Guest guest Posted May 31, 2008 Report Share Posted May 31, 2008 > > > > > > Tommy: The content of consciousness is searching within the > > content of consciousness for consciousness itself. > HUH ? > > No, Toomb, > > Something is searching and the result of that search eventually will > get made conscious but it is not consciousness itself which is > searching. > > Consciousness IS !!! memory and memory isn't searching anything. > > Consciousness in now way is an activity, an active agent which can > do or plan or react. > > Please see: When memory neurons in the brain start firing then this > firing is called consciousness, but it is and remains an activity of > memory. > > One has to say good bye to that idea traded since millennia that > consciousness is a mirror and that this mirror can get wiped clean - > this is all rubbish and nonsense. > > And there is also no witness, no owner of consciousness. > > Werner > Hi Werner, please try to substitute the word " Consciousness " with " Awareness " as Nisargadatta use these terms interchangebly Awareness than has nothing to do with memory ! The " now " movement teachers are talking about removing the veils covering awareness and the veil is made up by distorted understanding varied from one person to the next. " Awareness " otoh is one and the same. The unclean mirror analogy points to the VEILS the dirt on the mirror: personal distortions and this mirror can get wiped clean. <vipassana> See ? Era > > > > > > Consciousness is searching within its own concepts for the source > > of concepts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Consciousness IS its content - no content, no consciousneess. > > > And consciousness IS memory. > > > > > > Therefore the Now, the I-am, the Being, Consciousness is the > > > same, IS memory. > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is not anything that it can name. > > > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > > > > > t. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 31, 2008 Report Share Posted May 31, 2008 Nisargadatta , " Era " <mi_nok wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Tommy: The content of consciousness is searching within the > > > content of consciousness for consciousness itself. > > > HUH ? > > > > > No, Toomb, > > > > Something is searching and the result of that search eventually will > > get made conscious but it is not consciousness itself which is > > searching. > > > > Consciousness IS !!! memory and memory isn't searching anything. > > > > Consciousness in now way is an activity, an active agent which can > > do or plan or react. > > > > Please see: When memory neurons in the brain start firing then this > > firing is called consciousness, but it is and remains an activity of > > memory. > > > > One has to say good bye to that idea traded since millennia that > > consciousness is a mirror and that this mirror can get wiped clean - > > this is all rubbish and nonsense. > > > > And there is also no witness, no owner of consciousness. > > > > Werner > > > > Hi Werner, > > please try to substitute the word " Consciousness " with > " Awareness " as Nisargadatta use these terms interchangebly > > Awareness than has nothing to do with memory ! Sorry Era, I won't do that. Take what I posted as it was written or forget it. When in my posts I used the word consciousness I meant consciousness and not awareness. But if you like you can rewrite my posts and be happy with it, but please leave me alone with that " awareness " rubbish. And I am not sure if Maharaj was using the word awareness the way his translators did. And if he did, he was wrong, absolutely wrong. I had this discussion already before, a dozend times or more. And I have to repeat to you too, an additional awareness prior to consciousness does not exist - it is pure fiction, rubbish. And I very well know that people hoping for or believing in life after death very much love " awareness " and it's inherent promise. I personally rather would suggest to substitute that word awareness with " neurosis " which fits much better. Btw, in German we don't have the word " awareness " , only consciosuness. Werner > > The " now " movement teachers are talking about removing the veils > covering awareness and the veil is made up by distorted understanding > varied from one person to the next. " Awareness " otoh is one and the > same. > > > The unclean mirror analogy points to the VEILS the dirt on the mirror: > personal distortions and this mirror can get wiped clean. <vipassana> > > See ? > > Era > > > > > > > > > > > > > Consciousness is searching within its own concepts for the source > > > of concepts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Consciousness IS its content - no content, no consciousneess. > > > > And consciousness IS memory. > > > > > > > > Therefore the Now, the I-am, the Being, Consciousness is the > > > > same, IS memory. > > > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is not anything that it can name. > > > > > > > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > t. > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 31, 2008 Report Share Posted May 31, 2008 Hi,please try to substitute the word "Consciousness" with "Awareness" as Nisargadatta use these terms interchangeblyNot only Maharaj but many saints (and not the translators) used these two words interchangably.I have attended the Discources and have marked the same.Sujal--- On Fri, 30/5/08, Era <mi_nok wrote:Era <mi_nok Re: "Now"Nisargadatta Date: Friday, 30 May, 2008, 3:33 PM> > > > > > Tommy: The content of consciousness is searching within the > > content of consciousness for consciousness itself. > HUH ? > > No, Toomb, > > Something is searching and the result of that search eventually will > get made conscious but it is not consciousness itself which is > searching. > > Consciousness IS !!! memory and memory isn't searching anything. > > Consciousness in now way is an activity, an active agent which can > do or plan or react. > > Please see: When memory neurons in the brain start firing then this > firing is called consciousness, but it is and remains an activity of > memory. > > One has to say good bye to that idea traded since millennia that > consciousness is a mirror and that this mirror can get wiped clean - > this is all rubbish and nonsense. > > And there is also no witness, no owner of consciousness. > > Werner > Hi Werner, please try to substitute the word "Consciousness" with "Awareness" as Nisargadatta use these terms interchangebly Awareness than has nothing to do with memory ! The "now" movement teachers are talking about removing the veils covering awareness and the veil is made up by distorted understanding varied from one person to the next. "Awareness" otoh is one and the same. The unclean mirror analogy points to the VEILS the dirt on the mirror: personal distortions and this mirror can get wiped clean. <vipassana> See ? Era > > > > > > Consciousness is searching within its own concepts for the source > > of concepts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Consciousness IS its content - no content, no consciousneess. > > > And consciousness IS memory. > > > > > > Therefore the Now, the I-am, the Being, Consciousness is the > > > same, IS memory. > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It is not anything that it can name. > > > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > > > > > t. > > > Bollywood, fun, friendship, sports and more. You name it, we have it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 31, 2008 Report Share Posted May 31, 2008 Hi toombaru, "There is no path for an assumption that will lead to what it imagines to be its source."Then what is Self Enquiry "WHO AM I" taught by Sri Ramana Maharshi.Whatever you think/ feel, will be with the help of mind. I will attempt to answer the question. As i am trying to translate from my native language to english, please excuse me if the statement is gramatically incorrect.Following is a discussion between Sri Ramana and one devotee found in Sri Yogeshwarji's book "Bhagawan Ramana Maharshi - Life and his works"Q: what is the path of path by which the mind can become silent (destroyed)?A: SELF ENQUIRY. to think 'WHO AM I".  this is also a mental process. By with the help of this thought, all other thoughts are removed or uprooted. then this thought also fades away. Just like the fire extinhuishes by itself after burning the corpse. The fire does not continue to burn. In the same way the mind will merge into the source. Than there will be no seperate existance of mind. After this there is spontaneous realisation of the SELF."there is another description from 40 verses on truth:21. What is the Truth of the scriptures which declare that if one sees the Self one sees God? How can one see one's Self? If, since one is a single being, one cannot see one's Self, how can one see God? Only by becoming a prey to Him.32. Although the scriptures proclaim 'Thou art That', it is only a sign of weakness of mind to meditate 'I am That, not this', because you are eternally That. What has to be done is to investigate what one really is and remain That.(To keep on saying "i am that supreme reality" is nothing but the weekness of mind. How can one realise the absence of ego without knowing the source.)27. The State of non-emergence of 'I' is the state of being THAT. Without questing for that State of the non-emergence of 'I' and attaining It, how can one accomplish one's own extinction, from which the 'I' does not revive? Without that attainment how is it possible to abide in one's true State, where one is THAT? 28. Just as a man would dive in order to get something that had fallen into the water, so one should dive into oneself, with a keen one-pointed mind, controlling speech and breath, and find the place whence the 'I' originates. 29. The only enquiry leading to Self-realization is seeking the Source of the 'I' with in-turned mind and without uttering the word 'I'. Meditation on 'I am not this; I am That' may be an aid to the enquiry but it cannot be the enquiry. 