Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

RE : I am (Bill)

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Nisargadatta , OConnor Patricia <gdtige wrote:

>

>

> --- pliantheart <pliantheart a écrit :

>

> > Nisargadatta , OConnor

> > Patricia <gdtige@> wrote:

> > >

> > >

> > > --- pliantheart <pliantheart@> a écrit :

> > >

> > > > Nisargadatta , OConnor

> > > > Patricia <gdtige@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > you can only understand what you are not.

> > > > > For the rest,< youcanonlybe>

> > > > > when you find I am, what else can you say, why

> > > > would

> > > > > words matter?

> > > > > There are no right word that can describe it,

> > you

> > > > can

> > > > > only try to know who is talking to you, then

> > > > seeing if

> > > > > their choice of word is in the same line than

> > > > yours,

> > > > > or not.

> > > > That's exactly what my question about " I am " is

> > all

> > > > about. " I am " seems not the description for me

> > at

> > > > all.

> > >

> > > > So when someone else does use " I am " to

> > describe,

> > > > does that mean they are describing something

> > quite

> > > > different, or does it mean that they actually

> > are

> > > > describing the same thing (more or less), but

> > that

> > > > the term " I am " does resonate for them even

> > though

> > > > for me it doesn't.

> > > >

> > > > > When you find I am, it doesn`t matter how you

> > call

> > > > it.

> > > > > You`ll touch their beingness because there is

> > > > nothing

> > > > > else to be.

> > > > > There is only disappearance of the seeker.

> > > > Some use the term 'This' for that.

> > > > At this moment I'm inclined to say: " alivenenss

> > > > everywhere "

> > > >

> > > > For those who incline to say " I am " ...

> > > > I wonder if there is a " sense of I " ...

> > > > even with the disappearance of the seeker.

> > >

> >

> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

> > > so, the seeker gone, there could still be a sense

> > of

> > > I?

> >

> > So you are saying that for you no sense of I...

> > that is what I am interested to know.

> >

> > >

> > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.

> > > >

> > > > If not, I don't understand calling it " I am " .

> > > >

> > > > If so, then they are describing something quite

> > > > different from what I describe when I say

> > > > " aliveness everywhere " .

> > > >

> > > > For one who would say " I am " I wonder if

> > > > simply " beingness " would work just as well.

> > > > Does there really have to be an " I " in it?

> > >

> >

> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I

> > > understand your reluctance to the word I. And it

> > is

> > > wise to be very careful.

> > > But I find now that <I am> is not a all personnal,

> > it

> > > is yet so appropriate because it describes

> > something

> > > oh...so very close to home, nearer than hands and

> > feet

> > > and irrefutable.....Patricia

> >

> > So no " sense of I " yet the term " I am " does speak

> > for

> > you. OK. Hard for me to understand. But OK.

> >

> > Thank you for going into this with me.

> >

> > Bill

> Bill, the sense of Aliveness everywhere with no center

> is made of atoms,

it is?

 

I don't sense atoms

just aliveness-everywhere

 

And is OK...

words can't get to the bottom of this.

 

you said that for you no " sense of I " ,

and that is all I needed to know really.

 

If there is a sense of 'I' then there is

a separation (seems to me). If not, then

no separation. That is all that really

matters.

 

How we talk about what is when no sense

of 'I' can evidently vary wildly. Michael

said " isness " ... I say " aliveness-everywhere " ,

you say " I am " . But since it is beyond

description we can't meaningfully talk

about it. It is as if once past the sense

of 'I' we are on our own.

 

Well, love may find a way, from time to

time, to commune from the ineffable to

the ineffable. That's what poetry is for.

 

> atoms made of awareness,

> and they can only be called <I am >

> because their awareness is that of the All.

 

What you say here is intriguing.

Perhaps it is true.

Since I can't know that directly

I can't say yes to it.

Perhaps it is just beyond me at this time.

 

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...