Guest guest Posted August 29, 2009 Report Share Posted August 29, 2009 Nisargadatta Maharaj: We believe in so many things on hearsay. We believe in distant lands and people, in heavens and hells, in gods and goddesses, because we were told. Similarly, we were told about ourselves, our parents, name, position, duties and so on. We never cared to verify. The way to truth lies through the destruction of the false. To destroy the false, you must question your most inveterate beliefs. Of these the idea that you are the body is the worst. With the body comes the world, with the world -- God, who is supposed to have created the world and thus it starts -- fears, religions, prayers, sacrifices, all sorts of systems -- all to protect and support the child-man, frightened out of his wits by monsters of his own making. -- From " I Am That " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 29, 2009 Report Share Posted August 29, 2009 Nisargadatta , " fewtch " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta Maharaj: We believe in so many things on hearsay. We believe in distant lands and people, in heavens and hells, in gods and goddesses, because we were told. Similarly, we were told about ourselves, our parents, name, position, duties and so on. We never cared to verify. The way to truth lies through the destruction of the false. To destroy the false, you must question your most inveterate beliefs. > > Of these the idea that you are the body is the worst. With the body comes the world, with the world -- God, who is supposed to have created the world and thus it starts -- fears, religions, prayers, sacrifices, all sorts of systems -- all to protect and support the child-man, frightened out of his wits by monsters of his own making. > > -- From " I Am That " There aren't bad ideas. There is the error of defining a volitional center that is capable of holding ideas. He is addressing a volitional center which supposedly has the ability to identify or not identify with the body, to question or not question. All of that is fine as far as it goes. But it just doesn't go far enough. I suppose that no teacher can convince a student to drop the volitional center, because without a volitional center, there is no one to do or not do what the teacher is advising. It seems that the error is of one's own making, and one unmakes it. One made it nonvolitionally, and it is unmade only when there is readiness to release it. The error therefore isn't really an error, because no one made a mistake. The impersonal process of manifestation at a certain point forms an apparent volitional center due to social, language, memory, and perceptual factors. This center is undermined when a kind of " flood of awareness " happens uncalled for, spontaneously, out of nowhere. In all honesty, no teacher or teaching or practice is capable of providing this. But Nis. couldn't help saying what he said, anymore than I can untype these words once they are sent on their way. - D - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 29, 2009 Report Share Posted August 29, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > The impersonal process of manifestation at a certain point forms an apparent volitional center due to social, language, memory, and perceptual factors. > > This center is undermined when a kind of " flood of awareness " > happens uncalled for, spontaneously, out of nowhere. That's exactly what happened here. Extended periods of remaining 'here and now', based on circumstances. There was no choice for this to happen, nothing was being sought, etc. > In all honesty, no teacher or teaching or practice is capable of > providing this. > > But Nis. couldn't help saying what he said, anymore than I can > untype these words once they are sent on their way. > > - D - Too twue... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 29, 2009 Report Share Posted August 29, 2009 Nisargadatta , " fewtch " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > The impersonal process of manifestation at a certain point forms an apparent volitional center due to social, language, memory, and perceptual factors. > > > > This center is undermined when a kind of " flood of awareness " > > happens uncalled for, spontaneously, out of nowhere. > > That's exactly what happened here. Extended periods of > remaining 'here and now', based on circumstances. There was no > choice for this to happen, nothing was being sought, etc. BTW, I wonder if there are any parallels here with the Noah's Ark story, and " the great flood " . Could be a stretch, I dunno :-p. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 29, 2009 Report Share Posted August 29, 2009 - dan330033 Nisargadatta Saturday, August 29, 2009 10:35 AM Re: tonight's Nisargadatta Nisargadatta , " fewtch " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta Maharaj: We believe in so many things on hearsay. We believe > in distant lands and people, in heavens and hells, in gods and goddesses, > because we were told. Similarly, we were told about ourselves, our > parents, name, position, duties and so on. We never cared to verify. The > way to truth lies through the destruction of the false. To destroy the > false, you must question your most inveterate beliefs. > > Of these the idea that you are the body is the worst. With the body comes > the world, with the world -- God, who is supposed to have created the > world and thus it starts -- fears, religions, prayers, sacrifices, all > sorts of systems -- all to protect and support the child-man, frightened > out of his wits by monsters of his own making. > > -- From " I Am That " There aren't bad ideas. There is the error of defining a volitional