Guest guest Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 advaitin , " pakira_reddy " <pakirareddy wrote: > > May I request the experts of Advaita to enlighten me > 'Is Advaita a religion? If not, why not? > > Dr.Kurri Pakirareddy > Dear sir Even though not an expert trying to answer your question.We live in a dual world which is a manifestation of language we speak and write.Non duality is not the opposite of duality but the Truth. Dual state of mind is responsible for human friction,commotion,and all sorts of emotions.It is like a waves of ocean. Advaitha(non duality) is not a religion but an investigation of one self.It is neither simple acceptance nor denial but understanding the imposed i,e verbal knowledge as is.If you require more details go in adhyasa ( imposed) thank you sekhar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 19, 2009 Report Share Posted October 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > It is not possible to discard knowledge, the known. It is essential though to establish a harmonious dynamism between them. Hmm, between what and what ? > So in this sense attention is the continual perception of the limitation of the known, of the bounded field where knowledge must function. Ok Geo, do it ! > -geo- > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 19, 2009 Report Share Posted October 19, 2009 It is not possible to discard knowledge, the known. It is essential though to establish a harmonious dynamism between them. So in this sense attention is the continual perception of the limitation of the known, of the bounded field where knowledge must function. -geo- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 19, 2009 Report Share Posted October 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > wwoehr > Nisargadatta > Monday, October 19, 2009 1:41 PM > Re: Advaita > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > It is not possible to discard knowledge, the known. It is essential though > > to establish a harmonious dynamism between them. > > Hmm, between what and what ? > > > So in this sense attention is the continual perception of the limitation > > of the known, of the bounded field where knowledge must > function. > > -geo- > > Ok Geo, do it ! > -w- > > It is being done: just observation, no observer. Are you doing it? > -geo- > Geo, 'No observer' is an ideal you must have read somewhere. No observer implies no longer any separation: No longer any thought appearing which says 'I see','I am watching'. 'I am observing', 'I am aware of' etc. Is this the case with you ? If yes, then write to COEP 'Sosiecty of enlightened people' and ask for a regitration and they will send you a sticker with that text: 'No Observer Inside' Werner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 19, 2009 Report Share Posted October 19, 2009 - wwoehr Nisargadatta Monday, October 19, 2009 1:41 PM Re: Advaita Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > It is not possible to discard knowledge, the known. It is essential though > to establish a harmonious dynamism between them. Hmm, between what and what ? > So in this sense attention is the continual perception of the limitation > of the known, of the bounded field where knowledge must function. -geo- Ok Geo, do it ! -w- It is being done: just observation, no observer. Are you doing it? -geo- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 19, 2009 Report Share Posted October 19, 2009 - wwoehr Nisargadatta Monday, October 19, 2009 2:32 PM Re: Advaita Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > wwoehr > Nisargadatta > Monday, October 19, 2009 1:41 PM > Re: Advaita > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > It is not possible to discard knowledge, the known. It is essential > > though > > to establish a harmonious dynamism between them. > > Hmm, between what and what ? > > > So in this sense attention is the continual perception of the limitation > > of the known, of the bounded field where knowledge must > function. > > -geo- > > Ok Geo, do it ! > -w- > > It is being done: just observation, no observer. Are you doing it? > -geo- > Geo, 'No observer' is an ideal you must have read somewhere. -w- There is no observer. Where is the observer? -geo- No observer implies no longer any separation: No longer any thought appearing which says 'I see','I am watching'. 'I am observing', 'I am aware of' etc. Is this the case with you ? -w- Of course, yes. There is no " I " observing. -geo- If yes, then write to COEP 'Sosiecty of enlightened people' and ask for a regitration and they will send you a sticker with that text: 'No Observer Inside' Werner Which leaves you with only two possibilities that make up one: either geo read that and is parroting or he is faking enlightment. Very good stand for an open dialogue :>) -geo- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 19, 2009 Report Share Posted October 19, 2009 - cerosoul Nisargadatta Monday, October 19, 2009 4:33 PM Re: Advaita Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > wwoehr > Nisargadatta > Monday, October 19, 2009 2:32 PM > Re: Advaita > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > wwoehr > > Nisargadatta > > Monday, October 19, 2009 1:41 PM > > Re: Advaita > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > It is not possible to discard knowledge, the known. It is essential > > > though > > > to establish a harmonious dynamism between them. > > > > Hmm, between what and what ? > > > > > So in this sense attention is the continual perception of the > > > limitation > > > of the known, of the bounded field where knowledge must > > function. > > > > -geo- > > > > Ok Geo, do it ! > > -w- > > > > It is being done: just observation, no observer. Are you doing it? > > -geo- > > > > Geo, > > 'No observer' is an ideal you must have read somewhere. > -w- > > There is no observer. Where is the observer? > -geo- > > No observer implies no longer any separation: No longer any thought > appearing which says 'I see','I am watching'. 'I am observing', 'I am > aware > of' etc. > > Is this the case with you ? > -w- > > Of course, yes. There is no " I " observing. > -geo- > > If yes, then write to COEP 'Sosiecty of enlightened people' and ask for a > regitration and they will send you a sticker with that text: 'No Observer > Inside' > > > > Werner > > Which leaves you with only two possibilities that make up one: either geo > read that and is parroting or he is faking enlightment. Very good stand > for > an open dialogue :>) > -geo- P: Well I'm a good Advaita parrot spotter. Here are the " telltail " signs: They were green pants. They very seldom, or never write anything a beginner doesn't know. They seldom write more than three sentences. OK, Geo, beside that green shirt in your closet, how many sentences does you posts have on average? geo> 3.2 on average....ufffaa....that was close... -geo- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 20, 2009 Report Share Posted October 20, 2009 Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6 wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > wwoehr > > Nisargadatta > > Monday, October 19, 2009 2:32 PM > > Re: Advaita > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > - > > > wwoehr > > > Nisargadatta > > > Monday, October 19, 2009 1:41 PM > > > Re: Advaita > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > It is not possible to discard knowledge, the known. It is essential > > > > though > > > > to establish a harmonious dynamism between them. > > > > > > Hmm, between what and what ? > > > > > > > So in this sense attention is the continual perception of the limitation > > > > of the known, of the bounded field where knowledge must > > > function. > > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > Ok Geo, do it ! > > > -w- > > > > > > It is being done: just observation, no observer. Are you doing it? > > > -geo- > > > > > > > Geo, > > > > 'No observer' is an ideal you must have read somewhere. > > -w- > > > > There is no observer. Where is the observer? > > -geo- > > > > No observer implies no longer any separation: No longer any thought > > appearing which says 'I see','I am watching'. 