Guest guest Posted June 25, 2006 Report Share Posted June 25, 2006 some may say, that some knowledge is better than other knowledge.... but that is just knowledge.......ignorance ....iietsa Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 25, 2006 Report Share Posted June 25, 2006 Nisargadatta , " iietsa " <iietsa wrote: > > some may say, that some knowledge is better than other knowledge.... > but that is just knowledge.......ignorance > > ...iietsa > of one has acquired a habit of continually returning to the now, to the present moment, is that habit knowledge? and if so is it ignorance? Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 25, 2006 Report Share Posted June 25, 2006 Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " iietsa " <iietsa@> wrote: > > > > some may say, that some knowledge is better than other knowledge.... > > but that is just knowledge.......ignorance > > > > ...iietsa > > > > of one has acquired a habit of continually returning > to the now, to the present moment, is that habit > knowledge? > > and if so is it ignorance? > > Bill > ignoring knowledge is ______________.? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 25, 2006 Report Share Posted June 25, 2006 Nisargadatta , " anabebe57 " <kailashana wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " iietsa " <iietsa@> wrote: > > > > > > some may say, that some knowledge is better than other > knowledge.... > > > but that is just knowledge.......ignorance > > > > > > ...iietsa > > > > > > > of one has acquired a habit of continually returning > > to the now, to the present moment, is that habit > > knowledge? > > > > and if so is it ignorance? > > > > Bill > > > In order to return to the now.....one would have to somehow have gotten outside of the now....and then by definition would be forever lost in some strange place. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 25, 2006 Report Share Posted June 25, 2006 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anabebe57 " <kailashana@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " iietsa " <iietsa@> wrote: > > > > > > > > some may say, that some knowledge is better than other > > knowledge.... > > > > but that is just knowledge.......ignorance > > > > > > > > ...iietsa > > > > > > > > > > of one has acquired a habit of continually returning > > > to the now, to the present moment, is that habit > > > knowledge? > > > > > > and if so is it ignorance? > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > In order to return to the now.....one would have to somehow have > gotten outside of the now....and then by definition would be forever > lost in some strange place. > > > > toombaru > you would have to know more about that than anyone else, what with your tar nation. luv ya ~*~ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 25, 2006 Report Share Posted June 25, 2006 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anabebe57 " <kailashana@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " iietsa " <iietsa@> wrote: > > > > > > > > some may say, that some knowledge is better than other > > knowledge.... > > > > but that is just knowledge.......ignorance > > > > > > > > ...iietsa > > > > > > > > > > of one has acquired a habit of continually returning > > > to the now, to the present moment, is that habit > > > knowledge? > > > > > > and if so is it ignorance? > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > In order to return to the now.....one would have to somehow have > gotten outside of the now....and then by definition would be forever > lost in some strange place. > > > > toombaru > I'm sort of with you on that... any not-in-the-now-ness would have to be virtual, not real, as now is always necessarily the case. hence any " return to the now " would have to be virtual as well. which is a kind of strangeness. but then the " forever lost " part of your argument does not apply. do we agree that sometimes it happens that a case of not-in-the-now can undergoe some sort of (virtual) " transformation " such that no longer not-in-the-now? Bill Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 25, 2006 Report Share Posted June 25, 2006 Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " anabebe57 " <kailashana@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " iietsa " <iietsa@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > some may say, that some knowledge is better than other > > > knowledge.... > > > > > but that is just knowledge.......ignorance > > > > > > > > > > ...iietsa > > > > > > > > > > > > > of one has acquired a habit of continually returning > > > > to the now, to the present moment, is that habit > > > > knowledge? > > > > > > > > and if so is it ignorance? > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In order to return to the now.....one would have to somehow have > > gotten outside of the now....and then by definition would be forever > > lost in some strange place. > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > I'm sort of with you on that... > > any not-in-the-now-ness would have to be virtual, > not real, as now is always necessarily the case. > > hence any " return to the now " would have to be > virtual as well. > > which is a kind of strangeness. > > but then the " forever lost " part of your argument > does not apply. > > do we agree that sometimes it happens that a case > of not-in-the-now can undergoe some sort of (virtual) > " transformation " such that no longer not-in-the-now? > > Bill > > > > Bill > No.........we do not agree. 