Guest guest Posted May 2, 2006 Report Share Posted May 2, 2006 Nisargadatta , ADHHUB wrote: > > > In a message dated 4/30/2006 7:25:03 PM Pacific Daylight Time, > Nisargadatta writes: > > Mon, 1 May 2006 03:31:10 +0200 (CEST) > OConnor Patricia <gdtige > RE: Re: More on " surrender " > > > --- toombaru2006 <lastrain a écrit : > > > > Nisargadatta , OConnor Patricia > <gdtige@> wrote: > > > > > > --- toombaru2006 <lastrain@> a écrit : > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , OConnor > Patricia > > <gdtige@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > < The key is that when something like that > > > comes up > > > > > > > < and I allow myself to *be* whatever it > is, > > I > > > am > > > > > > > < not trying to fix, heal, correct. And I > am > > > not > > > > > > > < *trying to surrender* either. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > < It is, or at least seems to be, that I > > have > > > learned > > > > > > > < that when something " charged " comes up > it > > is > > > best > > > > > > > < not to fight that. It is OK. No need to > > > fight anything. > > > > > > > < There is no state that is not grace. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > < Bill > > > > > > What a graceful post , thank-you. > > > > > > Patricia > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I believe another way of stating the above > > is > > > " to be > > > > uncontracted > > > > > in > > > > > > the > > > > > > > presence of contraction " . As good ol' J. > > > Krishnamurti put > > > > > it, " to make > > > > > > > absolutely no movement whatsoever in any > > > direction " . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Michael > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The attempt to make no movement.....is > > movement. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > Michael didn`t talk about attempting not to make > any > > > movements, he talked about non-reaction : > immobility > > > in face of adversity. > > > Try it.... Oh you have ??... > > > Then you know how it is!! > > > No more formulas Toomb. > > > I want milk. > > > > > > Patricia > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Any attempt by the self.......or any suggestion > given > > to....or > > received by the self...is an effort to revive the > > dead. > > > > It is the illusion of self that wants and needs > > sustenance. > > > > Without food....it atrophies....but it can live a > long > > time on nothing > > but memories. > > > > > > toombaru > > > > maybe you don`t really try to read what we are > talking > > about...it was not about revivification of the dead. > > When witnessing without reacting...you call that an > > attempt by the self? > > > > Witnessing is reacting. > > The statement that witnessing is possible without > reacting is an > ideation concocted by self....for self. > > Michael says that he " allows himself to be what he > is " . > > If he is allowing himself to be what he is....he > isn't. > > " He " cannot see himself at any given time.....by the > time he sees > " himself " ....whatever that was has moves on..... > > This 'himself' that he claims to be able to allow to > do what it is > doing is nothing other then the one observing. > > He speaks as if there were two of him....one > doing.....and one > attempting to allow the observed doing. > > Can you see the problem here? > > (And yes......I have to admit......I do like my name > at the bottom) > > > toombaru > > > HHmmm intersting... > I see the problem, > But I don`t see the solution. > > Patricia > > P.s : I think I beat you to the last name on this > post. > > > > The solution is to stop, but that's not something you can choose to do, so > you keep going instead. > > Phil Unless one doesn't. It is not arbitrary that one continues to *try* etc. But cessation is never by any effort. Nor is it by " surrender " . It is because there has finally come the point of complete despair. And one can never *choose* to come to that point. That's the entire value of inquiry. Inquiry, the very word, would seem to be a path to *finding out* what is the case. But nondual inquiry (at least as used by Nisargadatta) means the deep investigation that leads ultimately to bona fide despair. Despair can never be the goal. But it is the gate, the rite of passage. To finally break upon the shoals of despair is the greatest of all blessings. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 2, 2006 Report Share Posted May 2, 2006 Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn wrote: > > Nisargadatta , ADHHUB@ wrote: > > > > > > In a message dated 4/30/2006 7:25:03 PM Pacific Daylight Time, > > Nisargadatta writes: > > > > Mon, 1 May 2006 03:31:10 +0200 (CEST) > > OConnor Patricia <gdtige@> > > RE: Re: More on " surrender " > > > > > > --- toombaru2006 <lastrain@> a écrit : > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , OConnor Patricia > > <gdtige@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > --- toombaru2006 <lastrain@> a écrit : > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , OConnor > > Patricia > > > <gdtige@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > < The key is that when something like that > > > > comes up > > > > > > > > < and I allow myself to *be* whatever it > > is, > > > I > > > > am > > > > > > > > < not trying to fix, heal, correct. And I > > am > > > > not > > > > > > > > < *trying to surrender* either. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > < It is, or at least seems to be, that I > > > have > > > > learned > > > > > > > > < that when something " charged " comes up > > it > > > is > > > > best > > > > > > > > < not to fight that. It is OK. No need to > > > > fight anything. > > > > > > > > < There is no state that is not grace. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > < Bill > > > > > > > > What a graceful post , thank-you. > > > > > > > > Patricia > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I believe another way of stating the above > > > is > > > > " to be > > > > > uncontracted > > > > > > in > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > presence of contraction " . As good ol' J. > > > > Krishnamurti put > > > > > > it, " to make > > > > > > > > absolutely no movement whatsoever in any > > > > direction " . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Michael > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The attempt to make no movement.....is > > > movement. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > > > > Michael didn`t talk about attempting not to make > > any > > > > movements, he talked about non-reaction : > > immobility > > > > in face of adversity. > > > > Try it.... Oh you have ??... > > > > Then you know how it is!! > > > > No more formulas Toomb. > > > > I want milk. > > > > > > > > Patricia > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Any attempt by the self.......or any suggestion > > given > > > to....or > > > received by the self...is an effort to revive the > > > dead. > > > > > > It is the illusion of self that wants and needs > > > sustenance. > > > > > > Without food....it atrophies....but it can live a > > long > > > time on nothing > > > but memories. > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > maybe you don`t really try to read what we are > > talking > > > about...it was not about revivification of the dead. > > > When witnessing without reacting...you call that an > > > attempt by the self? > > > > > > > > Witnessing is reacting. > > > > The statement that witnessing is possible without > > reacting is an > > ideation concocted by self....for self. > > > > Michael says that he " allows himself to be what he > > is " . > > > > If he is allowing himself to be what he is....he > > isn't. > > > > " He " cannot see himself at any given time.....by the > > time he sees > > " himself " ....whatever that was has moves on..... > > > > This 'himself' that he claims to be able to allow to > > do what it is > > doing is nothing other then the one observing. > > > > He speaks as if there were two of him....one > > doing.....and one > > attempting to allow the observed doing. > > > > Can you see the problem here? > > > > (And yes......I have to admit......I do like my name > > at the bottom) > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > HHmmm intersting... > > I see the problem, > > But I don`t see the solution. > > > > Patricia > > > > P.s : I think I beat you to the last name on this > > post. > > > > > > > > The solution is to stop, but that's not something you can choose to > do, so > > you keep going instead. > > > > Phil > > Unless one doesn't. > > It is not arbitrary that one continues to *try* etc. > > But cessation is never by any effort. > Nor is it by " surrender " . > It is because there has finally come the point > of complete despair. > > And one can never *choose* to come to that point. > > That's the entire value of inquiry. > > Inquiry, the very word, would seem to be a path > to *finding out* what is the case. But nondual > inquiry (at least as used by Nisargadatta) > means the deep investigation that leads ultimately > to bona fide despair. > > Despair can never be the goal. But it is the gate, > the rite of passage. > > To finally break upon the shoals of despair is the > greatest of all blessings. > > Bill Bless you. Len Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.