Guest guest Posted January 29, 2009 Report Share Posted January 29, 2009 Every thought, concept, word and often syllables are signifiers, pointers, so to speak, that always point to another signifier. They are relative and not absolute as culture, language and religion might tell us, e.g. " at the beginning was the word " . Meaning, thus, is relative, too. But, we always search for unifying signifiers or a master-signifier. We don't like relativity and things without a clear defined direction. 'All is One', as many greek philosophers and Heidegger postulated, is the prototype of any possible unifying signifier. 'One' can have different disguises: god, democracy, fatherland, and so on. Language, communication and many other forms of social interactions appear meaningless for many people, when they lack a unifying signifier or master-signifier. Nisargadatta, Buddha et al. tell us and demonstrated that it is possible to live without a master-signifier. Meaning and sense are coupled to language. Outside language is life; the realm of words and concepts is the realm of the dead. Entering language we become zombies and slaves, if we not become aware of it, during the dream of our lives and this universe. We think that we have lost something entering language: some primordial, free and happy subject we could have been or have been without language. But this not true. What we find going back or further is lack. We are so in love with the commodities of this life that we transform lack into loss, not being aware of the void we already as subjects represent. Also the Self, with capital letter, is a unifying signifier. They are useful in didactic settings, but also those unifying signifiers that helped us at the beginning must be discarded, sooner or later. These walking sticks have also to be dropped. Ricardo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 29, 2009 Report Share Posted January 29, 2009 Nisargadatta , Ricardo Almon <almon2009 wrote: > > Every thought, concept, word and often syllables are signifiers, pointers, so to speak, that always point to another signifier. They are relative and not absolute as culture, language and religion might tell us, e.g. " at the beginning was the word " . Meaning, thus, is relative, too. But, we always search for unifying signifiers or a master-signifier. We don't like relativity and things without a clear defined direction. > > 'All is One', as many greek philosophers and Heidegger postulated, is the prototype of any possible unifying signifier. 'One' can have different disguises: god, democracy, fatherland, and so on. Language, communication and many other forms of social interactions appear meaningless for many people, when they lack a unifying signifier or master-signifier. > > Nisargadatta, Buddha et al. tell us and demonstrated that it is possible to live without a master-signifier. Meaning and sense are coupled to language. Outside language is life; the realm of words and concepts is the realm of the dead. Entering language we become zombies and slaves, if we not become aware of it, during the dream of our lives and this universe. > > We think that we have lost something entering language: some primordial, free and happy subject we could have been or have been without language. But this not true. What we find going back or further is lack. We are so in love with the commodities of this life that we transform lack into loss, not being aware of the void we already as subjects represent. > > Also the Self, with capital letter, is a unifying signifier. They are useful in didactic settings, but also those unifying signifiers that helped us at the beginning must be discarded, sooner or later. These walking sticks have also to be dropped. > > Ricardo > so....why you don't drop/stop to talk about this your mentionned " Self, with capital letter " .....? Marc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 29, 2009 Report Share Posted January 29, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , Ricardo Almon <almon2009@> > wrote: > > > > Every thought, concept, word and often syllables are signifiers, > pointers, so to speak, that always point to another signifier. They > are relative and not absolute as culture, language and religion might > tell us, e.g. " at the beginning was the word " . Meaning, thus, is > relative, too. But, we always search for unifying signifiers or a > master-signifier. We don't like relativity and things without a clear > defined direction. > > > > 'All is One', as many greek philosophers and Heidegger postulated, > is the prototype of any possible unifying signifier. 