Guest guest Posted September 20, 2007 Report Share Posted September 20, 2007 Tom, let me try to illustrate my point in a different way. Lets say, somebody reads " I am that " by Nisargadatta. There he reads statements like: " consciousness is constant change, and change is memory " " consciousness and the actual have nothing in common " " perception is recognition, perception involves memory " Now he might go: " wow, the words of a master, they sound wise, I have to meditate upon them " . But the same person, when he hears about scientists who come to the same conclusions goes: " Leave us in peace! Those scientists know nothing and they produce only smoke! " I just do not get this. Especially Nisargadatta was very scientific in a way. I am not a science fanatic, but now that I heard about those experiements, I find them valid. What is the point in rejecting them when I appreciate Nisargadattas teachings, which say essentially the same? And, more important, since they match my findings in the course of my own inner quest? In other words: once I go out of the door, I will smell some very fresh air! Does it matter why I went out in the first place? Please do not misunderstand me. I do not mean to criticize you. With my examples I just try to illustrate my point, and why I stood up to defend the scientists view. I very much appreciate your effort to maintain a dialog in such a difficult environment. Stefan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 20, 2007 Report Share Posted September 20, 2007 Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge wrote: > > Tom, let me try to illustrate my point in a different way. > Lets say, somebody reads " I am that " by Nisargadatta. > > There he reads statements like: > " consciousness is constant change, and change is memory " > " consciousness and the actual have nothing in common " > " perception is recognition, perception involves memory " > > Now he might go: " wow, the words of a master, they sound wise, I have > to meditate upon them " . But the same person, when he hears about > scientists who come to the same conclusions goes: > > " Leave us in peace! Those scientists know nothing and they produce > only smoke! " > > I just do not get this. Especially Nisargadatta was very scientific in > a way. I am not a science fanatic, but now that I heard about those > experiements, I find them valid. What is the point in rejecting them > when I appreciate Nisargadattas teachings, which say essentially the > same? And, more important, since they match my findings in the course > of my own inner quest? > > In other words: once I go out of the door, I will smell some very > fresh air! Does it matter why I went out in the first place? > > Please do not misunderstand me. I do not mean to criticize you. With > my examples I just try to illustrate my point, and why I stood up to > defend the scientists view. I very much appreciate your effort to > maintain a dialog in such a difficult environment. > > Stefan don't forget ....that there are people who didn't read Niz.....and also aren't informed about the most recent scientific results.... and still come to exactly same conclusions.... Marc > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 20, 2007 Report Share Posted September 20, 2007 Of course, I did not forget. It does not matter why one opens the door, or how, once it is seen that there was never a door. Stefan Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33 wrote: > don't forget ....that there are people who didn't read Niz.....and > also aren't informed about the most recent scientific results.... > > and still come to exactly same conclusions.... > > > > Marc > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 20, 2007 Report Share Posted September 20, 2007 Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge wrote: > > Tom, let me try to illustrate my point in a different way. > Lets say, somebody reads " I am that " by Nisargadatta. > > There he reads statements like: > " consciousness is constant change, and change is memory " > " consciousness and the actual have nothing in common " > " perception is recognition, perception involves memory " > > Now he might go: " wow, the words of a master, they sound wise, I have > to meditate upon them " . But the same person, when he hears about > scientists who come to the same conclusions goes: > > " Leave us in peace! Those scientists know nothing and they produce > only smoke! " > > I just do not get this. Especially Nisargadatta was very scientific in > a way. I am not a science fanatic, but now that I heard about those > experiements, I find them valid. What is the point in rejecting them > when I appreciate Nisargadattas teachings, which say essentially the > same? And, more important, since they match my findings in the course > of my own inner quest? > > In other words: once I go out of the door, I will smell some very > fresh air! Does it matter why I went out in the first place? > > Please do not misunderstand me. I do not mean to criticize you. With > my examples I just try to illustrate my point, and why I stood up to > defend the scientists view. I very much appreciate your effort to > maintain a dialog in such a difficult environment. > > Stefan > Stefan: People do what they like. What they have talent for. I don't enjoy science too much. I must also say I have not read much of Nis-- just excerpts of his books on the internet. Only one of his books