of what is possible is not truth.

> > >

> > > And I am not saying that attachments don't ever arise.

> > > They do. But they become more and more infrequent. And

> > > there can be great expanses of luminous awareness, of

> > > " the sparkle of Now " .

> > >

> > > And I am not the only one who will say this to you.

> > > Ask Dan for example. It would be interesting to hear

> > > what he has to say. And I know there are others on this

> > > list that will say the same. I invite their comments.

> > >

> > > Bill

> >

> > You think too much.

> > And in this thinking you lose awareness of reality, so to you

it

> > seems that what you think is true. This is a common disease

among

> > humans, the only difference between people is the content of

the

> > thoughts they drown in.

> > You like thinking about peace, awareness, not caring, no

ownership

> > etc... while some others are identyfied with money and success.

But

> > basically there is no difference. I´m sure there are plenty of

> > others on this list who agree with you, because this list is

full

> of

> > dreamers like you. It is not that you are in majority, that

your

> > imagination becomes reality.

> > You are not interested in understanding, just faking it to feel

> good

> > about yourself and to spend your time in pleasurable way.

> >

> > Len

> >

>

> Well gee Len. Thanks for your consultation services!

> Errrr... didn't I mention no thanks!

>

> And where are those hip boots when I really need them!

>

> Bill

>

> Yes, thanks, Len. That's very much the way I see Bill as well.

There are

> times when experiences are related and it can be delightful, but

other times the

> mind invents games for it's own delight. I have a reputation as a

deep

> thinker that is gratefully changing, and it seems I no longer

have the patience to

> attempt to follow such thought streams that arrive at the same

place they

> began and leave me wondering why the adventure took place at all.

> (There's no judgment here, Bill, I only mean to say you have been

of help to

> me.)

>

> Phil

I´m simply allergic to fakeness, so I sense it from another

continent. On top of it I don´t care about my reputation here, I

rather be alone then unhappily surrounded by glorious worshippers of

Holy Image.

Glad you see that too.

Len

April 30, 2006

In a message dated 4/29/2006 8:52:08 AM Pacific Daylight Time,

Nisargadatta writes:

Sat, 29 Apr 2006 12:10:15 -0000

" lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002

Re: Is the " sparkle of Now " just fantasy? / Len and EVERYONE

Nisargadatta , ADHHUB wrote:

>

> In a message dated 4/27/2006 9:10:02 AM Pacific Daylight Time,

> Nisargadatta writes:

>

> Thu, 27 Apr 2006 14:04:37 -0000

> " billrishel " <illusyn

> Re: Is the " sparkle of Now " just fantasy? / Len and

EVERYONE

>

> Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@>

> wrote:

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@>

> > wrote:

> > >

> > > <snip>

> > >

> > > > > > ...and then the realization that this realization

> > > > > > is a concept too ;-)

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Len

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > it would seem to become an infinite regress...

> > > > > but at some point the " bubble pops " ...

> > > > >

> > > > > and then what remains is just the sparkle of Now

> > > > >

> > > > > Bill

> > > >

> > > > No, then one comes back on earth, and real life starts.

> > > > With all these annoying things one would rather not own ;-)

> > > >

> > > > Len

> > > >

> > >

> > > Then you are just speaking for yourself.

> > >

> > > Is it possible to drive for over two hours from point

> > > A to point B with no thought, with no memory left,

> > > with no " residue " ?

> > >

> > > I tell you it is.

> > >

> > > Perhaps you will ask, " If there is no memory, how can

> > > there be any memory that such even happened? "

> > >

> > > There is just memory of the unbrokenness of that drive.

> > > It is as if there were a long elastic bubble stretching

> > > the two hours from A to B, and nothing separate within

> > > that.

> > >

> > > Krishnmurti talks of such things. For example, in

> > > *Krishnamurti's Notebook* he writes:

> > >

> > > Meditation, in the still hours of early morning,

> > > with no car rattling by, was the unfolding of

> > > beauty. It was not thought exploring with its

> > > limited capacity nor the sensitivity of feeling; it

> > > was not any outward or inward substance which was

> > > expressing itself; it was not the movement of time,

> > > for the brain was still. It was total negation of

> > > everything known, not a reaction but a denial that

> > > had no cause; it was a movement in complete freedom,

> > > a movement that had no direction and dimension; in

> > > that movement there was boundless energy whose very

> > > essence was stillness. Its action was total inaction

> > > and the essence of that inaction is freedom. There

> > > was great bliss, a great ecstasy that perished at

> > > the touch of thought.