center that is capable of holding ideas. He is addressing a volitional center which supposedly has the ability to identify or not identify with the body, to question or not question. All of that is fine as far as it goes. But it just doesn't go far enough. I suppose that no teacher can convince a student to drop the volitional center, because without a volitional center, there is no one to do or not do what the teacher is advising. It seems that the error is of one's own making, and one unmakes it. One made it nonvolitionally, and it is unmade only when there is readiness to release it. The error therefore isn't really an error, because no one made a mistake. The impersonal process of manifestation at a certain point forms an apparent volitional center due to social, language, memory, and perceptual factors. This center is undermined when a kind of " flood of awareness " happens uncalled for, spontaneously, out of nowhere. In all honesty, no teacher or teaching or practice is capable of providing this. But Nis. couldn't help saying what he said, anymore than I can untype these words once they are sent on their way. - D - One should consider the whole " work " . Going through nis words from several sources do point to something - sometimes just a phrase, why not? It is not possible for us to guess what will or not ring a bell in someones being. It is like trying to judge wich activities or doings do what. There is no doership....it is happening...so who can tell? -geo- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 29, 2009 Report Share Posted August 29, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > dan330033 > Nisargadatta > Saturday, August 29, 2009 10:35 AM > Re: tonight's Nisargadatta > > > Nisargadatta , " fewtch " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta Maharaj: We believe in so many things on hearsay. We believe > > in distant lands and people, in heavens and hells, in gods and goddesses, > > because we were told. Similarly, we were told about ourselves, our > > parents, name, position, duties and so on. We never cared to verify. The > > way to truth lies through the destruction of the false. To destroy the > > false, you must question your most inveterate beliefs. > > > > Of these the idea that you are the body is the worst. With the body comes > > the world, with the world -- God, who is supposed to have created the > > world and thus it starts -- fears, religions, prayers, sacrifices, all > > sorts of systems -- all to protect and support the child-man, frightened > > out of his wits by monsters of his own making. > > > > -- From " I Am That " > > There aren't bad ideas. > > There is the error of defining a volitional center that is capable of > holding ideas. > > He is addressing a volitional center which supposedly has the ability to > identify or not identify with the body, to question or not question. > > All of that is fine as far as it goes. > > But it just doesn't go far enough. > > I suppose that no teacher can convince a student to drop the volitional > center, because without a volitional center, there is no one to do or not do > what the teacher is advising. > > It seems that the error is of one's own making, and one unmakes it. > > One made it nonvolitionally, and it is unmade only when there is readiness > to release it. > > The error therefore isn't really an error, because no one made a mistake. > > The impersonal process of manifestation at a certain point forms an apparent > volitional center due to social, language, memory, and perceptual factors. > > This center is undermined when a kind of " flood of awareness " happens > uncalled for, spontaneously, out of nowhere. > > In all honesty, no teacher or teaching or practice is capable of providing > this. > > But Nis. couldn't help saying what he said, anymore than I can untype these > words once they are sent on their way. > > - D - > > One should consider the whole " work " . Going through nis words from several > sources do point to something - sometimes just a phrase, why not? It is not > possible for us to guess what will or not ring a bell in someones being. It > is like trying to judge wich activities or doings do what. There is no > doership....it is happening...so who can tell? > -geo- His words aren't of any special nature. There is no doer of any words ever spoken anywhere. Who can tell about anything? - D - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 29, 2009 Report Share Posted August 29, 2009 - dan330033 Nisargadatta Saturday, August 29, 2009 12:53 PM Re: tonight's Nisargadatta Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > dan330033 > Nisargadatta > Saturday, August 29, 2009 10:35 AM > Re: tonight's Nisargadatta > > > Nisargadatta , " fewtch " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta Maharaj: We believe in so many things on hearsay. We > > believe > > in distant lands and people, in heavens and hells, in gods and > > goddesses, > > because we were told. Similarly, we were told about ourselves, our > > parents, name, position, duties and so on. We never cared to verify. The > > way to truth lies through the destruction of the false. To destroy the > > false, you must question your most inveterate beliefs. > > > > Of these the idea that you are the body is the worst. With the body > > comes > > the world, with the world -- God, who is supposed to have created the > > world and thus it starts -- fears, religions, prayers, sacrifices, all > > sorts of systems -- all to protect and support the child-man, frightened > > out of his wits by monsters of his own making. > > > > -- From " I Am That " > > There aren't bad ideas. > > There is the error of defining a