'I am observing', 'I am aware > > of' etc. > > > > Is this the case with you ? > > -w- > > > > Of course, yes. There is no " I " observing. > > -geo- > > > > If yes, then write to COEP 'Sosiecty of enlightened people' and ask for a > > regitration and they will send you a sticker with that text: 'No Observer > > Inside' > > > > > > > > Werner > > > > Which leaves you with only two possibilities that make up one: either geo > > read that and is parroting or he is faking enlightment. Very good stand for > > an open dialogue :>) > > > -geo- > > P: Well, I'm a good Advaita parrot spotter. > Here are the " telltail " signs: > > They wear green pants. > > They very seldom, or never write anything > a beginner doesn't know. > > They seldom write more than three sentences. > > OK, Geo, besides that green shirt in your closet, > how many sentences do you post on average? > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 20, 2009 Report Share Posted October 20, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > It is not possible to discard knowledge, the known. It is essential > though to establish a harmonious dynamism between them. There are not two separate 'things' to establish a relationship between. And who's the third party that would do that, anyway? ;-). Where is this " party " located, inside one's head? Which of the three should bring the booze? ;-). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 20, 2009 Report Share Posted October 20, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > Tim G. > Nisargadatta > Monday, October 19, 2009 11:49 PM > Re: Advaita > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > It is not possible to discard knowledge, the known. It is essential > > though to establish a harmonious dynamism between them. > > There are not two separate 'things' to establish a relationship between. And > who's the third party that would do that, anyway? ;-). > > Where is this " party " located, inside one's head? Which of the three should > bring the booze? ;-). > -tim- > > Yes....I am not a good writer...not any kind of a writer in fact. > That was > badly expressed and a few words I had in mind are missing there. Well, I say the thoughts that arise in the moment " for geo " are just fine, and of course are always in the past by the time somebody else reads them... so the intent wasn't to try and correct a past event ;-). Just to note an impression of it, which is now another past event. > What I > wanted to say is that the known, knowledge can not be discarded or > transformed. Once I learned to speak english I know it. I know my > way home. > I know how to drive a car. I know math. There is no point in trying > to get > rid of all that. Yes... instead one realizes that rather than an entity there called a " mind " or " knowledge " , thoughts merely arising in the moment... another example of an " -ing " instead of an entity. And so there isn't anybody to know anything... instead, the " anybody " is also a thought that arises in the moment... or maybe doesn't... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 20, 2009 Report Share Posted October 20, 2009 - Tim G. Nisargadatta Monday, October 19, 2009 11:49 PM Re: Advaita Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > It is not possible to discard knowledge, the known. It is essential > though to establish a harmonious dynamism between them. There are not two separate 'things' to establish a relationship between. And who's the third party that would do that, anyway? ;-). Where is this " party " located, inside one's head? Which of the three should bring the booze? ;-). -tim- Yes....I am not a good writer...not any kind of a writer in fact. That was badly expressed and a few words I had in mind are missing there. What I wanted to say is that the known, knowledge can not be discarded or transformed. Once I learned to speak english I know it. I know my way home. I know how to drive a car. I know math. There is no point in trying to get rid of all that. In fact the human world could not be recognized/lived without a certain amount of knowledge. So I was trying to point out the need of a harmonious co-existence between the known, the timebound....and the essencialy unknowable and timeless. They are not separate, nothing is separate. -geo- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 20, 2009 Report Share Posted October 20, 2009 - Tim G. Nisargadatta Tuesday, October 20, 2009 7:26 AM Re: Advaita Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > Tim G. > Nisargadatta > Monday, October 19, 2009 11:49 PM > Re: Advaita > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > It is not possible to discard knowledge, the known. It is essential > > though to establish a harmonious dynamism between them. > > There are not two separate 'things' to establish a relationship between. > And > who's the third party that would do that, anyway? ;-). > > Where is this " party " located, inside one's head? Which of the three > should > bring the booze? ;-). > -tim- > > Yes....I am not a good writer...not any kind of a writer in fact. > That was > badly expressed and a few words I had in mind are missing there. Well, I say the thoughts that arise in the moment " for geo " are just fine, and of course are always in the past by the time somebody else reads them... so the intent wasn't to try and correct a past event ;-). Just to note an impression of it, which is now another past event. > What I > wanted to say is that the known, knowledge can not be discarded or > transformed. Once I learned to speak english I know it. I know my > way home. > I know how to drive a car. I know math. There is no point in trying > to > get > rid of all that. Yes... instead one realizes that rather than an entity there called a " mind " or " knowledge " , thoughts merely arising in the moment... another example of an " -ing " instead of an entity. And so there isn't anybody to know anything... instead, the " anybody " is also a thought that arises in the moment... or maybe doesn't... -t- Indeed...another way of putting it. -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.