Guest guest Posted August 17, 2009 Report Share Posted August 17, 2009 Nisargadatta: All exists in awareness and awareness neither dies nor is reborn. It is the changeless reality itself. All the universe of experience is born with the body and dies with the body; it has its beginning and end in awareness, but awareness knows no beginning, nor end. If you think it out carefully and brood over it for a long time, you will come to see the light of awareness in all its clarity and the world will fade out of your vision. It is like looking at a burning incense stick, you see the stick and the smoke first; when you notice the fiery point, you realise that it has the power to consume mountains of sticks and fill the universe with smoke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 17, 2009 Report Share Posted August 17, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta: All exists in awareness and awareness neither dies nor is reborn. It is the changeless reality itself. > > All the universe of experience is born with the body and dies with the body; it has its beginning and end in awareness, but awareness knows no beginning, nor end. > > If you think it out carefully and brood over it for a long time, you will come to see the light of awareness in all its clarity and the world will fade out of your vision. It is like looking at a burning incense stick, you see the stick and the smoke first; when you notice the fiery point, you realise that it has the power to consume > mountains of sticks and fill the universe with smoke. > All this he wrote when still alive. The brain can produce the most wonderous images, sensations and movies, especially when the so called 'reality control' has lost its grip or got bypassed. I wonder what Niz would have told when already dead and his body had decayed ? Werner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 17, 2009 Report Share Posted August 17, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr wrote: > > All this he wrote when still alive. > > The brain can produce the most wonderous images, sensations and movies, especially when the so called 'reality control' has lost its grip or got bypassed. > > I wonder what Niz would have told when already dead and his body had > decayed ? You don't wonder that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 17, 2009 Report Share Posted August 17, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > All this he wrote when still alive. > > > > The brain can produce the most wonderous images, sensations and movies, especially when the so called 'reality control' has lost its grip or got bypassed. > > > > I wonder what Niz would have told when already dead and his body had > decayed ? > > You don't wonder that. > Yes, Tim, I was joking. Chuckle ... Werner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 17, 2009 Report Share Posted August 17, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > > > All this he wrote when still alive. > > > > > > The brain can produce the most wonderous images, sensations and movies, especially when the so called 'reality control' has lost its grip or got bypassed. > > > > > > I wonder what Niz would have told when already dead and his body had > decayed ? > > > > You don't wonder that. > > > > > Yes, Tim, I was joking. > > Chuckle ... Werner Yeah, sure. You're a joke, Werner. That isn't even there. That makes it a very bad joke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 17, 2009 Report Share Posted August 17, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > > > > > All this he wrote when still alive. > > > > > > > > The brain can produce the most wonderous images, sensations and movies, especially when the so called 'reality control' has lost its grip or got bypassed. > > > > > > > > I wonder what Niz would have told when already dead and his body had > decayed ? > > > > > > You don't wonder that. > > > > > > > > > Yes, Tim, I was joking. > > > > Chuckle ... Werner > > Yeah, sure. > > You're a joke, Werner. > > That isn't even there. > > That makes it a very bad joke. > Ooops - Tim the moralist ! A new side of you. That's even more fun. Werner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 17, 2009 Report Share Posted August 17, 2009 - Tim G. Nisargadatta Monday, August 17, 2009 5:49 AM today's Nisargadatta Nisargadatta: All exists in awareness and awareness neither dies nor is reborn. It is the changeless reality itself. All the universe of experience is born with the body and dies with the body; it has its beginning and end in awareness, but awareness knows no beginning, nor end. If you think it out carefully and brood over it for a long time, you will come to see the light of awareness in all its clarity and the world will fade out of your vision. It is like looking at a burning incense stick, you see the stick and the smoke first; when you notice the fiery point, you realise that it has the power to consume mountains of sticks and fill the universe with smoke. === The existence of what he calls awareness is not sensible. It is not a sense-object. The senses and their objects are it. It is obviously present, but if someone asks geo " how do you know it is so " .....all I can say is " because of this " . -geo- avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS): 090526-0, 26/05/2009 Tested on: 17/8/2009 06:28:42 avast! - copyright © 1988-2009 ALWIL Software. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 17, 2009 Report Share Posted August 17, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta: All exists in awareness and awareness neither dies nor is reborn. It is the changeless reality itself. > > All the universe of experience is born with the body and dies with the body; it has its beginning and end in awareness, but awareness knows no beginning, nor end. > > If you think it out carefully and brood over it for a long time, you will come to see the light of awareness in all its clarity and the world will fade out of your vision. It is like looking at a burning incense stick, you see the stick and the smoke first; when you notice the fiery point, you realise that it has the power to consume > mountains of sticks and fill the universe with smoke. When freedom speaks, it doesn't speak to anyone, nor to provide anything. Freedom speaks freely, because it is natural to freedom. The conditionless being doesn't imagine there are beings imprisoned in conditions. It addresses beings because that is the conventional " knowledge " imbedded in language use, an imaginary " knowledge " that existing beings communicate and so have devised language; this assumption is undermined when freedom speaks. It addressed the body as an object because conventionally, bodies are assumed to exist as the speakers and retainers of knowledge and memory. Freedom naturally undermines this assumption of body-containers of knowledge and knowing. Freedom undermines knowledge, freely. Not so one gets rid of knowledge. So one understands without having understood anything. - D - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 17, 2009 Report Share Posted August 17, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta: All exists in awareness and awareness neither dies nor is reborn. It is the changeless reality itself. > > > > All the universe of experience is born with the body and dies with the body; it has its beginning and end in awareness, but awareness knows no beginning, nor end. > > > > If you think it out carefully and brood over it for a long time, you will come to see the light of awareness in all its clarity and the world will fade out of your vision. It is like looking at a burning incense stick, you see the stick and the smoke first; when you notice the fiery point, you realise that it has the power to consume > > mountains of sticks and fill the universe with smoke. > > > > > All this he wrote when still alive. > > The brain can produce the most wonderous images, sensations and movies, especially when the so called 'reality control' has lost its grip or got bypassed. > > I wonder what Niz would have told when already dead and his body had decayed ? > > Werner Listen. Do you hear that silence speaking? - D - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 17, 2009 Report Share Posted August 17, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > Tim G. > Nisargadatta > Monday, August 17, 2009 5:49 AM > today's Nisargadatta > > > Nisargadatta: All exists in awareness and awareness neither dies nor is > reborn. It is the changeless reality itself. > > All the universe of experience is born with the body and dies with the body; > it has its beginning and end in awareness, but awareness knows no beginning, > nor end. > > If you think it out carefully and brood over it for a long time, you will > come to see the light of awareness in all its clarity and the world will > fade out of your vision. It is like looking at a burning incense stick, you > see the stick and the smoke first; when you notice the fiery point, you > realise that it has the power to consume > mountains of sticks and fill the universe with smoke. > === > > The existence of what he calls awareness is not sensible. It is not a > sense-object. The senses and their objects are it. It is obviously present, > but if someone asks geo " how do you know it is so " .....all I can say is > " because of this " . > -geo- Yes. So the word and concept " awareness " go, are tossed. It's like building a bridge to nowhere and everywhere. No such bridge can be built. Suddenly, though, you are there. Nowhere, everywhere, all, each perception of each moment, beyond any perception, timeless. There are no words whatsoever, but words can be offered and perceived, too. They express freely. All expresses freely. All sounds express silence. All perceptions express the imperceptible. Nothing is expressed at all. There is nothing but freedom. No bridges are involved. Concepts dissolve. Yet, one expresses. As a human being, one communicates. Without anything having been said. There is nothing that is not the crystalization of infinity, anywhere. Trite concepts like " crystalization of infinity " dissolve away, unneeded. No bridge. Just this. - D - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 17, 2009 Report Share Posted August 17, 2009 As a human being, one communicates.Without anything having been said.-d- I read this several times. I dont want to let the question go. What do you mean by nothing was said? I would say nothing was said about IT. Is that it? -geo- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 17, 2009 Report Share Posted August 17, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > As a human being, one communicates. > > Without anything having been said. > -d- > > I read this several times. I dont want to let the question go. What do you mean by nothing was said? I would say nothing was said about IT. Is that it? > -geo- It's more than that (and less). It's that nothing rememebered has actually occurred. All of our experiences are remembered. Nothing occurred. It's not just losing the conceptual center. It's losing the entire bubble-world of perceptual experiences that the center was constructed as a reference point for. Yes, you can still do math. Because you remember that this happened, you did math. Yes, you still perceive, because you remember you perceived something. What people call " the present " isn't presence, isn't the aware no-thing/everything. What people call the present is a memory that seems to have occurred very, very recently. There is no " the past. " Very recent memory, very distant memory, all of it is about a past that isn't. The present that actually is, isn't divided into past, present, future. So, it isn't happening. Everything considered time, everything remembered, simultaneously is not happening, and is this eternal presence. Events a million years ago, today, a million years in the future, are equally now - and so are not events, are not separable, are not recalled. So, nothing happened. Nothing has been said. And I repeat, because you keep bringing this up, it doesn't mean that you can't do math or that you don't perceive anything. You are what you perceive. Therefore there is neither a " you " or a " something that was perceived, " a " perception. " It's purely a matter of direct knowing, direct awareness, direct being. It's not philosophical, it's not a position to take in a debate, it's not a kind of knowledge that can be written or spoken about. When one speaks of this, automatically the