'Now' is a concept involving another concept 'time'. Time would have to be able to be divided into tiny segments in order for there to be a definite now. When the secondary conceptual overlay is seen for what it is..(by no one)......It falls apart......and in its place......the most pristine naturalness shines through. But it cannot be captured with words. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 25, 2006 Report Share Posted June 25, 2006 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anabebe57 " <kailashana@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " iietsa " <iietsa@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > some may say, that some knowledge is better than other > > > > knowledge.... > > > > > > but that is just knowledge.......ignorance > > > > > > > > > > > > ...iietsa > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of one has acquired a habit of continually returning > > > > > to the now, to the present moment, is that habit > > > > > knowledge? > > > > > > > > > > and if so is it ignorance? > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In order to return to the now.....one would have to somehow have > > > gotten outside of the now....and then by definition would be forever > > > lost in some strange place. > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > I'm sort of with you on that... > > > > any not-in-the-now-ness would have to be virtual, > > not real, as now is always necessarily the case. > > > > hence any " return to the now " would have to be > > virtual as well. > > > > which is a kind of strangeness. > > > > but then the " forever lost " part of your argument > > does not apply. > > > > do we agree that sometimes it happens that a case > > of not-in-the-now can undergoe some sort of (virtual) > > " transformation " such that no longer not-in-the-now? > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > No.........we do not agree. > > > 'Now' is a concept involving another concept 'time'. > > Time would have to be able to be divided into tiny segments in order > for there to be a definite now. > > When the secondary conceptual overlay is seen for what it is..(by no > one)......It falls apart......and in its place......the most pristine > naturalness shines through. > > > But it cannot be captured with words. > > > toombaru > Nothing can be captured by words. That's trite. Don't we get tired of hearing it on line, all the time, yet? And of course by " now " we don't mean temporally! That's just a complete misunderstanding. What is meant, really, is eternity. But that's also subject to misunderstanding. So is " the most pristine naturalness shines through. " Reparte is easy, and is really just a lot of koanishness, when you deal with these simple little cliche's, continually recycled. There! Wasn't that fun? Actually it was. Never mind. (More nails. Hammering is fun, sometimes.) lv ~*~ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 25, 2006 Report Share Posted June 25, 2006 > > > > But it cannot be captured with words. > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > Nothing can be captured by words. That's trite. Don't we get tired > of hearing it on line, all the time. I have known seekers that have awakened after hearing that one hundred thousand times. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 25, 2006 Report Share Posted June 25, 2006 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > > > > > > > But it cannot be captured with words. > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > Nothing can be captured by words. That's trite. Don't we get tired > > of hearing it on line, all the time. > > > > > > I have known seekers that have awakened after hearing that one hundred > thousand times. > > > > > > toombaru > Toomy the sage! Yes, I too, believe in repetition. I was just doing the hammer, just like you. But who's counting, here, have another cookie. lv ~*~ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 25, 2006 Report Share Posted June 25, 2006 Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " iietsa " <iietsa@> wrote: > > > > some may say, that some knowledge is better than other knowledge.... > > but that is just knowledge.......ignorance > > > > ...iietsa > > > > of one has acquired a habit of continually returning > to the now, to the present moment, is that habit > knowledge? > > and if so is it ignorance? > > Bill your real " self " is now-presence.... so who is this " who " that returns to the now ? and goes away, and returns again ? all habits are time-bound... just stay who you are... and the need for the habit to return...is not needed at all....iietsa Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 25, 2006 