Guest guest Posted November 13, 2009 Report Share Posted November 13, 2009 Nisargadatta , " methusalum " <methusalum wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " methusalum " <methusalum@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > It seems inevitable that people will make reference to an absolute or to the absolute, or the Absolute. > > > > > > > > > > It is a necessary contrast to " the relative. " > > > > > > > > > > Just like there inevitably are words like, " the One, " " Nothingness, " " atemporal, " " totality, " " the unknowable, " " the nonconceptual, " or " the timeless. " > > > > > > > > > > These kinds of references must be made, to suggest something that is not of words, time, relative experience, or thought. > > > > > > > > > > The only difficulty with this scenario is that you end up with a temporal being discussing the atemporal, a relative being talking about the absolute, etc. > > > > > > > > > > A relative being can't know anything about an absolute, nor can a temporal being have any way to encounter the atemporal. > > > > > > > > > > Still, these concepts about the nonconceptual, which can't be conceptualized about - are inevitable. > > > > > > > > > > Plus, they make for interesting statements. > > > > > > > > > > Not to mention all the religions they have fueled. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - Dan - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you can't take out of mind the " Absolute " ...by whatever words, concepts and theories > > > > > > > > never! > > > > > > > > The relation of imaginary, individual little being....to the Absolute.....that's what Life is about! > > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > > If you don't want to Live!... > > > > > > > > because of whatever concepts, theories and non-dual crap!.... > > > > > > > > that's up to you...and the Absolute... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > Dan > > > > > > your email is self contradictory. firstly, are you talking about perfection or limitlessness; and do you want to exclude statements, ideas, and/or natural laws, geometric principles, etc. (I think the list itself could be limitless)? Or perhaps somewhat like " there are no absolutes except this statement! " would be ok. > > > > No. > > > > It's that the relative being comes to a full stop. > > > > It realizes that it can never comprehend. > > > > It can't even comprehend that it can't comprehend, or what it can't comprehend. > > > > This is to be absorbed by stillness. > > > > Death, in other words. > > > > Being. > > > > > > - Dan - > > > You seem to have a good grasp of the poetic. Saying that it realises something, then that it cannot comprehend the same. Yes, exactly. Or, could say: it's not there, so there isn't any realization for it to have, and that's the realization. > but that is trivial, what I really want to know is what happens to a being when it comes to a full stop. Pause, take a breath, continue? Yes, in a way - continuing without continuity. Disintegration. Spontaneous reintegration. Unobservable. And yet, so. - D - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > > but that is trivial, what I really want to know is what happens to a being when it comes to a full stop. Pause, take a breath, continue? > > Yes, in a way - continuing without continuity. > > Disintegration. > > Spontaneous reintegration. > > Unobservable. > > And yet, so. > > > - D - It has been described quite often in terms of death. There have been those who seemed convinced that an actual 'clinical death' happens (e.g. U.G.). It can certainly seem so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > but that is trivial, what I really want to know is what happens to a being when it comes to a full stop. Pause, take a breath, continue? > > > > Yes, in a way - continuing without continuity. > > > > Disintegration. > > > > Spontaneous reintegration. > > > > Unobservable. > > > > And yet, so. > > > > > > - D - > > It has been described quite often in terms of death. > > There have been those who seemed convinced that an actual 'clinical death' happens (e.g. U.G.). > > It can certainly seem so. the to " whom " it seems thus is a fiction. rely not on illusions. rely not at all. for such reliance in truth is impossible. just more dream-stuff and nonsense. ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > No. > > It's that the relative being comes to a full stop. > > It realizes that it can never comprehend. > > It can't even comprehend that it can't comprehend, or what it can't > comprehend. Indeed... one realizes that there was never anything to comprehend. The 'relative being' is only thought's tendency to divide the indivisible, apparently as a way to ensure survival of the organism. Why this tends to goes so far beyond the necessary in human beings, I can't comprehend :-p. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 > > You seem to have a good grasp of the poetic. Saying that it realises something, then that it cannot comprehend the same. > > Yes, exactly. > > Or, could say: it's not there, so there isn't any realization for it to have, and that's the realization. > > > > but that is trivial, what I really want to know is what happens to a being when it comes to a full stop. Pause, take a breath, continue? > > Yes, in a way - continuing without continuity. > Dan Please correct me if I am wrong. You appear to be saying that there can be such a thing as an act (continuing) without a state (continuity). I would have thought the act was the weaker of the pair. A state can be accomplished passively; but an act needs an agent to first be and then be doing something. So it is fine to say " The thing is " . But to stay that " The thing is doing " means that it first must be, and then it must possess the power to do. Meth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 14, 2009 Report Share Posted November 14, 2009 > > Disintegration. > > Spontaneous reintegration. > > Unobservable. > > And yet, so. > > > - D - > Dan Can you say what it is that disintegrates. Surely it cannot be Atman, life, awareness, soul. They appear elemental and not easily split. Although I have heard it said that someone possesses not much of a life. I assumed they meant it metaphorically -- that the person possessed zombie like qualities and not that they were a zombie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 15, 2009 Report Share Posted November 15, 2009 - Tim G. Nisargadatta Saturday, November 14, 2009 6:32 AM Re: The Absolute Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > No. > > It's that the relative being comes to a full stop. > > It realizes that it can never comprehend. > > It can't even comprehend that it can't comprehend, or what it can't > > comprehend. Indeed... one realizes that there was never anything to comprehend. The 'relative being' is only thought's tendency to divide the indivisible, apparently as a way to ensure survival of the organism. Why this tends to goes so far beyond the necessary in human beings, I can't comprehend :-p. geo> I think that for an organism to be able to understand - in the truest sense, the potential for the big mistake must be there. Like a powerful computer: it can do allot, but it can go wrong in the same proportion. Man is a seed, an egg, mostly just potential. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 16, 2009 Report Share Posted November 16, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > No. > > > > It's that the relative being comes to a full stop. > > > > It realizes that it can never comprehend. > > > > It can't even comprehend that it can't comprehend, or what it can't > comprehend. > > Indeed... one realizes that there was never anything to comprehend. > > The 'relative being' is only thought's tendency to divide the indivisible, apparently as a way to ensure survival of the organism. > > Why this tends to goes so far beyond the necessary in human beings, I can't comprehend :-p. It's a puzzle within a mystery, wrapped in an enigma. Scratching head, Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 16, 2009 Report Share Posted November 16, 2009 Nisargadatta , " methusalum " <methusalum wrote: > > > > > > You seem to have a good grasp of the poetic. Saying that it realises something, then that it cannot comprehend the same. > > > > Yes, exactly. > > > > Or, could say: it's not there, so there isn't any realization for it to have, and that's the realization. > > > > > > > but that is trivial, what I really want to know is what happens to a being when it comes to a full stop. Pause, take a breath, continue? > > > > Yes, in a way - continuing without continuity. > > > > Dan > > Please correct me if I am wrong. You appear to be saying that there can be such a thing as an act (continuing) without a state (continuity). Hi Meth - Do you have a cousin Crystal? Anyway, that's an interesting way to put it, an act without a state. Or maybe, it's an act without a stage. > I would have thought the act was the weaker of the pair. A state can be accomplished passively; but an act needs an agent to first be and then be doing something. An act can just be movement. Not an accomplishment. A state is a quality. So, you can have an action without a quality. Not an accomplishment. A spontaneous event-ing. Unpremeditated and not enduring. Not subject to comparison. > So it is fine to say " The thing is " . But to stay that " The thing is doing " means that it first must be, and then it must possess the power to do. Well, I meant an action that never " achieved " existence nor is nonexistent. - D - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 17, 2009 Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 - Tim G. Nisargadatta Monday, November 16, 2009 11:30 PM Re: The Absolute Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > No. > > > > > > It's that the relative being comes to a full stop. > > > > > > It realizes that it can never comprehend. > > > > > > It can't even comprehend that it can't comprehend, or what it can't > > > > comprehend. > > > > Indeed... one realizes that there was never anything to comprehend. > > > > The 'relative being' is only thought's tendency to divide the > > indivisible, apparently as a way to ensure survival of the organism. > > > > Why this tends to goes so far beyond the necessary in human beings, I > > can't comprehend :-p. > > It's