'One' can have > different disguises: god, democracy, fatherland, and so on. Language, > communication and many other forms of social interactions appear > meaningless for many people, when they lack a unifying signifier or > master-signifier. > > > > Nisargadatta, Buddha et al. tell us and demonstrated that it is > possible to live without a master-signifier. Meaning and sense are > coupled to language. Outside language is life; the realm of words and > concepts is the realm of the dead. Entering language we become > zombies and slaves, if we not become aware of it, during the dream of > our lives and this universe. > > > > We think that we have lost something entering language: some > primordial, free and happy subject we could have been or have been > without language. But this not true. What we find going back or > further is lack. We are so in love with the commodities of this life > that we transform lack into loss, not being aware of the void we > already as subjects represent. > > > > Also the Self, with capital letter, is a unifying signifier. They > are useful in didactic settings, but also those unifying signifiers > that helped us at the beginning must be discarded, sooner or later. > These walking sticks have also to be dropped. > > > > Ricardo > > > > > so....why you don't drop/stop to talk about this your > mentionned " Self, with capital letter " .....? > > > Marc Ps: i knew somebody who believe/think that he don't need any presence to any " Teacher/Master/Swami etc " ........but whenever i met him.....he was busy reading Krishnamurti books....one after the other.....also about Ramana....and other Masters. It's indeed much more confortable to read nice books.....especially the books which are telling that one is already " enlightened " without knowing about.....that it's not necessary to do any effort......that there is no ego.......etc.....etc..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 29, 2009 Report Share Posted January 29, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , Ricardo Almon <almon2009@> > wrote: > > > > Every thought, concept, word and often syllables are signifiers, > pointers, so to speak, that always point to another signifier. They > are relative and not absolute as culture, language and religion might > tell us, e.g. " at the beginning was the word " . Meaning, thus, is > relative, too. But, we always search for unifying signifiers or a > master-signifier. We don't like relativity and things without a clear > defined direction. > > > > 'All is One', as many greek philosophers and Heidegger postulated, > is the prototype of any possible unifying signifier. 'One' can have > different disguises: god, democracy, fatherland, and so on. Language, > communication and many other forms of social interactions appear > meaningless for many people, when they lack a unifying signifier or > master-signifier. > > > > Nisargadatta, Buddha et al. tell us and demonstrated that it is > possible to live without a master-signifier. Meaning and sense are > coupled to language. Outside language is life; the realm of words and > concepts is the realm of the dead. Entering language we become > zombies and slaves, if we not become aware of it, during the dream of > our lives and this universe. > > > > We think that we have lost something entering language: some > primordial, free and happy subject we could have been or have been > without language. But this not true. What we find going back or > further is lack. We are so in love with the commodities of this life > that we transform lack into loss, not being aware of the void we > already as subjects represent. > > > > Also the Self, with capital letter, is a unifying signifier. They > are useful in didactic settings, but also those unifying signifiers > that helped us at the beginning must be discarded, sooner or later. > These walking sticks have also to be dropped. > > > > Ricardo > > > > > so....why you don't drop/stop to talk about this your > mentionned " Self, with capital letter " .....? ..........why should I? You could explain me, why you ask this question (confounding things here in this question?) Yours, Ricardo > > Marc > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 29, 2009 Report Share Posted January 29, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , Ricardo Almon <almon2009@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Every thought, concept, word and often syllables are signifiers, > > pointers, so to speak, that always point to another signifier. They > > are relative and not absolute as culture, language and religion > might > > tell us, e.g. " at the beginning was the word " . Meaning, thus, is > > relative, too. But, we always search for unifying signifiers or a > > master-signifier. We don't like relativity and things without a > clear > > defined direction. > > > > > > 'All is One', as many greek philosophers and Heidegger > postulated, > > is the prototype of any possible unifying signifier. 'One' can have > > different disguises: god, democracy, fatherland, and so on. > Language, > > communication and many other forms of social interactions appear > > meaningless for many people, when they lack a unifying signifier or > > master-signifier. > > > > > > Nisargadatta, Buddha et al. tell us and demonstrated that it is > > possible to live without a master-signifier. Meaning and sense are > > coupled to language. Outside language is life; the realm of words > and > > concepts is the realm of the dead. Entering language we become > > zombies and slaves, if we not become aware of it, during the dream > of > > our lives and this universe. > > > > > > We think that we have lost something entering language: some > > primordial, free and happy subject we could have been or have been > > without language. But this not true. What we find going back or > > further is lack. We are so in love with the commodities of this > life > > that we transform lack into loss, not being aware of the void we > > already as subjects represent. > > > > > > Also the Self, with capital letter, is a unifying signifier. They > > are useful in didactic settings, but also those unifying signifiers > > that helped us at the beginning must