Guest guest Posted March 6, 2000 Report Share Posted March 6, 2000 > Antoine <carrea > Roger Isaacs wrote: > > I'm interested in experiential > > reality: does one percieve that one's > > essence > > is limited to the body or coincident > > with the body? Who cares about > > scientific opinion: what is our > > perception? > > Just fascinating Roger, the questions > that you raise... A nice question, I > would ask myself in experiencing a > sunset, is how do I experience the sun, > do i see it as moving in the sky?, or as > not moving and and feeling the planet > rotating?... Or any other way, or not at > all... , > .... > Antoine Is there someway that the question "how do I experience the sunset" can go deeper? Is it possible to experience the sunset without the movement of thought? Thought is an intermediary, an interpreter, a shadow of the real! The fading pink clouds take away not only the breath but also thought? Roger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 7, 2000 Report Share Posted March 7, 2000 Dear Geovani, Roger, re: addiction Roger said: >> I'm interested in experiential >> reality: does one percieve that one's >> essence >> is limited to the body or coincident >> with the body? ~~(M) I think your question is perhaps based on the idea it is possible to 'perceive' one's essence as either limited or co-incident with the body'. I say 'idea', because where did you get the impression that you have an essence? This is to me a fundamental flaw in many teachings. Zen very often refers to 'one's' Buddha nature. Soem misguided Hindu teachers will talk of the Atman as your deepest nature. So this has lead many confused as to the possible nature of the Self, Buddha Nature etc. If I had an essense, then what would be the essense of a dog, this computer, the universe and so on? Would this be different from MY essense? Is there really such a 'thing' or even experience as my (presumably true) nature? Would it not be more pointing to non-duality if the question was rephrased to read: What is the essense of EVERYTHING? Otherwise My essense could be different from yours and the rest of the world. Self-enquiry generally directs its enquiry at the nature of ALL phenomena. Not only what is taken to be the limited self and then try to expand it from there to find its 'own' essesnse. Love , Moller geovani <inandor < > 05 March 2000 09:02 Re: Addiction/habit >"geovani" <inandor > > >Roger Isaacs wrote: > >> R: >> I'm interested in experiential >> reality: does one percieve that one's >> essence >> is limited to the body or coincident >> with the body? Who cares about >> scientific opinion: what is our >> perception? > >Antoine>Just fascinating Roger, the questions >that you raise... A nice question, I >would ask myself in experiencing a >sunset, is how do I experience the sun, >do i see it as moving in the sky?, or as >not moving and and feeling the planet >rotating?... Or any other way, or not at >all... The scientific opinion, as the >religious one, and so many other >opinions, have been forming the way we >experience things. We are most often not >aware that seeing things as simple as >the sun moving is a work of habit, or >the sensation of "up" or "down". >Standing on the head for a while may >change the unique perspective one may >have of its world, as much as changing >language, or changing hair colour >Until there is no rooted habit left to >care or see opinion in others >perspective. > >A perspective, > >Antoine > >geovani> Perspectives: To perceive the human world >as a subject/object experience, the human organism >had to exist. Where else could the human world be perceived >if not in the human organism? When the centered inner >separate observed is seen through, then one may >say that one is the human dimension, the human >mind, the human field as a whole. In the other hand, when >the centered observer is active, that inner outsider makes us >feel as one among billions. But....the way this individuality >was created, came forth - is a lovely mistery. >- > >------ >DON'T HATE YOUR RATE! >Get a NextCard Visa, in 30 seconds! Get rates as low as >0.0% Intro or 9.9% Fixed APR and no hidden fees. >Apply NOW! >http://click./1/2120/3/_/520931/_/952276171/ >------ > >// > >All paths go somewhere. No path goes nowhere. Paths, places, sights, perceptions, and indeed all >experiences arise from and exist in and subside back into the Space of Awareness. Like waves rising >are not different than the ocean, all things arising from Awareness are of the nature of Awareness. >Awareness does not come and go but is always Present. It is Home. Home is where the Heart Is. Jnanis >know the Heart to be the Finality of Eternal Being. A true devotee relishes in the Truth of >Self-Knowledge, spontaneously arising from within into It Self. Welcome all to a. > >To from this list, go to the ONElist web site, at > www., and select the User Center link from the menu bar > on the left. This menu will also let you change your subscription > between digest and normal mode. > > > > > > >------ >PERFORM CPR ON YOUR APR! >Get a NextCard Visa, in 30 seconds! Get rates as low as >0.0% Intro or 9.9% Fixed APR and no hidden fees. >Apply NOW! >http://click./1/2121/3/_/520931/_/952282926/ >------ > >// > >All paths go somewhere. No path goes nowhere. Paths, places, sights, perceptions, and indeed all experiences arise from and exist in and subside back into the Space of Awareness. Like waves rising are not different than the ocean, all things arising from Awareness are of the nature of Awareness. Awareness does not come and go but is always Present. It is Home. Home is where the Heart Is. Jnanis know the Heart to be the Finality of Eternal Being. A true devotee relishes in the Truth of Self-Knowledge, spontaneously arising from within into It Self. Welcome all to a. > >To from this list, go to the ONElist web site, at > www., and