volitional center that is capable of > holding ideas. > > He is addressing a volitional center which supposedly has the ability to > identify or not identify with the body, to question or not question. > > All of that is fine as far as it goes. > > But it just doesn't go far enough. > > I suppose that no teacher can convince a student to drop the volitional > center, because without a volitional center, there is no one to do or not > do > what the teacher is advising. > > It seems that the error is of one's own making, and one unmakes it. > > One made it nonvolitionally, and it is unmade only when there is readiness > to release it. > > The error therefore isn't really an error, because no one made a mistake. > > The impersonal process of manifestation at a certain point forms an > apparent > volitional center due to social, language, memory, and perceptual factors. > > This center is undermined when a kind of " flood of awareness " happens > uncalled for, spontaneously, out of nowhere. > > In all honesty, no teacher or teaching or practice is capable of providing > this. > > But Nis. couldn't help saying what he said, anymore than I can untype > these > words once they are sent on their way. > > - D - > > One should consider the whole " work " . Going through nis words from several > sources do point to something - sometimes just a phrase, why not? It is > not > possible for us to guess what will or not ring a bell in someones being. > It > is like trying to judge wich activities or doings do what. There is no > doership....it is happening...so who can tell? > -geo- His words aren't of any special nature. There is no doer of any words ever spoken anywhere. Who can tell about anything? - D - Words comming from a non-centered source have different meaning/effects then those comming from a conceptual center. The formers are instruments of emptiness, the laters are mixed with illusional/temporal/social needs and aims. The laters may be called teachers or not. -geo- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 29, 2009 Report Share Posted August 29, 2009 - geo Nisargadatta Saturday, August 29, 2009 1:33 PM Re: Re: tonight's Nisargadatta - dan330033 Nisargadatta Saturday, August 29, 2009 12:53 PM Re: tonight's Nisargadatta Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > dan330033 > Nisargadatta > Saturday, August 29, 2009 10:35 AM > Re: tonight's Nisargadatta > > > Nisargadatta , " fewtch " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta Maharaj: We believe in so many things on hearsay. We > > believe > > in distant lands and people, in heavens and hells, in gods and > > goddesses, > > because we were told. Similarly, we were told about ourselves, our > > parents, name, position, duties and so on. We never cared to verify. The > > way to truth lies through the destruction of the false. To destroy the > > false, you must question your most inveterate beliefs. > > > > Of these the idea that you are the body is the worst. With the body > > comes > > the world, with the world -- God, who is supposed to have created the > > world and thus it starts -- fears, religions, prayers, sacrifices, all > > sorts of systems -- all to protect and support the child-man, frightened > > out of his wits by monsters of his own making. > > > > -- From " I Am That " > > There aren't bad ideas. > > There is the error of defining a volitional center that is capable of > holding ideas. > > He is addressing a volitional center which supposedly has the ability to > identify or not identify with the body, to question or not question. > > All of that is fine as far as it goes. > > But it just doesn't go far enough. > > I suppose that no teacher can convince a student to drop the volitional > center, because without a volitional center, there is no one to do or not > do > what the teacher is advising. > > It seems that the error is of one's own making, and one unmakes it. > > One made it nonvolitionally, and it is unmade only when there is readiness > to release it. > > The error therefore isn't really an error, because no one made a mistake. > > The impersonal process of manifestation at a certain point forms an > apparent > volitional center due to social, language, memory, and perceptual factors. > > This center is undermined when a kind of " flood of awareness " happens > uncalled for, spontaneously, out of nowhere. > > In all honesty, no teacher or teaching or practice is capable of providing > this. > > But Nis. couldn't help saying what he said, anymore than I can untype > these > words once they are sent on their way. > > - D - > > One should consider the whole " work " . Going through nis words from several > sources do point to something - sometimes just a phrase, why not? It is > not > possible for us to guess what will or not ring a bell in someones being. > It > is like trying to judge wich activities or doings do what. There is no > doership....it is happening...so who can tell? > -geo- His words aren't of any special nature. There is no doer of any words ever spoken anywhere. Who can tell about anything? - D - Words comming from a non-centered source have different meaning/effects then those comming from a conceptual center. The formers are instruments of emptiness, the laters are mixed with illusional/temporal/social needs and aims. The laters may be called teachers or not. I meant: the formers may be called......not the laters -geo- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 29, 2009 Report Share Posted August 29, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > dan330033 > Nisargadatta > Saturday, August 29, 2009 12:53 PM > Re: tonight's Nisargadatta > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > dan330033 > > Nisargadatta > > Saturday, August 29, 2009 10:35 AM > > Re: tonight's Nisargadatta > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " fewtch " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta Maharaj: We believe in so many things on hearsay. We > > > believe > > > in distant lands and people, in heavens and hells, in gods and > > > goddesses, > > > because we were told. Similarly, we were told about ourselves, our > > > parents, name, position, duties and so on. We never cared to verify. The > > > way to truth lies through the destruction of the false. To destroy the > > > false, you must question your most inveterate beliefs. > > > > > > Of these the idea that you are the body is the worst. With the body > > > comes > > > the world, with the world -- God, who is supposed to have created the > > > world and thus it starts -- fears, religions, prayers, sacrifices, all > > > sorts of systems -- all to protect and support the child-man, frightened > > > out of his wits by monsters of his own making. > > > > > > -- From " I Am That " > > > > There aren't bad ideas. > > > > There is the error of defining a volitional center that is capable of > > holding ideas. > > > > He is addressing a volitional center which supposedly has the ability to > > identify or not identify with the body, to question or not question. > > > > All of that is fine as far as it goes. > > > > But it just doesn't go far enough. > > > > I suppose that no teacher can convince a student to drop the volitional > > center, because without a volitional center, there is no one to do or not > > do > > what the teacher is advising. > > > > It seems that the error is of one's own making, and one unmakes it. > > > > One made it nonvolitionally, and it is unmade only when there is readiness > > to release it. > > > > The error therefore isn't really an error, because no one made a mistake. > > > > The impersonal process of manifestation at a certain point forms an > > apparent > > volitional center due to social, language, memory, and perceptual factors. > > > > This center is undermined when a kind of " flood of awareness " happens > > uncalled for, spontaneously, out of nowhere. > > > > In all honesty, no teacher or teaching or practice is capable of providing > > this. > > > > But Nis. couldn't help saying what he said, anymore than I can untype > > these > > words once they are sent on their way. > > > > - D - > > > > One should consider the whole " work " . Going through nis words from several > > sources do point to something - sometimes just a phrase, why not? It is > > not > > possible for us to guess what will or not ring a bell in someones being. > > It > > is like trying to judge wich activities or doings do what. There is no > > doership....it is happening...so who can tell? > > -geo- > > His words aren't of any special nature. > > There is no doer of any words ever spoken anywhere. > > Who can tell about anything? > > - D - > > Words comming from a non-centered source have different meaning/effects then > those comming from a conceptual center. There is no such thing as a " non-centered source " . toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > dan330033 > Nisargadatta > Saturday, August 29, 2009 12:53 PM > Re: tonight's Nisargadatta > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > dan330033 > > Nisargadatta > > Saturday, August 29, 2009 10:35 AM > > Re: tonight's Nisargadatta > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " fewtch " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta Maharaj: We believe in so many things on hearsay. We > > > believe > > > in distant lands and people, in heavens and hells, in gods and > > > goddesses, > > > because we were told. Similarly, we were told about ourselves, our > > > parents, name, position, duties and so on. We never cared to verify. The > > > way to truth lies through the destruction of the false. To destroy the > > > false, you must question your most inveterate beliefs. > > > > > > Of these the idea that you are the body is the worst. With the body > > > comes > > > the world, with the world -- God, who is supposed to have created the > > > world and thus it starts -- fears, religions, prayers, sacrifices, all > > > sorts of systems -- all to protect and support the child-man, frightened > > > out of his wits by monsters of his own making. > > > > > > -- From " I Am That " > > > > There aren't bad ideas. > > > > There is the error of defining a volitional center that is capable of > > holding ideas. > > > > He is addressing a volitional center which supposedly has the ability to > > identify or not identify with the body, to question or not question. > > > > All of that is fine as far as it goes. > > > > But it just doesn't go far enough. > > > > I suppose that no teacher can convince a student to drop the volitional > > center, because without a volitional center, there is no one to do or not > > do > > what the teacher is advising. > > > > It seems that the error is of one's own making, and one unmakes it. > > > > One made it nonvolitionally, and it is unmade only when there is readiness > > to release it. > > > > The error therefore isn't really an error, because no one made a mistake. > > > > The impersonal process of manifestation at a certain point forms an > > apparent > > volitional center due to social, language, memory, and perceptual factors. > > > > This center is undermined when a kind of " flood of awareness " happens > > uncalled for, spontaneously, out of nowhere. > > > > In all honesty, no teacher or teaching or practice is capable of providing > > this. > > > > But Nis. couldn't help saying what he said, anymore