Guest guest Posted May 3, 2008 Report Share Posted May 3, 2008 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , souldreamone@ wrote: > > > > > > In a message dated 30/04/2008 9:38:32 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > > mi_nok@ writes: > > > > _ > > Toombebe/_ > > (Toombebe/) > > > > > > > > Sooo, are we allowed to challenge said wisdom, or is it an imbibing thingy > > only? > > > > > > > > > > > The tidbits forthcoming from toombaru are tossed into the arena for the sole purpose of > an honest inquiry into the nature of self. > > They are not presumed to be fact but are merely speculations open to discussion. > > In the past..........there are those who will persistently attack the author and make little or > no comment on the actual content of the post. > > There are those who are more concerned with the quantity of the posts and generally > refrain from any actual debate concerning ideas presented. > > Any comment....pro of con....is deeply appreciated. > > If they are vulnerable to logic......they should be amended or discarded. > > I......like you..........and just trying to figure out what in the hell is going on in this most > mysterious..................................what-ever-it-is. > > > > :-) > > > > toombaru > " I......like you..........and just trying to figure out what in the hell is going on in this most mysterious..................................what-ever-it-is. " - You have been doing that since April 2003, that's 5 years of wasting your time on preaching, proselytizing and giving unasked 'advice'. Niz needed 3 years of sincere and disciplined looking 'inside' to figure out what the hell is going on - in silence... Keep the tongue dripping Tammie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 3, 2008 Report Share Posted May 3, 2008 In a message dated 02/05/2008 1:56:00 PM Pacific Daylight Time, wwoehr writes: > Hi Pete,> > Ingteresting - false identity. What's that ?> > I never before have read such an expression. Is it the opposite > of "true identification" ? If yes, then could you please explain what > is true identification ? I also have no idea what that is.> > Werner> > > > ***I hear Ginko is really good for the memory.....or is it Ginseng? I forget.> Al........no, wait!....Phil> >Fine, PhilAnd now - can you tell me the difference between self-inquiry and self-knowledge ?If you honestly and seriously think about ít then you must realize that self-inquiry is nonsense, it does not exist, no one can inquire himself.Werner ****Welp, i really don't know in what way you mean that. Do you mean there is no self to do the inquiring, or do you mean that 'something' can't see itself (i.e. the eye can't see the eye) or do you mean something else? I'll address it from whatever perspective you're taking. Phil Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on family favorites at AOL Food. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 3, 2008 Report Share Posted May 3, 2008 In a message dated 02/05/2008 5:29:30 PM Pacific Daylight Time, yohansky writes: > > The tidbits forthcoming from toombaru are tossed into the arena for the sole purpose of > an honest inquiry into the nature of self.> > They are not presumed to be fact but are merely speculations open to discussion.> > In the past..........there are those who will persistently attack the author and make little or > no comment on the actual content of the post.> > There are those who are more concerned with the quantity of the posts and generally > refrain from any actual debate concerning ideas presented.> > Any comment....pro of con....is deeply appreciated.> > If they are vulnerable to logic......they should be amended or discarded.> > I......like you..........and just trying to figure out what in the hell is going on in this most > mysterious..................................what-ever-it-is.> > > > :-)> > > > toombaru>"I......like you..........and just trying to figure out what in the hell is goingon in this mostmysterious..................................what-ever-it-is."- You have been doing that since April 2003, that's 5 years of wasting your time on preaching, proselytizing and giving unasked 'advice'.Niz needed 3 years of sincere and disciplined looking 'inside' to figure out what the hell is going on - in silence...Keep the tongue dripping Tammie. ****Well, first of all, maybe the implication that anybody who goes 5 years instead of three before Awakening may not be doing it right, is unfounded in any way. We could talk about those who have spent decades in silence, and nada, zip, zilch, since there is no cause effect relationship and no method to any of this. Secondly, I don't believe forum interaction prevents either looking inside or silence, nor does it imply lack of sincerity or discipline. Certainly, all that CAN be so, but whether or not it is depends on what is done with it. At the moment, I'm sitting in my garden listening to the birds and the waterfall, without any tongues wagging anywhere, and sincerely looking at why such a means of exploration would be seen as evil and pointless or whatever. It's not one of my most fruitfull intuitive explorations, but it seems a certain amount of 'garbage collection' in terms of motives and such is sometimes involved. (I mean my own). There's not a frenzied, sweaty egoic mentation spinning going on here, just a peaceful, relaxed contemplation seeking intuitive clarity. I fail to see what's so bad about that. It has, in fact, been extremely useful for me. Nobody is forcing me to type, and the silence is available to me in spite of the not so intimidating words appearing on this screen. Phil Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on family favorites at AOL Food. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 3, 2008 Report Share Posted May 3, 2008 Nisargadatta , " Johan " <yohansky wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , souldreamone@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > In a message dated 30/04/2008 9:38:32 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > > > mi_nok@ writes: > > > > > > _ > > > Toombebe/_ > > > (Toombebe/) > > > > > > > > > > > > Sooo, are we allowed to challenge said wisdom, or is it an > imbibing thingy > > > only? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The tidbits forthcoming from toombaru are tossed into the arena > for the sole purpose of > > an honest inquiry into the nature of self. > > > > They are not presumed to be fact but are merely speculations open > to discussion. > > > > In the past..........there are those who will persistently attack > the author and make little or > > no comment on the actual content of the post. > > > > There are those who are more concerned with the quantity of the > posts and generally > > refrain from any actual debate concerning ideas presented. > > > > Any comment....pro of con....is deeply appreciated. > > > > If they are vulnerable to logic......they should be amended or > discarded. > > > > I......like you..........and just trying to figure out what in the > hell is going on in this most > > mysterious..................................what-ever-it-is. > > > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > " I......like you..........and just trying to figure out what in the > hell is going > on in this most > mysterious..................................what-ever-it-is. " > > - You have been doing that since April 2003, that's 5 years of > wasting your time on preaching, proselytizing and giving > unasked 'advice'. > > Niz needed 3 years of sincere and disciplined looking 'inside' to > figure out what the hell is going on - in silence... > > Keep the tongue dripping Tammie. > This a good example of what was was mentioned above. toombafru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 3, 2008 Report Share Posted May 3, 2008 In a message dated 03/05/2008 12:46:19 AM Pacific Daylight Time, wwoehr writes: > And now - can you tell me the difference between self-inquiry and > self-knowledge ?> > If you honestly and seriously think about ít then you must realize > that self-inquiry is nonsense, it does not exist, no one can inquire > himself.> > Werner> > > > ****Welp, i really don't know in what way you mean that. Do you mean there > is no self to do the inquiring, or do you mean that 'something' can't see > itself (i.e. the eye can't see the eye) oiograpr do you mean something else? I'll > address it from whatever perspective you're taking.> > PhilPhil,Self-knowledge you gain from moment to moment. That what consciousness at this given moment is revealing about you is all you get and then it will get stored your in memory and is added to your biography.And that is all.And you only can remember again that part of your biography which gets triggered by some event. And to the rest of your biography you don't have any access.You cannot inquire yourself or your past by will, where would you start ?And not to forget - who is the inquirer ?Self-inquiry is just some fancy idea, nice to talk about in cocktail parties to present to others how smart, deeply rooted and serious you are, very impressive that, isn't it ? Especially when already half drunk :)Werner Okay, thanks for the clarification. Given the open mindedness of your response, I'll once again be chatting with myself. The idea of nonvolition itself needs to be investigated beyond the conceptual, or it too becomes just one more delusion to add to all the other conceptual delusions. Nothing, of course, is given to 'me' or stored in 'my' memory or added to 'my' biography because this 'my' is just made up. That's the whole friggin point. The idea that there is no me does not place me in a position of being given butkiss. THERE IS NO ME, so stop referencing it like it's some kind of victim in a swirling cosmos of consciousness. Find that helpless victim and we can both go string him up and be done with it. Self inquiry does not address something that doesn't exist and ask it to investigate itself. How stupid would that be? Something clearly does exist or it wouldn't be running around like a blithering fool declaring it doesn't. That doohickey that does obviously exist, whatever it is, is what's being addressed. Once you get past all the ohh, so logical reasons for not doing self inquiry, you find that this doohicky is awake and alive and present and more unimaginably aware than this half asleep imagined 'me' ever dreamed. Phil Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on family favorites at AOL Food. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 3, 2008 Report Share Posted May 3, 2008 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Johan " <yohansky@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , souldreamone@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > In a message dated 30/04/2008 9:38:32 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > > > > mi_nok@ writes: > > > > > > > > _ > > > > Toombebe/_ > > > > (Toombebe/) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sooo, are we allowed to challenge said wisdom, or is it an > > imbibing thingy > > > > only? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The tidbits forthcoming from toombaru are tossed into the arena > > for the sole purpose of > > > an honest inquiry into the nature of self. > > > > > > They are not presumed to be fact but are merely speculations open > > to discussion. > > > > > > In the past..........there are those who will persistently attack > > the author and make little or > > > no comment on the actual content of the post. > > > > > > There are those who are more concerned with the quantity of the > > posts and generally > > > refrain from any actual debate concerning ideas presented. > > > > > > Any comment....pro of con....is deeply appreciated. > > > > > > If they are vulnerable to logic......they should be amended or > > discarded. > > > > > > I......like you..........and just trying to figure out what in the > > hell is going on in this most > > > mysterious..................................what-ever-it-is. > > > > > > > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > " I......like you..........and just trying to figure out what in the > > hell is going > > on in this most > > mysterious..................................what-ever-it-is. " > > > > - You have been doing that since April 2003, that's 5 years of > > wasting your time on preaching, proselytizing and giving > > unasked 'advice'. > > > > Niz needed 3 years of sincere and disciplined looking 'inside' to > > figure out what the hell is going on - in silence... > > > > Keep the tongue dripping Tammie. > > > > > > This a good example of what was was mentioned above. > > > toombafru > Excuse me Sri Fru Fru Monsoonfrog ; You call your posts Tidbits? Maybe its time you should have a look at your previous posts. You may be embarressed to find out that 96.3% of those posts is about 'correctional preaching', or whatever, to others on this forum. Isn't it a bit about accepting where and what others ARE and THINK at any time in the course of their life, without feeling the urge of taking up the role of a pretentious, preposterous and painfully sad unranked Sarlo Clown. The Buddha said: No one saves us but ourselves. No one CAN and no one MAY. We ourselves must walk the path. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 3, 2008 Report Share Posted May 3, 2008 Nisargadatta , souldreamone wrote: > > > In a message dated 02/05/2008 1:56:00 PM Pacific Daylight Time, > wwoehr writes: > > > Hi Pete, > > > > Ingteresting - false identity. What's that ? > > > > I never before have read such an expression. Is it the opposite > > of " true identification " ? If yes, then could you please explain > what > > is true identification ? I also have no idea what that is. > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > ***I hear Ginko is really good for the memory.....or is it Ginseng? > I forget. > > Al........no, wait!....Phil > > > > > > > Fine, Phil > > And now - can you tell me the difference between self-inquiry and > self-knowledge ? > > If you honestly and seriously think about ít then you must realize > that self-inquiry is nonsense, it does not exist, no one can inquire > himself. > > Werner > > > > ****Welp, i really don't know in what way you mean that. Do you mean there > is no self to do the inquiring, or do you mean that 'something' can't see > itself (i.e. the eye can't see the eye) oiograpr do you mean something else? I'll > address it from whatever perspective you're taking. > > Phil Phil, Self-knowledge you gain from moment to moment. That what consciousness at this given moment is revealing about you is all you get and then it will get stored your in memory and is added to your biography. And that is all. And you only can remember again that part of your biography which gets triggered by some event. And to the rest of your biography you don't have any access. You cannot inquire yourself or your past by will, where would you start ? And not to forget - who is the inquirer ? Self-inquiry is just some fancy idea, nice to talk about in cocktail parties to present to others how smart, deeply rooted and serious you are, very impressive that, isn't it ? Especially when already half drunk Werner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 3, 2008 Report Share Posted May 3, 2008 Nisargadatta , souldreamone wrote: > > > In a message dated 02/05/2008 1:56:00 PM Pacific Daylight Time, > wwoehr writes: > > > Hi Pete, > > > > Ingteresting - false identity. What's that ? > > > > I never before have read such an expression. Is it the opposite > > of " true identification " ? If yes, then could you please explain > what > > is true identification ? I also have no idea what that is. > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > ***I hear Ginko is really good for the memory.....or is it Ginseng? > I forget. > > Al........no, wait!....Phil > > > > > > > Fine, Phil > > And now - can you tell me the difference between self-inquiry and > self-knowledge ? > > If you honestly and seriously think about ít then you must realize > that self-inquiry is nonsense, it does not exist, no one can inquire > himself. > > Werner > > > > ****Welp, i really don't know in what way you mean that. Do you mean there > is no self to do the inquiring, or do you mean that 'something' can't see > itself (i.e. the eye can't see the eye) or do you mean something else? I'll > address it from whatever perspective you're taking. > > Phil Phil, Self-knowledge you gain from moment to moment. That what consciousness at this given moment is revealing about you is all you get and then it will get stored off again in memory and is added to your biography. And that is all. And you only can remember again that part of your biography which gets triggered by some event. And to the rest of your of it you don't have any access. You cannot inquire yourself or your past by will, where would you