Mysticism's Basic concepts ; an attempted interpretation

[Guest guest]

Hello

Ego and Personality

1-Ego is an inward orientation that might dominates man's

consciousnesstotally, whereby man's consciousness is always in a

continous processof comparing between self and others in the form of

good or bad, lossor gain, right or wrong, rich or poor...etc, and

undoubtedlythis " Observatory " is the seed of all envy, antagonisim,

hatred,joelousy, aggression, competition...etc, it can only breed,

pain.

2-Personality, it is the outer garment we wear for others, it might

be nice,charming, welcoming, kind...etc, by time it becomes a habit

and asecond nature to this man.

Identification

1-Being Identified,It is obviuos what is the meaning of your outer

identity, your name, age,esx, your physical appearance...etc, yet

there is another inward deeper identification, whereby we are

identified with concepts such as rich, gallant, intelegent,

dependable, honest, good father, good mother, family man, sincere

freind...etc.The problem arises when we are much attached to one of

these identificartions, due to the DISTINCTION we derive out of it -

vanity- in this case it dominates our outlook to life in the sense

that we will be very judgemental to others and incidents that are

opposite to what we hold dear, hence it breeds, hatred, aggression,

and unfairness. Basically, the main motive for man to become

identified is simply an outcry " look at me " , an inferiority complex

just as psychiatrists put it.

2-Being unidentified , means that man, sees all these identities, as

roles or garments in the eyes of others, but he knows quite clearly,

that he can yeild to temptation at any moment and he cannot mentian

this garment for ever because it entirely depends on circumstances

and on our resistence to these circumstances, if circumstances are

favourable, he would appear as king, if unfavourable he would appear

as a theif. To continue wearing this beautifull garment in the eyes

of others is a miracle, actually , these beautiful garments

are bestowed on man from another dimension, because man cannot

control circumstances.

Not seeing people and seeing ghosts or images

Not seeing poeple means that an unidentified man sees poeple as

images, in the sense that he sees the body image and the garments of

personality, but this unidentified man never relys or depends or

expects anything from the image, this is what makes them images not

poeple.

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " hsin_shang " <hsin_shang

wrote:

>

> Hello

> Ego and Personality

> 1-Ego is an inward orientation that might dominates man's

> consciousnesstotally, whereby man's consciousness is always in a

> continous processof comparing between self and others in the form

of

> good or bad, lossor gain, right or wrong, rich or poor...etc, and

> undoubtedlythis " Observatory " is the seed of all envy, antagonisim,

> hatred,joelousy, aggression, competition...etc, it can only breed,

> pain.

 

 

Sorry,

 

But consciousness is the end-product of the brain and so is unable to

do, it cannot compare between self and others in the form of good and

bad, etc ...

 

All you were enumerating about consciousness is done by thought but

in no way by consciousness.

 

Are you able to differ between thought and consciousness ?

 

Thought is a content of consciousness like sound is or vision is.

When thought becomes conscious it already is over, finished. There is

nothing you can do about.

 

Werner

 

 

> 2-Personality, it is the outer garment we wear for others, it might

> be nice,charming, welcoming, kind...etc, by time it becomes a habit

> and asecond nature to this man.

> Identification

> 1-Being Identified,It is obviuos what is the meaning of your outer

> identity, your name, age,esx, your physical appearance...etc, yet

> there is another inward deeper identification, whereby we are

> identified with concepts such as rich, gallant, intelegent,

> dependable, honest, good father, good mother, family man, sincere

> freind...etc.The problem arises when we are much attached to one of

> these identificartions, due to the DISTINCTION we derive out of it -

> vanity- in this case it dominates our outlook to life in the sense

> that we will be very judgemental to others and incidents that are

> opposite to what we hold dear, hence it breeds, hatred, aggression,

> and unfairness. Basically, the main motive for man to become

> identified is simply an outcry " look at me " , an inferiority complex

> just as psychiatrists put it.

> 2-Being unidentified , means that man, sees all these identities, as

> roles or garments in the eyes of others, but he knows quite clearly,

> that he can yeild to temptation at any moment and he cannot mentian

> this garment for ever because it entirely depends on circumstances

> and on our resistence to these circumstances, if circumstances are

> favourable, he would appear as king, if unfavourable he would

appear

> as a theif. To continue wearing this beautifull garment in the eyes

> of others is a miracle, actually , these beautiful garments

> are bestowed on man from another dimension, because man cannot

> control circumstances.