speech becomes representation, becomes a perceptual object, which is then remembered as having occurred. So, why speak? Why not? It happens freely. It is like any other event occurring. And thus, hasn't happened, because only in memory do any perceptual events seem to occur. In words, this sounds like a philosophical position, or an intellectual idea. Actually, though, there isn't any position or idea. Many people think that one understanding this wouldn't speak, wouldn't be posting anything. But words are offered freely. There is no reason not to communicate what never will register in memory, what never will form a perceptual image or experience, what never will have content to be communicated. The ultimate freedom which is this, that is. Which is beyond any freedom, because nothing to be free of, and nothing to be free to do. - D - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 17, 2009 Report Share Posted August 17, 2009 - dan330033 Nisargadatta Monday, August 17, 2009 4:14 PM Re: today's Nisargadatta Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > As a human being, one communicates. > > Without anything having been said. > -d- > > I read this several times. I dont want to let the question go. What do you > mean by nothing was said? I would say nothing was said about IT. Is that > it? > -geo- It's more than that (and less). It's that nothing rememebered has actually occurred. All of our experiences are remembered. Nothing occurred. It's not just losing the conceptual center. It's losing the entire bubble-world of perceptual experiences that the center was constructed as a reference point for. Yes, you can still do math. Because you remember that this happened, you did math. Yes, you still perceive, because you remember you perceived something. What people call " the present " isn't presence, isn't the aware no-thing/everything. What people call the present is a memory that seems to have occurred very, very recently. There is no " the past. " Very recent memory, very distant memory, all of it is about a past that isn't. The present that actually is, isn't divided into past, present, future. So, it isn't happening. Everything considered time, everything remembered, simultaneously is not happening, and is this eternal presence. Events a million years ago, today, a million years in the future, are equally now - and so are not events, are not separable, are not recalled. So, nothing happened. Nothing has been said. And I repeat, because you keep bringing this up, it doesn't mean that you can't do math or that you don't perceive anything. You are what you perceive. Therefore there is neither a " you " or a " something that was perceived, " a " perception. " It's purely a matter of direct knowing, direct awareness, direct being. It's not philosophical, it's not a position to take in a debate, it's not a kind of knowledge that can be written or spoken about. When one speaks of this, automatically the speech becomes representation, becomes a perceptual object, which is then remembered as having occurred. So, why speak? Why not? It happens freely. It is like any other event occurring. And thus, hasn't happened, because only in memory do any perceptual events seem to occur. In words, this sounds like a philosophical position, or an intellectual idea. Actually, though, there isn't any position or idea. Many people think that one understanding this wouldn't speak, wouldn't be posting anything. But words are offered freely. There is no reason not to communicate what never will register in memory, what never will form a perceptual image or experience, what never will have content to be communicated. The ultimate freedom which is this, that is. Which is beyond any freedom, because nothing to be free of, and nothing to be free to do. - D - It is interesting. I am looking at it as never had been seen yet. I understand ...yes...nothing happened...nothing changed...nothing moved..no experience. In order to see this there is the subjective non-centered center that is unchanging as referrence. Nothing was referred to. -geo- avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS): 090816-0, 17/08/2009 Tested on: 17/8/2009 16:35:19 avast! - copyright © 1988-2009 ALWIL Software. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 17, 2009 Report Share Posted August 17, 2009 - geo Nisargadatta Monday, August 17, 2009 4:41 PM Re: Re: today's Nisargadatta - dan330033 Nisargadatta Monday, August 17, 2009 4:14 PM Re: today's Nisargadatta Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > As a human being, one communicates. > > Without anything having been said. > -d- > > I read this several times. I dont want to let the question go. What do you > mean by nothing was said? I would say nothing was said about IT. Is that > it? > -geo- It's more than that (and less). It's that nothing rememebered has actually occurred. All of our experiences are remembered. Nothing occurred. It's not just losing the conceptual center. It's losing the entire bubble-world of perceptual experiences that the center was constructed as a reference point for. Yes, you can still do math. Because you remember that this happened, you did math. Yes, you still perceive, because you remember you perceived something. What people call " the present " isn't presence, isn't the aware no-thing/everything. What people call the present is a memory that seems to have occurred very, very recently. There is no " the past. " Very recent memory, very distant memory, all of it is about a past that isn't. The present that actually is, isn't divided into past, present, future. So, it isn't happening. Everything considered time, everything remembered, simultaneously is not happening, and is this eternal presence. Events a million years ago, today, a million years in the future, are equally now - and so are not events, are not separable, are not recalled. So, nothing happened. Nothing has been said. And I repeat, because you keep bringing this up, it doesn't mean that you can't do math or that you don't perceive anything. You are what you perceive. Therefore there is neither a " you " or a " something that was perceived, " a " perception. " It's purely a matter of direct knowing, direct awareness, direct being. It's not philosophical, it's