start ? And not to forget - who is the inquirer ? Self-inquiry is just some fancy idea, nice to talk about in cocktail parties to present to others how smart, deeply rooted and serious you are, very impressive that, isn't it ? Especially when already half drunk Werner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 3, 2008 Report Share Posted May 3, 2008 Nisargadatta , souldreamone wrote: > > > In a message dated 03/05/2008 12:46:19 AM Pacific Daylight Time, > wwoehr writes: > > > And now - can you tell me the difference between self-inquiry and > > self-knowledge ? > > > > If you honestly and seriously think about ít then you must realize > > that self-inquiry is nonsense, it does not exist, no one can > inquire > > himself. > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > ****Welp, i really don't know in what way you mean that. Do you > mean there > > is no self to do the inquiring, or do you mean that 'something' > can't see > > itself (i.e. the eye can't see the eye) oiograpr do you mean > something else? I'll > > address it from whatever perspective you're taking. > > > > Phil > > > Phil, > > Self-knowledge you gain from moment to moment. That what > consciousness at this given moment is revealing about you is all you > get and then it will get stored your in memory and is added to your > biography. > > And that is all. > > And you only can remember again that part of your biography which > gets triggered by some event. And to the rest of your biography you > don't have any access. > > You cannot inquire yourself or your past by will, where would you > start ? > > And not to forget - who is the inquirer ? > > Self-inquiry is just some fancy idea, nice to talk about in cocktail > parties to present to others how smart, deeply rooted and serious you > are, very impressive that, isn't it ? Especially when already half > drunk > > Werner > > > > Okay, thanks for the clarification. Given the open mindedness of your > response, I'll once again be chatting with myself. > The idea of nonvolition itself needs to be investigated beyond the > conceptual, or it too becomes just one more delusion to add to all the other > conceptual delusions. Nothing, of course, is given to 'me' or stored in 'my' memory or > added to 'my' biography because this 'my' is just made up. That's the whole > friggin point. The idea that there is no me does not place me in a position > of being given butkiss. THERE IS NO ME, so stop referencing it like it's some > kind of victim in a swirling cosmos of consciousness. Find that helpless > victim and we can both go string him up and be done with it. > > Self inquiry does not address something that doesn't exist and ask it to > investigate itself. How stupid would that be? Something clearly does exist or it > wouldn't be running around like a blithering fool declaring it doesn't. That > doohickey that does obviously exist, whatever it is, is what's being > addressed. Once you get past all the ohh, so logical reasons for not doing self > inquiry, you find that this doohicky is awake and alive and present and more > unimaginably aware than this half asleep imagined 'me' ever dreamed. > > Phil > > Ok, ok, When I write of that the given moment is stored in " your " memory then it just means that it is not stored in " your " ass or in " your " ears or in whatever else. So stop please suspecting " me " of believing in the existence of a " me " . And therfore stop please telling me there is no me. But, if you like it or not, consciousness is subjective, and therefore " your " consciousness is presenting " your " subjectivity and not " mine " . Your history, your biography is YOUR's and not MINE. Therefore is is justified to use words like " you " and " me " which is a commonplace to do that. " You are the world and the world is you " said J.K. You understand ? Your world is your world and not my world. Your subjectivity is your's and not mine. And because your consciousness is YOU and not ME it is also justified to use words like " mine " and " yours " . Therefore stop that ridiculous hair splitting when someones uses personal pronouns. Better ponder why there is no self-inquiry possible. Who is the inquirer ? Who is that ? Werner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 3, 2008 Report Share Posted May 3, 2008 In a message dated 03/05/2008 2:30:39 AM Pacific Daylight Time, wwoehr writes: > Okay, thanks for the clarification. Given the open mindedness of your > response, I'll once again be chatting with myself.> The idea of nonvolition itself needs to be investigated beyond the > conceptual, or it too becomes just one more delusion to add to all the other > conceptual delusions. Nothing, of course, is given to 'me' or stored in 'my' memory or > added to 'my' biography because this 'my' is just made up. That's the whole > friggin point. The idea that there is no me does not place me in a position > of being given butkiss. THERE IS NO ME, so stop referencing it like it's some > kind of victim in a swirling cosmos of consciousness. Find that helpless > victim and we can both go string him up and be done with it.> > Self inquiry does not address something that doesn't exist and ask it to > investigate itself. How stupid would that be? Something clearly does exist or it > wouldn't be running around like a blithering fool declaring it doesn't. That > doohickey that does obviously exist, whatever it is, is what's being > addressed. Once you get past all the ohh, so logical reasons for not doing self > inquiry, you find that this doohicky is awake and alive and present and more > unimaginably aware than this half asleep imagined 'me' ever dreamed.