Report Share Posted June 25, 2006 Nisargadatta , " iietsa " <iietsa wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " iietsa " <iietsa@> wrote: > > > > > > some may say, that some knowledge is better than other > knowledge.... > > > but that is just knowledge.......ignorance > > > > > > ...iietsa > > > > > > > of one has acquired a habit of continually returning > > to the now, to the present moment, is that habit > > knowledge? > > > > and if so is it ignorance? > > > > Bill > > your real " self " is now-presence.... > so who is this " who " that returns to the now ? > and goes away, and returns again ? > all habits are time-bound... > just stay who you are... > and the need for the habit to return...is not needed at all....iietsa > OK... then please substitute the habit of " just stay who you are " ... and what does it mean to " go away from " who you are? Let's look at this: " your real 'self' is now-presence " ... that pretty much works for me [i actually prefer to avoid the term 'self' and tend to the passive voice for such things, as in: only now-presence is real That is leaner, cleaner, in my view.] Can we take the second way I put it: > a habit of continually returning to the > present moment OK... by " present moment " I mean experiencing (consciously) the immediacy of sensory experience to such a degree that there is nothing continuous... all is constantly " breaking up " , transforming... there is nothing that persists over even the shortest interval of time. Now contrast that with something that comes up reminding one of an old sorrow, and the old sorrow comes up in full bloom. Now something is going on that does involve a persistence over a short interval of time. Are you saying that the second case above is a not " staying who you are " ? Note that there was no choice in that sorrow coming up. It just did. And in so doing there *is* a persistence over a short interval of time. Hence if the 2nd case is indeed, in your view, a not " staying who you are " , then " staying who you are " is not a choice. Yet you seem to recommend " staying who you are " as a choice. So this depends on your response to my question above. Bill Note: The kind of " habit " I was referring to was one of immediately noticing that something is persisting over time and so going back into a mode of attention to the non-continuous nature of experience. It appears that when the sorrow " takes over " what is happening is that the *attention* is captured and becomes " entrained " by the mini- movie of the sorrow replay that has been invoked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 25, 2006 Report Share Posted June 25, 2006 Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " iietsa " <iietsa@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " iietsa " <iietsa@> wrote: > > > > > > > > some may say, that some knowledge is better than other > > knowledge.... > > > > but that is just knowledge.......ignorance > > > > > > > > ...iietsa > > > > > > > > > > of one has acquired a habit of continually returning > > > to the now, to the present moment, is that habit > > > knowledge? > > > > > > and if so is it ignorance? > > > > > > Bill > > > > your real " self " is now-presence.... > > so who is this " who " that returns to the now ? > > and goes away, and returns again ? > > all habits are time-bound... > > just stay who you are... > > and the need for the habit to return...is not needed at all....iietsa > > > > OK... then please substitute > the habit of " just stay who you are " ... > > and what does it mean to " go away from " > who you are? > > Let's look at this: > > " your real 'self' is now-presence " ... > that pretty much works for me > [i actually prefer to avoid the term 'self' > and tend to the passive voice for such things, > as in: only now-presence is real > That is leaner, cleaner, in my view.] > > Can we take the second way I put it: > > a habit of continually returning to the > > present moment .................the word " habit " as I know the word .....is something that is going on more than once..... maybe ten times or more....but you are not a thing that goes on even twice... > OK... by " present moment " I mean > experiencing (consciously) the immediacy > of sensory experience to such a degree that > there is nothing continuous... all is constantly > " breaking up " , transforming... there is nothing > that persists over even the shortest interval > of time. you alone are constant...you are not " breaking up " shift attention from what is moving...changing... to your own real self...to what has never moved...changed... > Now contrast that with something that comes > up reminding one of an old sorrow, and the > old sorrow comes up in full bloom. Now something > is going on that does involve a persistence > over a short interval of time. who had this sorrow ? find out... not the real you.... the real you is nothing but pure happiness if there is taking the sorrow to be the real.... then you take yourself to be what you are not... > Are you saying that the second case above > is a not " staying who you are " ? I am a simple man... I have