Guest guest Posted August 20, 2008 Report Share Posted August 20, 2008 Please just ponder over this simple teaching of Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj at: http://www.scribd.com/doc/4906556/The-Simple-Teaching-of-Sri-Nisargadatta-Maharaj love Pradeep Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 20, 2008 Report Share Posted August 20, 2008 Tks Pradeep http://abideinself.blogspot.com/2008/04/blog-post_16.html love n regards http://abideinself.blogspot.com/ Pradeep Apte <prdp_apteNisargadatta Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2008 1:15:11 PM The simple teaching Please just ponder over this simple teaching of Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj at: http://www.scribd. com/doc/4906556/ The-Simple- Teaching- of-Sri-Nisargada tta-Maharaj love Pradeep Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 20, 2008 Report Share Posted August 20, 2008 Nisargadatta , Pradeep Apte <prdp_apte wrote: > > Please just ponder over this simple teaching of Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj at: > http://www.scribd.com/doc/4906556/The-Simple-Teaching-of-Sri- Nisargadatta-Maharaj > love > Pradeep > Thanks for that short text, Pradeep. Pondering it already in the first line I stumbled accross Maharaj's suggestion to " turn away fron the experience to the experiencer " . I know that Maharaj believed in the existence of a " witness " which these words again were reflecting. But there is no witness and so there also is no experiencer one could turn to. It is thought which claims to be the witness or the experiencer. And who should do that turning away from ? There is no one at home - there was and is no doer. Werner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 20, 2008 Report Share Posted August 20, 2008 Dear Pradeep, Unfortunately this teaching is not so simple for me: how can I manage to feel "I am". As yet "I am" is for me an intellectual exercise. I look forward to your help, Munir Belt. my e-mail j.belt P.S. I was very glad to read your contribution related to the words by Nisargadatta. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 20, 2008 Report Share Posted August 20, 2008 pradeepji, immense thanks- most probably, this is part of the book 'i am that'- suggest, pl. try to read a book named 'pointer' based on the same sage. He says; 'you are not conscious of what you are & whateverl you are conscious of is neither you nor yours.' regards, ever yours, sai. Pradeep Apte <prdp_apteNisargadatta Sent: Wednesday, 20 August, 2008 12:45:11 AM The simple teaching Please just ponder over this simple teaching of Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj at: http://www.scribd. com/doc/4906556/ The-Simple- Teaching- of-Sri-Nisargada tta-Maharaj love PradeepSend instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 20, 2008 Report Share Posted August 20, 2008 werner sir, immense thanks- most probably, this is part of the book 'i am that'- suggest, pl. try to read a book named 'pointer' based on the same sage. He says; 'you are not conscious of what you are & whatever you are conscious of is neither you nor yours.' regards, ever yours, sai. Werner Woehr <wwoehrNisargadatta Sent: Wednesday, 20 August, 2008 3:04:09 AM Re: The simple teaching Nisargadatta, Pradeep Apte <prdp_apte@. ..> wrote:>> Please just ponder over this simple teaching of Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj at:> http://www.scribd. com/doc/4906556/ The-Simple- Teaching- of-Sri-Nisargadatta- Maharaj> love> Pradeep>Thanks for that short text, Pradeep.Pondering it already in the first line I stumbled accross Maharaj'ssuggestion to "turn away fron the experience to the experiencer" .I know that Maharaj believed in the existence of a "witness" whichthese words again were reflecting. But there is no witness and so there also is no experiencer one could turn to.It is thought which claims to be the witness or the experiencer.And who should do that turning away from ? There is no one at home -there was and is no doer.WernerSend instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 20, 2008 Report Share Posted August 20, 2008 belt sir, the teaching is very direct- in manifestation, we are just 'consciousness' as such & not this individual or that. the knowledge 'i am' ( consciousness ) is ever with us, uninterrupted holding on to this sense of presence is the key. sages have declared that in manifestation, we are only consciousness & what we really are is prior to the consciousness i.e absolute unity, which can not be described being 'that which is'. in fact, we can not acquire what we already are , we can only recognise it. and such recognition can only happen spontaneously. though reading book does not help much but introduces to 'basics' & then the 'intuition' has to take over to reveal the truth, which we already are.. pl. try to read a book named 'pointer' based on the same sage. He says; 'you are not conscious of what you are & whatever you are conscious of is neither you nor yours.' regards, ever yours, sai. J. Belt <J.BeltNisargadatta Sent: Wednesday, 20 August, 2008 5:27:55 AM Re:The simple teaching Dear Pradeep, Unfortunately this teaching is not so simple for me: how can I manage to feel "I am". As yet "I am" is for me an intellectual exercise. I look forward to your help, Munir Belt. my e-mail j.belt (AT) planet (DOT) nl P.S. I was very glad to read your contribution related to the words by Nisargadatta.Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 20, 2008 Report Share Posted August 20, 2008 Nisargadatta , N SAINATH <sai4nath wrote: > > werner sir,         >            immense thanks- most probably, this is part of the book 'i am that'- suggest, pl. try to read a book named 'pointer' based on the same sage. >    He says; >       'you are not conscious of what you are & whatever you are conscious of is neither you nor yours.' >                 regards, >                          ever yours, >                                   sai. >                 > > Thanks Sainath, I already have read " Pointers " by Ramesh Balsekar. It is nicely written and also fun to read. Werner > > > Werner Woehr <wwoehr > Nisargadatta > Wednesday, 20 August, 2008 3:04:09 AM > Re: The simple teaching > > > Nisargadatta, Pradeep Apte <prdp_apte@ ..> > wrote: > > > > Please just ponder over this simple teaching of Sri Nisargadatta > Maharaj at: > > http://www.scribd. com/doc/4906556/ The-Simple- Teaching- of-Sri- > Nisargadatta- Maharaj > > love > > Pradeep > > > > Thanks for that short text, Pradeep. > > Pondering it already in the first line I stumbled accross Maharaj's > suggestion to " turn away fron the experience to the experiencer " . > > I know that Maharaj believed in the existence of a " witness " which > these words again were reflecting. But there is no witness and so > there also is no experiencer one could turn to. > > It is thought which claims to be the witness or the experiencer. > > And who should do that turning away from ? There is no one at home - > there was and is no doer. > > Werner > > > > Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 21, 2008 Report Share Posted August 21, 2008 Are you sure about this? Wouldn't that mean that Nisargadatta's whole " belief-system " is false? On 20.8.2008, at 09:57, Werner Woehr wrote: > I know that Maharaj believed in the existence of a " witness " which > these words again were reflecting. But there is no witness and so > there > is also no experiencer one could turn to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 21, 2008 Report Share Posted August 21, 2008 immense thanks, sai Werner Woehr <wwoehrNisargadatta Sent: Wednesday, 20 August, 2008 10:57:09 AM Re: The simple teaching Nisargadatta, N SAINATH <sai4nath@.. .> wrote:>> werner sir,         >            immense thanks- most probably, this is partof the book 'i am that'- suggest, pl. try to read a book named'pointer' based on the same sage.>    He says;>       'you are not conscious of what you are & whatever youare conscious of is neither you nor yours.'>                 regards,>                          ever yours,>                                   sai.>                 > >Thanks Sainath,I already have read "Pointers" by Ramesh Balsekar. It is nicelywritten and also fun to read.Werner> > > Werner Woehr <wwoehr> Nisargadatta> Wednesday, 20 August, 2008 3:04:09 AM> Re: The simple teaching> > > Nisargadatta, Pradeep Apte <prdp_apte@ ..> > wrote:> >> > Please just ponder over this simple teaching of Sri Nisargadatta > Maharaj at:> > http://www.scribd. com/doc/4906556/ The-Simple- Teaching- of-Sri-> Nisargadatta- Maharaj> > love> > Pradeep> >> > Thanks for that short text, Pradeep.> > Pondering it already in the first line I stumbled accross Maharaj's> suggestion to "turn away fron the experience to the experiencer" .> > I know that Maharaj believed in the existence of a "witness" which> these words again were reflecting. But there is no witness and so > there also is no experiencer one could turn to.> > It is thought which claims to be the witness or the experiencer.> > And who should do that turning away from ? There is no one at home -> there was and is no doer.> > Werner> > > > Send instant messages to your online friendshttp://uk.messenger .>Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 21, 2008 Report Share Posted August 21, 2008 Nisargadatta , Arnór Kristjánsson <addi wrote: > > Are you sure about this? Wouldn't that mean that Nisargadatta's whole > " belief-system " is false? Hm, Arnor, is there something like a true beliefsystem ? Werner > > On 20.8.2008, at 09:57, Werner Woehr wrote: > > > I know that Maharaj believed in the existence of a " witness " which > > these words again were reflecting. But there is no witness and so > > there > > is also no experiencer one could turn to. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 21, 2008 Report Share Posted August 21, 2008 Say I have a headache....or let me say any condition that I don`t like. How would I use this teaching improve this condition......be o.k. with it? Practically speaking. k Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 25, 2008 Report Share Posted August 25, 2008 Dear Pradeep, I live at Brasil read You book Nisargadatta Gita were You speak about Your way. We have somethings similar on the way. I dream one day to go at Bombaim know the places and the people were Nisargadata Maharaj lived, peoples that Known Him. May be at next Years I wil go. On last month I thougth write You talk about Maharaj and Agriculture economY. Best regards Ivan Best Regards Ivan Nisargadatta , Pradeep Apte <prdp_apte wrote: > > Please just ponder over this simple teaching of Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj at: > http://www.scribd.com/doc/4906556/The-Simple-Teaching-of-Sri- Nisargadatta-Maharaj > love > Pradeep > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 25, 2008 Report Share Posted August 25, 2008 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr wrote: > > Nisargadatta , Arnór Kristjánsson <addi@> wrote: > > > > Are you sure about this? Wouldn't that mean that Nisargadatta's whole > > " belief-system " is false? > > > Hm, Arnor, is there something like a true beliefsystem ? > > Werner > > Truth is relative. As there are no separate things....relativity does not exit. The concept " true " is meaningless. toombaru > > > > > On 20.8.2008, at 09:57, Werner Woehr wrote: > > > > > I know that Maharaj believed in the existence of a " witness " which > > > these words again were reflecting. But there is no witness and so > > > there > > > is also no experiencer one could turn to. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 27, 2008 Report Share Posted August 27, 2008 Nisargadatta , Keith Karnaky <htiek0 wrote: > > Say I have a headache....or let me say any condition that I don`t like. > > How would I use this teaching improve this condition......be o.k. with it? > > Practically speaking. > > k > Find out how substantial the I that thinks it is the thing doing the thinking really is and all questions about what it should or shouldn't do evaporate. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 31, 2008 Report Share Posted August 31, 2008 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr wrote: > > Nisargadatta , Pradeep Apte <prdp_apte@> > wrote: > > > > Please just ponder over this simple teaching of Sri Nisargadatta > Maharaj at: > > http://www.scribd.com/doc/4906556/The-Simple-Teaching-of-Sri- > Nisargadatta-Maharaj > > love > > Pradeep > > > > Thanks for that short text, Pradeep. > > Pondering it already in the first line I stumbled accross Maharaj's > suggestion to " turn away fron the experience to the experiencer " . > > I know that Maharaj believed in the existence of a " witness " which > these words again were reflecting. But there is no witness and so > there also is no experiencer one could turn to. > > It is thought which claims to be the witness or the experiencer. > > And who should do that turning away from ? There is no one at home - > there was and is no doer. > > Werner If there is no one at home, to whom does the question register aka " who should do that turning away from " . If there is no one at home, for whom does Nisargadatta or his beedi laced prattlings exist? To a prevailing sense of something experienced...the suggestion was to repent. The term repent connotes to re-turn. Re-turn on itself. The prevailing sense of something experienced re-turns on itself to look for the sense of an experience, as the former could not exist without the latter. In the finding or really the non-finding, in the re-turn, who would be at home to cognize the presence or the absence of anything. If there is no one at home.....who would be around to cognize, experience and thus conceptualize/articulate this absence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 31, 2008 Report Share Posted August 31, 2008 Nisargadatta , " Sandeep " <sandeep1960 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , Pradeep Apte <prdp_apte@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Please just ponder over this simple teaching of Sri Nisargadatta > > Maharaj at: > > > http://www.scribd.com/doc/4906556/The-Simple-Teaching-of-Sri- > > Nisargadatta-Maharaj > > > love > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > Thanks for that short text, Pradeep. > > > > Pondering it already in the first line I stumbled accross Maharaj's > > suggestion to " turn away fron the experience to the experiencer " . > > > > I know that Maharaj believed in the existence of a " witness " which > > these words again were reflecting. But there is no witness and so > > there also is no experiencer one could turn to. > > > > It is thought which claims to be the witness or the experiencer. > > > > And who should do that turning away from ? There is no one at home - > > there was and is no doer. > > > > Werner > > > > If there is no one at home, to whom does the question register aka > " who should do that turning away from " . > > If there is no one at home, for whom does Nisargadatta or his beedi > laced prattlings exist? > > > > To a prevailing sense of something experienced...the