Guest guest Posted December 15, 2008 Report Share Posted December 15, 2008 List Moderators' Note: When you send you reply to a post, please do not include the entire content of the previous poster. Just include the most relevent part as it is done here. Also when you send your one line appreciation, you are advised to send to the author directly instead of sending to all! Thanks for your cooperation! ================================= Thank you Bindu! Namaste! advaitin , " bindu " <binduau wrote: > > Dear friends, > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 15, 2008 Report Share Posted December 15, 2008 Nisargadatta , " bindu " <binduau wrote: > > What is A me or AN i - The i-concept > > > > Namaste ---- > > > > What is " A me " how can a " me " be separate from all else… hence all > is happening to no one named " me " .. it is ALL happening " AS " > existence; this does not mean that what seems to be happening to > what seems to be me is or can be separated from the whole i.e. my > seeming existence or seeming specialness is no more or less > important than a mote of dust or the earth itself . > > > > All these beings are modes of the light of the conscious Self (what > the yogis call the ParaAtma or supreme Self or Krishna\Siva\Visnu ) > appearing as such due to the light of said Self shining thru the > layers (Vasanas) or construct of experience that the mind likes to > call " me – i " .. This, let us call it modulating principal (karma in > yogic terms) makes a being what it is but it is not the being; nor > does the karma belong to the being it merely modulates the > experience of existence that the Self in back of the mind of a given > being is having thru that mind or being much like light is changed > by colored plastic when shone thru it… it is the same light but > colored by the plastic … lookup prism @ wikipedia > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prism > > The mind could be likened to a prism – > > The same principal at the root of the mind operates to modulate the > configuration of the cells of the various bodies (e.g. mental, > emotional, and gross physical bodies etc..) thusly the body takes on > the size, shape and health paradigm of the Karmic mind and the life > experience of that configuration goes to maintain that configuration. > > > > The " me " then (regardless as to which being or species it is, or of > whether or not the " me " or " I " is a concept only) is a mode of the > Self but is not the entire Self nor does its existence connote any > separate " i " existing as " me " ; rather the existence of a " me " > or " i " verifies the existence of The Self. Else who can it be that > is conscious in the absence of " i " ? > > > > In this way the Self is conscious " AS " all beings-plural as they are > modes of That super-conscient Oneness. (Krishna has said: " I am the > field and the actor in all fields " ) or again it has been said That > Siva is free in ALL modes of His own consciousness. > > > > The statement that " He is free in ALL modes of His own consciousness > has been taken to mean that the free\enlightened (Jivan-Mukta) is > free in the three states of HIS own consciousness vis: waking, > dream, and deep sleep; (as if Jiva had any consciousness to begin > with that could be free) No, the foregoing is an oxymoron since the > Jiva has no self who could have a mode of consciousness of his own. > The idea then of the freedom of the Jiva or enlightenment cannot be > realized by said Jiva. > > > > The fact is that The Self (Krishna\Siva\ God etc) is free in all > beings as they are modes of HIS consciousness. so then instead of > thinking how wonderful it is that this or that is happening to > a " me " how about entertaining the idea that all modes (beings and > configurations of consciousness) are awesome and acceptable, even > wondrous in The Self: e.g. accept all beings events and things with > even-mindedness (i.e. to put it in Buddhist terms: Develop the bodhi- > chitta or consciousness that All is The Self). > > > > When you know you don't know .. when you know it is not you who > knows – when you know you cannot know – when the knowing is > inexpressible and unthinkable -- the knowledge that The Self alone > knows appears " as " the mind. appears? to whom? ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 15, 2008 Report Share Posted December 15, 2008 Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " bindu " <binduau@> wrote: > > > > What is A me or AN i - The i-concept > > > > > > > > Namaste ---- > > > > > > > > What is " A me " how can a " me " be separate from all else… hence all > > is happening to no one named " me " .. it is ALL happening " AS " > > existence; this does not mean that what seems to be happening to > > what seems to be me is or can be separated from the whole i.e. my > > seeming existence or seeming specialness is no more or less > > important than a mote of dust or the earth itself . > > > > > > > > All these beings are modes of the light of the conscious Self (what > > the yogis call the ParaAtma or supreme Self or Krishna\Siva\Visnu ) > > appearing as such due to the light of said Self shining thru the > > layers (Vasanas) or construct of experience that the mind likes to > > call " me – i " .. This, let us call it modulating principal (karma in > > yogic terms) makes a being what it is but it is not the being; nor > > does the karma belong to the being it merely modulates the > > experience of existence that the Self in back of the mind of a given > > being is having thru that mind or being much like light is changed > > by colored plastic when shone thru it… it is the same light but > > colored by the plastic … lookup prism @ wikipedia > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prism > > > > The mind could be likened to a prism – > > > > The same principal at the root of the mind operates to modulate the > > configuration of the cells of the various bodies (e.g. mental, > > emotional, and gross physical bodies etc..) thusly the body takes on > > the size, shape and health paradigm of the Karmic mind and the life > > experience of that configuration