Guest guest Posted July 4, 2006 Report Share Posted July 4, 2006 any " sense of self " is false. surely that is clear. therefore, why speak of self? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 4, 2006 Report Share Posted July 4, 2006 Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart wrote: > > any " sense of self " is false. > surely that is clear. > > therefore, why speak of self? > In my usage, there is a differance between the " sense of self " and Self. " sense of self " is just a thhougt form. Self is beyond, before and after the thought. It is exitence, life whatever term you like... Self is who I am. Self is who I am with, without, within, beyond a form, name, identification. In my usage, saying that there is no Self is life saying that there is no Life, there is no existence, I don't exist i.e. it is self-evident lie as even in order to say " I am not " - I am. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 4, 2006 Report Share Posted July 4, 2006 Nisargadatta , " adithya_comming " <adithya_comming wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart@> > wrote: > > > > any " sense of self " is false. > > surely that is clear. > > > > therefore, why speak of self? > > > > > In my usage, there is a differance > between the " sense of self " and > Self. > > " sense of self " is just a thhougt > form. Self is beyond, before and > after the thought. > > It is exitence, life whatever term > you like... > > Self is who I am. > > Self is who I am with, without, > within, beyond a form, name, > identification. > > > In my usage, saying that there > is no Self is life saying that > there is no Life, there is no > existence, I don't exist > i.e. it is self-evident > lie as even in order to > say " I am not " - I am. > Thank you. We seem to forget the first rule of advaita: not two, not one. We find I am in I am not; however, I am is an on going process processing the life of I Am. Walking the balance between who I Am and who I Am not is a razor's edge at first, awkward at best. Eventually it is the only Way. YIL, Ana Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 4, 2006 Report Share Posted July 4, 2006 Nisargadatta , " adithya_comming " <adithya_comming wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart@> > wrote: > > > > any " sense of self " is false. > > surely that is clear. > > > > therefore, why speak of self? > > > > > In my usage, there is a differance > between the " sense of self " and > Self. > > " sense of self " is just a thhougt > form. Self is beyond, before and > after the thought. > > It is exitence, life whatever term > you like... > > Self is who I am. > > Self is who I am with, without, > within, beyond a form, name, > identification. > > > In my usage, saying that there > is no Self is life saying that > there is no Life, there is no > existence, I don't exist > i.e. it is self-evident > lie as even in order to > say " I am not " - I am. > thank you for the cogent reply! so for you, I take it, there is Self, but no " sense " of that... I am trying to understand... in my case I might speak of Stillness... and true... there is no " sense " of that... it is just a word that seems to fit but just now even Stillness not a fit no way to say as if a Great Numbness typing here a tiny speck of love, though, is embedded in the period at the end of this sentence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 4, 2006 Report Share Posted July 4, 2006 Nisargadatta , " anabebe57 " <kailashana wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " adithya_comming " > <adithya_comming@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart@> > > wrote: > > > > > > any " sense of self " is false. > > > surely that is clear. > > > > > > therefore, why speak of self? > > > > > > > > > In my usage, there is a differance > > between the " sense of self " and > > Self. > > > > " sense of self " is just a thhougt > > form. Self is beyond, before and > > after the thought. > > > > It is exitence, life whatever term > > you like... > > > > Self is who I am. > > > > Self is who I am with, without, > > within, beyond a form, name, > > identification. > > > > > > In my usage, saying that there > > is no Self is life saying that > > there is no Life, there is no > > existence, I don't exist > > i.e. it is self-evident > > lie as even in order to > > say " I am not " - I am. > > > > > Thank you. > > We seem to forget the first rule of advaita: not two, not one. > We find I am in I am not; however, I am is an on going process > processing the life of I Am. > > Walking the balance between who I Am and who I Am not is a razor's > edge at first, awkward at best. > > Eventually it is the only Way. > > YIL, > Ana > I Am dies in the Eye-of-Non Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 4, 2006 Report Share Posted July 4, 2006 Nisargadatta , " adithya_comming " <adithya_comming wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart@> > wrote: > > > > any " sense of self " is false. > > surely that is clear. > > > > therefore, why speak of self? > > > > > In my usage, there is a differance > between the " sense of self " and > Self. > > " sense of self " is just a thougt > form. In fact, " sense of self " is more than just a thought form. There is also a subtle feeling