30. If one enquires 'Who am I?' within the mind, the individual 'I' falls down abashed as soon as one reaches the Heart and immediately Reality manifests itself spontaneously as 'I-I'. Although it reveals itself as 'I', it is not the ego but the Perfect Being, the Absolute Self.""We" do not assume. "We" are the assumption."the fact that we, unknowingly, assume oueselves as body, mind, intellect, ego, etc.This is not my explanation. It is given in in Sri Yogeshwarji's book "Bhagawan Ramana Maharshi - Life and his works"Well to believe the genuinity of this translation is upto you. "You are always standing on both sides of the river......one side is just a little further away." But two ends of river and railway tracks never meetVedanta is a living experience. I believe that it should be able to practically apply in the day-day life. I had similar discussion with Phil. If you are able to, than just go for it. You can ignore this posts if they does not suit your phylosophy.Sujal--- On Fri, 30/5/08, toombaru2006 <lastrain wrote:toombaru2006 <lastrain Re: "Now"Nisargadatta Date: Friday, 30 May, 2008, 8:35 AMNisargadatta, sujal <sujal_u > wrote: > > Hi, > > The language or the way of expression is is called as 'Asmat Prayog'. I dont know the exact meaning of 'Asmat' but 'Prayog' means 'attempt'. > > There are words like 'dive within', 'be merged' etc which looks like dual from surface. > The reason why the saints try to explain the non-dual concept in such a way is due to the fact that we, unknowingly, assume oueselves as body, mind, intellect, ego, etc. Hi sujai, "We" do not assume. "We" are the assumption. > > Our statements like 'I came 10 minutes earlier'. It goes without saying that in this case, we assume ourselves as body. I hope you get my point. > > So the process of undoing and neglecting all other than the SELF seems difficult for many people, eventhough it is the striaght path as gives clarity. There is no path for an assumption that will lead to what it imagines to be its source. There are no enlightened shadows. > > This is the reason why the saints explain in this way. A person who is able to experience that is is different from the mind and the thoughts can only understand the process of undoing. > > The surface meaning (vachiarth) looks like dual, but the essence (lakshiarth) is the non- dual. > > Each word has a 'vachiarth' and a 'lakshiarth' .Following example is given by Swami Sukhbodhananda: > > > A person points a finger to the idol of Lord Krishna and says "This is a statue of Lord Krishna" > > In this case, the finger pointing towards the idol is called as 'vachiarth'. . It helps us to give direction. At the North Pole......all needles point South. But we do not keep on looking at the tip of finger but look in the direction pointer by the finger. Thus we bypass the finger (as it has done it's work of giving direction) and look at the idol. This idol is the 'lakshiarth' . The finger is important but not the destination. The destination is the idol of lord Krishna. You are always standing on both sides of the river......one side is just a little further away. > > People try to follow word by word and end up in rigidity and confusion.. > > Sujal > People are the confusion. toombaru > > --- On Fri, 30/5/08, dennis_travis33 dennis_travis33@ ... wrote: > dennis_travis33 dennis_travis33@ ... > Re: "Now" > Nisargadatta > Friday, 30 May, 2008, 2:11 AM > > Nisargadatta, sujal sujal_u@ & gt; wrote: > & gt; > & gt; Hi Marc, > & gt; > & gt; In other verses Sri Ramana has said that for an ignorant person the > world is limited to the the (visible) 3 dimensional world, while for > a realised saint, the world is the substratum (or the source) of this > 3 dimensional world. For a realised saint the world and his body is > unlimited i.e. it is nothing other than the SELF or brahman. > & gt; > & gt; .... and yes i think Sri Ramana is talking about the same 'SELF' > & gt; > & gt; AUM > & gt; > & gt; Sujal > > Hello Sujal, > > yes, the "body" of Ramana is.....unlimited > for a such "body".....there is nothing but SELF > > Marc > > & gt; > & gt; --- On Fri, 30/5/08, dennis_travis33 dennis_travis33@ ... wrote: > & gt; dennis_travis33 dennis_travis33@ ... > & gt; Re: "Now" > & gt; Nisargadatta > & gt; Friday, 30 May, 2008, 1:27 AM > & gt; > & gt; Nisargadatta, sujal sujal_u@ & amp;gt; wrote: > & gt; & amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; Hello Marc, > & gt; & amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; I think this verse from Ramana's 40 verses on reality > (truth) > & gt; suits your phylosophy. > & gt; & amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; "'The world is real.' 'No, it, is a mere illusory > appearance.' 'The > & gt; world is conscious.' 'No.' 'The world is happiness( i.e. it is > & gt; conscousness - existance - bliss).' 