Guest guest Posted June 30, 2006 Report Share Posted June 30, 2006 Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart wrote: > > ................................................. > > why is it that i don`t feel beyond correction?? > > it is not about *feeling beyond correction* > (iietsa didn't mention any such feeling) > > perhaps there can be a feeling of a need to > correct something (in oneself). > > if such a feeling should arise, then it just is. > > in the moment there can never be an actual " correction " > because in the moment there is just what is. > > correcting/not correcting is in time, not in the moment... > > if living in the moment the issue of correction never arises. > > Bill This moment is as is. Who could exist apart from it to evaluate it? There is no preceding moment, nor is there a next moment, nor is there a surface where one moment can touch another. Even though thought seems to be referring to preceding thoughts, and memory seems to refer to a collection of previous moments, upon close inspection this isn't what is occurring with thought and memory. When I look deeply and closely into and as this moment, it isn't a looking from a position apart, and what is noticed is that thought and memory don't have to generate illusionary realities. There doesn't have to be an inference of an " I " that collects experiences or that exists as such a collection. But what about all the grief when a collection of remembered moments dissolves? Doesn't that prove that real, existing individuals have been born and died? -- Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 30, 2006 Report Share Posted June 30, 2006 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart@> > wrote: > > > > ................................................. > > > why is it that i don`t feel beyond correction?? > > > > it is not about *feeling beyond correction* > > (iietsa didn't mention any such feeling) > > > > perhaps there can be a feeling of a need to > > correct something (in oneself). > > > > if such a feeling should arise, then it just is. > > > > in the moment there can never be an actual " correction " > > because in the moment there is just what is. > > > > correcting/not correcting is in time, not in the moment... > > > > if living in the moment the issue of correction never arises. > > > > Bill > I love getting a post like this from you. I feel like a lion that has just got a fresh gazelle to gnaw on... > This moment is as is. Who could exist apart from it to evaluate it? No one. Suppose, though, that some grief arises, and that the reflex is in place to take that into the moment, to be vividly, immediately present with each subtle sensation of what *was called* the grief (for to come to the reality, the truth the names must perish)... Was there a " someone " that felt the grief, and then dissolved into the immediacy, the nowness... so that both grief and self-sense mutually annihilated in an opening into the flux, the aliveness? If there is an " entering into the moment " then that is a death to whatever imaginary self-sense that " so entered " ... And that process can certainly happen: * grief (or some other " named state " ) arises * something about that " named state " triggers a recognition that this is " false " (perhaps the *rigidity*...?) * which in turn triggers reflex to just be completely present with in absolute immediacy, in the moment And that process seems to be a kind of fire of purgation, of burning away cinders of untruth... > There is no preceding moment, nor is there a next moment, nor is there > a surface where one moment can touch another. > > Even though thought seems to be referring to preceding thoughts, and > memory seems to refer to a collection of previous moments, upon close > inspection this isn't what is occurring with thought and memory. > > When I look deeply and closely into and as this moment, it isn't a > looking from a position apart, and what is noticed is that thought and > memory don't have to generate illusionary realities. There doesn't > have to be an inference of an " I " that collects experiences or that > exists as such a collection. yes... just this liquid, vibrance... flooding every pore... > But what about all the grief when a > collection of remembered moments dissolves? Doesn't that prove that > real, existing individuals have been born and died? born and died, as indicated above... but not real, existing... that's the whole point, isn't it? the not-realness was their undoing (thankfully!), and so they perished in the dance of now that does not feed them the *continuity* that they need to survive. Bill > > -- Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 30, 2006 Report Share Posted June 30, 2006 Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart wrote: > born and died, as indicated above... > but not real, existing... > that's the whole point, isn't it? > the not-realness was their undoing (thankfully!), > and so they perished in the dance of now > that does not feed them the *continuity* that they > need to survive. > > Bill Yes, quite so. And as you pointed out, the grief is accepted and embodied. And passes away and through. One dies, and dies, and dies. As life. Not an intellectual exercise. The embodiment of life/death nonseparate. All-inclusive of all that we consider living beings -- at once. Timelessly so. -- D. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 30, 2006 Report Share Posted June 30, 2006 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart@> > wrote: > > > born and died, as indicated above... > > but not real, existing... > > that's the whole point, isn't it? > > the not-realness was their undoing (thankfully!), > > and so they perished in the dance of now > > that does not feed them the *continuity* that they > > need to survive. > > > > Bill > > Yes, quite so. > > And as you pointed out, the grief is accepted and embodied. > > And passes away and through. > > One dies, and dies, and dies. As life. > > Not an intellectual exercise. > > The embodiment of life/death nonseparate. > > All-inclusive of all that we consider living beings -- at once. > > Timelessly so. > > -- D. > What you wrote so gorgeous... oh wow..................... Bill 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.