that is associated with. That is what gives gave me a somewhat steady sense of " localization " and " form identification " - as if I was 'tied' into the form. I think that is what Ramana called the 'knot of heart' - yes, it did feel in heart. I notice that that 'knot' is no longer there and as a consequence I feel like not having a body, not having a location, not having a form, not having a form attachment - yet, everything works just fine. But, I also see that only 'knot' is gone not the 'possiblity' of forming knot. I guess, I always that possiblity of forming that knot again. > Self is beyond, before and > after the thought. Self is what remains after this " sense of self " dissolves. It is just a name to express existence - just like any other name such as 'life'. > > It is exitence, life whatever term > you like... > > Self is who I am. > > Self is who I am with, without, > within, beyond a form, name, > identification. > > > In my usage, saying that there > is no Self is life saying that > there is no Life, there is no > existence, I don't exist > i.e. it is self-evident > lie as even in order to > say " I am not " - I am. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 4, 2006 Report Share Posted July 4, 2006 Nisargadatta , " anabebe57 " <kailashana wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " adithya_comming " > <adithya_comming@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart@> > > wrote: > > > > > > any " sense of self " is false. > > > surely that is clear. > > > > > > therefore, why speak of self? > > > > > > > > > In my usage, there is a differance > > between the " sense of self " and > > Self. > > > > " sense of self " is just a thhougt > > form. Self is beyond, before and > > after the thought. > > > > It is exitence, life whatever term > > you like... > > > > Self is who I am. > > > > Self is who I am with, without, > > within, beyond a form, name, > > identification. > > > > > > In my usage, saying that there > > is no Self is life saying that > > there is no Life, there is no > > existence, I don't exist > > i.e. it is self-evident > > lie as even in order to > > say " I am not " - I am. > > > > > Thank you. > > We seem to forget the first rule of advaita: not two, not one. > We find I am in I am not; however, I am is an on going process > processing the life of I Am. > > Walking the balance between who I Am and who I Am not is a razor's > edge at first, awkward at best. > > Eventually it is the only Way. > > YIL, > Ana > What are you doing this late Lady? I am feeling very sleepy now. Good ninght and sweet " dreams " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 4, 2006 Report Share Posted July 4, 2006 Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " adithya_comming " > <adithya_comming@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart@> > > wrote: > > > > > > any " sense of self " is false. > > > surely that is clear. > > > > > > therefore, why speak of self? > > > > > > > > > In my usage, there is a differance > > between the " sense of self " and > > Self. > > > > " sense of self " is just a thhougt > > form. Self is beyond, before and > > after the thought. > > > > It is exitence, life whatever term > > you like... > > > > Self is who I am. > > > > Self is who I am with, without, > > within, beyond a form, name, > > identification. > > > > > > In my usage, saying that there > > is no Self is life saying that > > there is no Life, there is no > > existence, I don't exist > > i.e. it is self-evident > > lie as even in order to > > say " I am not " - I am. > > > > thank you for the cogent reply! > > so for you, I take it, there is > Self, but no " sense " of that... > > I am trying to understand... > > in my case I might speak of Stillness... > and true... there is no " sense " of that... > it is just a word that seems to fit > > but just now even > Stillness not a fit > > no way to say > > as if a Great Numbness > typing here > > a tiny speck of love, though, > is embedded in the period > at the end of this sentence. > Think of air that was trapped in a baloon and thought it was a baloon. Now, imagine that this baloon popped and air merged with air, the universe... Now, it still exits, it is still air but, it is no longer trapped in baloon and is no longer identified as baloon. Merged with all that is, now it no longer has a sense of 'locality', a sense of 'boundary'. It no longer knows - this is " me " and this is " not me " . Yet, it still is. It still exists. This is one way I would try to explain it. still IS. It still exi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 4, 2006 Report Share Posted July 4, 2006 Nisargadatta , " adithya_comming " <adithya_comming wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " adithya_comming " > <adithya_comming@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart@> > > wrote: > > > > > > any " sense of self " is false. > > > surely that is clear. > > > > > > therefore, why speak of self? > > > > > > > > > In my usage, there is a differance > > between the " sense of self " and > > Self. > > > > " sense of self " is just a thougt > > form. > > In fact, " sense of self " is more > than just a thought form. There is > also a subtle feeling that is associated > with. That is what gives gave me