> > >

> > > Such pure emptiness may not be immediately available.

> > > It may take decades of dwelling in silence for such

> > > clarity to be realized. For some even a lifetime may

> > > not suffice. But it *is* possible.

> > >

> > > I would not ordinarily speak of this, but I cannot

> > > let your absurd denials stand. When you say:

> > > " No, then one comes back on earth, and real life starts.

> > > With all these annoying things one would rather not own. "

> > > you are apparently expressing your own experience. To

> > > cynically claim that what is your experience is the height

> > > of what is possible is not truth.

> > >

> > > And I am not saying that attachments don't ever arise.

> > > They do. But they become more and more infrequent. And

> > > there can be great expanses of luminous awareness, of

> > > " the sparkle of Now " .

> > >

> > > And I am not the only one who will say this to you.

> > > Ask Dan for example. It would be interesting to hear

> > > what he has to say. And I know there are others on this

> > > list that will say the same. I invite their comments.

> > >

> > > Bill

> >

> > You think too much.

> > And in this thinking you lose awareness of reality, so to you

it

> > seems that what you think is true. This is a common disease

among

> > humans, the only difference between people is the content of

the

> > thoughts they drown in.

> > You like thinking about peace, awareness, not caring, no

ownership

> > etc... while some others are identyfied with money and success.

But

> > basically there is no difference. I´m sure there are plenty of

> > others on this list who agree with you, because this list is

full

> of

> > dreamers like you. It is not that you are in majority, that

your

> > imagination becomes reality.

> > You are not interested in understanding, just faking it to feel

> good

> > about yourself and to spend your time in pleasurable way.

> >

> > Len

> >

>

> Well gee Len. Thanks for your consultation services!

> Errrr... didn't I mention no thanks!

>

> And where are those hip boots when I really need them!

>

> Bill

>

> Yes, thanks, Len. That's very much the way I see Bill as well.

There are

> times when experiences are related and it can be delightful, but

other times the

> mind invents games for it's own delight. I have a reputation as a

deep

> thinker that is gratefully changing, and it seems I no longer

have the patience to

> attempt to follow such thought streams that arrive at the same

place they

> began and leave me wondering why the adventure took place at all.

> (There's no judgment here, Bill, I only mean to say you have been

of help to

> me.)

>

> Phil

I´m simply allergic to fakeness, so I sense it from another

continent. On top of it I don´t care about my reputation here, I

rather be alone then unhappily surrounded by glorious worshippers of

Holy Image.

Glad you see that too.

Len

And just to dig our graves deeper,...... I tend to ignore the pretenses

because really they don't matter and it's all my creation anyhoo. Since I can

see

it all on an intuitive level, which maybe you can too, it's everywhere and

nonstop. But every once in a while, there's this deep urge to tell the truth,

and of course it would trigger a landslide of ego. I finally understood, like

you describe here, that I had to hear the truth, even if it was just me

saying it. I love the truth and when I irritate folks with it, it has nothing

to

do with them. It's just about being true to what I love.

(Obviously, I don't care about my reputation either. Hehe.)

P

April 30, 2006

Nisargadatta , ADHHUB wrote:

>

> In a message dated 4/29/2006 8:52:08 AM Pacific Daylight Time,

> Nisargadatta writes:

>

> Sat, 29 Apr 2006 12:10:15 -0000

> " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002

> Re: Is the " sparkle of Now " just fantasy? / Len and

EVERYONE

>

> Nisargadatta , ADHHUB@ wrote:

> >

> > In a message dated 4/27/2006 9:10:02 AM Pacific Daylight Time,

> > Nisargadatta writes:

> >

> > Thu, 27 Apr 2006 14:04:37 -0000

> > " billrishel " <illusyn@>

> > Re: Is the " sparkle of Now " just fantasy? / Len and

> EVERYONE

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 "

<lissbon2002@>

> > wrote:

> > >

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

> > > wrote:

> > > >

> > > > <snip>

> > > >

> > > > > > > ...and then the realization that this realization

> > > > > > > is a concept too ;-)

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Len

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > it would seem to become an infinite regress...

> > > > > > but at some point the " bubble pops " ...

> > > > > >

> > > > > > and then what remains is just the sparkle of Now

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Bill

> > > > >

> > > > > No, then one comes back on earth, and real life starts.

> > > > > With all these annoying things one would rather not

own ;-)

> > > > >

> > > > > Len

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > Then you are just speaking for yourself.

> > > >

> > > > Is it possible to drive for over two hours from point

> > > > A to point B with no thought, with no memory left,

> > > > with no " residue " ?

