Guest guest Posted February 28, 2000 Report Share Posted February 28, 2000 At 12:57 PM 2/28/00 -0300, you wrote: >"geovani" <inandor > >JM>~ The last sentence is very profound, because it cuts through any sense of >dualistic 'perception'. Things do not appear to us because we perceive >them, but simply because they are self-evident. The appearance and the >'awareness' of such an appearance is the same. A kind of joint-phenomenon. >Simply whole. > >geovani>...and maybe one could even say: "There is no such thing >as awareness". Of course I am reinforcing the above statement, but >one must be attentive to the subtle idea of an awareness that is not separate >from events - but is still conceived as extant parameter per se. D: Quite so, Geovani and Moller. Great hearing from you, Geovani! Indeed - it's an unsplit situation. Once we talk about it, our words seem to split it up. But even so, it's still not "really" split, and our words themselves are a manifestation of unsplit reality. As a flower forms petals, humans form words. Our words will never clarify what is always the case. Love, Dan 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.