a puzzle within a mystery, wrapped in an enigma. > > > Scratching head, > > Dan It may have something to do with 'being able to project my own death', once I feel that 'I exist'. " I exist " (thus) " I will die " becomes a sort of broken thought-loop, existing only for its own continuation, and stirring up all sorts of other silliness in the process. The issue is 'time', and the associated dream. geo> Yes. This is the basic fear-program that runs time-based dream-pseudo-existence Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 17, 2009 Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > Tim G. > Nisargadatta > Monday, November 16, 2009 11:30 PM > Re: The Absolute > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > It's that the relative being comes to a full stop. > > > > > > > > It realizes that it can never comprehend. > > > > > > > > It can't even comprehend that it can't comprehend, or what it can't > > > > > comprehend. > > > > > > Indeed... one realizes that there was never anything to comprehend. > > > > > > The 'relative being' is only thought's tendency to divide the > > > indivisible, apparently as a way to ensure survival of the organism. > > > > > > Why this tends to goes so far beyond the necessary in human beings, I > > > can't comprehend :-p. > > > > It's a puzzle within a mystery, wrapped in an enigma. > > > > > > Scratching head, > > > > Dan > > It may have something to do with 'being able to project my own death', once > I feel that 'I exist'. > > " I exist " (thus) " I will die " becomes a sort of broken thought-loop, > existing only for its own continuation, and stirring up all sorts of other > silliness in the process. > > The issue is 'time', and the associated dream. > > geo> Yes. This is the basic fear-program that runs time-based > dream-pseudo-existence I have never been born, so I wouldn't know. - D - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 17, 2009 Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 - dan330033 Nisargadatta Tuesday, November 17, 2009 1:58 PM Re: The Absolute Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > Tim G. > Nisargadatta > Monday, November 16, 2009 11:30 PM > Re: The Absolute > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > It's that the relative being comes to a full stop. > > > > > > > > It realizes that it can never comprehend. > > > > > > > > It can't even comprehend that it can't comprehend, or what it can't > > > > > > > > > comprehend. > > > > > > Indeed... one realizes that there was never anything to comprehend. > > > > > > The 'relative being' is only thought's tendency to divide the > > > indivisible, apparently as a way to ensure survival of the organism. > > > > > > Why this tends to goes so far beyond the necessary in human beings, I > > > can't comprehend :-p. > > > > It's a puzzle within a mystery, wrapped in an enigma. > > > > > > Scratching head, > > > > Dan > > It may have something to do with 'being able to project my own death', > once > I feel that 'I exist'. > > " I exist " (thus) " I will die " becomes a sort of broken thought-loop, > existing only for its own continuation, and stirring up all sorts of other > silliness in the process. > > The issue is 'time', and the associated dream. > > geo> Yes. This is the basic fear-program that runs time-based > dream-pseudo-existence I have never been born, so I wouldn't know. - D - But you know you dont know? You dont know what? -geo- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 17, 2009 Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > dan330033 > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 1:58 PM > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > Tim G. > > Nisargadatta > > Monday, November 16, 2009 11:30 PM > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > > > It's that the relative being comes to a full stop. > > > > > > > > > > It realizes that it can never comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > It can't even comprehend that it can't comprehend, or what it can't > > > > > > > > > > > comprehend. > > > > > > > > Indeed... one realizes that there was never anything to comprehend. > > > > > > > > The 'relative being' is only thought's tendency to divide the > > > > indivisible, apparently as a way to ensure survival of the organism. > > > > > > > > Why this tends to goes so far beyond the necessary in human beings, I > > > > can't comprehend :-p. > > > > > > It's a puzzle within a mystery, wrapped in an enigma. > > > > > > > > > Scratching head, > > > > > > Dan > > > > It may have something to do with 'being able to project my own death', > > once > > I feel that 'I exist'. > > > > " I exist " (thus) " I will die " becomes a sort of broken thought-loop, > > existing only for its own continuation, and stirring up all sorts of other > > silliness in the process. > > > > The issue is 'time', and the associated dream. > > > > geo> Yes. This is the basic fear-program that runs time-based > > dream-pseudo-existence > > I have never been born, so I wouldn't know. > > - D - > > But you know you dont know? You dont know what? > -geo- In other words, I am not encapsulated by a fear-based program or an existence in