> > > >

> > > > I tell you it is.

> > > >

> > > > Perhaps you will ask, " If there is no memory, how can

> > > > there be any memory that such even happened? "

> > > >

> > > > There is just memory of the unbrokenness of that drive.

> > > > It is as if there were a long elastic bubble stretching

> > > > the two hours from A to B, and nothing separate within

> > > > that.

> > > >

> > > > Krishnmurti talks of such things. For example, in

> > > > *Krishnamurti's Notebook* he writes:

> > > >

> > > > Meditation, in the still hours of early morning,

> > > > with no car rattling by, was the unfolding of

> > > > beauty. It was not thought exploring with its

> > > > limited capacity nor the sensitivity of feeling; it

> > > > was not any outward or inward substance which was

> > > > expressing itself; it was not the movement of time,

> > > > for the brain was still. It was total negation of

> > > > everything known, not a reaction but a denial that

> > > > had no cause; it was a movement in complete freedom,

> > > > a movement that had no direction and dimension; in

> > > > that movement there was boundless energy whose very

> > > > essence was stillness. Its action was total inaction

> > > > and the essence of that inaction is freedom. There

> > > > was great bliss, a great ecstasy that perished at

> > > > the touch of thought.

> > > >

> > > > Such pure emptiness may not be immediately available.

> > > > It may take decades of dwelling in silence for such

> > > > clarity to be realized. For some even a lifetime may

> > > > not suffice. But it *is* possible.

> > > >

> > > > I would not ordinarily speak of this, but I cannot

> > > > let your absurd denials stand. When you say:

> > > > " No, then one comes back on earth, and real life starts.

> > > > With all these annoying things one would rather not

own. "

> > > > you are apparently expressing your own experience. To

> > > > cynically claim that what is your experience is the height

> > > > of what is possible is not truth.

> > > >

> > > > And I am not saying that attachments don't ever arise.

> > > > They do. But they become more and more infrequent. And

> > > > there can be great expanses of luminous awareness, of

> > > > " the sparkle of Now " .

> > > >

> > > > And I am not the only one who will say this to you.

> > > > Ask Dan for example. It would be interesting to hear

> > > > what he has to say. And I know there are others on this

> > > > list that will say the same. I invite their comments.

> > > >

> > > > Bill

> > >

> > > You think too much.

> > > And in this thinking you lose awareness of reality, so to

you

> it

> > > seems that what you think is true. This is a common disease

> among

> > > humans, the only difference between people is the content of

> the

> > > thoughts they drown in.

> > > You like thinking about peace, awareness, not caring, no

> ownership

> > > etc... while some others are identyfied with money and

success.

> But

> > > basically there is no difference. I´m sure there are plenty

of

> > > others on this list who agree with you, because this list is

> full

> > of

> > > dreamers like you. It is not that you are in majority, that

> your

> > > imagination becomes reality.

> > > You are not interested in understanding, just faking it to

feel

> > good

> > > about yourself and to spend your time in pleasurable way.

> > >

> > > Len

> > >

> >

> > Well gee Len. Thanks for your consultation services!

> > Errrr... didn't I mention no thanks!

> >

> > And where are those hip boots when I really need them!

> >

> > Bill

> >

> > Yes, thanks, Len. That's very much the way I see Bill as well.

> There are

> > times when experiences are related and it can be delightful,

but

> other times the

> > mind invents games for it's own delight. I have a reputation as

a

> deep

> > thinker that is gratefully changing, and it seems I no longer

> have the patience to

> > attempt to follow such thought streams that arrive at the same

> place they

> > began and leave me wondering why the adventure took place at

all.

> > (There's no judgment here, Bill, I only mean to say you have

been

> of help to

> > me.)

> >

> > Phil

>

> I´m simply allergic to fakeness, so I sense it from another

> continent. On top of it I don´t care about my reputation here, I

> rather be alone then unhappily surrounded by glorious worshippers

of

> Holy Image.

> Glad you see that too.

>

> Len

>

> And just to dig our graves deeper,...... I tend to ignore the

pretenses

> because really they don't matter and it's all my creation anyhoo.

The pretences are not your creation, but your eventual emotional

reaction to them - is.

> Since I can see

> it all on an intuitive level, which maybe you can too, it's

everywhere and

> nonstop. But every once in a while, there's this deep urge to

tell the truth,

> and of course it would trigger a landslide of ego. I finally

understood, like

> you describe here, that I had to hear the truth, even if it was

just me

> saying it. I love the truth and when I irritate folks with it, it

has nothing to

> do with them. It's just about being true to what I love.

