Real Life Must Impinge on You Such That There is Actual Need

[Guest guest]

Yes, but the deal is, it's not merely an academic affair, in order to

> catch yourself in the act, you have to *put* yourself in the act,

and

> that's what I'm trying to get across here. Iow, just saying

something

> is so, repeating it over and over again, doesn't make it so.

>

> Iow, you can't practice swimming standing on the deck.

>

> Judi

 

The way I interpret what you're saying here is like this:

 

Knowing/being truth is on a " need to know basis. "

 

You can't even know that you need to know, unless you know the

suffering that results in the need.

 

So, be the suffering, embody the suffering condition, without any

quibbling, without any avoidance of all of what it is.

 

Only then will you need to know.

 

Then, you can " knock and it shall be opened unto you. "

 

 

 

**************

 

Yes, thanks, because without " need " , it's just so much going in

circles.

 

The need has to be there for investigation into yourself to make any

real headway.

 

Isn't there a saying, Ben Franklin or somebody, " need is the mother

of invention. "

 

And like you said, in order for there to be a need, there must be a

suffering, grist for the mill so to speak. All this

philosophical " playing at inquiry " doesn't go anywhere.

 

So what I'm trying to do is to get these guys " familiar " with their

suffering, not avoiding it with all their mental gyrations, but

giving themselves over to it, whatever is the case.

 

Iow, it's safe to surrender. In fact, like I think Thaddeus Golas, in

the Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment, said, it's the only safety.

And in doing that, a higher form of intelligence is awakened, an

intelligence that's now free. Iow, as long as there's a stake in the

game, a person cannot effectively see what they're up to, cannot

effectively investigate themselves.

 

Surrender comes first,THEN investigation. It can't be in the reverse.

And that's the rub.

 

Judi

[Guest guest]

>

> Surrender comes first,THEN investigation. It can't be in the reverse.

> And that's the rub.

>

> Judi

>

 

**********

And simply being emotional, positively or negatively, over your love

life, or lack of, is not sufficient *need*, that's merely the

dramatizaiton of your co-dependency. Surrender requires your rising

above, the letting go, all your " seeking " adventures and

dramatizations. Surrender is COMPLETE sobriety in the face of all of

that childish self-masturbation. And might I add, Jesus didn't

sufficiently learn THAT lesson until it was too late, when he was

hanging on the cross. Real life finally *impinged* on him.

 

Die now, or die later, but you will die.

 

The Piper will be paid.

 

Judi

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " Judi Rhodes " <rhodesjudi@> wrote:

> >

> > Yes, but the deal is, it's not merely an academic affair, in order to

> > > catch yourself in the act, you have to *put* yourself in the act,

> > and

> > > that's what I'm trying to get across here. Iow, just saying

> > something

> > > is so, repeating it over and over again, doesn't make it so.

> > >

> > > Iow, you can't practice swimming standing on the deck.

> > >

> > > Judi

> >

> > The way I interpret what you're saying here is like this:

> >

> > Knowing/being truth is on a " need to know basis. "

> >

> > You can't even know that you need to know, unless you know the

> > suffering that results in the need.

> >

> > So, be the suffering, embody the suffering condition, without any

> > quibbling, without any avoidance of all of what it is.

> >

> > Only then will you need to know.

> >

> > Then, you can " knock and it shall be opened unto you. "

> >

> >

> >

> > **************

> >

> > Yes, thanks, because without " need " , it's just so much going in

> > circles.

> >

> > The need has to be there for investigation into yourself to make any

> > real headway.

> >

> > Isn't there a saying, Ben Franklin or somebody, " need is the mother

> > of invention. "

> >

> > And like you said, in order for there to be a need, there must be a

> > suffering, grist for the mill so to speak. All this

> > philosophical " playing at inquiry " doesn't go anywhere.

> >

> > So what I'm trying to do is to get these guys " familiar " with their

> > suffering, not avoiding it with all their mental gyrations, but

> > giving themselves over to it, whatever is the case.

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

 

 

They cannot get familiar with the suffering.....They ARE the suffering.

 

 

 

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> > Iow, it's safe to surrender. In fact, like I think Thaddeus Golas, in

> > the Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment, said, it's the only safety.