nothing...and I need nothing... I have everything where I am.... > Note that there was no choice in that > sorrow coming up. It just did. And in so doing > there *is* a persistence over a short interval > of time. Hence if the 2nd case is indeed, in > your view, a not " staying who you are " , then > " staying who you are " is not a choice. Yet you > seem to recommend " staying who you are " as a > choice. I do not intefere or get involved with (sorrow) its not my buisness...I am I choices are not for me... > So this depends on your response to my question > above. > > Bill > > Note: > > The kind of " habit " I was referring to was one of > immediately noticing that something is persisting > over time and so going back into a mode of > attention to the non-continuous nature of > experience. leave habits alone.... your life runs itself...so do habits... no need for habits... > It appears that when the sorrow " takes over " > what is happening is that the *attention* is > captured and becomes " entrained " by the mini- > movie of the sorrow replay that has been > invoked. > yes....when the sorrow takes over as you say.... you have given it the power, to take over.... if you dont give power to nothing... then nothing matters... you are the power.... stay who you are....the power and you will taste what real happiness is .....iietsa Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 25, 2006 Report Share Posted June 25, 2006 Nisargadatta , " iietsa " <iietsa wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " iietsa " <iietsa@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " > <pliantheart@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " iietsa " <iietsa@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > some may say, that some knowledge is better than other > > > knowledge.... > > > > > but that is just knowledge.......ignorance > > > > > > > > > > ...iietsa > > > > > > > > > > > > > of one has acquired a habit of continually returning > > > > to the now, to the present moment, is that habit > > > > knowledge? > > > > > > > > and if so is it ignorance? > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > your real " self " is now-presence.... > > > so who is this " who " that returns to the now ? > > > and goes away, and returns again ? > > > all habits are time-bound... > > > just stay who you are... > > > and the need for the habit to return...is not needed at > all....iietsa > > > > > > > OK... then please substitute > > the habit of " just stay who you are " ... > > > > and what does it mean to " go away from " > > who you are? > > > > Let's look at this: > > > > " your real 'self' is now-presence " ... > > that pretty much works for me > > [i actually prefer to avoid the term 'self' > > and tend to the passive voice for such things, > > as in: only now-presence is real > > That is leaner, cleaner, in my view.] > > > > Can we take the second way I put it: > > > a habit of continually returning to the > > > present moment > ................the word " habit " as I know the word > ....is something that is going on more than once..... > maybe ten times or more....but you are not a thing that goes on even > twice... > > > > OK... by " present moment " I mean > > experiencing (consciously) the immediacy > > of sensory experience to such a degree that > > there is nothing continuous... all is constantly > > " breaking up " , transforming... there is nothing > > that persists over even the shortest interval > > of time. > > you alone are constant...you are not " breaking up " > shift attention from what is moving...changing... > to your own real self...to what has never moved...changed... > > > > Now contrast that with something that comes > > up reminding one of an old sorrow, and the > > old sorrow comes up in full bloom. Now something > > is going on that does involve a persistence > > over a short interval of time. > > who had this sorrow ? find out... > not the real you.... > the real you is nothing but pure happiness > if there is taking the sorrow to be the real.... > then you take yourself to be what you are not... > > > Are you saying that the second case above > > is a not " staying who you are " ? > > I am a simple man... > I have nothing...and I need nothing... > I have everything where I am.... > > > Note that there was no choice in that > > sorrow coming up. It just did. And in so doing > > there *is* a persistence over a short interval > > of time. Hence if the 2nd case is indeed, in > > your view, a not " staying who you are " , then > > " staying who you are " is not a choice. Yet you > > seem to recommend " staying who you are " as a > > choice. > > > I do not intefere or get involved with (sorrow) > its not my buisness...I am I > choices are not for me... > > > So this depends on your response to my question > > above. > > > > Bill > > > > Note: > > > > The kind of " habit " I was referring to was one of > > immediately noticing that something is persisting > > over time and so going back into a mode of > > attention to the non-continuous nature of > > experience. > > leave habits alone.... > your life runs itself...so do