Guest guest Posted June 9, 2006 Report Share Posted June 9, 2006 Questioner: What comes first: consciousness or awareness? Nisargadatta: Awareness becomes consciousness when it has an object. The object changes all the time. In consciousness there is movement; awareness by itself is motionless and timeless, here and now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 9, 2006 Report Share Posted June 9, 2006 That there is something as awareness is a wide spread spiritual concept. And in my eyes it is a delusion. I think Niz was prone to that concept and delusion. In my understanding what generally is regarded as awareness independent of consciousness is another word for NEUROSIS. Werner Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart wrote: > > Questioner: What comes first: consciousness or > awareness? > > Nisargadatta: Awareness becomes consciousness > when it has an object. The object changes all > the time. In consciousness there is movement; > awareness by itself is motionless and timeless, > here and now. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 9, 2006 Report Share Posted June 9, 2006 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr wrote: > > That there is something as awareness is a wide spread spiritual > concept. And in my eyes it is a delusion. I think Niz was prone to > that concept and delusion. > > In my understanding what generally is regarded as awareness > independent of consciousness is another word for NEUROSIS. > > Werner What foundation does your understanding rest upon? Do you trust to your understanding only because it is *yours*? Bill > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart@> > wrote: > > > > Questioner: What comes first: consciousness or > > awareness? > > > > Nisargadatta: Awareness becomes consciousness > > when it has an object. The object changes all > > the time. In consciousness there is movement; > > awareness by itself is motionless and timeless, > > here and now. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 9, 2006 Report Share Posted June 9, 2006 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> > > wrote: > > > > > > That there is something as awareness is a wide spread spiritual > > > concept. And in my eyes it is a delusion. I think Niz was prone to > > > that concept and delusion. > > > > > > In my understanding what generally is regarded as awareness > > > independent of consciousness is another word for NEUROSIS. > > > > > > Werner > > > > What foundation does your understanding rest upon? > > Do you trust to your understanding only because it > > is *yours*? > > > > Bill > > > > > All understanding involves things. > > All understanding is relative and ultimately meaningless. > > There is an understanding that burns itself up. > > > toombaru you mean like the way the match understands the flame? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 9, 2006 Report Share Posted June 9, 2006 Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > That there is something as awareness is a wide spread spiritual > > > > concept. And in my eyes it is a delusion. I think Niz was prone to > > > > that concept and delusion. > > > > > > > > In my understanding what generally is regarded as awareness > > > > independent of consciousness is another word for NEUROSIS. > > > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > What foundation does your understanding rest upon? > > > Do you trust to your understanding only because it > > > is *yours*? > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > All understanding involves things. > > > > All understanding is relative and ultimately meaningless. > > > > There is an understanding that burns itself up. > > > > > > toombaru > > you mean like the way the > match understands > the flame? > The match is the flame. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 9, 2006 Report Share Posted June 9, 2006 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > That there is something as awareness is a wide spread spiritual > > > > > concept. And in my eyes it is a delusion. I think Niz was > prone to > > > > > that concept and delusion. > > > > > > > > > > In my understanding what generally is regarded as awareness > > > > > independent of consciousness is another word for NEUROSIS. > > > > > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > What foundation does your understanding rest upon? > > > > Do you trust to your understanding only because it > > > > is *yours*? > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > All understanding involves things. > > > > > > All understanding is relative and ultimately meaningless. > > > > > > There is an understanding that burns itself up. > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > you mean like the way the > > match understands > > the flame? > > > > > The match is the flame. > > > toombaru > understood Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 9, 2006 Report Share Posted June 9, 2006 Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > That there is something as awareness is a wide spread spiritual > > > > > > concept. And in my eyes it is a delusion. I think Niz was > > prone to > > > > > > that concept and delusion. > > > > > > > > > > > > In my understanding what generally is regarded as awareness > > > > > > independent of consciousness is another word for NEUROSIS. > > > > > > > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > > > What foundation does your understanding rest upon? > > > > > Do you trust to your understanding only because it > > > > > is *yours*? > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All understanding involves things. > > > > > > > > All understanding is relative and ultimately meaningless. > > > > > > > > There is an understanding that burns itself up. > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > you mean like the way the > > > match understands > > > the flame? > > > > > > > > > The match is the flame. > > > > > > toombaru > > > > understood > Then let it burn. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 9, 2006 Report Share Posted June 9, 2006 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That there is something as awareness is a wide spread > spiritual > > > > > > > concept. And in my eyes it is a delusion. I think Niz was > > > prone to > > > > > > > that concept and delusion. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In my understanding what generally is regarded as awareness > > > > > > > independent of consciousness is another word for NEUROSIS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > > > > > What foundation does your understanding rest upon? > > > > > > Do you trust to your understanding only because it > > > > > > is *yours*? > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All understanding involves things. > > > > > > > > > > All understanding is relative and ultimately meaningless. > > > > > > > > > > There is an understanding that burns itself up. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > you mean like the way the > > > > match understands > > > > the flame? > > > > > > > > > > > > > The match is the flame. > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > understood > > > > > > Then let it burn. > > > > toombaru > how about at both ends? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 9, 2006 Report Share Posted June 9, 2006 Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " > <pliantheart@> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That there is something as awareness is a wide spread > > spiritual > > > > > > > > concept. And in my eyes it is a delusion. I think Niz was > > > > prone to > > > > > > > > that concept and delusion. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In my understanding what generally is regarded as awareness > > > > > > > > independent of consciousness is another word for NEUROSIS. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What foundation does your understanding rest upon? > > > > > > > Do you trust to your understanding only because it > > > > > > > is *yours*? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All understanding involves things. > > > > > > > > > > > > All understanding is relative and ultimately meaningless. > > > > > > > > > > > > There is an understanding that burns itself up. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > > you mean like the way the > > > > > match understands > > > > > the flame? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The match is the flame. > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > > understood > > > > > > > > > > > Then let it burn. > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > how about at both ends? ^^^^^^^^^^^^^:-0^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 10, 2006 Report Share Posted June 10, 2006 Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart wrote: > > Questioner: What comes first: consciousness or > awareness? > > Nisargadatta: Awareness becomes consciousness > when it has an object. The object changes all > the time. In consciousness there is movement; > awareness by itself is motionless and timeless, > here and now. Where did the object come from? Someplace outside of awareness? (Not the way Niz would define it, methinks.) So, he's talking about an intermediate step in which one dissociates awareness from the object, and understands awareness as having its own inherent reality, truth, and being. And, by the way, this seems to be a key point where the Hindu tradition that he speaks from, and the Buddhist tradition, have very important differences. The reason I say it's an intermediate step is because there is still a duality between awareness and object of awareness, and the properties of each - one doesn't change, the other does. The last step would be to understand that awareness and object aren't two, aren't divided or divisible. Buddhism has a different perspective, saying that nothing has its own inherent properties or being to and of itself. Nonetheless, both teachings appear to aim at nondual realization of truth. It seems to me that whatever teaching vehicle is used, at the point of realization, the vehicle drops away in relevance and importance. Also, it seems the concept of realization also drops away and is irrelevant. Realizer, realization, and that which is realized -- not being divisible -- the concept " realization " becomes meaningless. Also, " realization " infers an event with a beginning, where as nonduality infers nondividedness, hence beginninglessness. -- Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 10, 2006 Report Share Posted June 10, 2006 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart@> > wrote: > > > > Questioner: What comes first: consciousness or > > awareness? > > > > Nisargadatta: Awareness becomes consciousness > > when it has an object. The object changes all > > the time. In consciousness there is movement; > > awareness by itself is motionless and timeless, > > here and now. > > Where did the object come from? > > Someplace outside of awareness? (Not the way Niz would define it, > methinks.) > > So, he's talking about an intermediate step in which one dissociates > awareness from the object, and understands awareness as having its own > inherent reality, truth, and being. > > And, by the way, this seems to be a key point where the Hindu > tradition that he speaks from, and the Buddhist tradition, have very > important differences. > > The reason I say it's an intermediate step is because there is still a > duality between awareness and object of awareness, and the properties > of each - one doesn't change, the other does. > > The last step would be to understand that awareness and object aren't > two, aren't divided or divisible. > > Buddhism has a different perspective, saying that nothing has its own > inherent properties or being to and of itself. > > Nonetheless, both teachings appear to aim at nondual realization of truth. > > It seems to me that whatever teaching vehicle is used, at the point of > realization, the vehicle drops away in relevance and importance. > Also, it seems the concept of realization also drops away and is > irrelevant. Realizer, realization, and that which is realized -- not > being divisible -- the concept " realization " becomes meaningless. > Also, " realization " infers an event with a beginning, where as > nonduality infers nondividedness, hence beginninglessness. > > -- Dan > Nonduality exists as All That Is In the beginning of consciousness words were created to explain consciousness sciences were