Guest guest Posted April 14, 2003 Report Share Posted April 14, 2003 I use the words "To I" when I need to pay attention, like when driving, so I don't merge my brains with someone else's and have a miscegenation of DNS's. Or when my mind is over active during a sitting meditation. This is the personal witness or the person witnessing, but there is no real person so it is a facet of the mind witnessing. My vispana teacher said that U.G's mindfulness got so strong that it blew away his discursive mind and he went into oneness. Seems reasonable to me. Looking intently at the arising of thoughts would do the same thing when it becomes so strong that the thoughts can not become thoughts. I typed in for the groups what Nisargadatta said about the three thought elements but I stupidly deleted it all when I thought I bonded with Ramana. It probably is in, Consciousness and the Absolute. I use "To Whom" during a sitting meditation when there are some thoughts. I am now bringing the Attention back to looking for that which makes the Attention possible; the eye that cannot see it self. Nisargadatta calls it the Attention eating up the Attention. This is a samadhi state. I am not asking the question "who am I" because I hold to what Nisagadatta said. It wont have any effect unless you are absorbed to some extent. I have used that question when I used to go out of the body and when I did I got a nice rush up like going up in an elevator at great speed. Any other views are most welcomed. Aloha, em-tee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 14, 2003 Report Share Posted April 14, 2003 " em-tee " <unbound@h...> wrote: > I use the words " To I " when I need to pay attention, like when driving, so I don't merge my brains with someone else's and have a miscegenation of DNS's. Or when my mind is over active during a sitting meditation. > This is the personal witness or the person witnessing, but there is no real person so it is a facet of the mind witnessing. > > My vispana teacher said that U.G's mindfulness got so strong that it blew away his discursive mind and he went into oneness. Seems reasonable to me. > > Looking intently at the arising of thoughts would do the same thing when it becomes so strong that the thoughts can not become thoughts. > I typed in for the groups what Nisargadatta said about the three thought elements but I stupidly deleted it all when I thought I bonded with Ramana. It probably is in, Consciousness and the Absolute. > > I use " To Whom " during a sitting meditation when there are some thoughts. I am now bringing the Attention back to looking for that which makes the Attention possible; the eye that cannot see it self. Nisargadatta calls it the Attention eating up the Attention. This is a samadhi state. > > I am not asking the question " who am I " because I hold to what Nisagadatta said. It wont have any effect unless you are absorbed to some extent. Hi Alton, It is true that there are degrees of *Awareness* from U.G. Krishnamurti to Nisargadatta and all and each of us is conscious differently. You seem to aim for the sehaja samadhi [living in samadhi vs sitting in] in your words; what Nisargadatta calls when: " the Attention eating up the Attention " , I call it pristine awareness: there is nothing in it only the awareness. Is this what you mean absorbed? Love, Karta I have used that question when I used to go out of the body and when I did I got a nice rush up like going up in an elevator at great speed. > > Any other views are most welcomed. > > Aloha, > em-tee 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.