habits... > no need for habits... > > > It appears that when the sorrow " takes over " > > what is happening is that the *attention* is > > captured and becomes " entrained " by the mini- > > movie of the sorrow replay that has been > > invoked. > > > yes....when the sorrow takes over as you say.... > you have given it the power, to take over.... > > if you dont give power to nothing... > then nothing matters... > you are the power.... > stay who you are....the power > and you will taste what real happiness is > ....iietsa > it is when you start focusing on whatever object.... you go away...or apparently transform into an ego-person ....iietsa Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 25, 2006 Report Share Posted June 25, 2006 Nisargadatta , " iietsa " <iietsa wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " iietsa " <iietsa@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " > <pliantheart@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " iietsa " <iietsa@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > some may say, that some knowledge is better than other > > > knowledge.... > > > > > but that is just knowledge.......ignorance > > > > > > > > > > ...iietsa > > > > > > > > > > > > > of one has acquired a habit of continually returning > > > > to the now, to the present moment, is that habit > > > > knowledge? > > > > > > > > and if so is it ignorance? > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > your real " self " is now-presence.... > > > so who is this " who " that returns to the now ? > > > and goes away, and returns again ? > > > all habits are time-bound... > > > just stay who you are... > > > and the need for the habit to return...is not needed at > all....iietsa > > > > > > > OK... then please substitute > > the habit of " just stay who you are " ... > > > > and what does it mean to " go away from " > > who you are? > > > > Let's look at this: > > > > " your real 'self' is now-presence " ... > > that pretty much works for me > > [i actually prefer to avoid the term 'self' > > and tend to the passive voice for such things, > > as in: only now-presence is real > > That is leaner, cleaner, in my view.] > > > > Can we take the second way I put it: > > > a habit of continually returning to the > > > present moment > ................the word " habit " as I know the word > ....is something that is going on more than once..... > maybe ten times or more....but you are not a thing that goes on even > twice... > > > > OK... by " present moment " I mean > > experiencing (consciously) the immediacy > > of sensory experience to such a degree that > > there is nothing continuous... all is constantly > > " breaking up " , transforming... there is nothing > > that persists over even the shortest interval > > of time. > > you alone are constant...you are not " breaking up " > shift attention from what is moving...changing... > to your own real self...to what has never moved...changed... > > > > Now contrast that with something that comes > > up reminding one of an old sorrow, and the > > old sorrow comes up in full bloom. Now something > > is going on that does involve a persistence > > over a short interval of time. > > who had this sorrow ? find out... > not the real you.... > the real you is nothing but pure happiness > if there is taking the sorrow to be the real.... > then you take yourself to be what you are not... > > > Are you saying that the second case above > > is a not " staying who you are " ? > > I am a simple man... > I have nothing...and I need nothing... > I have everything where I am.... > > > Note that there was no choice in that > > sorrow coming up. It just did. And in so doing > > there *is* a persistence over a short interval > > of time. Hence if the 2nd case is indeed, in > > your view, a not " staying who you are " , then > > " staying who you are " is not a choice. Yet you > > seem to recommend " staying who you are " as a > > choice. > > > I do not intefere or get involved with (sorrow) > its not my buisness...I am I > choices are not for me... > > > So this depends on your response to my question > > above. > > > > Bill > > > > Note: > > > > The kind of " habit " I was referring to was one of > > immediately noticing that something is persisting > > over time and so going back into a mode of > > attention to the non-continuous nature of > > experience. > > leave habits alone.... > your life runs itself...so do habits... > no need for habits... > > > It appears that when the sorrow " takes over " > > what is happening is that the *attention* is > > captured and becomes " entrained " by the mini- > > movie of the sorrow replay that has been > > invoked. > > > yes....when the sorrow takes over as you say.... > you have given it the power, to take over.... > > if you dont give power to nothing... > then nothing matters... > you are the power.... > stay who you are....the power > and you will taste what real happiness is > ....iietsa > I was once truly offended by that statement. I found it so offensive, that I hated the person who shared it with me. What a golden op, missed. lv ~*~ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 25, 2006 Report Share Posted June 25, 2006 Nisargadatta , " skywhilds " <skywords wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " iietsa " <iietsa@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " iietsa " <iietsa@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " > > <pliantheart@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " iietsa " <iietsa@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > some may say, that some knowledge is better than other > > > > knowledge.... > > > > > > but that is just knowledge.......ignorance > > > > > > > > > > > > ...iietsa > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of one has acquired a habit of continually returning > > > > > to the now, to the present moment, is that habit > > > > > knowledge? > > > > > > > > > > and if so is it ignorance? > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > your real " self " is now-presence.... > > > > so who is this " who " that returns to the now ? > > > > and goes away, and returns again ? > > > > all habits are time-bound... > > > > just stay who you are... > > > > and the need for the habit to return...is not needed at > > all....iietsa > > > > > > > > > > OK... then please substitute > > > the habit of " just stay who you are " ... > > > > > > and what does it mean to " go away from " > > > who you are? > > > > > > Let's look at this: > > > > > > " your real 'self' is now-presence " ... > > > that pretty much works for me > > > [i actually prefer to avoid the term 'self' > > > and tend to the passive voice for such things, > > > as in: only now-presence is real > > > That is leaner, cleaner, in my view.] > > > > > > Can we take the second way I put it: > > > > a habit of continually returning to the > > > > present moment > > ................the word " habit " as I know the word > > ....is something that is going on more than once..... > > maybe ten times or more....but you are not a thing that goes on even > > twice... > > > > > > > OK... by " present moment " I mean > > > experiencing (consciously) the immediacy > > > of sensory experience to such a degree that > > > there is nothing continuous... all is constantly > > > " breaking up " , transforming... there is nothing > > > that persists over even the shortest interval > > > of time. > > > > you alone are constant...you are not " breaking up " > > shift attention from what is moving...changing... > > to your own real self...to what has never moved...changed... > > > > > > > Now contrast that with something that comes > > > up reminding one of an old sorrow, and the > > > old sorrow comes up in full bloom. Now something > > > is going on that does involve a persistence > > > over a short interval of time. > > > > who had this sorrow ? find out... > > not the real you.... > > the real you is nothing but pure happiness > > if there is taking the sorrow to be the real.... > > then you take yourself to be what you are not... > > > > > Are you saying that the second case above > > > is a not " staying who you are " ? > > > > I am a simple man... > > I have nothing...and I need nothing... > > I have everything where I am.... > > > > > Note that there was no choice in that > > > sorrow coming up. It just did. And in so doing > > > there *is* a persistence over a short interval > > > of time. Hence if the 2nd case is indeed, in > > > your view, a not " staying who you are " , then > > > " staying who you are " is not a choice. Yet you > > > seem to recommend " staying who you are " as a > > > choice. > > > > > > I do not intefere or get involved with (sorrow) > > its not my buisness...I am I > > choices are not for me... > > > > > So this depends on your response to my question > > > above. > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > Note: > > > > > > The kind of " habit " I was referring to was one of > > > immediately noticing that something is persisting > > > over time and so going back into a mode of > > > attention to the non-continuous nature of > > > experience. > > > > leave habits alone.... > > your life runs itself...so do habits... > > no need for habits... > > > > > It appears that when the sorrow " takes over " > > > what is happening is that the *attention* is > > > captured and becomes " entrained " by the mini- > > > movie of the sorrow replay that has been > > > invoked. > > > > > yes....when the sorrow takes over as you say.... > > you have given it the power, to take over.... > > > > if you dont give power to nothing... > > then nothing matters... > > you are the power.... > > stay who you are....the power > > and you will taste what real happiness is > > ....iietsa > > > > > I was once truly offended by that statement. I found it so offensive, > that I hated the person who shared it with me. What a golden op, missed. > > lv > > ~*~ > ..............?....iietsa Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 25, 2006 Report Share Posted June 25, 2006 Nisargadatta , " iietsa " <iietsa wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " skywhilds " <skywords@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " iietsa " <iietsa@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " > <pliantheart@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " iietsa " <iietsa@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " > > > <pliantheart@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " iietsa " <iietsa@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > some may say, that some knowledge is better than other > > > > > knowledge.... > > > > > > > but that is just knowledge.......ignorance > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ...iietsa > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of one has acquired a habit of continually returning > > > > > > to the now, to the present moment, is that habit > > > > > > knowledge? > > > > > > > > > > > > and if so is it ignorance? > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > your real " self " is now-presence.... > > > > > so who is this " who " that returns to the now ? > > > > > and goes away, and returns again ? > > > > > all habits are time-bound... > > > > > just stay who you are... > > > > > and the need for the habit to return...is not needed at > > > all....iietsa > > > > > > > > > > > > > OK... then please substitute > > > > the habit of " just stay who you are " ... > > > > > > > > and what does it mean to " go away from " > > > > who you are? > > > > > > > > Let's look at this: > > > > > > > > " your real 'self' is now-presence " ... > > > > that pretty much works for me > > > > [i actually prefer to avoid the term 'self' > > > > and tend to the passive voice for such things, > > > > as in: only now-presence is real > > > > That is leaner, cleaner, in my view.] > > > > > > > > Can we take the second way I put it: > > > > > a habit of continually returning to the > > > > > present moment > > > ................the word " habit " as I know the word > > > ....is something that is going on more than once..... > > > maybe ten times or more....but you are not a thing that goes on > even > > > twice... > > > > > > > > > > OK... by " present moment " I mean > > > > experiencing (consciously) the immediacy > > > > of sensory experience to such a degree that > > > > there is nothing continuous... all is constantly > > > > " breaking up " , transforming... there is nothing > > > > that persists over even the shortest interval > > > > of time. > > > > > > you alone are constant...you are not " breaking up " > > > shift attention from what is moving...changing... > > > to your own real self...to what has never moved...changed... > > > > > > > > > > Now contrast that with something that comes > > > > up reminding one of an old sorrow, and the > > > > old sorrow comes up in full bloom. Now something > > > > is going on that does involve a persistence > > > > over a short interval of time. > > > > > > who had this sorrow ? find out... > > > not the real you.... > > > the real you is nothing but pure happiness > > > if there is taking the sorrow to be the real.... > > > then you take yourself to be what you are not... > > > > > > > Are you saying that the second case above > > > > is a not " staying who you are " ? > > > > > > I am a simple man... > > > I have nothing...and I need nothing... > > > I have everything where I am.... > > > > > > > Note that there was no choice in that > > > > sorrow coming up. It just did. And in so doing > > > > there *is* a persistence over a short interval > > > > of time. Hence if the 2nd case is indeed, in > > > > your view, a not " staying who you are " , then > > > > " staying who you are " is not a choice. Yet you > > > > seem to recommend " staying who you are " as a > > > > choice. > > > > > > > > > I do not intefere or get involved with (sorrow) > > > its not my buisness...I am I > > > choices are not for me... > > > > > > > So this depends on your response to my question > > > > above. > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > Note: > > > > > > > > The kind of " habit " I was referring to was one of > > > > immediately noticing that something is persisting > > > > over time and so going back into a mode of > > > > attention to the non-continuous nature of > > > > experience. > > > > > > leave habits alone.... > > > your life runs itself...so do habits... > > > no need for habits... > > > > > > > It appears that when the sorrow " takes over " > > > > what is happening is that the *attention* is > > > > captured and becomes " entrained " by the mini- > > > > movie of the sorrow replay that has been > > > > invoked. > > > > > > > yes....when the sorrow takes over as you say.... > > > you have given it the power, to take over.... > > > > > > if you dont give power to nothing... > > > then nothing matters... > > > you are the power.... > > > stay who you are....the power > > > and you will taste what real happiness is > > > ....iietsa > > > > > > > > > I was once truly offended by that statement. I found it so > offensive, > > that I hated the person who shared it with me. What a golden op, > missed. > > > > lv > > > > ~*~ > > > .............?....iietsa > I'm saying that I agree with your statement. ~*~ 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.