> Not seeing people and seeing ghosts or images

> Not seeing poeple means that an unidentified man sees poeple as

> images, in the sense that he sees the body image and the garments

of

> personality, but this unidentified man never relys or depends or

> expects anything from the image, this is what makes them images not

> poeple.

>

[Guest guest]

Hello Sir

First I would like to thank you for taking the trouble and read the

post. As I come to understand - it is by no means a perfect

understanding- that CONSCIUSNESS is man's ORIGINAL EXPERIENCE; this

Experience might be conditioned by " thought patterns " and this will

transform CONSCIOUSNESS into a conditioned consciousness or it might

not be so conditioned; man's spiritual journey is to return to this

unconditioned experience.

 

hsin

______

 

 

In Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " hsin_shang " <hsin_shang@>

> wrote:

> >

> > Hello

> > Ego and Personality

> > 1-Ego is an inward orientation that might dominates man's

> > consciousnesstotally, whereby man's consciousness is always in a

> > continous processof comparing between self and others in the

form

> of

> > good or bad, lossor gain, right or wrong, rich or poor...etc,

and

> > undoubtedlythis " Observatory " is the seed of all envy,

antagonisim,

> > hatred,joelousy, aggression, competition...etc, it can only

breed,

> > pain.

>

>

> Sorry,

>

> But consciousness is the end-product of the brain and so is unable

to

> do, it cannot compare between self and others in the form of good

and

> bad, etc ...

>

> All you were enumerating about consciousness is done by thought

but

> in no way by consciousness.

>

> Are you able to differ between thought and consciousness ?

>

> Thought is a content of consciousness like sound is or vision is.

> When thought becomes conscious it already is over, finished. There

is

> nothing you can do about.

>

> Werner

>

>

> > 2-Personality, it is the outer garment we wear for others, it

might

> > be nice,charming, welcoming, kind...etc, by time it becomes a

habit

> > and asecond nature to this man.

> > Identification

> > 1-Being Identified,It is obviuos what is the meaning of your

outer

> > identity, your name, age,esx, your physical appearance...etc, yet

> > there is another inward deeper identification, whereby we are

> > identified with concepts such as rich, gallant, intelegent,

> > dependable, honest, good father, good mother, family man, sincere

> > freind...etc.The problem arises when we are much attached to one

of

> > these identificartions, due to the DISTINCTION we derive out of

it -

> > vanity- in this case it dominates our outlook to life in the

sense

> > that we will be very judgemental to others and incidents that

are

> > opposite to what we hold dear, hence it breeds, hatred,

aggression,

> > and unfairness. Basically, the main motive for man to become

> > identified is simply an outcry " look at me " , an inferiority

complex

> > just as psychiatrists put it.

> > 2-Being unidentified , means that man, sees all these

identities, as

> > roles or garments in the eyes of others, but he knows quite

clearly,

> > that he can yeild to temptation at any moment and he cannot

mentian

> > this garment for ever because it entirely depends on

circumstances

> > and on our resistence to these circumstances, if circumstances

are

> > favourable, he would appear as king, if unfavourable he would

> appear

> > as a theif. To continue wearing this beautifull garment in the

eyes

> > of others is a miracle, actually , these beautiful garments

> > are bestowed on man from another dimension, because man cannot

> > control circumstances.

> > Not seeing people and seeing ghosts or images

> > Not seeing poeple means that an unidentified man sees poeple as

> > images, in the sense that he sees the body image and the

garments

> of

> > personality, but this unidentified man never relys or depends or

> > expects anything from the image, this is what makes them images

not

> > poeple.

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " hsin_shang " <hsin_shang

wrote:

>

> Hello Sir

> First I would like to thank you for taking the trouble and read the

> post. As I come to understand - it is by no means a perfect

> understanding- that CONSCIUSNESS is man's ORIGINAL EXPERIENCE; this

> Experience might be conditioned by " thought patterns " and this will

> transform CONSCIOUSNESS into a conditioned consciousness or it

might

> not be so conditioned; man's spiritual journey is to return to this

> unconditioned experience.

>

> hsin

 

 

Hi hsin,

 

A nice dream you have to return to the unconditioned state. But let

me ask you, who has left the unconditioned state and who will return

to it ? Who is that ?