a somewhat > steady sense of " localization " and > " form identification " - as if I was > 'tied' into the form. > > > I think that is what Ramana called > the 'knot of heart' - yes, it did > feel in heart. > > I notice that that 'knot' is no longer > there and as a consequence I feel like > not having a body, not having a location, > not having a form, not having a form > attachment - yet, everything works just > fine. > yes, but rather no feeling of having a body no feeling of having location no feeling of form or attachment yet all transpires of its own accord with no center no organizer no originator or driver you say you use the word " Self " just as a word, much as " life " the trouble is that conventionally there are associations with the word " self " as to what is " behind " what occurs, what drives what occurs so while one can define 'Self' as one likes and assign it as you have it seems to me that it brings confusion to those who don't already understand, because they have those " other associations " with the term. if what I say is confusing to someone who already understands, that is not a big problem, as they are already fine anyway. what is important is to minimize confusion for those who *don't* already understand. Indeed, if it weren't for those, why would I even be writing about this stuff? Bill <snip> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 4, 2006 Report Share Posted July 4, 2006 Nisargadatta , " " other associations " with the term. > ............. > if what I say is confusing to someone > who already understands, that is not > a big problem, as they are already fine > anyway. > > what is important is to minimize confusion > for those who *don't* already understand. > Indeed, if it weren't for those, why would > I even be writing about this stuff? > > Bill maybe because ...once you took the attitude....just to write about this " stuff " ....... one day.....maybe....this attitude is replaced by another one.... coming and going.... Marc Ps: there is nobody " who " realy need this " stuff " .....except the dream-bubble....in order to come to an end....again > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 4, 2006 Report Share Posted July 4, 2006 Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " " other associations " with the > term. > > ............. > > if what I say is confusing to someone > > who already understands, that is not > > a big problem, as they are already fine > > anyway. > > > > what is important is to minimize confusion > > for those who *don't* already understand. > > Indeed, if it weren't for those, why would > > I even be writing about this stuff? > > > > Bill > > maybe because ...once you took the attitude....just to write about > this " stuff " ....... > > one day.....maybe....this attitude is replaced by another one.... > > coming and going.... > > Marc > > Ps: there is nobody " who " realy need this " stuff " .....except the > dream-bubble....in order to come to an end....again > > > > > none of this is " important " ... we do what we do the dream goes on whether we know it as dream or not which raises an interesting question, Marc: does the dream-bubble really exist? I am interested to see what answer you dream up for that Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 4, 2006 Report Share Posted July 4, 2006 Nisargadatta , " adithya_comming " <adithya_comming wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " adithya_comming " > > <adithya_comming@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > any " sense of self " is false. > > > > surely that is clear. > > > > > > > > therefore, why speak of self? > > > > > > > > > > > > > In my usage, there is a differance > > > between the " sense of self " and > > > Self. > > > > > > " sense of self " is just a thhougt > > > form. Self is beyond, before and > > > after the thought. > > > > > > It is exitence, life whatever term > > > you like... > > > > > > Self is who I am. > > > > > > Self is who I am with, without, > > > within, beyond a form, name, > > > identification. > > > > > > > > > In my usage, saying that there > > > is no Self is life saying that > > > there is no Life, there is no > > > existence, I don't exist > > > i.e. it is self-evident > > > lie as even in order to > > > say " I am not " - I am. > > > > > > > thank you for the cogent reply! > > > > so for you, I take it, there is > > Self, but no " sense " of that... > > > > I am trying to understand... > > > > in my case I might speak of Stillness... > > and true... there is no " sense " of that... > > it is just a word that seems to fit > > > > but just now even > > Stillness not a fit > > > > no way to say > > > > as if a Great Numbness > > typing here > > > > a tiny speck of love, though, > > is embedded in the period > > at the end of this sentence. > > > > > Think of air that was trapped in > a baloon and thought it was a baloon. > > Now, imagine that this baloon popped > and air merged with air, the universe... > > Now, it still exits, it is still air > but, it is no longer trapped in baloon > and is no longer identified as baloon. > > Merged with all that is, now it no > longer has a sense of 'locality', > a sense of 'boundary'. It no longer > knows - this is " me " and this is " not > me " . Yet, it still