than I can untype > > these > > words once they are sent on their way. > > > > - D - > > > > One should consider the whole " work " . Going through nis words from several > > sources do point to something - sometimes just a phrase, why not? It is > > not > > possible for us to guess what will or not ring a bell in someones being. > > It > > is like trying to judge wich activities or doings do what. There is no > > doership....it is happening...so who can tell? > > -geo- > > His words aren't of any special nature. > > There is no doer of any words ever spoken anywhere. > > Who can tell about anything? > > - D - > > Words comming from a non-centered source have different meaning/effects then > those comming from a conceptual center. The formers are instruments of > emptiness, the laters are mixed with illusional/temporal/social needs and > aims. The laters may be called teachers or not. > -geo- Hi Geo - Look, I know what you mean. And on the surface, yes, there are different people coming from different places. But looking more deeply into it, there isn't any separable person who is the source of the words spoken. That is just a conventional attribution of ownership (of the words). There is only one undivided movement, the only " author. " You have said this yourself. All words spoken are of the same source. There is no separate do-er to make words come from different sources. Indeed, there isn't any " source " separate from or other than " this that is. " And I don't mean anything mystical. I just mean this, right now and here, that is. - Dan - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > dan330033 > > Nisargadatta > > Saturday, August 29, 2009 12:53 PM > > Re: tonight's Nisargadatta > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > - > > > dan330033 > > > Nisargadatta > > > Saturday, August 29, 2009 10:35 AM > > > Re: tonight's Nisargadatta > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " fewtch " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta Maharaj: We believe in so many things on hearsay. We > > > > believe > > > > in distant lands and people, in heavens and hells, in gods and > > > > goddesses, > > > > because we were told. Similarly, we were told about ourselves, our > > > > parents, name, position, duties and so on. We never cared to verify. The > > > > way to truth lies through the destruction of the false. To destroy the > > > > false, you must question your most inveterate beliefs. > > > > > > > > Of these the idea that you are the body is the worst. With the body > > > > comes > > > > the world, with the world -- God, who is supposed to have created the > > > > world and thus it starts -- fears, religions, prayers, sacrifices, all > > > > sorts of systems -- all to protect and support the child-man, frightened > > > > out of his wits by monsters of his own making. > > > > > > > > -- From " I Am That " > > > > > > There aren't bad ideas. > > > > > > There is the error of defining a volitional center that is capable of > > > holding ideas. > > > > > > He is addressing a volitional center which supposedly has the ability to > > > identify or not identify with the body, to question or not question. > > > > > > All of that is fine as far as it goes. > > > > > > But it just doesn't go far enough. > > > > > > I suppose that no teacher can convince a student to drop the volitional > > > center, because without a volitional center, there is no one to do or not > > > do > > > what the teacher is advising. > > > > > > It seems that the error is of one's own making, and one unmakes it. > > > > > > One made it nonvolitionally, and it is unmade only when there is readiness > > > to release it. > > > > > > The error therefore isn't really an error, because no one made a mistake. > > > > > > The impersonal process of manifestation at a certain point forms an > > > apparent > > > volitional center due to social, language, memory, and perceptual factors. > > > > > > This center is undermined when a kind of " flood of awareness " happens > > > uncalled for, spontaneously, out of nowhere. > > > > > > In all honesty, no teacher or teaching or practice is capable of providing > > > this. > > > > > > But Nis. couldn't help saying what he said, anymore than I can untype > > > these > > > words once they are sent on their way. > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > One should consider the whole " work " . Going through nis words from several > > > sources do point to something - sometimes just a phrase, why not? It is > > > not > > > possible for us to guess what will or not ring a bell in someones being. > > > It > > > is like trying to judge wich activities or doings do what. There is no > > > doership....it is happening...so who can tell? > > > -geo- > > > > His words aren't of any special nature. > > > > There is no doer of any words ever spoken anywhere. > > > > Who can tell about anything? > > > > - D - > > > > Words comming from a non-centered source have different meaning/effects then > > those comming from a conceptual center. The formers are instruments of > > emptiness, the laters are mixed with illusional/temporal/social needs and > > aims. The laters may be called teachers or not. > > -geo- > > Hi Geo - > > Look, I know what you mean. > > And on the surface, yes, there are different people coming from different places. > > But looking more deeply into it, there isn't any separable person who is the source of the words spoken. That is just a conventional attribution of ownership (of the words). > > There is only one undivided movement, the only " author. " > > You have said this yourself. > > All words spoken are of the same source. > > There is no separate do-er to make words come from different sources. > > Indeed, there isn't any " source " separate from or other than " this that is. " > > And I don't mean anything mystical. > > I just mean this, right now and here, that is. > > - Dan - Yup... Have the words ever appeared anywhere other than 'here'... for anyone? Were they ever written anywhere other than 'here'... for anyone? If there is no place other than 'here', for anyone, and no time other than now, for anyone... .... well ... :-). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 - dan330033 Nisargadatta Sunday, August 30, 2009 6:11 AM Re: tonight's Nisargadatta Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > dan330033 > Nisargadatta > Saturday, August 29, 2009 12:53 PM > Re: tonight's Nisargadatta > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > dan330033 > > Nisargadatta > > Saturday, August 29, 2009 10:35 AM > > Re: tonight's Nisargadatta > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " fewtch " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta Maharaj: We believe in so many things on hearsay. We > > > believe > > > in distant lands and people, in heavens and hells, in gods and > > > goddesses, > > > because we were told. Similarly, we were told about ourselves, our > > > parents, name, position, duties and so on. We never cared to verify. > > > The > > > way to truth lies through the destruction of the false. To destroy the > > > false, you must question your most inveterate beliefs. > > > > > > Of these the idea that you are the body is the worst. With the body > > > comes > > > the world, with the world -- God, who is supposed to have created the > > > world and thus it starts -- fears, religions, prayers, sacrifices, all > > > sorts of systems -- all to protect and support the child-man, > > > frightened > > > out of his wits by monsters of his own making. > > > > > > -- From " I Am That " > > > > There aren't bad ideas. > > > > There is the error of defining a volitional center that is capable of > > holding ideas. > > > > He is addressing a volitional center which supposedly has the ability to > > identify or not identify with the body, to question or not question. > > > > All of that is fine as far as it goes. > > > > But it just doesn't go far enough. > > > > I suppose that no teacher can convince a student to drop the volitional > > center, because without a volitional center, there is no one to do or > > not > > do > > what the teacher is advising. > > > > It seems that the error is of one's own making, and one unmakes it. > > > > One made it nonvolitionally, and it is unmade only when there is > > readiness > > to release it. > > > > The error therefore isn't really an error, because no one made a > > mistake. > > > > The impersonal process of manifestation at a certain point forms an > > apparent > > volitional center due to social, language, memory, and perceptual > > factors. > > > > This center is undermined when a kind of " flood of awareness " happens > > uncalled for, spontaneously, out of nowhere. > > > > In all honesty, no teacher or teaching or practice is capable of > > providing > > this. > > > > But Nis. couldn't help saying what he said, anymore than I can untype > > these > > words once they are sent on their way. > > > > - D - > > > > One should consider the whole " work " . Going through nis words from > > several > > sources do point to something - sometimes just a phrase, why not? It is > > not > > possible for us to guess what will or not ring a bell in someones being. > > It > > is like trying to judge wich activities or doings do what. There is no > > doership....it is happening...so who can tell? > > -geo- > > His words aren't of any special nature. > > There is no doer of any words ever spoken anywhere. > > Who can tell about anything? > > - D - > > Words comming from a non-centered source have different meaning/effects > then > those comming from a conceptual center. The formers are instruments of > emptiness, the laters are mixed with illusional/temporal/social needs and > aims. The laters may be called teachers or not. > -geo- Hi Geo - Look, I know what you mean. And on the surface, yes, there are different people coming from different places. But looking more deeply into it, there isn't any separable person who is the source of the words spoken. That is just a conventional attribution of ownership (of the words). There is only one undivided movement, the only " author. " You have said this yourself. All words spoken are of the same source. There is no separate do-er to make words come from different sources. Indeed, there isn't any " source " separate from or other than " this that is. " And I don't mean anything mystical. I just mean this, right now and here, that is. - Dan - If the source, the ground - whatever name, has been reached all is the same. But that is not the case of humanity. So, presently, just as there are living happy deer running in the fields, there are shot wounded ones suffering in the wet bloody ground. There are happy bulls and pigs running in the grass, and those ready to be killed in a horrible fashion, a horrible life...to be eaten in burgers. There are birds, stones...it is called diversity. In this diversity there are man and women who know they are not a separate entity and others that think they are inner separate entities that can be honored, humiliated, bullied, etc... Words of wisdom are welcome. Not a single human would be able to understand the whole thing all by himself. Words where read, heard, and like torches showing the way....they are indeed welcome. Diversity is not separation. -geo- 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.