be discarded, sooner or later. > > These walking sticks have also to be dropped. > > > > > > Ricardo > > > > > > > > > so....why you don't drop/stop to talk about this your > > mentionned " Self, with capital letter " .....? > > > > > > Marc > > > Ps: i knew somebody who believe/think that he don't need any presence > to any " Teacher/Master/Swami etc " ........but whenever i met > him.....he was busy reading Krishnamurti books....one after the > other.....also about Ramana....and other Masters. > It's indeed much more confortable to read nice books.....especially > the books which are telling that one is already " enlightened " without > knowing about.....that it's not necessary to do any effort......that > there is no ego.......etc.....etc..... ........I am not enlightened and I am not interested in enlightenment. I don't read this kind of books any longer. I stopped reading them about 7 years ago when I finished reading Niz. I am done with it. I prefer newspaper. Yours, Ricardo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 29, 2009 Report Share Posted January 29, 2009 Nisargadatta , " almon2009 " <almon2009 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Ricardo Almon <almon2009@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Every thought, concept, word and often syllables are signifiers, > > > pointers, so to speak, that always point to another signifier. They > > > are relative and not absolute as culture, language and religion > > might > > > tell us, e.g. " at the beginning was the word " . Meaning, thus, is > > > relative, too. But, we always search for unifying signifiers or a > > > master-signifier. We don't like relativity and things without a > > clear > > > defined direction. > > > > > > > > 'All is One', as many greek philosophers and Heidegger > > postulated, > > > is the prototype of any possible unifying signifier. 'One' can have > > > different disguises: god, democracy, fatherland, and so on. > > Language, > > > communication and many other forms of social interactions appear > > > meaningless for many people, when they lack a unifying signifier or > > > master-signifier. > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta, Buddha et al. tell us and demonstrated that it is > > > possible to live without a master-signifier. Meaning and sense are > > > coupled to language. Outside language is life; the realm of words > > and > > > concepts is the realm of the dead. Entering language we become > > > zombies and slaves, if we not become aware of it, during the dream > > of > > > our lives and this universe. > > > > > > > > We think that we have lost something entering language: some > > > primordial, free and happy subject we could have been or have been > > > without language. But this not true. What we find going back or > > > further is lack. We are so in love with the commodities of this > > life > > > that we transform lack into loss, not being aware of the void we > > > already as subjects represent. > > > > > > > > Also the Self, with capital letter, is a unifying signifier. They > > > are useful in didactic settings, but also those unifying signifiers > > > that helped us at the beginning must be discarded, sooner or later. > > > These walking sticks have also to be dropped. > > > > > > > > Ricardo > > > > > > > > > > > > > so....why you don't drop/stop to talk about this your > > > mentionned " Self, with capital letter " .....? > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > Ps: i knew somebody who believe/think that he don't need any presence > > to any " Teacher/Master/Swami etc " ........but whenever i met > > him.....he was busy reading Krishnamurti books....one after the > > other.....also about Ramana....and other Masters. > > It's indeed much more confortable to read nice books.....especially > > the books which are telling that one is already " enlightened " without > > knowing about.....that it's not necessary to do any effort......that > > there is no ego.......etc.....etc..... > > > .......I am not enlightened and I am not interested in enlightenment. I don't read this kind > of books any longer. I stopped reading them about 7 years ago when I finished reading > Niz. I am done with it. I prefer newspaper. > > Yours, > Ricardo > yes, there is nobody who realy care about " enlightenment " .....except few confused ego Freaks... only newspaper?....and then now this fabulous messages about/from some pseudo teachers in here?.... Marc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 29, 2009 Report Share Posted January 29, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " almon2009@ " <almon2009@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Ricardo Almon <almon2009@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Every thought, concept, word and often syllables are > signifiers, > > > > pointers, so to speak, that always point to another signifier. > They > > > > are relative and not absolute as culture, language and religion > > > might > > > > tell us, e.g. " at the beginning was the word " . Meaning, thus, > is > > > > relative, too. But, we always search for unifying signifiers or > a > > > > master-signifier. We don't like relativity and things without a > > > clear > > > > defined direction. > > > > > > > > > > 'All is One', as many greek philosophers and Heidegger > > > postulated, > > > > is the prototype of any possible unifying signifier. 