time. - D - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 17, 2009 Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > dan330033 > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 4:52 PM > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > dan330033 > > Nisargadatta > > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 1:58 PM > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > - > > > Tim G. > > > Nisargadatta > > > Monday, November 16, 2009 11:30 PM > > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > > > > > It's that the relative being comes to a full stop. > > > > > > > > > > > > It realizes that it can never comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > > > It can't even comprehend that it can't comprehend, or what it > > > > > > can't > > > > > > > > > > > > > comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > Indeed... one realizes that there was never anything to comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > The 'relative being' is only thought's tendency to divide the > > > > > indivisible, apparently as a way to ensure survival of the organism. > > > > > > > > > > Why this tends to goes so far beyond the necessary in human beings, > > > > > I > > > > > can't comprehend :-p. > > > > > > > > It's a puzzle within a mystery, wrapped in an enigma. > > > > > > > > > > > > Scratching head, > > > > > > > > Dan > > > > > > It may have something to do with 'being able to project my own death', > > > once > > > I feel that 'I exist'. > > > > > > " I exist " (thus) " I will die " becomes a sort of broken thought-loop, > > > existing only for its own continuation, and stirring up all sorts of > > > other > > > silliness in the process. > > > > > > The issue is 'time', and the associated dream. > > > > > > geo> Yes. This is the basic fear-program that runs time-based > > > dream-pseudo-existence > > > > I have never been born, so I wouldn't know. > > > > - D - > > > > But you know you dont know? You dont know what? > > -geo- > > In other words, I am not encapsulated by a fear-based program or an > existence in time. > > - D - > > I suppose for one who feels as... and is able to say " all is consciousness " > to talk about some " unborn " must sound absurd or imagination? > -geo- I have never been born, so I wouldn't know. - D - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 17, 2009 Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > dan330033 > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 4:52 PM > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > dan330033 > > Nisargadatta > > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 1:58 PM > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > - > > > Tim G. > > > Nisargadatta > > > Monday, November 16, 2009 11:30 PM > > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > > > > > It's that the relative being comes to a full stop. > > > > > > > > > > > > It realizes that it can never comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > > > It can't even comprehend that it can't comprehend, or what it > > > > > > can't > > > > > > > > > > > > > comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > Indeed... one realizes that there was never anything to comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > The 'relative being' is only thought's tendency to divide the > > > > > indivisible, apparently as a way to ensure survival of the organism. > > > > > > > > > > Why this tends to goes so far beyond the necessary in human beings, > > > > > I > > > > > can't comprehend :-p. > > > > > > > > It's a puzzle within a mystery, wrapped in an enigma. > > > > > > > > > > > > Scratching head, > > > > > > > > Dan > > > > > > It may have something to do with 'being able to project my own death', > > > once > > > I feel that 'I exist'. > > > > > > " I exist " (thus) " I will die " becomes a sort of broken thought-loop, > > > existing only for its own continuation, and stirring up all sorts of > > > other > > > silliness in the process. > > > > > > The issue is 'time', and the associated dream. > > > > > > geo> Yes. This is the basic fear-program that runs time-based > > > dream-pseudo-existence > > > > I have never been born, so I wouldn't know. > > > > - D - > > > > But you know you dont know? You dont know what? > > -geo- > > In other words, I am not encapsulated by a fear-based program or an > existence in time. > > - D - > > I suppose for one who feels as... and is able to say " all is consciousness " > to talk about some " unborn " must sound absurd or imagination? > -geo- Was this so-called consciousness that all is, something that was born? - D - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 17, 2009 Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > dan330033 > > Nisargadatta > > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 4:52 PM > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > - > > > dan330033 > > > Nisargadatta > > > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 1:58 PM > > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > Tim G. > > > > Nisargadatta > > > > Monday, November 16, 2009 11:30 PM > > > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's that the relative being comes to a full stop. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It realizes that it can never comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It can't even comprehend that it can't comprehend, or what it > > > > > > > can't > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > > > Indeed... one realizes that there was never anything to comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > > > The 'relative being' is only thought's tendency to divide the > > > > > > indivisible, apparently as a way to ensure survival of the organism. > > > > > > > > > > > > Why this tends to goes so far beyond the necessary in human beings, > > > > > > I > > > > > > can't comprehend :-p. > > > > > > > > > > It's a puzzle within a mystery, wrapped in an enigma. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Scratching head, > > > > > > > > > > Dan > > > > > > > > It may have something to do with 'being able to project my own death', > > > > once > > > > I feel that 'I exist'. > > > > > > > > " I exist " (thus) " I will die " becomes a sort of broken thought-loop, > > > > existing only for its own continuation, and stirring up all sorts of > > > > other > > > > silliness in the process. > > > > > > > > The issue is 'time', and the associated dream. > > > > > > > > geo> Yes. This is the basic fear-program that runs time-based > > > > dream-pseudo-existence > > > > > > I have never been born, so I wouldn't know. > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > But you know you dont know? You dont know what? > > > -geo- > > > > In other words, I am not encapsulated by a fear-based program or an > > existence in time. > > > > - D - > > > > I suppose for one who feels as... and is able to say " all is consciousness " > > to talk about some " unborn " must sound absurd or imagination? > > -geo- > > > Was this so-called consciousness that all is, something that was > born? > > - D - Fwiw, I think " all is consciousness " is a cheesy way to say " there's no such thing as objectivity " . Also fwiw, I don't recall you ever uttering the words " all is consciousness " . Thought that was Ramesh Balsekar's thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 17, 2009 Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > Fwiw, I think " all is consciousness " is a cheesy way to say " there's no such > thing as objectivity " . > > Also fwiw, I don't recall you ever uttering the words " all is > consciousness " . Thought that was Ramesh Balsekar's thing. > > = > > I did not have you in mind tim. BTW...what is fwiw? > -geo- And I didn't have you in mind, Geo... I was talking to Dan :-p. Fwiw, " fwiw " means 'for what it's worth' ;-). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 17, 2009 Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 - dan330033 Nisargadatta Tuesday, November 17, 2009 4:52 PM Re: The Absolute Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > dan330033 > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 1:58 PM > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > Tim G. > > Nisargadatta > > Monday, November 16, 2009 11:30 PM > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > > > It's that the relative being comes to a full stop. > > > > > > > > > > It realizes that it can never comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > It can't even comprehend that it can't comprehend, or what it > > > > > can't > > > > > > > > > > > comprehend. > > > > > > > > Indeed... one realizes that there was never anything to comprehend. > > > > > > > > The 'relative being' is only thought's tendency to divide the > > > > indivisible, apparently as a way to ensure survival of the organism. > > > > > > > > Why this tends to goes so far beyond the necessary in human beings, > > > > I > > > > can't comprehend :-p. > > > > > > It's a puzzle within a mystery, wrapped in an enigma. > > > > > > > > > Scratching head, > > > > > > Dan > > > > It may have something to do with 'being able to project my own death', > > once > > I feel that 'I exist'. > > > > " I exist " (thus) " I will die " becomes a sort of broken thought-loop, > > existing only for its own continuation, and stirring up all sorts of > > other > > silliness in the process. > > > > The issue is 'time', and the associated dream. > > > > geo> Yes. This is the basic fear-program that runs time-based > > dream-pseudo-existence > > I have never been born, so I wouldn't know. > > - D - > > But you know you dont know? You dont know what? > -geo- In other words, I am not encapsulated by a fear-based program or an existence in time. - D - I suppose for one who feels as... and is able to say " all is consciousness " to talk about some " unborn " must sound absurd or imagination? -geo- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 17, 2009 Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > > I think...ramesh, wine liquormen, pete, toombaru...and some others...There > are those who strive to fit " non-duality " into the one movement they call > consciousness. It somehow works out.....but it lacks the essence > -geo- Yes, 'all is consciousness' makes little sense, unless one is trying to say " there isn't such a thing as objectivity " (which is true). I used to joke on my old " Fewtchykrishnamurti " list that " All is Consciousness " is something they teach to anesthesiologists, to help them wake people up after surgery ;-). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 17, 2009 Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 - dan330033 Nisargadatta Tuesday, November 17, 2009 5:25 PM Re: The Absolute Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > dan330033 > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 4:52 PM > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > dan330033 > > Nisargadatta > > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 1:58 PM > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > - > > > Tim G. > > > Nisargadatta > > > Monday, November 16, 2009 11:30 PM > > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > > > > > It's that the relative being comes to a full stop. > > > > > > > > > > > > It realizes that it can never comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > > > It can't even comprehend that it can't comprehend, or what it > > > > > > can't > > > > > > > > > > > > > comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > Indeed... one realizes that there was never anything to > > > > > comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > The 'relative being' is only thought's tendency to divide the > > > > > indivisible, apparently as a way to ensure survival of the > > > > > organism. > > > > > > > > > > Why this tends to goes so far beyond the necessary in human > > > > > beings, > > > > > I > > > > > can't comprehend :-p. > > > > > > > > It's a puzzle within a mystery, wrapped in an enigma. > > > > > > > > > > > > Scratching head, > > > > > > > > Dan > > > > > > It may have something to do with 'being able to project my own death', > > > once > > > I feel that 'I exist'. > > > > > > " I exist " (thus) " I will die " becomes a sort of broken thought-loop, > > > existing only for its own continuation, and stirring up all sorts of > > > other > > > silliness in the process. > > > > > > The issue is 'time', and the associated dream. > > > > > > geo> Yes. This is the basic fear-program that runs time-based > > > dream-pseudo-existence > > > > I have never been born, so I wouldn't know. > > > > - D - > > > > But you know you dont know? You dont know what? > > -geo- > > In other words, I am not encapsulated by a fear-based program or an > existence in time. > > - D - > > I suppose for one who feels as... and is able to say " all is > consciousness " > to talk about some " unborn " must sound absurd or imagination? > -geo- Was this so-called consciousness that all is, something that was born? - D - I am not sure what would one of them answer - but I suppose they would say it was born with the organism. For example pete I think says all is happening in the brain. Toombaru something like that also. They say it is all one selfless movement, unknown in its nature because the limited mind can not know itself - nonetheless all was born with the body. -geo- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 17, 2009 Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 - dan330033 Nisargadatta Tuesday, November 17, 2009 5:23 PM Re: The Absolute Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > dan330033 > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 4:52 PM > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > dan330033 > > Nisargadatta > > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 1:58 PM > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > - > > > Tim G. > > > Nisargadatta > > > Monday, November 16, 2009 11:30 PM > > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > > > > > It's that the relative being comes to a full stop. > > > > > > > > > > > > It realizes that it can never comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > > > It can't even comprehend that it can't comprehend, or what it > > > > > > can't > > > > > > > > > > > > > comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > Indeed... one realizes that there was never anything to > > > > > comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > The 'relative being' is only thought's tendency to divide the > > > > > indivisible, apparently as a way to ensure survival of the > > > > > organism. > > > > > > > > > > Why this tends to goes so far beyond the necessary in human > > > > > beings, > > > > > I > > > > > can't comprehend :-p. > > > > > > > > It's a puzzle within a mystery, wrapped in an enigma. > > > > > > > > > > > > Scratching head, > > > > > > > > Dan > > > > > > It may have something to do with 'being able to project my own death', > > > once > > > I feel that 'I exist'. > > > > > > " I exist " (thus) " I will die " becomes a sort of broken thought-loop, > > > existing only for its own continuation, and stirring up all sorts of > > > other > > > silliness in the process. > > > > > > The issue is 'time', and the associated dream. > > > > > > geo> Yes. This is the basic fear-program that runs time-based > > > dream-pseudo-existence > > > > I have never been born, so I wouldn't know. > > > > - D - > > > > But you know you dont know? You