goes to maintain that configuration. > > > > > > > > The " me " then (regardless as to which being or species it is, or of > > whether or not the " me " or " I " is a concept only) is a mode of the > > Self but is not the entire Self nor does its existence connote any > > separate " i " existing as " me " ; rather the existence of a " me " > > or " i " verifies the existence of The Self. Else who can it be that > > is conscious in the absence of " i " ? > > > > > > > > In this way the Self is conscious " AS " all beings-plural as they are > > modes of That super-conscient Oneness. (Krishna has said: " I am the > > field and the actor in all fields " ) or again it has been said That > > Siva is free in ALL modes of His own consciousness. > > > > > > > > The statement that " He is free in ALL modes of His own consciousness > > has been taken to mean that the free\enlightened (Jivan-Mukta) is > > free in the three states of HIS own consciousness vis: waking, > > dream, and deep sleep; (as if Jiva had any consciousness to begin > > with that could be free) No, the foregoing is an oxymoron since the > > Jiva has no self who could have a mode of consciousness of his own. > > The idea then of the freedom of the Jiva or enlightenment cannot be > > realized by said Jiva. > > > > > > > > The fact is that The Self (Krishna\Siva\ God etc) is free in all > > beings as they are modes of HIS consciousness. so then instead of > > thinking how wonderful it is that this or that is happening to > > a " me " how about entertaining the idea that all modes (beings and > > configurations of consciousness) are awesome and acceptable, even > > wondrous in The Self: e.g. accept all beings events and things with > > even-mindedness (i.e. to put it in Buddhist terms: Develop the bodhi- > > chitta or consciousness that All is The Self). > > > > > > > > When you know you don't know .. when you know it is not you who > > knows – when you know you cannot know – when the knowing is > > inexpressible and unthinkable -- the knowledge that The Self alone > > knows appears " as " the mind. > > > > appears? > > to whom? > > .b b.b. > Let's just say, for argument's sake, *it* all happens *for* *appearance's sake*. Not much else is happening. ~A Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 15, 2008 Report Share Posted December 15, 2008 Nisargadatta , " anabebe57 " <kailashana wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " bindu " <binduau@> wrote: > > > > > > What is A me or AN i - The i-concept > > > > > > > > > > > > Namaste ---- > > > > > > > > > > > > What is " A me " how can a " me " be separate from all else… hence all > > > is happening to no one named " me " .. it is ALL happening " AS " > > > existence; this does not mean that what seems to be happening to > > > what seems to be me is or can be separated from the whole i.e. my > > > seeming existence or seeming specialness is no more or less > > > important than a mote of dust or the earth itself . > > > > > > > > > > > > All these beings are modes of the light of the conscious Self (what > > > the yogis call the ParaAtma or supreme Self or Krishna\Siva\Visnu ) > > > appearing as such due to the light of said Self shining thru the > > > layers (Vasanas) or construct of experience that the mind likes to > > > call " me – i " .. This, let us call it modulating principal (karma in > > > yogic terms) makes a being what it is but it is not the being; nor > > > does the karma belong to the being it merely modulates the > > > experience of existence that the Self in back of the mind of a given > > > being is having thru that mind or being much like light is changed > > > by colored plastic when shone thru it… it is the same light but > > > colored by the plastic … lookup prism @ wikipedia > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prism > > > > > > The mind could be likened to a prism – > > > > > > The same principal at the root of the mind operates to modulate the > > > configuration of the cells of the various bodies (e.g. mental, > > > emotional, and gross physical bodies etc..) thusly the body takes on > > > the size, shape and health paradigm of the Karmic mind and the life > > > experience of that configuration goes to maintain that configuration. > > > > > > > > > > > > The " me " then (regardless as to which being or species it is, or of > > > whether or not the " me " or " I " is a concept only) is a mode of the > > > Self but is not the entire Self nor does its existence connote any > > > separate " i " existing as " me " ; rather the existence of a " me " > > > or " i " verifies the existence of The Self. Else who can it be that > > > is conscious in the absence of " i " ? > > > > > > > > > > > > In this way the Self is conscious " AS " all beings-plural as they are > > > modes of That super-conscient Oneness. (Krishna has said: " I am the > > > field and the actor in all fields " ) or again it has been said That > > > Siva is free in ALL modes of His own consciousness. > > > > > > > > > > > > The statement that " He is free in ALL modes of His own consciousness > > > has been taken to mean that the free\enlightened (Jivan-Mukta) is > > > free in the three states of HIS own consciousness vis: waking, > > > dream, and deep sleep; (as if Jiva had any consciousness to begin > > > with that could be free) No, the foregoing is an oxymoron since the > > > Jiva has no self who could have a mode of consciousness of his own. > > > The idea then of the freedom of the Jiva or enlightenment cannot be > > > realized by said Jiva. > > > > > > > > > > > > The fact is that The Self (Krishna\Siva\ God etc) is free in all > > > beings as they are modes of HIS consciousness. so then instead of > > > thinking how wonderful it is that this or that is happening to > > > a " me " how about entertaining the idea that all modes (beings and > > > configurations of consciousness) are awesome and acceptable, even > > > wondrous in The Self: e.g. accept all beings events and things with > > > even-mindedness (i.e. to put it in Buddhist terms: Develop the bodhi- > > > chitta or consciousness that All is The Self). > > > > > > > > > > > > When you know you don't know .. when you know it is not you who > > > knows – when you know you cannot know – when the knowing is > > > inexpressible and unthinkable -- the knowledge that The Self alone > > > knows appears " as " the mind. > > > > > > > > appears? > > > > to whom? > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > Let's just say, for argument's sake, *it* all happens *for* > *appearance's sake*. > > Not much else is happening. > > ~A who is argument? why do anything for his/her sake? who's going to 'do' that anyway? why? who is appearance? why do anything for his/her sake? who's going to 'do' that anyway? why? bodhi-chitta or consciousness that All is The Self is chitter chatter. and all throughout...THAT remains unimpressed. ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 15, 2008 Report Share Posted December 15, 2008 Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111 wrote > and all throughout...THAT remains unimpressed. > > .b b.b. > .....and I am impressed that I am unimpressed. Hug. ~A Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 15, 2008 Report Share Posted December 15, 2008 Nisargadatta , " bindu " <binduau wrote: > > What is A me or AN i - The i-concept > > > > Namaste ---- > > > > What is " A me " how can a " me " be separate from all else… hence all > is happening to no one named " me " .. it is ALL happening " AS " > existence; this does not mean that what seems to be happening to > what seems to be me is or can be separated from the whole i.e. my > seeming existence or seeming specialness is no more or less > important than a mote of dust or the earth itself . > > > > All these beings are modes of the light of the conscious Self (what > the yogis call the ParaAtma or supreme Self or Krishna\Siva\Visnu ) > appearing as such due to the light of said Self shining thru the > layers (Vasanas) or construct of experience that the mind likes to > call " me – i " .. This, let us call it modulating principal (karma in > yogic terms) makes a being what it is but it is not the being; nor > does the karma belong to the being it merely modulates the > experience of existence that the Self in back of the mind of a given > being is having thru that mind or being much like light is changed > by colored plastic when shone thru it… it is the same light but > colored by the plastic … lookup prism @ wikipedia > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prism > > The mind could be likened to a prism – > > The same principal at the root of the mind operates to modulate the > configuration of the cells of the various bodies (e.g. mental, > emotional, and gross physical bodies etc..) thusly the body takes on > the size, shape and health paradigm of the Karmic mind and the life > experience of that configuration goes to maintain that configuration. > > > > The " me " then (regardless as to which being or species it is, or of > whether or not the " me " or " I " is a concept only) is a mode of the > Self but is not the entire Self nor does its existence connote any > separate " i " existing as " me " ; rather the existence of a " me " > or " i " verifies the existence of The Self. Else who can it be that > is conscious in the absence of " i " ? > > > > In this way the Self is conscious " AS " all beings-plural as they are > modes of That super-conscient Oneness. (Krishna has said: " I am the > field and the actor in all fields " ) or again it has been said That > Siva is free in ALL modes of His own consciousness. > > > > The statement that " He is free in ALL modes of His own consciousness > has been taken to mean that the free\enlightened (Jivan-Mukta) is > free in the three states of HIS own consciousness vis: waking, > dream, and deep sleep; (as if Jiva had any consciousness to begin > with that could be free) No, the foregoing is an oxymoron since the > Jiva has no self who could have a mode of consciousness of his own. > The idea then of the freedom of the Jiva or enlightenment cannot be > realized by said Jiva. > > > > The fact is that The Self (Krishna\Siva\ God etc) is free in all > beings as they are modes of HIS consciousness. so then instead of > thinking how wonderful it is that this or that is happening to > a " me " how about entertaining the idea that all modes (beings and > configurations of consciousness) are awesome and acceptable, even > wondrous in The Self: e.g. accept all beings events and things with > even-mindedness (i.e. to put it in Buddhist terms: Develop the bodhi- > chitta or consciousness that All is The Self). > > > > When you know you don't know .. when you know it is not you who > knows – when you know you cannot know – when the knowing is > inexpressible and unthinkable -- the knowledge that The Self alone > knows appears " as " the mind. > You lost me at concept. There is only " ME " . when you know you don't " know " . mind can then become quiet. a resting place for eternity. but then to say self appears as the mind is heresy mind appears as self is what I think you meant to say. Mark Mind is certainly alive and well,is it not? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 15, 2008 Report Share Posted December 15, 2008 Nisargadatta , " anabebe57 " <kailashana wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> > wrote > > > > > > and all throughout...THAT remains unimpressed. > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > ....and I am impressed that I am unimpressed. > > Hug. > > ~A I want to write about this stuff till the cows come home. I never get tire of chewing the same cud. If you see my cows tell them to hurry, I need company. Sitting on my porch, I scan the horizon looking for my herd, but there is no horizon to be seen in this rain, and of course, no cows. Maybe, I own no cows. Maybe, I'm a cow who loves to chew its cud, and pretend it owns a herd. Pete > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 15, 2008 Report Share Posted December 15, 2008 > Maybe, I'm a cow who loves to chew its > cud, and pretend it owns a herd. > > Pete > > > " one must herd one's own...the one or the many " ..b b.b. 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.