Maybe about not stopping yourself from naturally pointing to the

obvious, out of pretencious motives.

Len

> (Obviously, I don't care about my reputation either. Hehe.)

>

> P

>

May 1, 2006

Sun, 30 Apr 2006 21:54:13 -0000

" lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002

Re: Is the " sparkle of Now " just fantasy? / Len and EVERYONE

In a message dated 4/30/2006 7:25:03 PM Pacific Daylight Time,

Nisargadatta writes:

> And just to dig our graves deeper,...... I tend to ignore the

pretenses

> because really they don't matter and it's all my creation anyhoo.

The pretences are not your creation, but your eventual emotional

reaction to them - is.

P: I believe that we not only create our perception of what 'occurs', we

also create what 'occurs'. To the extent that there's pretension and

'falseness', this arises from a dualistic focus on seeing the truth and the

belief that

the opposite is there for us to deal with.

> Since I can see

> it all on an intuitive level, which maybe you can too, it's

everywhere and

> nonstop. But every once in a while, there's this deep urge to

tell the truth,

> and of course it would trigger a landslide of ego. I finally

understood, like

> you describe here, that I had to hear the truth, even if it was

just me

> saying it. I love the truth and when I irritate folks with it, it

has nothing to

> do with them. It's just about being true to what I love.

Maybe about not stopping yourself from naturally pointing to the

obvious, out of pretencious motives.

P: Yes, that's closer, though they're both true. The fear is that if I stop

pointing to the truth in others, I might stop pointing to it in myself.

Phil

May 1, 2006

Nisargadatta , ADHHUB wrote:

>

> Sun, 30 Apr 2006 21:54:13 -0000

> " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002

> Re: Is the " sparkle of Now " just fantasy? / Len and

EVERYONE

>

> In a message dated 4/30/2006 7:25:03 PM Pacific Daylight Time,

> Nisargadatta writes:

>

> > And just to dig our graves deeper,...... I tend to ignore the

> pretenses

> > because really they don't matter and it's all my creation

anyhoo.

>

> The pretences are not your creation, but your eventual emotional

> reaction to them - is.

>

> P: I believe that we not only create our perception of

what 'occurs', we

> also create what 'occurs'. To the extent that there's pretension

and

> 'falseness', this arises from a dualistic focus on seeing the

truth and the belief that

> the opposite is there for us to deal with.

You believe. It seems like a mental jump to me.

This way you can dismiss anything as illusion, own creation and

ignore it, but it is as meaningful as dismissing and ignoring the

ego as illusion, while you still believe in it.

Life reality is conditioned, but it doesn´t make a flat tire into

something unreal, a flat tire is a flat tire and must be dealt with

as such. In the same way an image is an image, and taking an image

for reality is self deception and pretence.

> > Since I can see

> > it all on an intuitive level, which maybe you can too, it's

> everywhere and

> > nonstop. But every once in a while, there's this deep urge to

> tell the truth,

> > and of course it would trigger a landslide of ego. I finally

> understood, like

> > you describe here, that I had to hear the truth, even if it

was

> just me

> > saying it. I love the truth and when I irritate folks with it,

it

> has nothing to

> > do with them. It's just about being true to what I love.

>

> Maybe about not stopping yourself from naturally pointing to the

> obvious, out of pretencious motives.

>

> P: Yes, that's closer, though they're both true. The fear is that

if I stop

> pointing to the truth in others, I might stop pointing to it in

myself.

>

> Phil

If fear is your motivation, you could explore what happens when you

stop pointing things out? What is being avoided?

Len

May 3, 2006

In a message dated 5/1/2006 7:48:33 PM Pacific Daylight Time,

Nisargadatta writes:

Mon, 01 May 2006 12:28:37 -0000

" lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002

Re: Is the " sparkle of Now " just fantasy? / Len and EVERYONE

Nisargadatta , ADHHUB wrote:

>

> Sun, 30 Apr 2006 21:54:13 -0000

> " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002

> Re: Is the " sparkle of Now " just fantasy? / Len and

EVERYONE

>

> In a message dated 4/30/2006 7:25:03 PM Pacific Daylight Time,

> Nisargadatta writes:

>

> > And just to dig our graves deeper,...... I tend to ignore the

> pretenses

> > because really they don't matter and it's all my creation

anyhoo.

>

> The pretences are not your creation, but your eventual emotional

> reaction to them - is.