select the User Center link from the menu bar > on the left. This menu will also let you change your subscription > between digest and normal mode. > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 7, 2000 Report Share Posted March 7, 2000 Roger said: >>> I'm interested in experiential >>> reality: does one percieve that one's >>> essence >>> is limited to the body or coincident >>> with the body? Moller (I think it was Moller at this point) said: >~~(M) I think your question is perhaps based on the idea it is possible to >'perceive' one's essence as either limited or co-incident with the body'. Greg: (jumping in here). In one sense, we don't percieve our essence, our essence percieves us. Rather, we appear to our essence, as our essence. In another sense, joining with what Moller says below -- all that is perceived is our essence. Many things help in the clear seeing of this, such as self-inquiry, jnana yoga, the 7-fold reasoning of Chandrakirti, metta meditation, OM meditation, meditation, intense and selfless love, etc. Not sure if this addresses Roger's point... With love, --Greg Back to Moller: >If I had an essense, then what would be the essense of a dog, this computer, >the universe and so on? Would this be different from MY essense? Is there >really such a 'thing' or even experience as my (presumably true) nature? >Would it not be more pointing to non-duality if the question was rephrased >to read: What is the essense of EVERYTHING? Otherwise My essense could be >different from yours and the rest of the world. > >Self-enquiry generally directs its enquiry at the nature of ALL phenomena. >Not only what is taken to be the limited self and then try to expand it from >there to find its 'own' essesnse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 7, 2000 Report Share Posted March 7, 2000 At 15:40 07/03/00 +0200, you wrote: >J M de la Rouviere <moller > >Dear Geovani, Roger, Hi y'all, Just got this: may I give you my ha'penny's worth? > >re: addiction > >Roger said: > >>> I'm interested in experiential >>> reality: does one percieve that one's >>> essence >>> is limited to the body or coincident >>> with the body? > >~~(M) I think your question is perhaps based on the idea it is possible to >'perceive' one's essence as either limited or co-incident with the body'. > >I say 'idea', because where did you get the impression that you have an >essence? This is to me a fundamental flaw in many teachings. Zen very >often refers to 'one's' Buddha nature. Soem misguided Hindu teachers will >talk of the Atman as your deepest nature. So this has lead many confused as >to the possible nature of the Self, Buddha Nature etc. I found this to be so too. The day I described that summer was for me a day of understanding "my essence". Which, I must say, was nothing more than a moving moment of awareness, a united part of a cosmic flow of united being. Bliss, honour, duty, love, wonder. Even that was illusion. Some time later I had an experience in which my only semblance to essence was a non-corporeal light that never wavered. It was not incarnate, indescribable except in reference to a point of light. It told me (even tho' I was desperate to believe its ultimate reality) that even *it* an illusion, however timeless, just the only way I could perceive any of my "essential" nature. I knew then that it was the illusion of the Reality creating everything. And this is what I understand by the Zen "Buddha nature": that we have a nature beyond pointing at, talking about, praying to, believing in. Whether the Hindu system feels the same, I cannot say, but imo Zen is definitely laying emptyness upon emptyness. The compassion of Buddha is that of the sense of suffering of our living under the illusion of suchness. IME. > >If I had an essense, then what would be the essense of a dog, this computer, >the universe and so on? Would this be different from MY essense? Is there >really such a 'thing' or even experience as my (presumably true) nature? >Would it not be more pointing to non-duality if the question was rephrased >to read: What is the essense of EVERYTHING? Otherwise My essense could be >different from yours and the rest of the world. All "is" how one perceives it to be. What else can one experience? Well, for one thing, the indescribable. Is that essence? Or is it essence as the illusion of the suchness of essence? Full circle. The middle of the circle is defined by our talking about it. But it is still only the hole in an illusury doughnut. IME. > >Self-enquiry generally directs its enquiry at the nature of ALL phenomena. >Not only what is taken to be the limited self and then try to expand it from >there to find its 'own' essesnse. IME, one implies the other, as we experience the world ourselves, and the phenomena dance in subjectivity. So we may as well all just get along. Must get back to work... Love Rob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 7, 2000 Report Share Posted March 7, 2000 > >Roger said: > >>> I'm interested in experiential > >>> reality: does one percieve that one's > >>> essence > >>> is limited to the body or coincident > >>> with the body? > > > >~~(M) I think your question is perhaps based on the idea it is possible to > >'perceive' one's essence as either limited or co-incident with the body'. > > > >I say 'idea', because where did you get the impression that you have an > >essence? This is to me a fundamental flaw in many teachings. Zen very > >often refers to 'one's' Buddha nature. Soem misguided Hindu teachers will > >talk of the Atman as your deepest nature. So this has lead many confused as > >to the possible nature of the Self, Buddha Nature etc. > > Rob: > I found this to be so too. The day I described that summer was for me a day > of understanding "my essence". Which, I must say, was nothing more than a > moving moment of awareness, a united part of a