 

Is there an entity which left and returned ? Is there an entity which

can choose to be conditioned or unconditioned ?

 

Can't it be that the very idea of deconditioning is part of the

conditioning ?

 

Werner

[Guest guest]

Hello Werner

Thank you again. It seems to me that we are talking from the two

opposit ends . I am descriping the beginings of the journey while

you are porteraying the final termination of the journey. You choose

to post from that terminal, I choose the other end. I choose the

other end because it is safer, if I am misinterpreted, no harm will

be done, but to misinterpret your end is rather serious. If I may

attact your attention to the fact that most of the old Masters

evaded descriping the final end with very few exceptions like

Gurunathan for example.

 

Nevertheless, I appreciate your choice and respect it for your own

reasons.

 

hsin

_____________

In Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " hsin_shang " <hsin_shang@>

> wrote:

> >

> > Hello Sir

> > First I would like to thank you for taking the trouble and read

the

> > post. As I come to understand - it is by no means a perfect

> > understanding- that CONSCIUSNESS is man's ORIGINAL EXPERIENCE;

this

> > Experience might be conditioned by " thought patterns " and this

will

> > transform CONSCIOUSNESS into a conditioned consciousness or it

> might

> > not be so conditioned; man's spiritual journey is to return to

this

> > unconditioned experience.

> >

> > hsin

>

>

> Hi hsin,

>

> A nice dream you have to return to the unconditioned state. But

let

> me ask you, who has left the unconditioned state and who will

return

> to it ? Who is that ?

>

> Is there an entity which left and returned ? Is there an entity

which

> can choose to be conditioned or unconditioned ?

>

> Can't it be that the very idea of deconditioning is part of the

> conditioning ?

>

> Werner

>

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " hsin_shang " <hsin_shang@>

> wrote:

> >

> > Hello Sir

> > First I would like to thank you for taking the trouble and read the

> > post. As I come to understand - it is by no means a perfect

> > understanding- that CONSCIUSNESS is man's ORIGINAL EXPERIENCE; this

> > Experience might be conditioned by " thought patterns " and this will

> > transform CONSCIOUSNESS into a conditioned consciousness or it

> might

> > not be so conditioned; man's spiritual journey is to return to this

> > unconditioned experience.

> >

> > hsin

>

>

> Hi hsin,

>

> A nice dream you have to return to the unconditioned state. But let

> me ask you, who has left the unconditioned state and who will return

> to it ? Who is that ?

>

> Is there an entity which left and returned ? Is there an entity which

> can choose to be conditioned or unconditioned ?

>

> Can't it be that the very idea of deconditioning is part of the

> conditioning ?

>

> Werner

 

P: Well, let's remark that no conditioned, or unconditioned

states exist (except, as concepts) the brain have been

taught certain habits, and this habits can be seen one by

one and abandon. Of course, no self, acquires or abandons

anything. The brain itself programs and deprograms itself.

>

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " hsin_shang " <hsin_shang

wrote:

>

> Hello Werner

> Thank you again. It seems to me that we are talking from the two

> opposit ends . I am descriping the beginings of the journey while

> you are porteraying the final termination of the journey. You

choose

> to post from that terminal, I choose the other end. I choose the

> other end because it is safer, if I am misinterpreted, no harm will

> be done, but to misinterpret your end is rather serious. If I may

> attact your attention to the fact that most of the old Masters

> evaded descriping the final end with very few exceptions like

> Gurunathan for example.

 

 

Dear hsin,

 

All those old master are dead, maybe not Tich Nat Han, and you carry

on their words in your mind. And their words were tickling your

fantasies and were tickling your ambition to fulfill their promises.

 

But who is the entity which finally will attain moksha, enlightenmnet,

satori, etc, etc ? Is it " YOU " ?

 

Can you see that what you have read from the old masters now your

thoughts are using to play games with themselves ? Your mind is like

that of a boy who has watched a movie and afterwards in his fantasy

is re-playing the hero.

 

And the game your thoughts are playing is called " mysticicsm "

and " enllightement " .

 

You wrote that you are at the secure side and I am at the dangerous

side. I neither can see any danger nor any security. These are all

just ideas, words. Don't be afraid, hsin, words are not dangerous.

 

 

>

> Nevertheless, I appreciate your choice and respect it for your own

> reasons.

>

> hsin

 

 

Thank you, hsin

 

for respecting my " choice " for my own response. But what I wrote to

you was not my choice - it just happened.