>

> P: I believe that we not only create our perception of

what 'occurs', we

> also create what 'occurs'. To the extent that there's pretension

and

> 'falseness', this arises from a dualistic focus on seeing the

truth and the belief that

> the opposite is there for us to deal with.

You believe. It seems like a mental jump to me.

This way you can dismiss anything as illusion, own creation and

ignore it, but it is as meaningful as dismissing and ignoring the

ego as illusion, while you still believe in it.

Life reality is conditioned, but it doesn´t make a flat tire into

something unreal, a flat tire is a flat tire and must be dealt with

as such. In the same way an image is an image, and taking an image

for reality is self deception and pretence.

What I'm saying is that perception and creation are the same. If you see

yourself as creating everything you experience, why would you be inclined to

dismiss it? On the contrary, you must claim responsibility for it and not only

explore your reactions to what you perceive but also your creation of the

events. Of course, it would be much easier to pretend you have nothing to do

with

the negativity in your world but it isn't so.

> > Since I can see

> > it all on an intuitive level, which maybe you can too, it's

> everywhere and

> > nonstop. But every once in a while, there's this deep urge to

> tell the truth,

> > and of course it would trigger a landslide of ego. I finally

> understood, like

> > you describe here, that I had to hear the truth, even if it

was

> just me

> > saying it. I love the truth and when I irritate folks with it,

it

> has nothing to

> > do with them. It's just about being true to what I love.

>

> Maybe about not stopping yourself from naturally pointing to the

> obvious, out of pretencious motives.

>

> P: Yes, that's closer, though they're both true. The fear is that

if I stop

> pointing to the truth in others, I might stop pointing to it in

myself.

>

> Phil

If fear is your motivation, you could explore what happens when you

stop pointing things out? What is being avoided?

Len

Phil: The fear is a fear of stagnation. It arises out of my desire to move

forward and not get stuck. As long as I keep seeing folks stuck, this fear is

difficult to release.

Fear arises from desire and the potential it may not be fulfilled. It is

your motivation as well. All desire implies fear.

May 3, 2006

Nisargadatta , ADHHUB wrote:

>

> In a message dated 5/1/2006 7:48:33 PM Pacific Daylight Time,

> Nisargadatta writes:

>

> Mon, 01 May 2006 12:28:37 -0000

> " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002

> Re: Is the " sparkle of Now " just fantasy? / Len and

EVERYONE

>

> Nisargadatta , ADHHUB@ wrote:

> >

> > Sun, 30 Apr 2006 21:54:13 -0000

> > " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@>

> > Re: Is the " sparkle of Now " just fantasy? / Len and

> EVERYONE

> >

> > In a message dated 4/30/2006 7:25:03 PM Pacific Daylight Time,

> > Nisargadatta writes:

> >

> > > And just to dig our graves deeper,...... I tend to ignore

the

> > pretenses

> > > because really they don't matter and it's all my creation

> anyhoo.

> >

> > The pretences are not your creation, but your eventual

emotional

> > reaction to them - is.

> >

> > P: I believe that we not only create our perception of

> what 'occurs', we

> > also create what 'occurs'. To the extent that there's

pretension

> and

> > 'falseness', this arises from a dualistic focus on seeing the

> truth and the belief that

> > the opposite is there for us to deal with.

>

> You believe. It seems like a mental jump to me.

> This way you can dismiss anything as illusion, own creation and

> ignore it, but it is as meaningful as dismissing and ignoring the

> ego as illusion, while you still believe in it.

> Life reality is conditioned, but it doesn´t make a flat tire into

> something unreal, a flat tire is a flat tire and must be dealt

with

> as such. In the same way an image is an image, and taking an

image

> for reality is self deception and pretence.

>

> What I'm saying is that perception and creation are the same. If

you see

> yourself as creating everything you experience, why would you be

inclined to

> dismiss it? On the contrary, you must claim responsibility for it

and not only

> explore your reactions to what you perceive but also your creation

of the

> events. Of course, it would be much easier to pretend you have

nothing to do with

> the negativity in your world but it isn't so.

I see what you mean. Still a flat tire needs to be treated as such,

and taking images for reality must be recognized as such in order to

see what ego is made of. Within the limitation of our perception

there are facts which need to be discerned from images. Without it,

the illusion created by thought will never be understood.

> > > Since I can see

> > > it all on an intuitive level, which maybe you can too, it's

> > everywhere and

> > > nonstop. But every once in a while, there's this deep urge

to

> > tell the truth,

> > > and of course it would trigger a landslide of ego. I

finally

> > understood, like

> > > you describe here, that I had to hear the truth, even if it

> was

> > just me

> > > saying it. I love the truth and when I irritate folks with

it,

> it

> > has nothing to

> > > do with them. It's just about being true to what I love.