suggestion was to > repent. > > The term repent connotes to re-turn. > > Re-turn on itself. > > The prevailing sense of something experienced re-turns on itself to > look for the sense of an experience, as the former could not exist > without the latter. > > In the finding or really the non-finding, in the re-turn, who would be > at home to cognize the presence or the absence of anything. > > If there is no one at home.....who would be around to cognize, > experience and thus conceptualize/articulate this absence. > Who indeed. It is the cognizing-conceptual process that gives rise to the ideation that there is a cognizer. Based on the premise of conceptual thought that would be a logical conclusion but it is not true. There is only the process.......empty in the center. Essentially it is a highly evolved program that functions to help the physical organism survive and reproduce. The phantom that emerges as the gravitational center within this process cannot intellectually grasp its own condition simply because it doesn't have one. (laughing now) toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 31, 2008 Report Share Posted August 31, 2008 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Sandeep " <sandeep1960@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Pradeep Apte <prdp_apte@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Please just ponder over this simple teaching of Sri Nisargadatta > > > Maharaj at: > > > > http://www.scribd.com/doc/4906556/The-Simple-Teaching-of-Sri- > > > Nisargadatta-Maharaj > > > > love > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > ve> > > Thanks for that short text, Pradeep. > > > > > > Pondering it already in the first line I stumbled accross Maharaj's > > > suggestion to " turn away fron the experience to the experiencer " . > > > > > > I know that Maharaj believed in the existence of a " witness " which > > > these words again were reflecting. But there is no witness and so > > > there also is no experiencer one could turn to. > > > > > > It is thought which claims to be the witness or the experiencer. > > > > > > And who should do that turning away from ? There is no one at home - > > > there was and is no doer. > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > If there is no one at home, to whom does the question register aka > > " who should do that turning away from " . > > > > If there is no one at home, for whom does Nisargadatta or his beedi > > laced prattlings exist? > > > > > > > > To a prevailing sense of something experienced...the suggestion was to > > repent. > > > > The term repent connotes to re-turn. > > > > Re-turn on itself. > > > > The prevailing sense of something experienced re-turns on itself to > > look for the sense of an experience, as the former could not exist > > without the latter. > > > > In the finding or really the non-finding, in the re-turn, who would be > > at home to cognize the presence or the absence of anything. > > > > If there is no one at home.....who would be around to cognize, > > experience and thus conceptualize/articulate this absence. > > > > > > Who indeed. > > > It is the cognizing-conceptual process that gives rise to the ideation > that there is a cognizer. > > Based on the premise of conceptual thought that would be a logical > conclusion but it is not true. > > There is only the process.......empty in the center. > > Essentially it is a highly evolved program that functions to help the > physical organism survive and reproduce. > > The phantom that emerges as the gravitational center within this > process cannot intellectually grasp its own condition simply because > it doesn't have one. > > (laughing now) > > > > > > toombaru > And yet this phantom is my dearest old friend, someone who I will be sad to see return to the great Unknown. See, she's been with me since the beginning thought of *anna*. She'll most certainly be my very last thought, leaving with my last exhale. ~A Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 31, 2008 Report Share Posted August 31, 2008 Nisargadatta , " anabebe57 " <kailashana wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Sandeep " <sandeep1960@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Pradeep Apte <prdp_apte@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Please just ponder over this simple teaching of Sri Nisargadatta > > > > Maharaj at: > > > > > http://www.scribd.com/doc/4906556/The-Simple-Teaching-of-Sri- > > > > Nisargadatta-Maharaj > > > > > love > > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > ve> > > Thanks for that short text, Pradeep. > > > > > > > > Pondering it already in the first line I stumbled accross Maharaj's > > > > suggestion to " turn away fron the experience to the experiencer " . > > > > > > > > I know that Maharaj believed in the existence of a " witness " which > > > > these words again were reflecting. But there is no witness and so > > > > there also is no experiencer one could turn to. > > > > > > > > It is thought which claims to be the witness or the