 

An unknown force is carrying water and is cutting wood - and is

writing posts to Hsin, the fearful one.

 

Werner

[Guest guest]

Hello Dear Wener

It is not safer for me, but safer for the one who listens. One has

to take that into account, there is no need to fall under the sway

of cauality. I always remember the story of Haykujo and the fox.

By the way there is Moksha, but no entity will attain it. As long as

there is a " You " there is no Moksha.

 

Thank you for your tolerance, hope all is cleared now.

 

hsin

_________

In Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " hsin_shang " <hsin_shang@>

> wrote:

> >

> > Hello Werner

> > Thank you again. It seems to me that we are talking from the two

> > opposit ends . I am descriping the beginings of the journey while

> > you are porteraying the final termination of the journey. You

> choose

> > to post from that terminal, I choose the other end. I choose the

> > other end because it is safer, if I am misinterpreted, no harm

will

> > be done, but to misinterpret your end is rather serious. If I may

> > attact your attention to the fact that most of the old Masters

> > evaded descriping the final end with very few exceptions like

> > Gurunathan for example.

>

>

> Dear hsin,

>

> All those old master are dead, maybe not Tich Nat Han, and you

carry

> on their words in your mind. And their words were tickling your

> fantasies and were tickling your ambition to fulfill their

promises.

>

> But who is the entity which finally will attain moksha,

enlightenmnet,

> satori, etc, etc ? Is it " YOU " ?

>

> Can you see that what you have read from the old masters now your

> thoughts are using to play games with themselves ? Your mind is

like

> that of a boy who has watched a movie and afterwards in his

fantasy

> is re-playing the hero.

>

> And the game your thoughts are playing is called " mysticicsm "

> and " enllightement " .

>

> You wrote that you are at the secure side and I am at the dangerous

> side. I neither can see any danger nor any security. These are all

> just ideas, words. Don't be afraid, hsin, words are not dangerous.

>

>

> >

> > Nevertheless, I appreciate your choice and respect it for your

own

> > reasons.

> >

> > hsin

>

>

> Thank you, hsin

>

> for respecting my " choice " for my own response. But what I wrote

to

> you was not my choice - it just happened.

>

> An unknown force is carrying water and is cutting wood - and is

> writing posts to Hsin, the fearful one.

>

> Werner

>

[Guest guest]

> >

> > Hi hsin,

> >

> > A nice dream you have to return to the unconditioned state. But let

> > me ask you, who has left the unconditioned state and who will return

> > to it ? Who is that ?

> >

> > Is there an entity which left and returned ? Is there an entity which

> > can choose to be conditioned or unconditioned ?

> >

> > Can't it be that the very idea of deconditioning is part of the

> > conditioning ?

> >

> > Werner

>

> P: Well, let's remark that no conditioned, or unconditioned

> states exist (except, as concepts) the brain have been

> taught certain habits, and this habits can be seen one by

> one and abandon. Of course, no self, acquires or abandons

> anything. The brain itself programs and deprograms itself.

 

 

*Dear Cerosoul...

 

The brain itself programs and deprograms itself????

 

Very interesting.

 

Three pounds of electro-chemical organic matter (the human brain)

programs and deprograms itself?

 

A few billion or so neurons - impulse-conducting cells that

constitute the brain, (along with the spinal column, and nerves)

consisting of a nucleated cell body with one or more dendrites and a

single axon have the innate wherewithall to program and deprogram

themselves???

 

Nah!

 

Just a few million neurons firing creating the mirage of individuality

with the supposed capacity to program and deprogram itself.

Could say: Consciousness having its way with itself.

 

So speaketh Consciousness.

 

(LOC=1,000)

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " Bob " <rgcbob wrote:

>

>

> > >

> > > Hi hsin,

> > >

> > > A nice dream you have to return to the unconditioned state. But let

> > > me ask you, who has left the unconditioned state and who will

return

> > > to it ? Who is that ?

> > >

> > > Is there an entity which left and returned ? Is there an entity

which

> > > can choose to be conditioned or unconditioned ?

> > >

> > > Can't it be that the very idea of deconditioning is part of the

> > > conditioning ?

> > >

> > > Werner

> >

> > P: Well, let's remark that no conditioned, or unconditioned

> > states exist (except, as concepts) the brain have been

> > taught certain habits, and this habits can be seen one by

> > one and abandon. Of course, no self, acquires or abandons

> > anything. The brain itself programs and deprograms itself.