> >

> > Maybe about not stopping yourself from naturally pointing to

the

> > obvious, out of pretencious motives.

> >

> > P: Yes, that's closer, though they're both true. The fear is

that

> if I stop

> > pointing to the truth in others, I might stop pointing to it in

> myself.

> >

> > Phil

>

> If fear is your motivation, you could explore what happens when

you

> stop pointing things out? What is being avoided?

>

> Len

>

> Phil: The fear is a fear of stagnation. It arises out of my desire

to move

> forward and not get stuck. As long as I keep seeing folks stuck,

this fear is

> difficult to release.

>

> Fear arises from desire and the potential it may not be fulfilled.

Yes. The idea it might be not fullfilled. And then other ideas are

trying to get rid of this idea, and the fearful conflict arises.

It seems to be this fear of unfullfillment which makes it so

difficult to get what we want. Without this fear the desire seems to

be its own fullfillment.

> It is

> your motivation as well. All desire implies fear.

Being stuck is not something I´m affraid of, if this is what you

mean. But there are other things of course.

Did you observe your fear of being stuck, I mean physically, bodily,

when it occurs?

Len

May 4, 2006

In a message dated 5/3/2006 11:10:59 AM Pacific Daylight Time,

Nisargadatta writes:

" lissbon2002 " lissbon2002

Wed May 3, 2006 5:04am(PDT)

Re: Is the " sparkle of Now " just fantasy? / Len and EVERYONE

Nisargadatta , ADHHUB wrote:

>

> In a message dated 5/1/2006 7:48:33 PM Pacific Daylight Time,

> Nisargadatta writes:

>

> Mon, 01 May 2006 12:28:37 -0000

> " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002

> Re: Is the " sparkle of Now " just fantasy? / Len and

EVERYONE

>

> Nisargadatta , ADHHUB@ wrote:

> >

> > Sun, 30 Apr 2006 21:54:13 -0000

> > " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@>

> > Re: Is the " sparkle of Now " just fantasy? / Len and

> EVERYONE

> >

> > In a message dated 4/30/2006 7:25:03 PM Pacific Daylight Time,

> > Nisargadatta writes:

> >

> > > And just to dig our graves deeper,...... I tend to ignore

the

> > pretenses

> > > because really they don't matter and it's all my creation

> anyhoo.

> >

> > The pretences are not your creation, but your eventual

emotional

> > reaction to them - is.

> >

> > P: I believe that we not only create our perception of

> what 'occurs', we

> > also create what 'occurs'. To the extent that there's

pretension

> and

> > 'falseness', this arises from a dualistic focus on seeing the

> truth and the belief that

> > the opposite is there for us to deal with.

>

> You believe. It seems like a mental jump to me.

> This way you can dismiss anything as illusion, own creation and

> ignore it, but it is as meaningful as dismissing and ignoring the

> ego as illusion, while you still believe in it.

> Life reality is conditioned, but it doesn´t make a flat tire into

> something unreal, a flat tire is a flat tire and must be dealt

with

> as such. In the same way an image is an image, and taking an

image

> for reality is self deception and pretence.

>

> What I'm saying is that perception and creation are the same. If

you see

> yourself as creating everything you experience, why would you be

inclined to

> dismiss it? On the contrary, you must claim responsibility for it

and not only

> explore your reactions to what you perceive but also your creation

of the

> events. Of course, it would be much easier to pretend you have

nothing to do with

> the negativity in your world but it isn't so.

I see what you mean. Still a flat tire needs to be treated as such,

and taking images for reality must be recognized as such in order to

see what ego is made of. Within the limitation of our perception

there are facts which need to be discerned from images. Without it,

the illusion created by thought will never be understood.

Phil: Yes, maybe you can see now why I challenged your idea of " facts " when

you first joined the forum. From my perspective, there are no facts when

creation and perception are the same, but I understand what you're saying now.

What you call " images " is what I call unconscious ego, I believe, and the

creation of these images is what I call self deception. Yes, the truth about

all

that most definitely needs to be revealed.

> > > Since I can see

> > > it all on an intuitive level, which maybe you can too, it's

> > everywhere and

> > > nonstop. But every once in a while, there's this deep urge

to

> > tell the truth,

> > > and of course it would trigger a landslide of ego. I

finally

> > understood, like

> > > you describe here, that I had to hear the truth, even if it

> was

> > just me

> > > saying it. I love the truth and when I irritate folks with

it,

> it

> > has nothing to

> > > do with them. It's just about being true to what I love.