created to explain words (thinking) philosophies were created to explain science and religion was created to explain philosophy and religion floundered in words and created spirituality and this is how the nonduality of existence speaks. ;-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 12, 2006 Report Share Posted June 12, 2006 Nisargadatta , " anabebe57 " <anabebe57 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Questioner: What comes first: consciousness or > > > awareness? > > > > > > Nisargadatta: Awareness becomes consciousness > > > when it has an object. The object changes all > > > the time. In consciousness there is movement; > > > awareness by itself is motionless and timeless, > > > here and now. > > > > Where did the object come from? > > > > Someplace outside of awareness? (Not the way Niz would define it, > > methinks.) > > > > So, he's talking about an intermediate step in which one > dissociates > > awareness from the object, and understands awareness as having its > own > > inherent reality, truth, and being. > > > > And, by the way, this seems to be a key point where the Hindu > > tradition that he speaks from, and the Buddhist tradition, have > very > > important differences. > > > > The reason I say it's an intermediate step is because there is > still a > > duality between awareness and object of awareness, and the > properties > > of each - one doesn't change, the other does. > > > > The last step would be to understand that awareness and object > aren't > > two, aren't divided or divisible. > > > > Buddhism has a different perspective, saying that nothing has its > own > > inherent properties or being to and of itself. > > > > Nonetheless, both teachings appear to aim at nondual realization > of truth. > > > > It seems to me that whatever teaching vehicle is used, at the > point of > > realization, the vehicle drops away in relevance and importance. > > Also, it seems the concept of realization also drops away and is > > irrelevant. Realizer, realization, and that which is realized -- > not > > being divisible -- the concept " realization " becomes meaningless. > > Also, " realization " infers an event with a beginning, where as > > nonduality infers nondividedness, hence beginninglessness. > > > > -- Dan > > > > > > Nonduality exists as All That Is > > In the beginning of consciousness > > words were created to explain consciousness > sciences were created to explain words (thinking) > philosophies were created to explain science > and religion was created to explain philosophy > > and religion floundered in words and created > spirituality and this is how the nonduality of > existence speaks. > > > ;-) Words are for experiences in time. Along with those experiences and memories, comes a creature trying to affirm existence. Words, naming, explanations, desires, fears, time, memory, and survival go hand in hand. Ceasing to have a claim or foothold as a being in time, ceasing to be able to accumlate experience -- this is not the secret wish of a creature trying to survive - give me love, bliss, joy, excitement, adventure, happiness, or even hatred, frustration, fear, and rage -- anything but this as it is! Nonetheless, knowing one's emptiness is also to know openness and peace. It just requires one to turn in all the baggage at the door. Nothing precious remains. What a loss! No wonder no one wants this as is. Although everyone already is this, everyone is begging: Please don't take my words, my thoughts, my obsessions, my experiences, my feelings away -- don't leave me just being as is. Anything but this! -- Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 13, 2006 Report Share Posted June 13, 2006 > > Words are for experiences in time. > > Along with those experiences and memories, comes a creature trying to > affirm existence. > > Words, naming, explanations, desires, fears, time, memory, and > survival go hand in hand. > > Ceasing to have a claim or foothold as a being in time, ceasing to be > able to accumlate experience -- this is not the secret wish of a > creature trying to survive - give me love, bliss, joy, excitement, > adventure, happiness, or even hatred, frustration, fear, and rage -- > anything but this as it is! > > Nonetheless, knowing one's emptiness is also to know openness and peace. > > It just requires one to turn in all the baggage at the door. > > Nothing precious remains. > > What a loss! > > No wonder no one wants this as is. > > Although everyone already is this, everyone is begging: > > Please don't take my words, my thoughts, my obsessions, my > experiences, my feelings away -- don't leave me just being as is. > > Anything but this! > > -- Dan > This is beautiful. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 14, 2006 Report Share Posted June 14, 2006 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > > > > > > Words are for experiences in time. > > > > Along with those experiences and memories, comes a creature trying to > > affirm existence. > > > > Words, naming, explanations, desires, fears, time, memory, and > > survival go hand in hand. > > > > Ceasing to have a claim or foothold as a being in time, ceasing to be > > able to accumlate experience -- this is not the secret wish of a > > creature trying to survive - give me love, bliss, joy, excitement, > > adventure, happiness, or even hatred, frustration, fear, and rage -- > > anything but this as it is! > > > > Nonetheless, knowing one's emptiness is also to know openness and peace. > > > > It just requires one to turn in all the baggage at the door. > > > > Nothing precious remains. > > > > What a loss! > > > > No wonder no one wants this as is. > > > > Although everyone already is this, everyone is begging: > > > > Please don't take my words, my thoughts, my obsessions, my > > experiences, my feelings away -- don't leave me just being as is. > > > > Anything but this! > > > > -- Dan > > > > > This is beautiful. > > > toombaru > And Anything IS Thus! Eventless Effortless Compassion Floats Eternal In boyant Blithe Compassion There Is no condition No precondition No supposition No position at all Nothing is dropped Nothing gained There is Just Floating Aimlessly Crisisless Eventless Moreless Lessless (More or lessly) ~*~ 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.