cosmic flow of united being. > Bliss, honour, duty, love, wonder. Roger: "Is it possible to perceive one's essence as ... the body?" How can we deny that most people perceive their essence as the body? You deny common experience? "where did you get the impression that you have an essence?" If you are perceptually the totality of the universe, do you still have an essence? Roger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 8, 2000 Report Share Posted March 8, 2000 At 16:11 07/03/00 -0700, you wrote: >"Roger Isaacs" <RIsaacs > Pls scroll down for reply: >> >Roger said: >> >>> I'm interested in experiential >> >>> reality: does one percieve that one's >> >>> essence >> >>> is limited to the body or coincident >> >>> with the body? >> > >> >~~(M) I think your question is perhaps based on the idea it is possible >to >> >'perceive' one's essence as either limited or co-incident with the body'. >> > >> >I say 'idea', because where did you get the impression that you have an >> >essence? This is to me a fundamental flaw in many teachings. Zen very >> >often refers to 'one's' Buddha nature. Soem misguided Hindu teachers >will >> >talk of the Atman as your deepest nature. So this has lead many confused >as >> >to the possible nature of the Self, Buddha Nature etc. >> >> Rob: >> I found this to be so too. The day I described that summer was for me a >day >> of understanding "my essence". Which, I must say, was nothing more than a >> moving moment of awareness, a united part of a cosmic flow of united >being. >> Bliss, honour, duty, love, wonder. Hi Roger: > >Roger: >"Is it possible to perceive one's essence as ... the body?" Yes, it is possible, imo. However, that limits you to whatever you perceive of your body. How deep do you go into that? At a deep level, the body reflects the stuff of life itself, and energy that permeates the phenomenal world. So back we come to oneness. There are ppl on this list who hold far more knowledge about deep levels in the human body than me. > >How can we deny that most people perceive their essence as the body? You >deny common experience? No, I have them too. Where your attention is, there will your belief boundary be. It varies. If I allow myself to experience my essence as my body, then that is my worldview. If I focus on the interrelatedness of my experience, then voila...! I responded to the post because I had something to say about my experience. Perhaps many ppl experience their body, not as their essence, but as something they "own" (my body, my left foot, my hunger etc). Identifying with the body because it is experienced through the senses. The strength and urgency of those sensations coupled with the nearness of them (they reside in the sensing vehicle, after all) can be compelling. Physical existence in the sensing vehicle includes the body's self-sustaining urge. Which is not to state I'm saying I see an either/or position here... Cartesianism is a limiting perception too. Perhaps, and this is heading for dangerously intellectual ground here, essence needs to be defined. Perhaps that definition itself changes with experience. Thus the discussion stands on shifting sands. I personally like the zen approach - spring comes, and the grass grows by itself. > >"where did you get the impression that you have an essence?" > >If you are perceptually the totality of the universe, do you still have an >essence? I have only experienced having been united with the universe, not been the totality of it "myself". I felt as if I did not "own" myself... Hence the duty aspect. I was given to the universe, had always belonged to it anyway, was no different from it. I was just lucky to be aware of it, and there lay the seeds of "my" differentiation from it. Perhaps this witnessing awareness was the Atman that the Hindhus speak of. All I know is it was ime the identity of oneness being aware of itself. I have also seen myself as a nondescript particle in a huge cosmos, alone and only significant to my self. Both these experiences were my perception, and at that level, an illusion as any other. I believe we are all the great things that we experience, and ultimately none of them also. I choose to follow in what I believe will be most beneficial to everything. I may be wrong, and often am. Life keeps teaching me its phenomenal lessons. May I ask: is the need to understand the essence focus something that has deep personal relevance to you at present? Love "Rob" > >Roger > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 8, 2000 Report Share Posted March 8, 2000 Dear Roger, Just to try and clear up something. You said: >If you are perceptually the totality of the universe, do you still have an >essence? My own scale is perhaps not so large. For me there is just present experience to consider in any given moment. This could be my body, the room, noises etc. Anything outside of these will obviously be a thought and must then be seen as such, but not mistaken for actually existing. So for me the universe is not included in my reckonings. So for me the question is how whole is this present situation for me? This total 'gestalt' of each living moment? I must also admit that this word 'essense' makes me uncomfortable. I know we have discussed it before, but wholeness to me is not essense. essense is still an overflow of the god concept . There somehow has to be some final 'container' of manifest existence. So it has been suggested that consciousness, awareness, god, essense and so on could serve as this container out of which all manifestation springs and to which it all returns. I have never sensed this. All I have to admit, is that when things settle down, and there is an absolute quietness, that all which can be said about that present situation is that is only what is. No essense, center, consciousness etc. Love Moller 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.