Guest guest Posted April 11, 2007 Report Share Posted April 11, 2007 Here. On the table is a pen. I see a pen. My friend come in a she see pen too! And if my dog come in she might play withe pen, and beetle running into pen then round pen. Therefore, something outside consciousness exist that make pen happen, but pen is not it. Pen is happen when consciousness + that which is outside consciousness happen. And no funny talk please :-) So this outside consciousness - what is it? Can it called absolute objective Reality? Is this correct? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 11, 2007 Report Share Posted April 11, 2007 Nisargadatta , " tigerlily_du_lac " <tigerlily_du_lac wrote: > > Here. On the table is a pen. I see a pen. My friend come in a she see > pen too! And if my dog come in she might play withe pen, and beetle > running into pen then round pen. > > Therefore, something outside consciousness exist that make pen happen, > but pen is not it. Pen is happen when consciousness + that which is > outside consciousness happen. > > And no funny talk please :-) > > So this outside consciousness - what is it? Can it called absolute > objective Reality? > > Is this correct? instead of the pen.....you could write about " your " perception of the world....in which there is a pen....and appearing others.....to whom this pen is appearing too.... impossible to take out this pen.....without breaking whole of your worldly perception.....and so, the wordly perception of appearing others too impossible to take out the appearing others....without breaking your worldly perception..... impossible to take out " your " perception....without waking up from a fantastic dream Marc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 11, 2007 Report Share Posted April 11, 2007 Nisargadatta , " tigerlily_du_lac " <tigerlily_du_lac wrote: > > Here. On the table is a pen. I see a pen. My friend come in a she see > pen too! And if my dog come in she might play withe pen, and beetle > running into pen then round pen. > > Therefore, something outside consciousness exist that make pen happen, > but pen is not it. Pen is happen when consciousness + that which is > outside consciousness happen. > > And no funny talk please :-) > > So this outside consciousness - what is it? Can it called absolute > objective Reality? > > Is this correct? this is funny. no funny talk implied or expressed. this is not correct. this is not wrong. it's funny that way. even if you don't say it in a funny way. your consciousness is the pen, when pen is in your thoughts. 'outside there' is 'inside here'. 'outside of consciousness' is within consciousness. until it's not. but 'you' will never know nor see THAT. it's all there is and doesn't need nor want 'you'. and be thankful for that. ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 11, 2007 Report Share Posted April 11, 2007 > until it's not. > but 'you' will never know nor see THAT. > it's all there is and doesn't need nor want 'you'. Problem for me is that if THAT is, then there is two, not one. There is consciousness, and there is inffer of things oustide consciousness. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 11, 2007 Report Share Posted April 11, 2007 > until it's not. > but 'you' will never know nor see THAT. > it's all there is and doesn't need nor want 'you'. Problem for me is that if THAT is, then there is two, not one. There is consciousness, and there is inffer of things oustide consciousness. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 11, 2007 Report Share Posted April 11, 2007 Nisargadatta , " tigerlily_du_lac " <tigerlily_du_lac wrote: > > > until it's not. > > > but 'you' will never know nor see THAT. > > > it's all there is and doesn't need nor want 'you'. > > Problem for me is that if THAT is, then there is two, not one. There > is consciousness, and there is inffer of things oustide consciousness. > The answer is in the first three words. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 11, 2007 Report Share Posted April 11, 2007 > The answer is in the first three words. Sometimes I think u hide behind this funny talk. It sounds very clever but may be problem for you also? It is a simple question. If consciousness is like a drop of water, what is that reflected in it? It seems that it musts exist out there, but we can never know it. If it out there, then who can advaita be correct? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 11, 2007 Report Share Posted April 11, 2007 Nisargadatta , " tigerlily_du_lac " <tigerlily_du_lac wrote: > > > The answer is in the first three words. > > Sometimes I think u hide behind this funny talk. It sounds very clever > but may be problem for you also? > > It is a simple question. > > If consciousness is like a drop of water, what is that reflected in > it? It seems that it musts exist out there, but we can never know it. > If it out there, then who can advaita be correct? consciousness is not like a drop of water. nothing is reflected in it. 'it' exists... right here... 'you' are 'it'... 'it' is the only thing 'you' can know. advaita is neither correct nor not correct. 'you' are neither correct nor not correct. consciousness is neither correct nor not correct. it is incorrect to think of 'things' as correct or not correct. this is as simple and unfunny as it gets. ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 11, 2007 Report Share Posted April 11, 2007 > If it out there, then who can advaita be correct? > I know I am not correct, but Nisargatta he is explaining with abstract concepts, and did he ever do the funny talk? He only answer straigt. It the Zen school who do the funny talk, or even hit you with a stick. Or the master say like " Oh, he came with a stick and a shoe " and or " Bodhidarma had no baird " , and " if and elephant can pass through the the keyhole why cant his tail pase through? " Oh if I want Zen I go to Zen canal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 11, 2007 Report Share Posted April 11, 2007 I am THAT. But THAT is not consciousness. Nis is saying THAT is what makes consciousness possible. He saying that consciouss is a bubble which appear, or he is that which observes the coming and going of cosnciousness. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 11, 2007 Report Share Posted April 11, 2007 Nisargadatta , " tigerlily_du_lac " <tigerlily_du_lac wrote: > > > until it's not. > > > but 'you' will never know nor see THAT. > > > it's all there is and doesn't need nor want 'you'. > > Problem for me is that if THAT is, then there is two, not one. There > is consciousness, and there is inffer of things oustide consciousness. 'you' seem to want to make a big and important 'thing' out of consciousness. 'you'/'consciousness'/ number:(0:01) / 'THAT' /... are not different abstractions. all and every of the afore 'somewhats' indicated are and is, only and every bit of itself. complete, without character or characteristic, neither inside nor outside but that very quality of capacity that allows for both and beyond and before and right now. and because 'it' is all that is the case, it is not 'other' nor 'aware' of 'other' and strangely not 'aware' of 'self'. not one..not two...'you' can't color an aroma, and 'you' can't put this in words. ..b boji baba Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 11, 2007 Report Share Posted April 11, 2007 Nisargadatta , " tigerlily_du_lac " <tigerlily_du_lac wrote: > > > If it out there, then who can advaita be correct? > > > > I know I am not correct, but Nisargatta he is explaining with abstract > concepts, and did he ever do the funny talk? He only answer straigt. > It the Zen school who do the funny talk, or even hit you with a stick. > Or the master say like " Oh, he came with a stick and a shoe " and > or " Bodhidarma had no baird " , and " if and elephant can pass through > the the keyhole why cant his tail pase through? " > > Oh if I want Zen I go to Zen canal. secretly sri nisarga-data was a zen master in the rinzai-sufi-jesuit order .. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 11, 2007 Report Share Posted April 11, 2007 > 'you' seem to want to make a big and important 'thing' out of > > consciousness. 'you'/'consciousness'/ number:(0:01) / 'THAT' /... are > > not different abstractions. all and every of the afore 'somewhats' > > indicated are and is, only and every bit of itself. complete, without > > character or characteristic, neither inside nor outside but that very > > quality of capacity that allows for both and beyond and before and > > right now. and because 'it' is all that is the case, it is not 'other' > > nor 'aware' of 'other' and strangely not 'aware' of 'self'. not > > one..not two...'you' can't color an aroma, and 'you' can't put this in > > words. > Okay. I just have to " Only go straight " as Zen Master Seung Sahn used to say. Because I don't know what you mean but then thenkyou for trying boji baba. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 11, 2007 Report Share Posted April 11, 2007 Nisargadatta , " tigerlily_du_lac " <tigerlily_du_lac wrote: > > > 'you' seem to want to make a big and important 'thing' out of > > > > consciousness. 