'No...' What use is it to > argue > & gt; thus? Leave this worldly vision (approach), (be introvert) > know > & gt; one's Self (know one's true nature), drop all notions of > duality > & gt; & amp;amp;amp; non-duality, without 'I' (egoless), this state of > self > & gt; realisation (ultimate truth) is universally accepted and > & gt; acknowledged. " verse No. 3 > & gt; & amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; I think this is what you are trying to express. > & gt; & amp;gt; Am i right? > & gt; & amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; AUM > & gt; & amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; Sujal > & gt; > & gt; Hello Sujal, > & gt; > & gt; .......reading this your message and words of Ramana.....i think > that > & gt; Ramana indeed is talking about same "Self" (true nature)..... and > so, > & gt; about an "egoless" view.....a relax & amp;amp; peaceful > view/reality. ....in > & gt; which what is called "the world" is of an appearent world ONLY > & gt; > & gt; Marc > & gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; --- On Thu, 29/5/08, dennis_travis33 dennis_travis33@ ... > wrote: > & gt; & amp;gt; dennis_travis33 dennis_travis33@ ... > & gt; & amp;gt; Re: "Now" > & gt; & amp;gt; Nisargadatta > & gt; & amp;gt; Thursday, 29 May, 2008, 11:50 PM > & gt; & amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; Nisargadatta, "toombaru2006" > & gt; lastrain@ .. & amp;amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; wrote: > & gt; & amp;gt; & amp;amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; & amp;amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; & amp;amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; & amp;amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; & amp;amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; & amp;amp;gt; The belief structure in which the conceptual > identified > & gt; entity > & gt; & amp;gt; finds itself is by nature in a > & gt; & amp;gt; & amp;amp;gt; constant state of stress. > & gt; & amp;gt; & amp;amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; & amp;amp;gt; It is a highly evolved addendum that functions to > help the > & gt; organism > & gt; & amp;gt; survive whose > & gt; & amp;gt; & amp;amp;gt; contribution is fundamentally fear based. > & gt; & amp;gt; & amp;amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; & amp;amp;gt; It adapts to the constant stress through an > intricate system > & gt; of > & gt; & amp;gt; compensatory adjustments. > & gt; & amp;gt; & amp;amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; & amp;amp;gt; All of which occur within its own imagination. . > & gt; & amp;gt; & amp;amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; & amp;amp;gt; One of its many ruses is the mentation that > involves what is > & gt; named > & gt; & amp;gt; the "now". > & gt; & amp;gt; & amp;amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; & amp;amp;gt; In an attempt to make the stress tolerable... .it > imagines > & gt; & amp;gt; an "eternal now" and then > & gt; & amp;gt; & amp;amp;gt; imagines that it can somehow get to this magical > & gt; place.....and wile > & gt; & amp;gt; away its time......just > & gt; & amp;gt; & amp;amp;gt; drifting through the dream....... ..happy as a clam. > & gt; & amp;gt; & amp;amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; & amp;amp;gt; It seems that very few of the phantoms are wired to > question > & gt; the > & gt; & amp;gt; whole idea of now....and > & gt; & amp;gt; & amp;amp;gt; even fewer to ask about the nature of the one that > seeks > & gt; refuge in > & gt; & amp;gt; it. > & gt; & amp;gt; & amp;amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; & amp;amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; & amp;amp;gt; toombaru > & gt; & amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; "The belief structure in which the conceptual identified > entity > & gt; finds > & gt; & amp;gt; itself is by nature in a > & gt; & amp;gt; & amp;amp;gt; constant state of stress." > & gt; & amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; yes.... > & gt; & amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; but > & gt; & amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; such described entity.....in "constant state of stress" only > can > & gt; & amp;gt; observe similar described entities.... .. > & gt; & amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; nothing else ..... > & gt; & amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; ..... > & gt; & amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; cool down!..... > & gt; & amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; everything will be fine.... > & gt; & amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; one day..... > & gt; & amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; Marc > & gt; & amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; Ps: in reality, indeed, there aren't such imaginary > described > & gt; & amp;gt; stressed individual entities.... . > & gt; & amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; all there is.....is of one wonderful and perfect peace...... > & gt; & amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; in which nothing ever happen realy...... > & gt; & amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; except little words.....here & amp; amp; amp; there.... > & gt; & amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; little few actions..... .here & amp;amp; amp; there. ... > & gt; & amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; little memory running..... here & amp;amp; amp; there. ... > & gt; & amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; little..... > & gt; & amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; ..... > & gt; & amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; > & gt; & amp;gt; Bring your gang together. Do your thing. Find your > favourite > & gt; group at http://in.promos. / groups/ > & gt; & amp;gt; > & gt; > & gt; > & gt; > & gt; > & gt; From Chandigarh to Chennai - find friends all over India. Go > to http://in.promos. / groups/citygroup s/ > & gt; > > > > > From Chandigarh to Chennai - find friends all over India. Go to http://in.promos. / groups/citygroup s/ > What is your Emotional Quotient? Find out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 31, 2008 Report Share Posted May 31, 2008 Nisargadatta , sujal <sujal_u wrote: > > Hi toombaru, > > " There is no path for an assumption that will lead to what it imagines to be its source. " > > Then what is Self Enquiry " WHO AM I " taught by Sri Ramana Maharshi. > Whatever you think/ feel, will be with the help of mind. It is an exercise offered to help the searcher understand the hopelessness of searching for something that exists only as an idea. He had to know that it is futile for the self to search for the source of its own imagined origin. > > I will attempt to answer the question. As i am trying to translate from my native language to english, please excuse me if the statement is gramatically incorrect. > > Following is a discussion between Sri Ramana and one devotee found in Sri Yogeshwarji's book " Bhagawan Ramana Maharshi - Life and his works " > > Q: what is the path of path by which the mind can become silent (destroyed)? A silent mind is like a still wind. The " mind " and the wind exist only in their movement. They are movement. > A: SELF ENQUIRY. to think 'WHO AM I " .  this is also a mental process. By with the help of this thought, all other thoughts are removed or uprooted. then this thought also fades away. Just like the fire extinhuishes by itself after burning the corpse. The fire does not continue to burn. In the same way the mind will merge into the source. Than there will be no seperate existance of mind. After this there is spontaneous realisation of the SELF. " > > there is another description from 40 verses on truth: > > 21. What is the Truth of the scriptures which declare that if one sees the Self one sees God? How can one see one's Self? If, since one is a single being, one cannot see one's Self, how can one see God? Only by becoming a prey to Him. > > 32. Although the scriptures proclaim 'Thou art That', it is only a sign of weakness of mind to meditate 'I am That, not this', because you are eternally That. What has to be done is to investigate what one really is and remain That. > > (To keep on saying " i am that supreme reality " is nothing but the weekness of mind. How can one realise the absence of ego without knowing the source.) > > 27. The State of non-emergence of 'I' is the state of being THAT. Without questing for that State of the non-emergence of 'I' and attaining It, how can one accomplish one's own extinction, from which the 'I' does not revive? Without that attainment how is it possible to abide in one's true State, where one is THAT? > > 28. Just as a man would dive in order to get something that had fallen into the water, so one should dive into oneself, with a keen one-pointed mind, controlling speech and breath, and find the place whence the 'I' originates.. > > 29. The only enquiry leading to Self-realization is seeking the Source of the 'I' with in- turned mind and without uttering the word 'I'. Meditation on 'I am not this; I am That' may be an aid to the enquiry but it cannot be the enquiry. > > 30. If one enquires 'Who am I?' within the mind, the individual 'I' falls down abashed as soon as one reaches the Heart and immediately Reality manifests itself spontaneously as 'I-I'. Although it reveals itself as 'I', it is not the ego but the Perfect Being, the Absolute Self. > > > " " We " do not assume. > > " We " are the assumption. " > > the fact that we, unknowingly, assume oueselves as body, mind, intellect, ego, etc. > > This is not my explanation. It is given in in Sri Yogeshwarji's book " Bhagawan Ramana Maharshi - Life and his works " > > Well to believe the genuinity of this translation is upto you. > > > " You are always standing on both sides of the river......one side is just a little further away. " > > But two ends of river and railway tracks never meet > > Vedanta is a living experience. I believe that it should be able to practically apply in the day-day life. I had similar discussion with Phil. > > If you are able to, than just go for it. You can ignore this posts if they does not suit your phylosophy. > > Sujal > > > > > --- On Fri, 30/5/08, toombaru2006 lastrain wrote: > toombaru2006 lastrain > Re: " Now " > Nisargadatta > Friday, 30 May, 2008, 8:35 AM > > Nisargadatta, sujal sujal_u@ & gt; wrote: > & gt; > & gt; Hi, > & gt; > & gt; The language or the way of expression is is called as 'Asmat Prayog'. I dont know the > exact meaning of 'Asmat' but 'Prayog' means 'attempt'. > & gt; > & gt; There are words like 'dive within', 'be merged' etc which looks like dual from surface. > & gt; The reason why the saints try to explain the non-dual concept in such a way is due to > the fact that we, unknowingly, assume oueselves as body, mind, intellect, ego, etc. > > Hi sujai, > > " We " do not assume. > > " We " are the assumption. > > All sages speak to the moment. There comes a time when everything they said has to be tossed in the trash. Only then can one reach the living edge of who they are. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 31, 2008 Report Share Posted May 31, 2008 Nisargadatta , sujal <sujal_u wrote: > > Hi, > > > please try to substitute the word " Consciousness " with > " Awareness " as Nisargadatta use these terms interchangebly > > Not only Maharaj but many saints (and not the translators) used these two words interchangably. > > I have attended the Discources and have marked the same. > > Sujal > Hi Sujal, I am fine with the interchangeability of consciousness and awareness. No probleme with that. But as I understood, for Maharaj they were different: Awareness is prior to consciousness which means, first there existed awarenesss and out of awareness arises consciousness: If you remove consciousness awareness still remains, which gives it a quality of eternity. And that is what I declined and called rubbish. Werner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 31, 2008 Report Share Posted May 31, 2008 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr wrote: > > Nisargadatta , sujal <sujal_u@> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > > > please try to substitute the word " Consciousness " with > > " Awareness " as Nisargadatta use these terms interchangebly > > > > Not only Maharaj but many saints (and not the translators) used > these two words interchangably. > > > > I have attended the Discources and have marked the same. > > > > Sujal > > > > > Hi Sujal, > > I am fine with the interchangeability of consciousness and awareness. > No probleme with that. > > But as I understood, for Maharaj they were different: Awareness is > prior to consciousness which means, first there existed awarenesss > and out of awareness arises consciousness: If you remove > consciousness awareness still remains, which gives it a quality of > eternity. > > And that is what I declined and called rubbish. > > Werner > Consciousness and awareness are two names that the conceptual mind uses in an attempt to explain its own assumed reality. They reflect the fundamentally dualistic nature of the mind and, in fact, have no value in the attempt by the mind to explain its own nature......since there isn't one. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 31, 2008 Report Share Posted May 31, 2008 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , sujal <sujal_u@> wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > please try to substitute the word " Consciousness " with > > > " Awareness " as Nisargadatta use these terms interchangebly > > > > > > Not only Maharaj but many saints (and not the translators) used > > these two words interchangably. > > > > > > I have attended the Discources and have marked the same. > > > > > > Sujal > > > > > > > > > Hi Sujal, > > > > I am fine with the interchangeability of consciousness and awareness. > > No probleme with that. > > > > But as I understood, for Maharaj they were different: Awareness is > > prior to consciousness which means, first there existed awarenesss > > and out of awareness arises consciousness: If you remove > > consciousness awareness still remains, which gives it a quality of > > eternity. > > > > And that is what I declined and called rubbish. > > > > Werner > > > > > > Consciousness and awareness are two names that the conceptual mind uses in an attempt > to explain its own assumed reality. > > They reflect the fundamentally dualistic nature of the mind and, in fact, have no value in > the attempt by the mind to explain its own nature......since there isn't one. > > > toombaru > Not quite, Toomb, I wouldn't describe it as two names " of the conceptual mind " but rather of the categorizing mind. There is a difference between a concept and a category. Awareness or consciousness in my understanding are no concepts but categories of one's physical exisatence like leg, eye, ear etc. Most problems are caused in spirtual and religious discussions when consciousness no longer is just a category but becomes a concept like " pure consciousness " , " cosmic consciousness " , " universal consciousness " or " divine consciousness " or " consciouness being of divine origin " you know, all that crap people love to invent to give their shoddy little life a bit more meaning. Werner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 31, 2008 Report Share Posted May 31, 2008 Hi,"It is an exercise offered to help the searcher understand the hopelessness of searching for something that exists only as an idea. He had to know that it is futile for the self to search for the source of its own imagined origin."If the efforts end up in futility, than does it mean that we will stop to make an effort, eventhough technically we are the SELF. (Do do we know our true nature?).If so than why is the technique of Self Enquiry taught.Sujal--- On Fri, 30/5/08, toombaru2006 <lastrain wrote:toombaru2006 <lastrain Re: "Now"Nisargadatta Date: Friday, 30 May, 2008, 11:12 PMNisargadatta, sujal <sujal_u > wrote: > > Hi toombaru, > > "There is no path for an assumption that will lead to what it imagines to be its source." > > Then what is Self Enquiry "WHO AM I" taught by Sri Ramana Maharshi. > Whatever you think/ feel, will be with