dont know what? > > -geo- > > In other words, I am not encapsulated by a fear-based program or an > existence in time. > > - D - > > I suppose for one who feels as... and is able to say " all is > consciousness " > to talk about some " unborn " must sound absurd or imagination? > -geo- I have never been born, so I wouldn't know. - D - You wouldn't know what would " they " say because you are unborn? Makes no sense. -geo- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 17, 2009 Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 - Tim G. Nisargadatta Tuesday, November 17, 2009 5:31 PM Re: The Absolute Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > dan330033 > > Nisargadatta > > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 4:52 PM > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > - > > > dan330033 > > > Nisargadatta > > > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 1:58 PM > > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > Tim G. > > > > Nisargadatta > > > > Monday, November 16, 2009 11:30 PM > > > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's that the relative being comes to a full stop. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It realizes that it can never comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It can't even comprehend that it can't comprehend, or what it > > > > > > > can't > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > > > Indeed... one realizes that there was never anything to > > > > > > comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > > > The 'relative being' is only thought's tendency to divide the > > > > > > indivisible, apparently as a way to ensure survival of the > > > > > > organism. > > > > > > > > > > > > Why this tends to goes so far beyond the necessary in human > > > > > > beings, > > > > > > I > > > > > > can't comprehend :-p. > > > > > > > > > > It's a puzzle within a mystery, wrapped in an enigma. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Scratching head, > > > > > > > > > > Dan > > > > > > > > It may have something to do with 'being able to project my own > > > > death', > > > > once > > > > I feel that 'I exist'. > > > > > > > > " I exist " (thus) " I will die " becomes a sort of broken thought-loop, > > > > existing only for its own continuation, and stirring up all sorts of > > > > other > > > > silliness in the process. > > > > > > > > The issue is 'time', and the associated dream. > > > > > > > > geo> Yes. This is the basic fear-program that runs time-based > > > > dream-pseudo-existence > > > > > > I have never been born, so I wouldn't know. > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > But you know you dont know? You dont know what? > > > -geo- > > > > In other words, I am not encapsulated by a fear-based program or an > > existence in time. > > > > - D - > > > > I suppose for one who feels as... and is able to say " all is > > consciousness " > > to talk about some " unborn " must sound absurd or imagination? > > -geo- > > > Was this so-called consciousness that all is, something that was > born? > > - D - Fwiw, I think " all is consciousness " is a cheesy way to say " there's no such thing as objectivity " . Also fwiw, I don't recall you ever uttering the words " all is consciousness " . Thought that was Ramesh Balsekar's thing. = I did not have you in mind tim. BTW...what is fwiw? -geo- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 17, 2009 Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 I have never been born, so I wouldn't know. - D - Why beeing unborn is an impediment to know anything that is known by the limited mind that is made to know it? -geo- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 17, 2009 Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 - Tim G. Nisargadatta Tuesday, November 17, 2009 5:40 PM Re: The Absolute Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > Fwiw, I think " all is consciousness " is a cheesy way to say " there's no > such > thing as objectivity " . > > Also fwiw, I don't recall you ever uttering the words " all is > consciousness " . Thought that was Ramesh Balsekar's thing. > > = > > I did not have you in mind tim. BTW...what is fwiw? > -geo- And I didn't have you in mind, Geo... I was talking to Dan :-p. Fwiw, " fwiw " means 'for what it's worth' ;-). = Yes, but I did not have dan in mind either :>)) -geo- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 17, 2009 Report Share Posted November 17, 2009 - geo Nisargadatta Tuesday, November 17, 2009 6:46 PM Re: Re: The Absolute - Tim G. Nisargadatta Tuesday, November 17, 2009 5:40 PM Re: The Absolute Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > Fwiw, I think " all is consciousness " is a cheesy way to say " there's no > such > thing as objectivity " . > > Also fwiw, I don't recall you ever uttering the words " all is > consciousness " . Thought that was Ramesh Balsekar's thing. > = I think...ramesh, wine liquormen, pete, toombaru...and some others...There are those who strive to fit " non-duality " into the one movement they call consciousness. It somehow works out.....but it lacks the essence -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.