> >

> > Maybe about not stopping yourself from naturally pointing to

the

> > obvious, out of pretencious motives.

> >

> > P: Yes, that's closer, though they're both true. The fear is

that

> if I stop

> > pointing to the truth in others, I might stop pointing to it in

> myself.

> >

> > Phil

>

> If fear is your motivation, you could explore what happens when

you

> stop pointing things out? What is being avoided?

>

> Len

>

> Phil: The fear is a fear of stagnation. It arises out of my desire

to move

> forward and not get stuck. As long as I keep seeing folks stuck,

this fear is

> difficult to release.

>

> Fear arises from desire and the potential it may not be fulfilled.

Yes. The idea it might be not fullfilled. And then other ideas are

trying to get rid of this idea, and the fearful conflict arises.

It seems to be this fear of unfullfillment which makes it so

difficult to get what we want. Without this fear the desire seems to

be its own fullfillment.

Phil: Well, yes, but can a desire be present without the fear of possible

unfulfilment? If one desires, one has attachment to outcome. This is why

Buddhism advocates the release of desire.

> It is

> your motivation as well. All desire implies fear.

Being stuck is not something I´m affraid of, if this is what you

mean. But there are other things of course.

Did you observe your fear of being stuck, I mean physically, bodily,

when it occurs?

No, I wasn't implying this was your fear, just that behind all desire is

fear.

Phil: I observe my fear of being stuck intuitively, but yes, it's also

observed as a physical and mental tension. It's also reflected in my

experience,

and so I've become something of an expert on how ego can get us stuck in

little side roads. :)This isn't seen as a problem, and may very well be the

reason

that I'm not actually stuck.

May 4, 2006

Nisargadatta , ADHHUB wrote:

>

> In a message dated 5/3/2006 11:10:59 AM Pacific Daylight Time,

> Nisargadatta writes:

>

> " lissbon2002 " lissbon2002

> Wed May 3, 2006 5:04am(PDT)

> Re: Is the " sparkle of Now " just fantasy? / Len and

EVERYONE

> I see what you mean. Still a flat tire needs to be treated as

such,

> and taking images for reality must be recognized as such in order

to

> see what ego is made of. Within the limitation of our perception

> there are facts which need to be discerned from images. Without

it,

> the illusion created by thought will never be understood.

> Phil: Yes, maybe you can see now why I challenged your idea

of " facts " when

> you first joined the forum.

Did you? :-) I forgot all about it.

> From my perspective, there are no facts when

> creation and perception are the same, but I understand what

you're saying now.

> What you call " images " is what I call unconscious ego, I believe,

and the

> creation of these images is what I call self deception. Yes, the

truth about all

> that most definitely needs to be revealed.

Yes, we are talking in relative terms, in function of understanding

the self-deception through images. How can we ever understand it if

we label everything as equally unreal? It is a very interesting

strategy for the ego, though. If everything is unreal, we have only

labels left to explore, which guarantees that the exploration will

never cross the imaginary ego fences.

> Yes. The idea it might be not fullfilled. And then other ideas

are

> trying to get rid of this idea, and the fearful conflict arises.

> It seems to be this fear of unfullfillment which makes it so

> difficult to get what we want. Without this fear the desire seems

to

> be its own fullfillment.

>

> Phil: Well, yes, but can a desire be present without the fear of

possible

> unfulfilment?

Well, it´s probably better to use some other word to describe it.

If you want something without fear interfering, there seems to be no

resistance in getting it.

> If one desires, one has attachment to outcome. This is why

> Buddhism advocates the release of desire.

How? From my observation of Buddhists it seems to come down to

suppression. How do you deal with desire?

> > It is

> > your motivation as well. All desire implies fear.

>

> Being stuck is not something I´m affraid of, if this is what you

> mean. But there are other things of course.

> Did you observe your fear of being stuck, I mean physically,

bodily,

> when it occurs?

>

> No, I wasn't implying this was your fear, just that behind all

desire is

> fear.

OK. So we would have to find another name for the desire not

disturbed by fear. It seems that when the desire is not disturbed,

what one wants is exactly what one gets.

> Phil: I observe my fear of being stuck intuitively, but yes, it's

also

> observed as a physical and mental tension. It's also reflected in

my experience,

> and so I've become something of an expert on how ego can get us

stuck in

> little side roads. :)This isn't seen as a problem, and may very

well be the reason

> that I'm not actually stuck.