>

>

> *Dear Cerosoul...

>

> The brain itself programs and deprograms itself????

>

> Very interesting.

>

> Three pounds of electro-chemical organic matter (the human brain)

> programs and deprograms itself?

>

> A few billion or so neurons - impulse-conducting cells that

> constitute the brain, (along with the spinal column, and nerves)

> consisting of a nucleated cell body with one or more dendrites and a

> single axon have the innate wherewithall to program and deprogram

> themselves???

>

> Nah!

>

> Just a few million neurons firing creating the mirage of individuality

> with the supposed capacity to program and deprogram itself.

> Could say: Consciousness having its way with itself.

>

> So speaketh Consciousness.

>

> (LOC=1,000)

 

 

 

programming, reason and rationality, all of spirituality, cognition,

science, mathematics, psychology, mind, totem and taboo:

 

much ado about nothing,

 

contained within an extremely thin and fairly insignificant layer of

skin of an 'onion' sized larger than a trillion suns...

 

'programming, reason and rationality, all of spirituality, cognition,

science, mathematics..etc. etc,'...are considered by the 'self' so

created in dimness and befoolery....to be highly important and

significant 'aspects' of THAT!

 

ho ho hooooooooo!

 

taking the most common, ordinary, self-evident' knowledge to some

level of mystical elitism is not only wronheaded it's plain wrong.

 

everyone and everything knows most fundamentally of anything that 'it'

can know...that 'it' is THAT...

 

THAT IS THAT..

 

OM TAT SAT,

 

Let the Game Begin!

 

Release the Hounds of Hell!

 

..b b.b.

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " hsin_shang " <hsin_shang wrote:

>

> Hello Dear Wener

> It is not safer for me, but safer for the one who listens. One has

> to take that into account, there is no need to fall under the sway

 

 

 

LOL! Without an " I " there would be NO MOKSHA, " I " invented the whole

kit and kaboodle, and don't YOU forget it!!!

 

Wink.

 

Anna

 

 

 

> of cauality. I always remember the story of Haykujo and the fox.

> By the way there is Moksha, but no entity will attain it. As long as

> there is a " You " there is no Moksha.

>

> Thank you for your tolerance, hope all is cleared now.

>

> hsin

> _________

> In Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> wrote:

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " hsin_shang " <hsin_shang@>

> > wrote:

> > >

> > > Hello Werner

> > > Thank you again. It seems to me that we are talking from the two

> > > opposit ends . I am descriping the beginings of the journey while

> > > you are porteraying the final termination of the journey. You

> > choose

> > > to post from that terminal, I choose the other end. I choose the

> > > other end because it is safer, if I am misinterpreted, no harm

> will

> > > be done, but to misinterpret your end is rather serious. If I may

> > > attact your attention to the fact that most of the old Masters

> > > evaded descriping the final end with very few exceptions like

> > > Gurunathan for example.

> >

> >

> > Dear hsin,

> >

> > All those old master are dead, maybe not Tich Nat Han, and you

> carry

> > on their words in your mind. And their words were tickling your

> > fantasies and were tickling your ambition to fulfill their

> promises.

> >

> > But who is the entity which finally will attain moksha,

> enlightenmnet,

> > satori, etc, etc ? Is it " YOU " ?

> >

> > Can you see that what you have read from the old masters now your

> > thoughts are using to play games with themselves ? Your mind is

> like

> > that of a boy who has watched a movie and afterwards in his

> fantasy

> > is re-playing the hero.

> >

> > And the game your thoughts are playing is called " mysticicsm "

> > and " enllightement " .

> >

> > You wrote that you are at the secure side and I am at the dangerous

> > side. I neither can see any danger nor any security. These are all

> > just ideas, words. Don't be afraid, hsin, words are not dangerous.

> >

> >

> > >

> > > Nevertheless, I appreciate your choice and respect it for your

> own

> > > reasons.

> > >

> > > hsin

> >

> >

> > Thank you, hsin

> >

> > for respecting my " choice " for my own response. But what I wrote

> to

> > you was not my choice - it just happened.

> >

> > An unknown force is carrying water and is cutting wood - and is

> > writing posts to Hsin, the fearful one.

> >

> > Werner

> >

>