Guest guest Posted September 20, 2008 Report Share Posted September 20, 2008 Unless you know yourself well, how can you know another? And when you know yourself you are the other. ~ Nisargadatta Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 20, 2008 Report Share Posted September 20, 2008 Nisargadatta , " Era " <mi_nok wrote: > > Unless you know yourself well, > > how can you know another? > > And when you know yourself > > you are the other. > > > ~ Nisargadatta > No longer is this believable. The " other " is a separate universe....a unique and isolated conceptual dream. Your dreams at night are experienced only within you own synaptic labyrinth....the " other " s dreams are experienced only within themselves. The daydream is no different. The " others " are yourself in the sense that they are known only as characters within your own personal dream. There is no grand union of imaginary selves that is your ultimate reality. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 20, 2008 Report Share Posted September 20, 2008 > > Unless you know yourself well, > > how can you know another? > > And when you know yourself > > you are the other. > > > ~ Nisargadatta > No longer is this believable. The " other " is a separate universe....a unique and isolated conceptual dream. Your dreams at night are experienced only within you own synaptic labyrinth....the " other " s dreams are experienced only within themselves. The daydream is no different. The " others " are yourself in the sense that they are known only as characters within your own personal dream. There is no grand union of imaginary selves that is your ultimate reality. toombaru What you wrote is not the point what Nisargadatta made, it is your own pony.. Era Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 20, 2008 Report Share Posted September 20, 2008 Nisargadatta , " Era " <mi_nok wrote: > > > > > Unless you know yourself well, > > > > how can you know another? > > > > And when you know yourself > > > > you are the other. > > > > > > ~ Nisargadatta > > > > > No longer is this believable. > > The " other " is a separate universe....a unique and isolated conceptual > dream. > > Your dreams at night are experienced only within you own synaptic > labyrinth....the " other " s dreams are experienced only within themselves. > > The daydream is no different. > > The " others " are yourself in the sense that they are known only as > characters within your own personal dream. > > There is no grand union of imaginary selves that is your ultimate reality. > > > > toombaru > > > What you wrote is not the point what Nisargadatta made, it is your > own pony.. > > > Era > What Nisargadatta wrote is bastardized by the sense of self and twisted to fit within its own private self-referential religiosity. The ego likes to believe that it is everything. It isn't. The naked truth of its ultimate emptiness is seldom approached. Any teacher that told the Ultimate Truth would have no followers. It's just too damn hard to swallow. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 21, 2008 Report Share Posted September 21, 2008 > > > Unless you know yourself well, > > > > > > how can you know another? > > > > > > And when you know yourself > > > > > > you are the other. > > > > > > > > > ~ Nisargadatta > > > > > > > > > No longer is this believable. > > > > The " other " is a separate universe....a unique and isolated > > conceptual dream. > > > > Your dreams at night are experienced only within you own synaptic > > labyrinth....the " other " s dreams are experienced only within > > themselves. > > > > The daydream is no different. > > > > The " others " are yourself in the sense that they are known only as > > characters within your own personal dream. > > > > There is no grand union of imaginary selves that is your ultimate > > reality. > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > What you wrote is not the point what Nisargadatta made, it is > > your own pony.. > > > > > > Era > > > > > What Nisargadatta wrote is bastardized by the sense of self and > twisted to fit within its own private self-referential religiosity. > > The ego likes to believe that it is everything. > > It isn't. > > The naked truth of its ultimate emptiness is seldom approached. > > Any teacher that told the Ultimate Truth would have no followers. > > It's just too damn hard to swallow. > > > toombaru > And you post on and on with your " conceptual " favorite words.. at the Nisargadatta club.. repeting yourself and admiring yourself and knocking him .. Era sigh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 21, 2008 Report Share Posted September 21, 2008 Nisargadatta , " Era " <mi_nok wrote: > > > > > Unless you know yourself well, > > > > > > > > how can you know another? > > > > > > > > And when you know yourself > > > > > > > > you are the other. > > > > > > > > > > > > ~ Nisargadatta > > > > > > > > > > > > > No longer is this believable. > > > > > > The " other " is a separate universe....a unique and isolated > > > conceptual dream. > > > > > > Your dreams at night are experienced only within you own synaptic > > > labyrinth....the " other " s dreams are experienced only within > > > themselves. > > > > > > The daydream is no different. > > > > > > The " others " are yourself in the sense that they are known only as > > > characters within your own personal dream. > > > > > > There is no grand union of imaginary selves that is your ultimate > > > reality. > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > What you wrote is not the point what Nisargadatta made, it is > > > your own pony.. > > > > > > > > > Era > > > > > > > > > What Nisargadatta wrote is bastardized by the sense of self and > > twisted to fit within its own private self-referential religiosity. > > > > The ego likes to believe that it is everything. > > > > It isn't. > > > > The naked truth of its ultimate emptiness is seldom approached. > > > > Any teacher that told the Ultimate Truth would have no followers. > > > > It's just too damn hard to swallow. > > > > > > toombaru > > > > And you post on and on with your " conceptual " favorite words.. > > > at the Nisargadatta club.. repeting yourself and admiring yourself and > knocking him .. > > > Era > > > sigh > Nisargadatta was a pointer.....a sign post. When one reaches the destination.......there is no reason to be grateful for the signs along the way. How long are you going to cling to the sign post Era? Nisargadatta can take you to the edge.....but you must be a brave little soldier to jump into the emptiness. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 22, 2008 Report Share Posted September 22, 2008 toombaru2006 wrote: >> > > > > Nisargadatta was a pointer.....a sign post. > > When one reaches the destination.......there is no reason to be > grateful for the signs along the way. > > How long are you going to cling to the sign post Era? > > Nisargadatta can take you to the edge.....but you must be a brave > little soldier to jump into the emptiness. > > > > > toombaru > > > > > toombaru > > > --- > > Indeed toombaru, Sri Nis himself freely and willingly admitted that what he spoke was NOT it but rather a symbolism of it, a pointer. Sri Nis said nothing of what it is, he spoke of what it isn't. I though that would be at least a fundamental understanding of his approach? tyga Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 22, 2008 Report Share Posted September 22, 2008 Nisargadatta , " Era " <mi_nok wrote: > > > > > Unless you know yourself well, > > > > > > > > how can you know another? > > > > > > > > And when you know yourself > > > > > > > > you are the other. > > > > > > > > > > > > ~ Nisargadatta > > > > > > > > > > > > > No longer is this believable. > > > > > > The " other " is a separate universe....a unique and isolated > > > conceptual dream. > > > > > > Your dreams at night are experienced only within you own synaptic > > > labyrinth....the " other " s dreams are experienced only within > > > themselves. > > > > > > The daydream is no different. > > > > > > The " others " are yourself in the sense that they are known only as > > > characters within your own personal dream. > > > > > > There is no grand union of imaginary selves that is your ultimate > > > reality. > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > What you wrote is not the point what Nisargadatta made, it is > > > your own pony.. > > > > > > > > > Era > > > > > > > > > What Nisargadatta wrote is bastardized by the sense of self and > > twisted to fit within its own private self-referential religiosity. > > > > The ego likes to believe that it is everything. > > > > It isn't. > > > > The naked truth of its ultimate emptiness is seldom approached. > > > > Any teacher that told the Ultimate Truth would have no followers. > > > > It's just too damn hard to swallow. > > > > > > toombaru > > > > And you post on and on with your " conceptual " favorite words.. > > > at the Nisargadatta club.. repeting yourself and admiring yourself and > knocking him .. > > > Era > > > sigh > Era... I don't see toomie knocking anyone...but since you do, why do you persist in knocking toomie and me, and others who are alive while niz, ramana, others are dead. they don't need knocking or admiration. and you seem to enjoy your knocking those whom you knock. ~anna Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 22, 2008 Report Share Posted September 22, 2008 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Era " <mi_nok@> wrote: > > > > Unless you know yourself well, > > > > how can you know another? > > > > And when you know yourself > > > > you are the other. > > > > > > ~ Nisargadatta > > > > > No longer is this believable. > > The " other " is a separate universe....a unique and isolated conceptual > dream. > > Your dreams at night are experienced only within you own synaptic > labyrinth....the " other " s dreams are experienced only within themselves. > > The daydream is no different. > > The " others " are yourself in the sense that they are known only as > characters within your own personal dream. > > There is no grand union of imaginary selves that is your ultimate reality. > > > > toombaru there is no difference between appearing others and oneself.... there is no difference between the appearent seperated " universes " .... All This....appear through One Being.....means, through our real Self There is only real Self, nothing else. Marc Ps: real Self is formless, changeless, infinite Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 22, 2008 Report Share Posted September 22, 2008 Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Era " <mi_nok@> wrote: > > > > > > Unless you know yourself well, > > > > > > how can you know another? > > > > > > And when you know yourself > > > > > > you are the other. > > > > > > > > > ~ Nisargadatta > > > > > > > > > No longer is this believable. > > > > The " other " is a separate universe....a unique and isolated > conceptual > > dream. > > > > Your dreams at night are experienced only within you own synaptic > > labyrinth....the " other " s dreams are experienced only within > themselves. > > > > The daydream is no different. > > > > The " others " are yourself in the sense that they are known only as > > characters within your own personal dream. > > > > There is no grand union of imaginary selves that is your ultimate > reality. > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > there is no difference between appearing others and oneself.... > > there is no difference between the appearent seperated " universes " .... > > All This....appear through One Being.....means, through our real Self > > There is only real Self, nothing else. > > Marc > > Ps: real Self is formless, changeless, infinite > " Real Self " is just another word for God. It is wishful-magical thinking. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 22, 2008 Report Share Posted September 22, 2008 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Era " <mi_nok@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Unless you know yourself well, > > > > > > > > how can you know another? > > > > > > > > And when you know yourself > > > > > > > > you are the other. > > > > > > > > > > > > ~ Nisargadatta > > > > > > > > > > > > > No longer is this believable. > > > > > > The " other " is a separate universe....a unique and isolated > > conceptual > > > dream. > > > > > > Your dreams at night are experienced only within you own synaptic > > > labyrinth....the " other " s dreams are experienced only within > > themselves. > > > > > > The daydream is no different. > > > > > > The " others " are yourself in the sense that they are known only as > > > characters within your own personal dream. > > > > > > There is no grand union of imaginary selves that is your ultimate > > reality. > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > there is no difference between appearing others and oneself.... > > > > there is no difference between the appearent seperated " universes " .... > > > > All This....appear through One Being.....means, through our real Self > > > > There is only real Self, nothing else. > > > > Marc > > > > Ps: real Self is formless, changeless, infinite > > > > > > " Real Self " is just another word for God. > > > It is wishful-magical thinking. > > > > > toombaru so you transform " Real Self " into " God " ....by your wishful-magical thinking?.... Marc Ps: how is your appearent seperate universe doing? > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 22, 2008 Report Share Posted September 22, 2008 > > > > Unless you know yourself well,> > > >> > > > how can you know another?> > > >> > > > And when you know yourself> > > >> > > > you are the other.> > > >> > > >> > > > ~ Nisargadatta> > > >> > > > > > > > > No longer is this believable.> > > > > > The "other" is a separate universe.... a unique and isolated > > > conceptual dream.> > > > > > Your dreams at night are experienced only within you own synaptic> > > labyrinth... .the "other"s dreams are experienced only within > > > themselves.> > > > > > The daydream is no different.> > > > > > The "others" are yourself in the sense that they are known only as> > > characters within your own personal dream.> > > > > > There is no grand union of imaginary selves that is your ultimate> > > reality.> > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru I agree that we are the ego center of our own world. it is like, everything that happenes to us or around us we understand and evaluate and make scense of according to what it means to us. for example, if someone gives me a dirty look, i evaluate it by thinking it has something to do with me...and it effects me, instead of the notion that it is all about them. our egos are the center of our material lfe....but when we are still, we allow our Self to come to the forefront and our preception of reality changes. it is not the reptilian brainand ego's scence of self but a higher Self understanding to which we are all the same. the brain needs to compartmentalize in order to understand and make sense of the world around us. the Self does not. The mind is addicted to duality, the Self is free. whe, at least in my expirience, i quiet myself long enough to let my ego get out of the center, my "world-view " changes and I realize that everything that says I am THIS, you are that, this is you, this is he...ect....are just conceptions. in Reality, we are all the same source...for there is only one source. just like our physical bodies come from the same mass and makeup of the earth, just different combonations...soo too is our Higest Self. I like tothik of it as we are all rays of ther sun, infinatley connected, yet seperated through perception so that we can expirience ourself. for we cannot know and expirewnce that which we are, if we are the entirety of everythig. its like the noton that someonetimes we have to expirience that which we are not to know what we are. if you can truely move out of the realm of the material and ego, you can expirtience the truth of what you are...interconnected....TAT TVAM ASI! we all are, in the end, exactly what we were searching for...but we couldnt figure that out untill we stopped searching and realized that we are that already. not to mention, many of the major world religions talk about this spiritual understanding..for example..."split a piece of wood and I am there "(gnostic/6th gospel), "whatever you to to your neighbor, you do unto me" (christianity), Tat Tvam Asi ("you are that)"- Upanishads..Hinduism, ect..., the law of three-fold (..whatever you do/put out, comes back to you 3fold)...wicca...ect................. but besides the rambeling ofrelgions (no offense) its is the expirientail understanding that comes with mystic revelation, after all, words are just symbols that point o the expirience. and while that is out there, can we al stop arguing over semantics on here...words are symbols, the point is to transcend then, not get stuck in them. peace, Your fellow travelers... see you on the inside! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 22, 2008 Report Share Posted September 22, 2008 Hi toombaru, In the spirit of inquiry, not of doubting what’s written below, I have a few questions prefaced by **** Michael Adamson …………………………………………………………. No longer is this believable. < The " other " is a separate universe....a unique and isolated conceptual dream. **** Ok! I can easily see that! Even though the tendency to see “them” as truly “over there” exerts a mighty strong pull.**** Your dreams at night are experienced only within you own synaptic labyrinth....the " other " s dreams are experienced only within themselves. **** Ok! I can easily see that! And, how do (or can) I know that I’m not also “dreaming” that there is an*other* whose dreams are experience only within themselves? **** The daydream is no different. The " others " are yourself in the sense that they are known only as characters within your own personal dream. There is no grand union of imaginary selves that is your ultimate reality. ****If there truly is no *other*, then whom am I expecting to get an answer/response from? Also, is what you’re saying different than “solipsism”? If so, how?**** Thanks, Michael A Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 22, 2008 Report Share Posted September 22, 2008 Nisargadatta , " Michael Adamson " <adamson wrote: > > Hi toombaru, > > > > In the spirit of inquiry, not of doubting what's written below, I have > a few questions prefaced by **** > > > > Michael Adamson > > …………………………………………………………. > No longer is this believable. > > < The " other " is a separate universe....a unique and isolated conceptual > dream. > > > > **** Ok! I can easily see that! Even though the tendency to see " them " as > truly " over there " exerts a mighty strong pull.**** Indeed. Last....in my dreams......all the characters seemed so real.....and so did I. > > Your dreams at night are experienced only within you own synaptic > labyrinth....the " other " s dreams are experienced only within themselves. > > > > **** Ok! I can easily see that! And, how do (or can) I know that I'm not > also " dreaming " that there is an*other* whose dreams are experience only > within themselves? **** The core of the " problem " is the assumption that it is you who is dreaming....that there is something substantial at the center of the swirling mnemonic debris. Once the sense of being an isolated-autonomous self looses its opacity all such questions become moot......and all that remains is this most peculiar activity flowing unimpeded by preference. .....or........now the preferences are seen for what they are and allowed to assume their natural shape. > > The daydream is no different. > > The " others " are yourself in the sense that they are known only as > characters within your own personal dream. > > There is no grand union of imaginary selves that is your ultimate reality. > > > > ****If there truly is no *other*, then whom am I expecting to get an > answer/response from? The brain cells in the frontal cortex have created a conceptual world. (dream). They look out upon a landscape of named objects (including the assumption of self) that has been mistaken for reality. They ask questions about their own accumulation of post-its and almost never ask who is asking the questions. The problem is that the asker arrives and exists only within the swirling postist.....It IS the swirling post-its. The illusory self is asking questions about its own self-referential pseudo world. When that knowledge is fully integrated into the psyche an existential crisis usually occurs and the whole " known-world " structure collapses. When the dust settles.....nothing has changed.......but it ain't the same. LOL Also, is what you're saying different than > " solipsism " ? If so, how?**** Solopism: >Denial of the materialist existence, in itself, is not enough to be a solipsist. toombaru: I am not denying the existence of the material world. I am saying that it is not accessible through the assumption of self. > Possibly the most controversial feature of the solipsistic world view is the denial of the existence of other minds. toomabru: I am not saying that other minds do not exist. I am saying that they are separate isolated conceptual dreams. > We can never directly know another's mental state. Qualia, or personal experience, are private and infallible. Another person's experience can be known only by analogy. toombaru: true. >Philosophers try to build knowledge on more than an inference or analogy. The failure of Descartes's epistemological enterprise brought to popularity the idea that all certain knowledge may end at " I think therefore I am " (cogito ergo sum).[1] The theory of solipsism also merits close examination because it relates to three widely held philosophical presuppositions, which are themselves fundamental and wide-ranging in importance. These are: 1. That my most certain knowledge is the contents of my own mind — my thoughts, experiences, affects, etc. 2. That there is no conceptual or logically necessary link between the mental and the physical — between, say, the occurrence of certain conscious experiences or mental states and the 'possession' and behavioral dispositions of a 'body' of a particular kind (see the Brain in a vat); 3. That the experiences of a given person are necessarily private to that person. Solipsism is not a single concept but instead refers to several world views whose common element is some form of denial of the existence of a universe independent from the mind of the agent. ******************************************************************* toombaru: Solipsism does not take into account the ultimate vacuity of the sense of self. > > > > Thanks, > > Michael A > Thank you Michael. Through your questions this mind gets to dives into the deep. It seems to like that. :-) 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.