'you'/'consciousness'/ number:(0:01) / 'THAT' /... > are > > > > not different abstractions. all and every of the afore 'somewhats' > > > > indicated are and is, only and every bit of itself. complete, > without > > > > character or characteristic, neither inside nor outside but that > very > > > > quality of capacity that allows for both and beyond and before and > > > > right now. and because 'it' is all that is the case, it is > not 'other' > > > > nor 'aware' of 'other' and strangely not 'aware' of 'self'. not > > > > one..not two...'you' can't color an aroma, and 'you' can't put > this in > > > > words. > > > > Okay. I just have to " Only go straight " as Zen Master Seung Sahn > used to say. Because I don't know what you mean but then thenkyou > for trying boji baba. always a thrill! ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 11, 2007 Report Share Posted April 11, 2007 Nisargadatta , " tigerlily_du_lac " <tigerlily_du_lac wrote: > > > The answer is in the first three words. > > Sometimes I think u hide behind this funny talk. It sounds very clever > but may be problem for you also? > > It is a simple question. > > If consciousness is like a drop of water, what is that reflected in > it? It seems that it musts exist out there, but we can never know it. > If it out there, then who can advaita be correct? If you are able to examine your senses closely, you'll see there is no way for input to be coming from " out there. " Key questions: Where does the sensing end and the something being sensed begin? How can you tell? You can't, because in trying to tell, you'd be relying on your sensing. If you form a " replica " in here, using an image, how can you tell whether or not it is accurate? You can only sense. And sensing will always give you a sensory image. What could possibly give you the nature of the actual thing you believe to exist out there? One who goes into these questions deeply will observe that object being sensed and activity of sensing are the same thing. One will observe that the time involved in the sensory process and the location of things in relation to each other and the observer are provided not by something out there, but by one's own mind. Once one observes that mind and sense are not operating separately from each other, one is co-extensive with all time and space. This is simply because one's own mind is the only means to provide time and space and one's sensing is all that can provide the impression of objects existing in time and space. Mind-sensing-objects-time ... there is no gap between them, it is one seamless dream ... One's own awareness. This no-thing. -- D. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 11, 2007 Report Share Posted April 11, 2007 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " tigerlily_du_lac " > <tigerlily_du_lac@> wrote: > > > > > The answer is in the first three words. > > > > Sometimes I think u hide behind this funny talk. It sounds very clever > > but may be problem for you also? > > > > It is a simple question. > > > > If consciousness is like a drop of water, what is that reflected in > > it? It seems that it musts exist out there, but we can never know it. > > If it out there, then who can advaita be correct? > > If you are able to examine your senses closely, you'll see there is no > way for input to be coming from " out there. " > > Key questions: Where does the sensing end and the something being > sensed begin? How can you tell? You can't, because in trying to > tell, you'd be relying on your sensing. > > If you form a " replica " in here, using an image, how can you tell > whether or not it is accurate? You can only sense. And sensing will > always give you a sensory image. What could possibly give you the > nature of the actual thing you believe to exist out there? > > One who goes into these questions deeply will observe that object > being sensed and activity of sensing are the same thing. One will > observe that the time involved in the sensory process and the location > of things in relation to each other and the observer are provided not > by something out there, but by one's own mind. > > Once one observes that mind and sense are not operating separately > from each other, one is co-extensive with all time and space. This is > simply because one's own mind is the only means to provide time and > space and one's sensing is all that can provide the impression of > objects existing in time and space. > > Mind-sensing-objects-time ... there is no gap between them, it is one > seamless dream ... > > One's own awareness. > > This no-thing. > > -- D. > THankyou Dan. It helps. But I want to say that sensing start with senses. With my eye. My eye is sensing light, sending to brain. And my ear. It is hearing sound and sending to brain. This sound silly to you buy that how it seem to me. I am going to meditate for and go straigt. Only don't know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 11, 2007 Report Share Posted April 11, 2007 >And sensing will >always give you a sensory image. What could possibly give you the >nature of the actual thing you believe to exist out there? Ah! This is including image of body too! So Eye, ear, all this is only sensed. But time now to stop with concepts. Enought. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 12, 2007 Report Share Posted April 12, 2007 Nisargadatta , " tigerlily_du_lac " <tigerlily_du_lac wrote: > > >And sensing will > >always give you a sensory image. What could possibly give you the > >nature of the actual thing you believe to exist out there? > > Ah! This is including image of body too! So Eye, ear, all this is only > sensed. > > But time now to stop with concepts. Enought. nought. ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 12, 2007 Report Share Posted April 12, 2007 Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " tigerlily_du_lac " > <tigerlily_du_lac@> wrote: > > > > >And sensing will > > >always give you a sensory image. What could possibly give you the > > >nature of the actual thing you believe to exist out there? > > > > Ah! This is including image of body too! So Eye, ear, all this is only > > sensed. > > > > But time now to stop with concepts. Enought. > > > nought. > > .b b.b. naugh.....tay! ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 12, 2007 Report Share Posted April 12, 2007 but nice,and nowt to get worked up about roberibus111 <Roberibus111 wrote: --- In Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " tigerlily_du_lac " > <tigerlily_du_lac@> wrote: > > > > >And sensing will > > >always give you a sensory image. What could possibly give you the > > >nature of the actual thing you believe to exist out there? > > > > Ah! This is including image of body too! So Eye, ear, all this is only > > sensed. > > > > But time now to stop with concepts. Enought. > > > nought. > > .b b.b. naugh.....tay! ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 12, 2007 Report Share Posted April 12, 2007 Nisargadatta , " tigerlily_du_lac " <tigerlily_du_lac wrote: > > > The answer is in the first three words. > > Sometimes I think u hide behind this funny talk. It sounds very clever > but may be problem for you also? Where else could I hide? > > It is a simple question. > > If consciousness is like a drop of water, what is that reflected in > it? It seems that it musts exist out there, but we can never know it. > If it out there, then who can advaita be correct? > Ok........here's the low-down: You assume that there is such a thing as 'advaita'. There isn't. You assume that there is such a thing as " consciousness " .....and then set out to define it with other concepts that you have accumulated. In truth.......there is no such thing as consciousness......and even if there were.....how could you expect it to be able to dissect and analyze itself? Oh I know......there appears to be this thought stream.....coursing through what you call your mind......but there is no such 'thing' as mind or thought. The more amazing: Even if there were a world 'out there' 'you' could never know it. The only way that 'you' can 'experience' anything is as an electro-chemical response in relationship to the accumulated memories that compose the sense of separateness. Every'thing' exists only in relationship to an imaginary self. There appears to be a psychological-center around which all of that revolves......but there isn't. 'You' have been asking questions about things that don't even exist........and the real kicker........you don't exist either. At least not in the form which you imagine. How can this be said in the concepts that are themselves the only cause of confusion...........It can't. You will just have to wrestle with this until the futility becomes apparent.....(or not)....and when the walls come a tumblin down........you will find yourself empty..........within the emptiness.......struck dumb and amazed. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 12, 2007 Report Share Posted April 12, 2007 Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " tigerlily_du_lac " > <tigerlily_du_lac@> wrote: > > > > > until it's not. > > > > > but 'you' will never know nor see THAT. > > > > > it's all there is and doesn't need nor want 'you'. > > > > Problem for me is that if THAT is, then there is two, not one. There > > is consciousness, and there is inffer of things oustide consciousness. > > > 'you' seem to want to make a big and important 'thing' out of > > consciousness. 