> > Phil> > Ok, ok,When I write of that the given moment is stored in "your" memory then it just means that it is not stored in "your" ass or in "your" ears or in whatever else.So stop please suspecting "me" of believing in the existence of a "me". And therfore stop please telling me there is no me.But, if you like it or not, consciousness is subjective, and therefore "your" consciousness is presenting "your" subjectivity and not "mine". Your history, your biography is YOUR's and not MINE.Therefore is is justified to use words like "you" and "me" which is a commonplace to do that."You are the world and the world is you" said J.K.You understand ? Your world is your world and not my world. Your subjectivity is your's and not mine.And because your consciousness is YOU and not ME it is also justified to use words like "mine" and "yours".Therefore stop that ridiculous hair splitting when someones uses personal pronouns.Better ponder why there is no self-inquiry possible.Who is the inquirer ? Who is that ?Werner ***I have no beef with using personal pronouns or acknowledging that my experiences are different from yours, and I'm not hair splitting. You're not hearing what I'm saying, apparently, and that's a real shocker. What I'm saying is that you begin with something that you know (conceptually) does not exist, and you conclude that it's not possible for that nonexistent thing to inquire into existence. Begin with the assumption that something does exist, and look to see what it is. What it is that would be looking is whatever actually does exist. To ask your question "Who is the inquirer" IS self inquiry, but I don't think you're actually inquiring because you've already concluded it's impossible. Phil Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on family favorites at AOL Food. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 3, 2008 Report Share Posted May 3, 2008 Nisargadatta , souldreamone wrote: > > > In a message dated 03/05/2008 2:30:39 AM Pacific Daylight Time, > wwoehr writes: > > > Okay, thanks for the clarification. Given the open mindedness of > your > > response, I'll once again be chatting with myself. > > The idea of nonvolition itself needs to be investigated beyond the > > conceptual, or it too becomes just one more delusion to add to all > the other > > conceptual delusions. Nothing, of course, is given to 'me' or > stored in 'my' memory or > > added to 'my' biography because this 'my' is just made up. That's > the whole > > friggin point. The idea that there is no me does not place me in a > position > > of being given butkiss. THERE IS NO ME, so stop referencing it > like it's some > > kind of victim in a swirling cosmos of consciousness. Find that > helpless > > victim and we can both go string him up and be done with it. > > > > Self inquiry does not address something that doesn't exist and ask > it to > > investigate itself. How stupid would that be? Something clearly > does exist or it > > wouldn't be running around like a blithering fool declaring it > doesn't. That > > doohickey that does obviously exist, whatever it is, is what's > being > > addressed. Once you get past all the ohh, so logical reasons for > not doing self > > inquiry, you find that this doohicky is awake and alive and > present and more > > unimaginably aware than this half asleep imagined 'me' ever > dreamed. > > > > Phil > > > > > > > Ok, ok, > > When I write of that the given moment is stored in " your " memory then > it just means that it is not stored in " your " ass or in " your " ears > or in whatever else. > > So stop please suspecting " me " of believing in the existence of > a " me " . And therfore stop please telling me there is no me. > > But, if you like it or not, consciousness is subjective, and > therefore " your " consciousness is presenting " your " subjectivity and > not " mine " . Your history, your biography is YOUR's and not MINE. > > Therefore is is justified to use words like " you " and " me " which is a > commonplace to do that. > > " You are the world and the world is you " said J.K. > > You understand ? Your world is your world and not my world. Your > subjectivity is your's and not mine. > > And because your consciousness is YOU and not ME it is also justified > to use words like " mine " and " yours " . > > Therefore stop that ridiculous hair splitting when someones uses > personal pronouns. > > Better ponder why there is no self-inquiry possible. > > Who is the inquirer ? Who is that ? > > Werner > > > > ***I have no beef with using personal pronouns or acknowledging that my > experiences are different from yours, and I'm not hair splitting. You're not > hearing what I'm saying, apparently, and that's a real shocker. > > What I'm saying is that you begin with something that you know > (conceptually) does not exist, and you conclude that it's not possible for that > nonexistent thing to inquire into existence. Begin with the assumption that something > does exist, and look to see what it is. What it is that would be looking is > whatever actually does exist. > > To ask your question " Who is the inquirer " IS self inquiry, but I don't > think you're actually inquiring because you've already concluded it's impossible. > > Phil > > > There is a most delightful light show that occurs between two assumptions of autonomy when they approach each other across the Grand Canyon that forever separates them. A few shots fired.......and answered........the small cannons are brought out......and then the big guns....... No one is ever hit or wounded........for one very good reason. toombaru 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.