have I read whole--The Ultimate Medeicne.Much of it I did not resonate to. The stuff about the child and a few other of his pet illustrations--but the basic points I got. I had heard of an experiment like Libets about 20 years ago. It was proven that decisions are made or initiated in another part of the brain than that part that which is conscious . I understood the principle becasue I had seen it already in myself--i.e., that edcisions are events like any other " outer " events and not controllable at all. But youi are right--you get what you need going down strange pathways,one of which is the study of science.For me, I would rather play the guitar.It doesn't really matter. Z Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 21, 2007 Report Share Posted September 21, 2007 Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge wrote: > > Of course, I did not forget. It does not matter why one opens the > door, or how, once it is seen that there was never a door. > > Stefan ... greetings to Crete Marc Ps: and then....one shouldn't forget, that one don't need to teach anything....if one has Nothing realy to teach > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > don't forget ....that there are people who didn't read Niz.....and > > also aren't informed about the most recent scientific results.... > > > > and still come to exactly same conclusions.... > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 21, 2007 Report Share Posted September 21, 2007 Hi Tom, when it comes to the innermost, the essence, the ultimate... I wonder if liking / disliking leads us anywhere? I suppose, if you look at your own life and at the big lessons that life has already taught you, you were not asked if you like what you see. Here is a story that I have just heard: A great Hassid Master was carrying a big and valuable book with him, all his life. He was even sleeping with that book. There was also a big secret about the book, because he would never allow anybody to open it. One day the master died, and his disciples, unable to hold back their curiosity any longer, took the book and opened it. But to their big disappointment they found that the pages were all empty, only the first page had something written on it. It was: " never take the container for the content " . Best wishes Stefan P:S: " I Am That " , the most famous book from Nisargadatta, is not empty, at least not at first sight. It can be downloaded free of charge here: http://home.earthlink.net/~grharmon/I_Am_That.pdf Nisargadatta , " tom " <jeusisbuen wrote: > Stefan: People do what they like. What they have talent for. I don't > enjoy science too much. I must also say I have not read much of Nis-- > just excerpts of his books on the internet. Only one of his books > have I read whole--The Ultimate Medeicne.Much of it I did not > resonate to. The stuff about the child and a few other of his pet > illustrations--but the basic points I got. I had heard of an > experiment like Libets about 20 years ago. It was proven that > decisions are made or initiated in another part of the brain than > that part that which is conscious . I understood the principle > becasue I had seen it already in myself--i.e., that edcisions are > events like any other " outer " events and not controllable at all. > But youi are right--you get what you need going down strange > pathways,one of which is the study of science.For me, I would rather > play the guitar.It doesn't really matter. Z > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 21, 2007 Report Share Posted September 21, 2007 Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge wrote: > > Hi Tom, > > when it comes to the innermost, the essence, the ultimate... I wonder > if liking / disliking leads us anywhere? I suppose, if you look at > your own life and at the big lessons that life has already taught you, > you were not asked if you like what you see. Here is a story that I > have just heard: > > A great Hassid Master was carrying a big and valuable book with him, > all his life. He was even sleeping with that book. There was also a > big secret about the book, because he would never allow anybody to > open it. One day the master died, and his disciples, unable to hold > back their curiosity any longer, took the book and opened it. But to > their big disappointment they found that the pages were all empty, > only the first page had something written on it. It was: " never take > the container for the content " . > > Best wishes > Stefan > > P:S: " I Am That " , the most famous book from Nisargadatta, is not > empty, at least not at first sight. It can be downloaded free of > charge here: > http://home.earthlink.net/~grharmon/I_Am_That.pdf > > > > Stefan: Whether liking or disliking leads us anywhere I will not address--but whether we like something or dislike it--that is not up to " us " anyway.Like and dislike are like any other content of conscoiusness--free as birds.If they come they come and if they don't, they don't.In the end, it comes to this: do we have any choice or don't we?And, as Libet points out, we don't.I guess Libet brings choice back in through the back door or the side door or the trap door in the ceiling, but I don't buy that stuff about freedom not to do or whatever it is. So.... What happens to a person when he has no choice?Isn't the essence of personhood freewill or free choice? No choice, no person. Z 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.