not a position to take in a debate, it's not a kind of knowledge that can be written or spoken about. When one speaks of this, automatically the speech becomes representation, becomes a perceptual object, which is then remembered as having occurred. So, why speak? Why not? It happens freely. It is like any other event occurring. And thus, hasn't happened, because only in memory do any perceptual events seem to occur. In words, this sounds like a philosophical position, or an intellectual idea. Actually, though, there isn't any position or idea. Many people think that one understanding this wouldn't speak, wouldn't be posting anything. But words are offered freely. There is no reason not to communicate what never will register in memory, what never will form a perceptual image or experience, what never will have content to be communicated. The ultimate freedom which is this, that is. Which is beyond any freedom, because nothing to be free of, and nothing to be free to do. - D - It is interesting. I am looking at it as never had been seen yet. I understand ...yes...nothing happened...nothing changed...nothing moved..no experience. In order to see this there is the subjective non-centered center that is unchanging as referrence. Nothing was referred to. == Now, considering temporal and spacial events....(math, streeets, chairs) of course it must " feel strange " . But it is not part of our " experience repertoaire " to have time and history and space and localization.......side by side with the timeless, spaceless, history-less, non-localized. And it is exaclty because there is no such experience that it is possible - but the quest for experience must not be there - which is the same as MElessness. -geo- avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS): 090816-0, 17/08/2009 Tested on: 17/8/2009 16:35:19 avast! - copyright © 1988-2009 ALWIL Software. avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS): 090816-0, 17/08/2009 Tested on: 17/8/2009 16:45:25 avast! - copyright © 1988-2009 ALWIL Software. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 17, 2009 Report Share Posted August 17, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > It is interesting. I am looking at it as never had been seen yet. I > understand ...yes...nothing happened...nothing changed...nothing moved..no > experience. > In order to see this there is the subjective non-centered center that is > unchanging as referrence. Nothing was referred to. > -geo- Forget " yet. " There is no " yet, " except if you involve time, which is memory. There isn't any subjectivity involved. The subject only appears with the object. There is no subjectivity in and of itself. Anymore than there is any object in and of itself. This is why, when perceiving, the object (literally) is the subject. The subject appears as if there could be a subjective awareness " taking in " an object over a period of time, during which time the object registers on memory. So subject seems apart from object, subject seems to have a quality of knowing, of sentience, and the object seems to have qualities that are apprehended by a subjectivity. This is imaginary. Memory includes the sense of time and registration, as if registration could occur. That nothing happens involves no reference point at all. It is the fact of " awareness " -- the term " awareness " can only be applied as long as there still remains some sense of knowing of something, whatever quality (e.g., subjectivity) that seems to explain the use of the term " awareness " ... past that point, there can't be any term employed. nor any experience. this is not a blank nothing, or a void with no characteristics, because voidness is a characteristic, blank emptiness is a characteristic. - D - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 17, 2009 Report Share Posted August 17, 2009 - dan330033 Nisargadatta Monday, August 17, 2009 4:55 PM Re: today's Nisargadatta Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > It is interesting. I am looking at it as never had been seen yet. I > understand ...yes...nothing happened...nothing changed...nothing moved..no > experience. > In order to see this there is the subjective non-centered center that is > unchanging as referrence. Nothing was referred to. > -geo- Forget " yet. " There is no " yet, " except if you involve time, which is memory. -d- No. It was used just as a word. No time involved. Disregard that. -geo- There isn't any subjectivity involved. The subject only appears with the object. There is no subjectivity in and of itself. Anymore than there is any object in and of itself. -d- There is no objectivity or there is no subjectivity or the other way around. In and out is the same. Taht is why I quickly added " nothing was referred " . I wanted to convey the fact that although awareness-ground is not referenciable..it must not be denyed...as in " there is only consciousness, nothing beyond " -geo- This is why, when perceiving, the object (literally) is the subject. The subject appears as if there could be a subjective awareness " taking in " an object over a period of time, during which time the object registers on memory. So subject seems apart from object, subject seems to have a quality of knowing, of sentience, and the object seems to have qualities that are apprehended by a subjectivity. This is imaginary. Memory includes the sense of time and registration, as if registration could occur. That nothing happens involves no reference point at all. It is the fact of " awareness " -- -d- LOL..I understand. It can not be referred...but can not be denied. -geo- the term " awareness " can only be applied as long as there still remains some sense of knowing of something, whatever quality (e.g., subjectivity) that seems to explain the use of the term " awareness " ... past that point, there can't be any term employed. nor any experience. this is not a blank nothing, or a void with no characteristics, because voidness is a characteristic, blank emptiness is a characteristic. - D - The limits of knowledge -geo- avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS): 090816-0, 17/08/2009 Tested on: 17/8/2009 17:12:09 avast! - copyright © 1988-2009 ALWIL Software. 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.