Guest guest Posted March 12, 2007 Report Share Posted March 12, 2007 Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " adithya_comming " > <adithya_comming@> wrote: > > >>>I want to be one with Reality, I want > >>>to want what it wants; I want to do > >>>what it does! As you say, it serves us; > >>>once I know I am no different than > >>>Reality, I want to play my part in > >>>'serving' its 'serving'! > >> > >>If you knew that you are not different from reality > >>You would see how silly the idea of " playing my part " really is. > >> > >> Stefan > > > > > >I don't understand your comments Stefan. > > > >Can you explain it to me like I am a 3 year old? > > > >and, can you also explain what reality means to you? > > > >My reality is very simple and it includes father, mother > >who birthed to me, teachers who taught me, workers who > >worked in our fields to grow grains, workers who built > >my house, my quilt.... > > > >What is your definition of Reality??? > > " Simple reality " means: one. not two. That is not that the Reality I know of, Stefan. The reality, that I see, experience and know there are many... in fact, more than I can count. It might be even called Infinite: teachers, masters, parents, children, leaders, workers, painters, poets, scientists, flowers, rivers and... so many galaxies, stars, planets, moons that I still know next to nothing about. > " Reality " is not only the outside world, > As in your above description. > It includes the one who is experiencing the outside world. Are you saying that reality means: I + outside world? > I think a 3 years old will easily understand this. I don't know. Should I ask my son, he is about 3 > > Your complicated effort in It doesn't look complicated to me, Stefan. Does it look " complicated " to you? Why does it look complicated to you? On the other hand, calling reality " one " surely and denouncing the multiplicity that I can so easily see, experience and know about... surely seems to be the result of possibly some very involved and complex thinking/reasoning - don't you think so? [...] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 12, 2007 Report Share Posted March 12, 2007 Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> > wrote: > >and may calm your savage and belittling > >intentions towards ac regarding statements made beforehand. > > No such intentions here! AC is teaching me by presenting his beliefs I am certainly not trying to " teach " " you " , Stefan. You come across as somebody who would be willing to learn something from " me'! Being a member of this group, you might see my messages, but, you are certainly not my intended audience. You don't come across as someone who 'open' to learn. On the contrary, you seem quite interested in displaying some special knowledge, wisdom, experience of your own. What I write is not intended for people like you. > which raise my doubts. I hope it works the other way as well! I think > it does, since he seems to enjoy arguing a lot. Minds spinning the > wheel. AC is a great guy, I just feel that he tends to make simple > things complicated, but this happens easily when trying to be a > teacher. After all, complicated things are for a teacher like dough > for a baker. I don't know, Stefan and I don't know what you mean. > > " I want to be part of reality " > " But I am reality " What are you asking, Stefan? I don't understand what you want me to do here. > > Beautiful! It has happened! > Whats next? What are you expecting? > I hope he will hit me hard! Can " I " hit " you " if we are all one? Or, is that part of some complex, evolved leela? > His hits are always loving because he is from India. I didn't know that and my wife certainly doesn't think so > > Stefan > Regards, ac Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 12, 2007 Report Share Posted March 12, 2007 AC, you surely have a talent to make simple things complicated. Of course there are many different things " IN " reality!!! " REALITY " means: all and everything that is real. I wonder: how is this in your world: do you have more than one " kind " of " real " ? >Are you saying that reality means: >I + outside world? The split between " I " and " outside world " is artificial, conceptual. This is my simple, profound and authentic experience. I found this by trying to find the " I " . And it is this simple, wonderful experience I like to share Stefan Nisargadatta , " adithya_comming " <adithya_comming wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " adithya_comming " > > <adithya_comming@> wrote: > > > > >>>I want to be one with Reality, I want > > >>>to want what it wants; I want to do > > >>>what it does! As you say, it serves us; > > >>>once I know I am no different than > > >>>Reality, I want to play my part in > > >>>'serving' its 'serving'! > > >> > > >>If you knew that you are not different from reality > > >>You would see how silly the idea of " playing my part " really is. > > >> > > >> Stefan > > > > > > > > >I don't understand your comments Stefan. > > > > > >Can you explain it to me like I am a 3 year old? > > > > > >and, can you also explain what reality means to you? > > > > > >My reality is very simple and it includes father, mother > > >who birthed to me, teachers who taught