is. It still exists. > > This is one way I would try to explain it. > > still IS. It still exi > I like your explanation... maybe drawing a bit different conclusion. before the air left the balloon it mistakenly thought of itself as " the balloon " . but was it only the air inside that made that mistake, or was it the air of the entire vastness that made that mistake? when the air has left the balloon the " air inside the balloon " does not exist as separate from the air of the entire vastness. now it is just the air of the entire vastness. when the bubble that was " Bill " popped there was no long any container here. just this Vastness Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 4, 2006 Report Share Posted July 4, 2006 Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " " other associations " with the > > term. > > > ............. > > > if what I say is confusing to someone > > > who already understands, that is not > > > a big problem, as they are already fine > > > anyway. > > > > > > what is important is to minimize confusion > > > for those who *don't* already understand. > > > Indeed, if it weren't for those, why would > > > I even be writing about this stuff? > > > > > > Bill > > > > maybe because ...once you took the attitude....just to write about > > this " stuff " ....... > > > > one day.....maybe....this attitude is replaced by another one.... > > > > coming and going.... > > > > Marc > > > > Ps: there is nobody " who " realy need this " stuff " .....except the > > dream-bubble....in order to come to an end....again > > > > > > > > > > none of this is " important " ... -yes > > we do what we do -yes.....there is nobody and nothing " who/what " lead us to do...whatever......except the little mind....busy.... > > the dream goes on > whether we know it as dream or not -the " dream " ...in reality....is fiction.... there is nobody " who " could " know the dream as dream " ...and continue to " dream " .... i mean...i have no problem if you like dreams.....but thats your business...and " stuff " ..... > > which raises an interesting question, Marc: > does the dream-bubble really exist? > > I am interested to see what answer you > dream up for that so you suggest that i need to " dream " an answer....to this your " interesting " question....?.... maybe it's interesting for the little busy mind....working..... " who " knows.... the dream can only be " seen " as dream.....when there is Self- realisation.... the dream exist ....appearing to be real only......inside the dream- bubble when there is Self(awareness)....there has never been any movement.....or creation....or dream....or life....or birth....or death....or interesting questions Marc > > > Bill > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 4, 2006 Report Share Posted July 4, 2006 Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " " other associations " with > the > > > term. > > > > ............. > > > > if what I say is confusing to someone > > > > who already understands, that is not > > > > a big problem, as they are already fine > > > > anyway. > > > > > > > > what is important is to minimize confusion > > > > for those who *don't* already understand. > > > > Indeed, if it weren't for those, why would > > > > I even be writing about this stuff? > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > maybe because ...once you took the attitude....just to write > about > > > this " stuff " ....... > > > > > > one day.....maybe....this attitude is replaced by another one.... > > > > > > coming and going.... > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > Ps: there is nobody " who " realy need this " stuff " .....except the > > > dream-bubble....in order to come to an end....again > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > none of this is " important " ... > > -yes > > > > we do what we do > > -yes.....there is nobody and nothing " who/what " lead us to > do...whatever......except the little mind....busy.... > > > > the dream goes on > > whether we know it as dream or not > > -the " dream " ...in reality....is fiction.... > > there is nobody " who " could " know the dream as dream " ...and continue > to " dream " .... > i mean...i have no problem if you like dreams.....but thats your > business...and " stuff " ..... > > > > which raises an interesting question, Marc: > > does the dream-bubble really exist? > > > > I am interested to see what answer you > > dream up for that > > so you suggest that i need to " dream " an answer....to this > your " interesting " question....?.... > > maybe it's interesting for the little busy mind....working..... " who " > knows.... > > the dream can only be " seen " as dream.....when there is Self- > realisation.... > > the dream exist ....appearing to be real only......inside the dream- > bubble > > when there is Self(awareness)....there has never been any > movement.....or creation....or dream....or life....or birth....or > death....or interesting questions > > > Marc more succintly then... does the dream-bubble exist? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 4, 2006 Report Share Posted July 4, 2006 Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " " other associations " with > > the > > > > term. > > > > > ............. > > > > > if what I say is confusing to someone > > > > > who already understands, that is not > > > > > a big problem, as they are already fine > > > > > anyway. > > > > > > > > > > what is important is to minimize confusion > > > > > for those who *don't* already understand. > > > > > Indeed, if it weren't for those, why would > > > > > I even be writing about this stuff? > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > maybe because ...once you took the attitude....just to write > > about > > > > this " stuff " ....... > > > > > > > > one day.....maybe....this attitude is replaced by another one.... > > > > > > > > coming and going.... > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > Ps: there is nobody " who " realy need this " stuff " .....except the > > > > dream-bubble....in order to come to an end....again > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > none of this is " important " ... > > > > -yes > > > > > > we do what we do > > > > -yes.....there is nobody and nothing " who/what " lead us to > > do...whatever......except the little mind....busy.... > > > > > > the dream goes on > > > whether we know it as dream or not > > > > -the " dream " ...in reality....is fiction.... > > > > there is nobody " who " could " know the dream as dream " ...and continue > > to " dream " .... > > i mean...i have no problem if you like dreams.....but thats your > > business...and " stuff " ..... > > > > > > which raises an interesting question, Marc: > > > does the dream-bubble really exist? > > > > > > I am interested to see what answer you > > > dream up for that > > > > so you suggest that i need to " dream " an answer....to this > > your " interesting " question....?.... > > > > maybe it's interesting for the little busy mind....working..... " who " > > knows.... > > > > the dream can only be " seen " as dream.....when there is Self- > > realisation.... > > > > the dream exist ....appearing to be real only......inside the dream- > > bubble > > > > when there is Self(awareness)....there has never been any > > movement.....or creation....or dream....or life....or birth....or > > death....or interesting questions > > > > > > Marc > > more succintly then... > does the dream-bubble exist? as much as your dream during last existed..... i wrote you more words about the subject than i should have written up to " you " ....Now.....and also Here Marc > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 4, 2006 Report Share Posted July 4, 2006 Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " " other associations " with the > term. > > ............. > > if what I say is confusing to someone > > who already understands, that is not > > a big problem, as they are already fine > > anyway. > > > > what is important is to minimize confusion > > for those who *don't* already understand. > > Indeed, if it weren't for those, why would > > I even be writing about this stuff? > > > > Bill > > maybe because ...once you took the attitude....just to write about > this " stuff " ....... > > one day.....maybe....this attitude is replaced by another one.... > > coming and going.... > > Marc > > Ps: there is nobody " who " realy need this " stuff " .....except the > dream-bubble....in order to come to an end....again ....(have been talking about this your own dream-bubble....because there is no " other " ) Marc > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 4, 2006 Report Share Posted July 4, 2006 Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " " other associations " > with > > > the > > > > > term. > > > > > > ............. > > > > > > if what I say is confusing to someone > > > > > > who already understands, that is not > > > > > > a big problem, as they are already fine > > > > > > anyway. > > > > > > > > > > > > what is important is to minimize confusion > > > > > > for those who *don't* already understand. > > > > > > Indeed, if it weren't for those, why would > > > > > > I even be writing about this stuff? > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > maybe because ...once you took the attitude....just to write > > > about > > > > > this " stuff " ....... > > > > > > > > > > one day.....maybe....this attitude is replaced by another > one.... > > > > > > > > > > coming and going.... > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > Ps: there is nobody " who " realy need this " stuff " .....except > the > > > > > dream-bubble....in order to come to an end....again > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > none of this is " important " ... > > > > > > -yes > > > > > > > > we do what we do > > > > > > -yes.....there is nobody and nothing " who/what " lead us to > > > do...whatever......except the little mind....busy.... > > > > > > > > the dream goes on > > > > whether we know it as dream or not > > > > > > -the " dream " ...in reality....is fiction.... > > > > > > there is nobody " who " could " know the dream as dream " ...and > continue > > > to " dream " .... > > > i mean...i have no problem if you like dreams.....but thats your > > > business...and " stuff " ..... > > > > > > > > which raises an interesting question, Marc: > > > > does the dream-bubble really exist? > > > > > > > > I am interested to see what answer you > > > > dream up for that > > > > > > so you suggest that i need to " dream " an answer....to this > > > your " interesting " question....?.... > > > > > > maybe it's interesting for the little busy > mind....working..... " who " > > > knows.... > > > > > > the dream can only be " seen " as dream.....when there is Self- > > > realisation.... > > > > > > the dream exist ....appearing to be real only......inside the > dream- > > > bubble > > > > > > when there is Self(awareness)....there has never been any > > > movement.....or creation....or dream....or life....or birth....or > > > death....or interesting questions > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > more succintly then... > > does the dream-bubble exist? > > > as much as your dream during last existed..... > > i wrote you more words about the subject than i should have written > > up to " you " ....Now.....and also Here > > Marc > > > > > > when the dreamer falls in love with the dream the dream falls in love with the dreamer endlessly when the wave returns to the ocean blue the feel of water rushes to the shore and the scent of salt fills the air when the sky is filled with clouds some dark some light and the thunder crashes and the lightning zigzags the sun is obscured when shining stars fill the night the moon fills the sky the curtain descends in silver gowns gives way to a night of Love when wings take flight in a beating bleeding heart grace flows from the open heart cave and the dreamer awkakens, another day is born. YIL, Ana 7/4/06 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 4, 2006 Report Share Posted July 4, 2006 Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart wrote: > > any " sense of self " is false. > surely that is clear. > > therefore, why speak of self? > Of what else can be spoken? toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 4, 2006 Report Share Posted July 4, 2006 Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " adithya_comming " > <adithya_comming@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " adithya_comming " > > <adithya_comming@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > any " sense of self " is false. > > > > surely that is clear. > > > > > > > > therefore, why speak of self? > > > > > > > > > > > > > In my usage, there is a differance > > > between the " sense of self " and > > > Self. > > > > > > " sense of self " is just a thougt > > > form. > > > > In fact, " sense of self " is more > > than just a thought form. There is > > also a subtle feeling that is associated > > with. That is what gives gave me a somewhat > > steady sense of " localization " and > > " form identification " - as if I was > > 'tied' into the form. > > > > > > I think that is what Ramana called > > the 'knot of heart' - yes, it did > > feel in heart. > > > > I notice that that 'knot' is no longer > > there and as a consequence I feel like > > not having a body, not having a location, > > not having a form, not having a form > > attachment - yet, everything works just > > fine. > > > > yes, but rather > no feeling of having a body > no feeling of having location > no feeling of form or attachment > yet all transpires of its own accord > > with no center > no organizer > no originator or driver > > you say you use the word " Self " just > as a word, much as " life " > > the trouble is that conventionally > there are associations with the word > " self " as to what is " behind " what occurs, > what drives what occurs > > so while one can define 'Self' as one likes > and assign it as you have > it seems to me that it brings > confusion to those who don't already > understand, because they have those > " other associations " with the term. > > if what I say is confusing to someone > who already understands, that is not > a big problem, as they are already fine > anyway. > > what is important is to minimize confusion > for those who *don't* already understand. > Indeed, if it weren't for those, why would > I even be writing about this stuff? > > Bill > > <snip> > Bill................there are no others. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 4, 2006 Report Share Posted July 4, 2006 > > more succintly then... > does the dream-bubble exist? > Nes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 4, 2006 Report Share Posted July 4, 2006 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > > > > > more succintly then... > > does the dream-bubble exist? > > > > > Nes > my first heart laugh of the day!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 4, 2006 Report Share Posted July 4, 2006 Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > more succintly then... > > > does the dream-bubble exist? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nes > > > > my first heart laugh of the day!!! > meant to say " hearty " but... well! heart laugh even better! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 4, 2006 Report Share Posted July 4, 2006 <snip> > > > > what is important is to minimize confusion > > for those who *don't* already understand. > > Indeed, if it weren't for those, why would > > I even be writing about this stuff? > > > > Bill > > > > <snip> > > > > > > Bill................there are no others. > > > > toombaru > is that why you've relaxed so to just be a Happy Buddha? 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.