'One' can > have > > > > different disguises: god, democracy, fatherland, and so on. > > > Language, > > > > communication and many other forms of social interactions > appear > > > > meaningless for many people, when they lack a unifying > signifier or > > > > master-signifier. > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta, Buddha et al. tell us and demonstrated that it > is > > > > possible to live without a master-signifier. Meaning and sense > are > > > > coupled to language. Outside language is life; the realm of > words > > > and > > > > concepts is the realm of the dead. Entering language we become > > > > zombies and slaves, if we not become aware of it, during the > dream > > > of > > > > our lives and this universe. > > > > > > > > > > We think that we have lost something entering language: some > > > > primordial, free and happy subject we could have been or have > been > > > > without language. But this not true. What we find going back or > > > > further is lack. We are so in love with the commodities of this > > > life > > > > that we transform lack into loss, not being aware of the void > we > > > > already as subjects represent. > > > > > > > > > > Also the Self, with capital letter, is a unifying signifier. > They > > > > are useful in didactic settings, but also those unifying > signifiers > > > > that helped us at the beginning must be discarded, sooner or > later. > > > > These walking sticks have also to be dropped. > > > > > > > > > > Ricardo > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > so....why you don't drop/stop to talk about this your > > > > mentionned " Self, with capital letter " .....? > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > Ps: i knew somebody who believe/think that he don't need any > presence > > > to any " Teacher/Master/Swami etc " ........but whenever i met > > > him.....he was busy reading Krishnamurti books....one after the > > > other.....also about Ramana....and other Masters. > > > It's indeed much more confortable to read nice > books.....especially > > > the books which are telling that one is already " enlightened " > without > > > knowing about.....that it's not necessary to do any > effort......that > > > there is no ego.......etc.....etc..... > > > > > > .......I am not enlightened and I am not interested in > enlightenment. I don't read this kind > > of books any longer. I stopped reading them about 7 years ago when > I finished reading > > Niz. I am done with it. I prefer newspaper. > > > > Yours, > > Ricardo > > > > > yes, there is nobody who realy care about " enlightenment " .....except > few confused ego Freaks... > > only newspaper?....and then now this fabulous messages about/from > some pseudo teachers in here?.... > > > Marc Hi Marc, I have to read very much scientific literature. I have read Lacan but do not read now anymore than here and there papers on Lacanian topics. Have read also some philosphers. I like the combination of Lacan's body of thought with philosophy....kind of meta- philosophy or meta-psychoanalysis. Yours, Ricardo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 29, 2009 Report Share Posted January 29, 2009 Nisargadatta , Ricardo Almon <almon2009 wrote: > > Every thought, concept, word and often syllables are signifiers, pointers, so to speak, that always point to another signifier. They are relative and not absolute as culture, language and religion might tell us, e.g. " at the beginning was the word " . Meaning, thus, is relative, too. But, we always search for unifying signifiers or a master-signifier. We don't like relativity and things without a clear defined direction. > > 'All is One', as many greek philosophers and Heidegger postulated, is the prototype of any possible unifying signifier. 'One' can have different disguises: god, democracy, fatherland, and so on. Language, communication and many other forms of social interactions appear meaningless for many people, when they lack a unifying signifier or master-signifier. > > Nisargadatta, Buddha et al. tell us and demonstrated that it is possible to live without a master-signifier. Meaning and sense are coupled to language. Outside language is life; the realm of words and concepts is the realm of the dead. Entering language we become zombies and slaves, if we not become aware of it, during the dream of our lives and this universe. > > We think that we have lost something entering language: some primordial, free and happy subject we could have been or have been without language. But this not true. What we find going back or further is lack. We are so in love with the commodities of this life that we transform lack into loss, not being aware of the void we already as subjects represent. > > Also the Self, with capital letter, is a unifying signifier. They are useful in didactic settings, but also those unifying signifiers that helped us at the beginning must be discarded, sooner or later. These walking sticks have also to be dropped. > > Ricardo if there postulatin' goin' on.. then ipso facto there is a postulator and his postulated.. first warp in the wave.. it goes out concentrically from there as ever widening potentials... which fall into Ignorance as you and me and the world. Implicit Identity is unaffected and takes no notice. ...as if nothing has ever been or been done..nor ever will be.. RIGHT NOW! Wow! ..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.