the help of mind. It is an exercise offered to help the searcher understand the hopelessness of searching for something that exists only as an idea. He had to know that it is futile for the self to search for the source of its own imagined origin. > > I will attempt to answer the question. As i am trying to translate from my native language to english, please excuse me if the statement is gramatically incorrect. > > Following is a discussion between Sri Ramana and one devotee found in Sri Yogeshwarji' s book "Bhagawan Ramana Maharshi - Life and his works" > > Q: what is the path of path by which the mind can become silent (destroyed)? A silent mind is like a still wind. The "mind" and the wind exist only in their movement. They are movement. > A: SELF ENQUIRY. to think 'WHO AM I".  this is also a mental process. By with the help of this thought, all other thoughts are removed or uprooted. then this thought also fades away. Just like the fire extinhuishes by itself after burning the corpse. The fire does not continue to burn. In the same way the mind will merge into the source. Than there will be no seperate existance of mind. After this there is spontaneous realisation of the SELF." > > there is another description from 40 verses on truth: > > 21. What is the Truth of the scriptures which declare that if one sees the Self one sees God? How can one see one's Self? If, since one is a single being, one cannot see one's Self, how can one see God? Only by becoming a prey to Him. > > 32. Although the scriptures proclaim 'Thou art That', it is only a sign of weakness of mind to meditate 'I am That, not this', because you are eternally That.. What has to be done is to investigate what one really is and remain That. > > (To keep on saying "i am that supreme reality" is nothing but the weekness of mind. How can one realise the absence of ego without knowing the source.) > > 27. The State of non-emergence of 'I' is the state of being THAT. Without questing for that State of the non-emergence of 'I' and attaining It, how can one accomplish one's own extinction, from which the 'I' does not revive? Without that attainment how is it possible to abide in one's true State, where one is THAT? > > 28. Just as a man would dive in order to get something that had fallen into the water, so one should dive into oneself, with a keen one-pointed mind, controlling speech and breath, and find the place whence the 'I' originates.. > > 29. The only enquiry leading to Self-realization is seeking the Source of the 'I' with in- turned mind and without uttering the word 'I'. Meditation on 'I am not this; I am That' may be an aid to the enquiry but it cannot be the enquiry. > > 30. If one enquires 'Who am I?' within the mind, the individual 'I' falls down abashed as soon as one reaches the Heart and immediately Reality manifests itself spontaneously as 'I-I'. Although it reveals itself as 'I', it is not the ego but the Perfect Being, the Absolute Self. > > > ""We" do not assume. > > "We" are the assumption." > > the fact that we, unknowingly, assume oueselves as body, mind, intellect, ego, etc. > > This is not my explanation. It is given in in Sri Yogeshwarji' s book "Bhagawan Ramana Maharshi - Life and his works" > > Well to believe the genuinity of this translation is upto you. > > > "You are always standing on both sides of the river......one side is just a little further away.." > > But two ends of river and railway tracks never meet > > Vedanta is a living experience. I believe that it should be able to practically apply in the day-day life. I had similar discussion with Phil. > > If you are able to, than just go for it. You can ignore this posts if they does not suit your phylosophy. > > Sujal > > > > > --- On Fri, 30/5/08, toombaru2006 lastrain wrote: > toombaru2006 lastrain > Re: "Now" > Nisargadatta > Friday, 30 May, 2008, 8:35 AM > > Nisargadatta, sujal sujal_u@ & gt; wrote: > & gt; > & gt; Hi, > & gt; > & gt; The language or the way of expression is is called as 'Asmat Prayog'. I dont know the > exact meaning of 'Asmat' but 'Prayog' means 'attempt'. > & gt; > & gt; There are words like 'dive within', 'be merged' etc which looks like dual from surface. > & gt; The reason why the saints try to explain the non-dual concept in such a way is due to > the fact that we, unknowingly, assume oueselves as body, mind, intellect, ego, etc. > > Hi sujai, > > "We" do not assume. > > "We" are the assumption. > > All sages speak to the moment. There comes a time when everything they said has to be tossed in the trash. Only then can one reach the living edge of who they are. toombaru Bollywood, fun, friendship, sports and more. You name it, we have it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 31, 2008 Report Share Posted May 31, 2008 Hi Werner,It the word 'consciousness', 'atmam' are spoken from different stand point.Bhagawat Gita Chapter 6 is titled 'Atmasayam Yog'. i..e. Control over SELF. But here SELF means mind. Some times the SELF is identified as body, somtimes as intellect, somtimes as ego, and sometimes as Awareness.So both of us are right, but from different stand point. Ramana Maharshi says that even the knower of the self has body. But the body is of the knowner of self is nothing