experiencer. > > > > > > > > And who should do that turning away from ? There is no one at home - > > > > there was and is no doer. > > > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > > > > > If there is no one at home, to whom does the question register aka > > > " who should do that turning away from " . > > > > > > If there is no one at home, for whom does Nisargadatta or his beedi > > > laced prattlings exist? > > > > > > > > > > > > To a prevailing sense of something experienced...the suggestion was to > > > repent. > > > > > > The term repent connotes to re-turn. > > > > > > Re-turn on itself. > > > > > > The prevailing sense of something experienced re-turns on itself to > > > look for the sense of an experience, as the former could not exist > > > without the latter. > > > > > > In the finding or really the non-finding, in the re-turn, who would be > > > at home to cognize the presence or the absence of anything. > > > > > > If there is no one at home.....who would be around to cognize, > > > experience and thus conceptualize/articulate this absence. > > > > > > > > > > > Who indeed. > > > > > > It is the cognizing-conceptual process that gives rise to the ideation > > that there is a cognizer. > > > > Based on the premise of conceptual thought that would be a logical > > conclusion but it is not true. > > > > There is only the process.......empty in the center. > > > > Essentially it is a highly evolved program that functions to help the > > physical organism survive and reproduce. > > > > The phantom that emerges as the gravitational center within this > > process cannot intellectually grasp its own condition simply because > > it doesn't have one. > > > > (laughing now) > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > And yet this phantom is my dearest old friend, someone who I will be > sad to see return to the great Unknown. See, she's been with me since > the beginning thought of *anna*. She'll most certainly be my very > last thought, leaving with my last exhale. > > ~A > She is merely a thought stream that evaporates with the last breath........no more substantial than a shadow. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 31, 2008 Report Share Posted August 31, 2008 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anabebe57 " <kailashana@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Sandeep " <sandeep1960@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Pradeep Apte <prdp_apte@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Please just ponder over this simple teaching of Sri > Nisargadatta > > > > > Maharaj at: > > > > > > http://www.scribd.com/doc/4906556/The-Simple-Teaching-of-Sri- > > > > > Nisargadatta-Maharaj > > > > > > love > > > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > > > > ve> > > Thanks for that short text, Pradeep. > > > > > > > > > > Pondering it already in the first line I stumbled accross > Maharaj's > > > > > suggestion to " turn away fron the experience to the experiencer " . > > > > > > > > > > I know that Maharaj believed in the existence of a " witness " which > > > > > these words again were reflecting. But there is no witness and so > > > > > there also is no experiencer one could turn to. > > > > > > > > > > It is thought which claims to be the witness or the experiencer. > > > > > > > > > > And who should do that turning away from ? There is no one at > home - > > > > > there was and is no doer. > > > > > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If there is no one at home, to whom does the question register aka > > > > " who should do that turning away from " . > > > > > > > > If there is no one at home, for whom does Nisargadatta or his beedi > > > > laced prattlings exist? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To a prevailing sense of something experienced...the suggestion > was to > > > > repent. > > > > > > > > The term repent connotes to re-turn. > > > > > > > > Re-turn on itself. > > > > > > > > The prevailing sense of something experienced re-turns on itself to > > > > look for the sense of an experience, as the former could not exist > > > > without the latter. > > > > > > > > In the finding or really the non-finding, in the re-turn, who > would be > > > > at home to cognize the presence or the absence of anything. > > > > > > > > If there is no one at home.....who would be around to cognize, > > > > experience and thus conceptualize/articulate this absence. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Who indeed. > > > > > > > > > It is the cognizing-conceptual process that gives rise to the ideation > > > that there is a cognizer. > > > > > > Based on the premise of conceptual thought that would be a logical > > > conclusion but it is not true. > > > > > > There is only the process.......empty in the center. > > > > > > Essentially it is a highly evolved program that functions to help the > > > physical organism survive and reproduce. > > > > > > The phantom that emerges as the gravitational center within this > > > process cannot intellectually grasp its own condition simply because > > > it doesn't have one. > > > > > > (laughing now) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > And yet this phantom is my dearest old friend, someone who I will be > > sad to see return to the great Unknown. See, she's been with me since > > the beginning thought of *anna*. She'll most certainly be my very > > last thought, leaving with my last exhale. > > > > ~A > > > > > She is merely a thought stream that evaporates with the last > breath........no more substantial than a shadow. > > > > > toombaru > Well, knowing her as well as I do, she'll probably say something stupid like *is that all there is?* lol. wink. ~A Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 31, 2008 Report Share Posted August 31, 2008 Nisargadatta , " anabebe57 " <kailashana wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " anabebe57 " <kailashana@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Sandeep " <sandeep1960@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Pradeep Apte <prdp_apte@> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please just ponder over this simple teaching of Sri > > Nisargadatta > > > > > > Maharaj at: > > > > > > > http://www.scribd.com/doc/4906556/The-Simple-Teaching-of-Sri- > > > > > > Nisargadatta-Maharaj > > > > > > > love > > > > > > > Pradeep > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ve> > > Thanks for that short text, Pradeep. > > > > > > > > > > > > Pondering it already in the first line I stumbled accross > > Maharaj's > > > > > > suggestion to " turn away fron the experience to the > experiencer " . > > > > > > > > > > > > I know that Maharaj believed in the existence of a " witness " > which > > > > > > these words again were reflecting. But there is no witness > and so > > > > > > there also is no experiencer one could turn to. > > > > > > > > > > > > It is thought which claims to be the witness or the experiencer. > > > > > > > > > > > > And who should do that turning away from ? There is no one at > > home - > > > > > > there was and is no doer. > > > > > > > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If there is no one at home, to whom does the question register aka > > > > > " who should do that turning away from " . > > > > > > > > > > If there is no one at home, for whom does Nisargadatta or his > beedi > > > > > laced prattlings exist? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To a prevailing sense of something experienced...the suggestion > > was to > > > > > repent. > > > > > > > > > > The term repent connotes to re-turn. > > > > > > > > > > Re-turn on itself. > > > > > > > > > > The prevailing sense of something experienced re-turns on > itself to > > > > > look for the sense of an experience, as the former could not exist > > > > > without the latter. > > > > > > > > > > In the finding or really the non-finding, in the re-turn, who > > would be > > > > > at home to cognize the presence or the absence of anything. > > > > > > > > > > If there is no one at home.....who would be around to cognize, > > > > > experience and thus conceptualize/articulate this absence. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Who indeed. > > > > > > > > > > > > It is the cognizing-conceptual process that gives rise to the > ideation > > > > that there is a cognizer. > > > > > > > > Based on the premise of conceptual thought that would be a logical > > > > conclusion but it is not true. > > > > > > > > There is only the process.......empty in the center. > > > > > > > > Essentially it is a highly evolved program that functions to > help the > > > > physical organism survive and reproduce. > > > > > > > > The phantom that emerges as the gravitational center within this > > > > process cannot intellectually grasp its own condition simply because > > > > it doesn't have one. > > > > > > > > (laughing now) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > > > > > And yet this phantom is my dearest old friend, someone who I will be > > > sad to see return to the great Unknown. See, she's been with me since > > > the beginning thought of *anna*. She'll most certainly be my very > > > last thought, leaving with my last exhale. > > > > > > ~A > > > > > > > > > She is merely a thought stream that evaporates with the last > > breath........no more substantial than a shadow. > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > Well, knowing her as well as I do, she'll probably say something > stupid like *is that all there is?* lol. > > > wink. > > ~A > It all depends on what you mean by " is " . LOL t. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 1, 2008 Report Share Posted September 1, 2008 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: Scnipped! > > > > Well, knowing her as well as I do, she'll probably say something > > stupid like *is that all there is?* lol. > > > > > > wink. > > > > ~A > > > > > > It all depends on what you mean by " is " . > > > LOL > > > > t. > Ooops. You're right that should have been *was*. ;-) 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.