I´d say: if it isn´t seen as a problem, you´re not affraid of it.

Len

May 4, 2006

In a message dated 5/4/2006 8:37:09 AM Pacific Daylight Time,

Nisargadatta writes:

" lissbon2002 " lissbon2002

Thu May 4, 2006 5:41am(PDT)

Re: Is the " sparkle of Now " just fantasy? / Len and EVERYONE

Nisargadatta , ADHHUB wrote:

>

> In a message dated 5/3/2006 11:10:59 AM Pacific Daylight Time,

> Nisargadatta writes:

>

> " lissbon2002 " lissbon2002

> Wed May 3, 2006 5:04am(PDT)

> Re: Is the " sparkle of Now " just fantasy? / Len and

EVERYONE

> I see what you mean. Still a flat tire needs to be treated as

such,

> and taking images for reality must be recognized as such in order

to

> see what ego is made of. Within the limitation of our perception

> there are facts which need to be discerned from images. Without

it,

> the illusion created by thought will never be understood.

> Phil: Yes, maybe you can see now why I challenged your idea

of " facts " when

> you first joined the forum.

Did you? :-) I forgot all about it.

Phil: Oh......well, never mind then. Hehe.

> From my perspective, there are no facts when

> creation and perception are the same, but I understand what

you're saying now.

> What you call " images " is what I call unconscious ego, I believe,

and the

> creation of these images is what I call self deception. Yes, the

truth about all

> that most definitely needs to be revealed.

Yes, we are talking in relative terms, in function of understanding

the self-deception through images. How can we ever understand it if

we label everything as equally unreal? It is a very interesting

strategy for the ego, though. If everything is unreal, we have only

labels left to explore, which guarantees that the exploration will

never cross the imaginary ego fences.

Phil: Zackly. The original idea that something is illusion, and therefore

not Real in an absolute sense, wasn't intended to be cause for dismissing it.

The illusion is our entire experience and it doesn't go away by pretending it

isn't there. Some masters will advocate leaving mind/ego alone, and sometimes

I wonder if this isn't the best advice for some folks when we look around

and see how any focus on ego is an attempt to further establish it's position.

However, not focussing on it clearly doesn't help to dissolve it either.

> Yes. The idea it might be not fullfilled. And then other ideas

are

> trying to get rid of this idea, and the fearful conflict arises.

> It seems to be this fear of unfullfillment which makes it so

> difficult to get what we want. Without this fear the desire seems

to

> be its own fullfillment.

>

> Phil: Well, yes, but can a desire be present without the fear of

possible

> unfulfilment?

Well, it´s probably better to use some other word to describe it.

If you want something without fear interfering, there seems to be no

resistance in getting it.

> If one desires, one has attachment to outcome. This is why

> Buddhism advocates the release of desire.

How? From my observation of Buddhists it seems to come down to

suppression. How do you deal with desire?

Phil: From what I could tell, there was never a 'method' for this release.

Yes, it would amount to suppression. However, the identification of desire as

problematic is correct.

> > It is

> > your motivation as well. All desire implies fear.

>

> Being stuck is not something I´m affraid of, if this is what you

> mean. But there are other things of course.

> Did you observe your fear of being stuck, I mean physically,

bodily,

> when it occurs?

>

> No, I wasn't implying this was your fear, just that behind all

desire is

> fear.

OK. So we would have to find another name for the desire not

disturbed by fear. It seems that when the desire is not disturbed,

what one wants is exactly what one gets.

Phil: Yes, this happens when there's no real attachment to outcome. The less

attachment, the more likely it is to occur. Ultimately, what is seen as

desirable is whatever is occurring. This is acceptance and nonattachment.

> Phil: I observe my fear of being stuck intuitively, but yes, it's

also

> observed as a physical and mental tension. It's also reflected in

my experience,

> and so I've become something of an expert on how ego can get us

stuck in

> little side roads. :)This isn't seen as a problem, and may very

well be the reason

> that I'm not actually stuck.

I´d say: if it isn´t seen as a problem, you´re not affraid of it.

Phil: Good point! Hehe....... Lets just say the 'concern' about stagnation

has created a focus of vigilance which I believe has been beneficial. You're

right, in that sense there is no problem and no need for concern. There's just

a vigilant focus that serves me right now, which is why I've held it in

place in spite of seeing the process.

Thanks, that's actually helpful.

Is the sparkle of Now just fantasy? / Len and EVERYONE

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Join the conversation

Support the Ashram

Join Groups

Top Downloads