else but the self.It is just a way of expression. Sujal--- On Fri, 30/5/08, Werner Woehr <wwoehr wrote:Werner Woehr <wwoehr Re: "Now"Nisargadatta Date: Friday, 30 May, 2008, 11:26 PMNisargadatta, sujal <sujal_u > wrote: > > Hi, > > > please try to substitute the word "Consciousness" with > "Awareness" as Nisargadatta use these terms interchangebly > > Not only Maharaj but many saints (and not the translators) used these two words interchangably. > > I have attended the Discources and have marked the same. > > Sujal > Hi Sujal, I am fine with the interchangeability of consciousness and awareness. No probleme with that. But as I understood, for Maharaj they were different: Awareness is prior to consciousness which means, first there existed awarenesss and out of awareness arises consciousness: If you remove consciousness awareness still remains, which gives it a quality of eternity. And that is what I declined and called rubbish. Werner Did you know? You can CHAT without downloading messenger. Click here Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 31, 2008 Report Share Posted May 31, 2008 > > > > Consciousness and awareness are two names that the conceptual mind > uses in an attempt > > to explain its own assumed reality. > > > > They reflect the fundamentally dualistic nature of the mind and, in > fact, have no value in > > the attempt by the mind to explain its own nature......since there > isn't one. > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > Not quite, Toomb, > > I wouldn't describe it as two names " of the conceptual mind " but > rather of the categorizing mind. > > There is a difference between a concept and a category. Awareness or > consciousness in my understanding are no concepts but categories of > one's physical exisatence like leg, eye, ear etc. > > Most problems are caused in spirtual and religious discussions when > consciousness no longer is just a category but becomes a concept > like " pure consciousness " , " cosmic consciousness " , " universal > consciousness " or " divine consciousness " or " consciouness being of > divine origin " you know, all that crap people love to invent to give > their shoddy little life a bit more meaning. > > Werner > I start to understand what is going on. I look at Nisargadatta's terms as tools to achiedve clarity, not as a linguist, or philosopher, what is interesting btw. Era That the German language has no word for awareness is mind bugleing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 31, 2008 Report Share Posted May 31, 2008 Nisargadatta , "Era" <mi_nok wrote:> > > > That the German language has no word for awareness is mind bugleing> >Hi Era,The French language has neither a special word for awareness..it has only one word (conscience) for both consciousness andawareness.So having translated in French Nz, it was very interestingto find words to express as clearly as possible...both words.I had to explain in a note the choices I made to be very clear,and I used "ConsciencePresence" together* or not with a capital C to speak about the pure "Conscience"(Awareness,Svarupa) versus consciousness of I am.*Bob Adamson speaks often of presence-awareness Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 31, 2008 Report Share Posted May 31, 2008 Nisargadatta , " Era " <mi_nok wrote: > > > > > > > Consciousness and awareness are two names that the conceptual mind > > uses in an attempt > > > to explain its own assumed reality. > > > > > > They reflect the fundamentally dualistic nature of the mind and, in > > fact, have no value in > > > the attempt by the mind to explain its own nature......since there > > isn't one. > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > Not quite, Toomb, > > > > I wouldn't describe it as two names " of the conceptual mind " but > > rather of the categorizing mind. > > > > There is a difference between a concept and a category. Awareness or > > consciousness in my understanding are no concepts but categories of > > one's physical exisatence like leg, eye, ear etc. > > > > Most problems are caused in spirtual and religious discussions when > > consciousness no longer is just a category but becomes a concept > > like " pure consciousness " , " cosmic consciousness " , " universal > > consciousness " or " divine consciousness " or " consciouness being of > > divine origin " you know, all that crap people love to invent to give > > their shoddy little life a bit more meaning. > > > > Werner > > > > I start to understand what is going on. I look at Nisargadatta's > terms as tools to achiedve clarity, not as a linguist, or philosopher, > what is interesting btw. > > Era > > That the German language has no word for awareness is mind bugleing > I like " mind bugling " .......but dod you mean mind boggling? :-) t. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 31, 2008 Report Share Posted May 31, 2008 > Therefore the Now, the I-am, the Being, Consciousness is the same, IS > memory. > > Werner > > < It is not anything that it can name. :-) < t. The world is not real. Only “God/Being/Consciousness” is real. God/Being/Consciousness IS the world.” And *it* also ain’t at the same time! Go figure! :-o Michael A 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.