Guest guest Posted June 21, 2007 Report Share Posted June 21, 2007 Hello everyone, this is my first post on this forum. My question is the 'position' of the " realized " in regards 'the observer' v [for lack of a better description] the subject of manifestation, I am 'stuck' with an obvious contradiction... .....on the one hand, " there is no doer " that " all will be rolled up as a scroll " , " life is a dream " and we should live as observer only. On the other hand, there is a great body of literature on 'how to manifest'. In the new testament, eg, we are instructed: " ....whatsoever you desire when you pray believe that you receive them and you shall have them " But why pray for anything as there is no desire or no one to have desires? If there is no one that prays and ultimately nothing to pray for as nothing happens. Why not roll over and play dead and is not ANY desire, drinking water, for instance, a desire that the self, through the body has? Their answer is that we will not get it until there is that mysterious 'click' of self realization, illumination, salvation and realize we are not the body and can only identify with awareness, that this is bliss. If there is no one here, for whom is this bliss? I imagine that we're supposed to proceed on the assumption that 'whatever happens' is all-right because ultimately we have no control as there is no individual to control anything or to proceed anywhere. If this is so, why are we here in the first place? [this they never answer], and what if the nonexistent 'I' is in pain? We're just supposed to observe the horrors as, " even these will pass " ...Nisargatta in 'the ultimate medicine, seems " pissed " at people who ask him rudimentary questions. Who is getting mad if there is no one here? He has cancer and it's ok because it is not " him " but his body seems like denial and if he is " even beyond God " why can't he cure himself rather than suffer through this agony? This type of thinking, not unlike Christianity, bothers me because it abdicates all responsibility, " que sera, sera " , we're not here... It does not take much imagination to come up w/ a system where we observe from afar, from without and with no " personal " involvement and perhaps " illumination " is such a system but frankly, I don't get it. Is there really no " personal freedom " where all that happens occurs because 'nothing happens' and dosen't this beg the question that whatever happens can be explained as planned? Why get out of bed in the morning, because it was planned! On the other hand, there is a rather large body of literature that " proves " that thought and imagination create reality. I know, we're back to begging the question; ie, were we programmed from the beginning to " control thought " and " create " or can one really do this and if there is no one to do anything, then we're back to square one. Don't want to ramble on...Thomas Troward speaks on this very subject and his conclusion I will save for later... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2007 Report Share Posted June 22, 2007 Nisargadatta , " hvncb " <americanallied wrote: > > Hello everyone, this is my first post on this forum. My question is > the 'position' of the " realized " in regards 'the observer' v [for lack > of a better description] the subject of manifestation, I am 'stuck' > with an obvious contradiction... > > ....on the one hand, " there is no doer " that " all will be rolled up as > a scroll " , " life is a dream " and we should live as observer only. > > On the other hand, there is a great body of literature on 'how to > manifest'. In the new testament, eg, we are instructed: > " ....whatsoever you desire when you pray believe that you receive them > and you shall have them " > > But why pray for anything as there is no desire or no one to have > desires? If there is no one that prays and ultimately nothing to pray > for as nothing happens. Why not roll over and play dead and is not > ANY desire, drinking water, for instance, a desire that the self, > through the body has? > > Their answer is that we will not get it until there is that mysterious > 'click' of self realization, illumination, salvation and realize we > are not the body and can only identify with awareness, that this is > bliss. If there is no one here, for whom is this bliss? > > I imagine that we're supposed to proceed on the assumption that > 'whatever happens' is all-right because ultimately we have no control > as there is no individual to control anything or to proceed anywhere. > If this is so, why are we here in the first place? [this they never > answer], and what if the nonexistent 'I' is in pain? We're just > supposed to observe the horrors as, " even these will > pass " ...Nisargatta in 'the ultimate medicine, seems " pissed " at people > who ask him rudimentary questions. Who is getting mad if there is no > one here? He has cancer and it's ok because it is not " him " but his > body seems like denial and if he is " even beyond God " why can't he > cure himself rather than suffer through this agony? > > This type of thinking, not unlike Christianity, bothers me because it > abdicates all responsibility, " que sera, sera " , we're not here... > > It does not take much imagination to come up w/ a system where we > observe from afar, from without and with no " personal " involvement and > perhaps " illumination " is such a system but frankly, I don't get it. > > Is there really no " personal freedom " where all that happens occurs > because 'nothing happens' and dosen't this beg the question that > whatever happens can be explained as planned? Why get out of bed in > the morning, because it was planned! > > On the other hand, there is a rather large body of literature that > " proves " that thought and imagination create reality. I know, we're > back to begging the question; ie, were we programmed from the > beginning to " control thought " and " create " or can one really do this > and if there is no one to do anything, then we're back to square one. > > Don't want to ramble on...Thomas Troward speaks on this very subject > and his conclusion I will save for later... > ....first of all you must understund that all words are limited by nature...just like a hippo cannot fly across the ocean... what you are...the real you...is beyond all words...you can see words just as you can see the body...but you can never see yourself... ....you are the seer of everything...