> > And in doing that, a higher form of intelligence is awakened, an

> > intelligence that's now free. Iow, as long as there's a stake in the

> > game, a person cannot effectively see what they're up to, cannot

> > effectively investigate themselves.

> >

> > Surrender comes first,THEN investigation. It can't be in the reverse.

> > And that's the rub.

> >

> > Judi

> >

>

>

>

 

 

Investigation precedes surrender precedes investigation.

 

 

toombaru

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote:

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " Judi Rhodes " <rhodesjudi@>

wrote:

> > >

> > > Yes, but the deal is, it's not merely an academic affair, in

order to

> > > > catch yourself in the act, you have to *put* yourself in the act,

> > > and

> > > > that's what I'm trying to get across here. Iow, just saying

> > > something

> > > > is so, repeating it over and over again, doesn't make it so.

> > > >

> > > > Iow, you can't practice swimming standing on the deck.

> > > >

> > > > Judi

> > >

> > > The way I interpret what you're saying here is like this:

> > >

> > > Knowing/being truth is on a " need to know basis. "

> > >

> > > You can't even know that you need to know, unless you know the

> > > suffering that results in the need.

> > >

> > > So, be the suffering, embody the suffering condition, without any

> > > quibbling, without any avoidance of all of what it is.

> > >

> > > Only then will you need to know.

> > >

> > > Then, you can " knock and it shall be opened unto you. "

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > **************

> > >

> > > Yes, thanks, because without " need " , it's just so much going in

> > > circles.

> > >

> > > The need has to be there for investigation into yourself to make

any

> > > real headway.

> > >

> > > Isn't there a saying, Ben Franklin or somebody, " need is the mother

> > > of invention. "

> > >

> > > And like you said, in order for there to be a need, there must be a

> > > suffering, grist for the mill so to speak. All this

> > > philosophical " playing at inquiry " doesn't go anywhere.

> > >

> > > So what I'm trying to do is to get these guys " familiar " with their

> > > suffering, not avoiding it with all their mental gyrations, but

> > > giving themselves over to it, whatever is the case.

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

>

>

> They cannot get familiar with the suffering.....They ARE the suffering.

 

*** But officer, I couldn't see that stop sign because

I AM the stop sign.

>

>

>

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > >

> > > Iow, it's safe to surrender. In fact, like I think Thaddeus

Golas, in

> > > the Lazy Man's Guide to Enlightenment, said, it's the only safety.

> > > And in doing that, a higher form of intelligence is awakened, an

> > > intelligence that's now free. Iow, as long as there's a stake in

the

> > > game, a person cannot effectively see what they're up to, cannot

> > > effectively investigate themselves.

> > >

> > > Surrender comes first,THEN investigation. It can't be in the

reverse.

> > > And that's the rub.

> > >

> > > Judi

> > >

> >

> >

> >

>

>

> Investigation precedes surrender precedes investigation.

>

>

> toombaru

>

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " kenj02001 " <kenj02001 wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote:

> >

> >> >

> > They cannot get familiar with the suffering.....They ARE the

suffering.

>

> *** But officer, I couldn't see that stop sign because

> I AM the stop sign.

> >

> >

>

***********

Yes, any fool can speak in the absolute, spouting truths like a parrot,

but knowing the process and what it takes in actual human terms is a

completely different story, and in order to speak to the process, one

must have gone through it himself. Just seeing the logic of what

separateness is only prolongs, and actually prohibits one from going

through it. Cleverness is just another game of avoidance.

 

Judi

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain

wrote:

>> > > Surrender comes first,THEN investigation. It can't be in the

reverse.

> > > And that's the rub.

> > >

> > > Judi

> > >

>>

>

> Investigation precedes surrender precedes investigation.

>

>

> toombaru

>

**********

No, and that's where you're hung up. You can investigate from now

till doomsday, but it's to no avail. Surrender first, THEN

understanding.

 

An example is Jesus on the cross. It wasn't until he cried out to God

and was NOT answered, that he surrenderd and THEN he understood.

You can't have even thread of a stake in the game and expect to

understand. It does NOT work that way.

 

Judi