me, workers who > > >worked in our fields to grow grains, workers who built > > >my house, my quilt.... > > > > > >What is your definition of Reality??? > > > > " Simple reality " means: one. not two. > > That is not that the Reality I know of, Stefan. > The reality, that I see, experience and know > there are many... in fact, more than I can count. > It might be even called Infinite: teachers, masters, > parents, children, leaders, workers, painters, > poets, scientists, flowers, rivers and... > > so many galaxies, stars, planets, moons > that I still know next to nothing about. > > > > " Reality " is not only the outside world, > > As in your above description. > > It includes the one who is experiencing the outside world. > > > Are you saying that reality means: > > I + outside world? > > > > > I think a 3 years old will easily understand this. > > I don't know. Should I ask my son, he is about 3 > > > > > > Your complicated effort in > > It doesn't look complicated to me, Stefan. > > Does it look " complicated " to you? > Why does it look complicated to you? > > > On the other hand, calling reality " one " surely > and denouncing the multiplicity that I can so > easily see, experience and know about... surely > seems to be the result of possibly some very involved > and complex thinking/reasoning - don't you think so? > > > [...] > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 12, 2007 Report Share Posted March 12, 2007 Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge wrote: > > AC, > > you surely have a talent to make simple things complicated. > Of course there are many different things " IN " reality!!! > > " REALITY " means: all and everything that is real. > > I wonder: how is this in your world: > do you have more than one " kind " of " real " ? > > >Are you saying that reality means: > >I + outside world? > > The split between " I " and " outside world " is artificial, conceptual. Is this how you translate your earlier statement: " " Reality " is not only the outside world, As in your above description. It includes the one who is experiencing the outside world. " [...] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 13, 2007 Report Share Posted March 13, 2007 Nisargadatta , " adithya_comming " <adithya_comming wrote: > >You come across as somebody who would be willing >to learn something from " me'! > >Being a member of this group, you might see my messages, >but, you are certainly not my intended audience. > >You don't come across as someone who 'open' to learn. >On the contrary, you seem quite interested in displaying some >special knowledge, wisdom, experience of your own. > >What I write is not intended for people like you. I feel sorry, AC. I had misunderstood your intentions completely. Please believe me, I am wide open to " learn " . Therefor I have said, that you are " teaching " me. Your ideas have provoked me to put inner experiences into words, which I never thought could be communicated. I have noticed that you reacted very defensive, but was hoping, that you will get over it, especially because you immediately went into detailed " discussions " over my comments. But until now I did not know that your postings are directed to a certain " audience " and that you do not wish to communicate with me. But honestly: then I still do not understand why you went into those detailed discussions about my comments. Maybe you have taken my persistent curiosity about you and your way of thinking - the " thinking " of a group member which calls himself enlightened - mistakenly as " not open to learn " . The opposite is the case. I was many years very close with the same master as you, Arvind. One thing I have learned from him was to deeply and consequently inquire when something feels unclear, when the heart feels that something is not right. But again, forgive me. I promise, I will never get in touch with you again. All the best Stefan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 13, 2007 Report Share Posted March 13, 2007 Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " adithya_comming " > <adithya_comming@> wrote: > > > >You come across as somebody who would be willing > >to learn something from " me'! > > > >Being a member of this group, you might see my messages, > >but, you are certainly not my intended audience. > > > >You don't come across as someone who 'open' to learn. > >On the contrary, you seem quite interested in displaying some > >special knowledge, wisdom, experience of your own. > > > >What I write is not intended for people like you. > > I feel sorry, AC. I had misunderstood your intentions completely. > Please believe me, I am wide open to " learn " . Therefor I have said, > that you are " teaching " me. Your ideas have provoked me to put inner > experiences into words, which I never thought could be communicated. Why didn't you say so before ?;) Am I to assume that they have been of any value/use to you without you having said so? > I > have noticed that you reacted very defensive, Yes, that is possible. I was really trying to 'get rid of' you I thought you were wasting my time by starting complex philosophical discussions > but was hoping, that you > will get over it, especially because you immediately went into > detailed " discussions " over my comments. But until now I did not know > that your postings are directed to a certain " audience " Yes, it is intended for anyone who thinks he/she can learn from it, experiment with it, inquire with it, give it a try or use it and possibly benefit from it. I didn't think you were such a person. You came across as someone who was trying to challenge it and was more interested in proving them wrong rather than giving them a chance. > and that you > do not wish to communicate with me. As I said before, philosophical debates are not my favorites. If you find what I write, worth consideration and experiment then, try them. If not, they are not meant for me. > But honestly: then I still do not > understand why you went into those detailed discussions about my comments. I was trying to 'defend' my viewpoint. I was not trying to teach you anything. > > Maybe you have taken my persistent curiosity about you and your way of > thinking - the " thinking " of a group member which calls himself > enlightened - mistakenly as " not open to learn " . Yes, I took it as a " challenge " and not as an willingness to learn. > The opposite is the > case. Maybe, but, it didn't come across as that to me. > I was many years very close with the same master as you, Arvind. Are you talking about Osho? > One thing I have learned from him was to deeply and consequently > inquire when something feels unclear, when the heart feels that > something is not right. Sure. Are you sure it was your " heart " that was not feeling right Or, was it just your 'mind' ?;) > > But again, forgive me. I promise, I will never get in touch with you > again. Let us see if you keep your promise > > All the best > Stefan Regards, ac Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 13, 2007 Report Share Posted March 13, 2007 Nisargadatta , " adithya_comming " <adithya_comming wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " adithya_comming " > > <adithya_comming@> wrote: > > > > > >You come across as somebody who would be willing > > >to learn something from " me'! > > > > > >Being a member of this group, you might see my messages, > > >but, you are certainly not my intended audience. > > > > > >You don't come across as someone who 'open' to learn. > > >On the contrary, you seem quite interested in displaying some > > >special knowledge, wisdom, experience of your own. > > > > > >What I write is not intended for people like you. > > > > I feel sorry, AC. I had misunderstood your intentions completely. > > Please believe me, I am wide open to " learn " . Therefor I have said, > > that you are " teaching " me. Your ideas have provoked me to put > inner > > experiences into words, which I never thought could be > communicated. > > Why didn't you say so before ?;) > > Am I to assume that they have been of any value/use to you > without you having said so? > > > > > I > > have noticed that you reacted very defensive, > > Yes, that is possible. I was really trying to 'get rid of' you > > I thought you were wasting my time by starting > complex philosophical discussions > > > > but was hoping, that you > > will get over it, especially because you immediately went into > > detailed " discussions " over my comments. But until now I did not > know > > that your postings are directed to a certain " audience " > > Yes, it is intended for anyone who thinks he/she can > learn from it, experiment with it, inquire with it, give it a try > or use it and possibly benefit from it. > > I didn't think you were such a person. You came across as someone > who was trying to challenge it and was more interested in proving > them wrong rather than giving them a chance. > > > and that you > > do not wish to communicate with me. > > As I said before, philosophical debates are not my favorites. > > If you find what I write, worth consideration and experiment > then, try them. If not, they are not meant for me. > > > > But honestly: then I still do not > > understand why you went into those detailed discussions about my > comments. > > I was trying to 'defend' my viewpoint. > I was not trying to teach you anything. > > > > > > Maybe you have taken my persistent curiosity about you and your > way of > > thinking - the " thinking " of a group member which calls himself > > enlightened - mistakenly as " not open to learn " . > > Yes, I took it as a " challenge " and not as an > willingness to learn. > > > > The opposite is the > > case. > > Maybe, but, it didn't come across as that to me. > > > I was many years very close with the same master as you, Arvind. > > Are you talking about Osho? > > > > One thing I have learned from him was to deeply and consequently > > inquire when something feels unclear, when the heart feels that > > something is not right. > > Sure. Are you sure it was your " heart " that was not feeling right > Or, was it just your 'mind' ?;) > > > > > > > But again, forgive me. I promise, I will never get in touch with > you > > again. > > Let us see if you keep your promise > > > > > All the best > > Stefan > > > Regards, > ac > two fierce Lions battling!!!!! ... such a MAGNIFICIENT sight!! and remember you all!!!! ... ... ...... ... ............ . ...lions are CATS!!! ..b b.b. 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.