(or the observer)...but you identify with the body...from the bodies point of view life is an endless road of sorrow...with short moments of cover...sex, food, money, power....and all the rest of it.... from the bodies point of view you will never understand pure freedom...but from pure freedom you will understand everything about unfreedom....release all and you will be totaly free as the real seer...hold on to something and be bound to something as the untrue seer... there is nothing wrong in identifying with the body... but its a battlefield of pain...of course there will be pleasure at times...and maby because of this you will continue the identification-game a couple of years more if that is all you want...then that is all you want... but I can tell you from my own light, that what you really want is not just the small pleasures of the body...covering up the road of sorrow.... http://iietsa.blogspot.com/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2007 Report Share Posted June 22, 2007 Their answer is that we will not get it until there is that mysterious 'click' of self realization, illumination, salvation and realize we are not the body and can only identify with awareness, that this is bliss. If there is no one here, for whom is this bliss? ~~~~~~~~~ there is no " we " realizing anything. it is not that " we " identify with awareness, it is that whatever sense of " personal self " disappears and only awareness remains. awareness has no need to identify with anything. as for bliss... there is no " experience of bliss " ... there is no " experience of " in the sense of " this is my experience " ... speculating on " what it is like " is completely off track and missing the point. there is no point in trying to imagine what cannot be imagined. while Nisargadatta does recommend the practice of " witnessing " , he also comments that it is inherently self-contradictory, but still can be a valuable step along the path. the thing about witnessing is that if there is simple witnessing of whatever happens without interference in that... then the fact that whatever happens (including any behavior, that is) happens of its own starts to become evident. And if behavior happens of its own without any intentional " driving " it can start to be clear that there really is no need to conjure the notion of a self to " make things happen " . So witnessing can be a very deep practice in that regard. it is not that self/ego goes away. It is realization that there never was one. Bill Nisargadatta , " hvncb " <americanallied wrote: > > Hello everyone, this is my first post on this forum. My question is > the 'position' of the " realized " in regards 'the observer' v [for lack > of a better description] the subject of manifestation, I am 'stuck' > with an obvious contradiction... > > ....on the one hand, " there is no doer " that " all will be rolled up as > a scroll " , " life is a dream " and we should live as observer only. > > On the other hand, there is a great body of literature on 'how to > manifest'. In the new testament, eg, we are instructed: > " ....whatsoever you desire when you pray believe that you receive them > and you shall have them " > > But why pray for anything as there is no desire or no one to have > desires? If there is no one that prays and ultimately nothing to pray > for as nothing happens. Why not roll over and play dead and is not > ANY desire, drinking water, for instance, a desire that the self, > through the body has? > > Their answer is that we will not get it until there is that mysterious > 'click' of self realization, illumination, salvation and realize we > are not the body and can only identify with awareness, that this is > bliss. If there is no one here, for whom is this bliss? > > I imagine that we're supposed to proceed on the assumption that > 'whatever happens' is all-right because ultimately we have no control > as there is no individual to control anything or to proceed anywhere. > If this is so, why are we here in the first place? [this they never > answer], and what if the nonexistent 'I' is in pain? We're just > supposed to observe the horrors as, " even these will > pass " ...Nisargatta in 'the ultimate medicine, seems " pissed " at people > who ask him rudimentary questions. Who is getting mad if there is no > one here? He has cancer and it's ok because it is not " him " but his > body seems like denial and if he is " even beyond God " why can't he > cure himself rather than suffer through this agony? > > This type of thinking, not unlike Christianity, bothers me because it > abdicates all responsibility, " que sera, sera " , we're not here... > > It does not take much imagination to come up w/ a system where we > observe from afar, from without and with no " personal " involvement and > perhaps " illumination " is such a system but frankly, I don't get it. > > Is there really no " personal freedom " where all that happens occurs > because 'nothing happens' and dosen't this beg the question that > whatever happens can be explained as planned? Why get out of bed in > the morning, because it was planned! > > On the other hand, there is a rather large body of literature that > " proves " that thought and imagination create reality. I know, we're > back to begging the question; ie, were we programmed from the > beginning to " control thought " and " create " or can one really do this > and if there is no one to do anything, then we're back to square one. > > Don't want to ramble on...Thomas Troward speaks on this very subject > and his conclusion I will save for later... > 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.