'you'/'consciousness'/ number:(0:01) / 'THAT' /... are > > not different abstractions. all and every of the afore 'somewhats' > > indicated are and is, only and every bit of itself. complete, without > > character or characteristic, neither inside nor outside but that very > > quality of capacity that allows for both and beyond and before and > > right now. and because 'it' is all that is the case, it is not 'other' > > nor 'aware' of 'other' and strangely not 'aware' of 'self'. not > > one..not two...'you' can't color an aroma, and 'you' can't put this in > > words. > > > .b boji baba > Enlightenment in a tin can from Woolworths. Unbelievable BULLSHIT! Get real mother of all Wannabe Gurus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 12, 2007 Report Share Posted April 12, 2007 Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " tigerlily_du_lac " > <tigerlily_du_lac@> wrote: > > > > > If it out there, then who can advaita be correct? > > > > > > > I know I am not correct, but Nisargatta he is explaining with abstract > > concepts, and did he ever do the funny talk? He only answer straigt. > > It the Zen school who do the funny talk, or even hit you with a stick. > > Or the master say like " Oh, he came with a stick and a shoe " and > > or " Bodhidarma had no baird " , and " if and elephant can pass through > > the the keyhole why cant his tail pase through? " > > > > Oh if I want Zen I go to Zen canal. > > > secretly sri nisarga-data was a zen master in the rinzai-sufi- jesuit order > . > Sooooooooooooo funny. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 12, 2007 Report Share Posted April 12, 2007 Nisargadatta , " mstrdmmlbrn " <mstrdmmlbrn wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " > <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " tigerlily_du_lac " > > <tigerlily_du_lac@> wrote: > > > > > > > until it's not. > > > > > > > but 'you' will never know nor see THAT. > > > > > > > it's all there is and doesn't need nor want 'you'. > > > > > > Problem for me is that if THAT is, then there is two, not one. > There > > > is consciousness, and there is inffer of things oustide > consciousness. > > > > > > 'you' seem to want to make a big and important 'thing' out of > > > > consciousness. 'you'/'consciousness'/ number:(0:01) / 'THAT' /... > are > > > > not different abstractions. all and every of the afore 'somewhats' > > > > indicated are and is, only and every bit of itself. complete, > without > > > > character or characteristic, neither inside nor outside but that > very > > > > quality of capacity that allows for both and beyond and before and > > > > right now. and because 'it' is all that is the case, it is > not 'other' > > > > nor 'aware' of 'other' and strangely not 'aware' of 'self'. not > > > > one..not two...'you' can't color an aroma, and 'you' can't put this > in > > > > words. > > > > > > .b boji baba > > > > Enlightenment in a tin can from Woolworths. > > Unbelievable BULLSHIT! Get real mother of all Wannabe Gurus. take a breath melvin....calmly have a look at what you have written above...now son aren't you a little ashamed of yourself? you bet! how could you not be. such a vicious diatribe over things that you don't even understand. silly child. i forgive you melvin. now it's up to you to forgive yourself. then you can go right on back to being a nice imbecile rather than this nasty one we see here. thanks for what's most likely your failed effort, ..b bobji b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 12, 2007 Report Share Posted April 12, 2007 Nisargadatta , " mstrdmmlbrn " <mstrdmmlbrn wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " > <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " tigerlily_du_lac " > > <tigerlily_du_lac@> wrote: > > > > > > > If it out there, then who can advaita be correct? > > > > > > > > > > I know I am not correct, but Nisargatta he is explaining with > abstract > > > concepts, and did he ever do the funny talk? He only answer > straigt. > > > It the Zen school who do the funny talk, or even hit you with a > stick. > > > Or the master say like " Oh, he came with a stick and a shoe " and > > > or " Bodhidarma had no baird " , and " if and elephant can pass > through > > > the the keyhole why cant his tail pase through? " > > > > > > Oh if I want Zen I go to Zen canal. > > > > > > secretly sri nisarga-data was a zen master in the rinzai-sufi- > jesuit order > > . > > > > Sooooooooooooo funny. well actually no..it's not meant to be..but i suppose in the life of a loser it's big stuff. hope you enjoy the dumb laugh melvin. i wasn't expecting our little boy to really understand. ..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.