Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

A Net of Jewels October 6

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

A NET of JEWELS

daily meditations for seekers of Truth

RAMESH S. BALSEKAR

http://www.advaita.org

 

 

 

 

October 6

 

 

 

The reality and permanence of the object that one imagines oneself to be is

an illusory continuity like that of a river, which appears to remain the

same yet is composed of entirely different water from one moment to the

next.

 

 

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

 

 

The question of what will happen to me when I die is indeed as misconceived

as the question of what happens to my lap when I stand up or to my fist when

I open my hand.

 

 

 

 

Subscribe: ANetofJewels-

URL to this page: ANetofJewels

 

 

 

 

 

 

_______

 

Get your free @ address at

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>

> The question of what will happen to me when I die is indeed as

misconceived

> as the question of what happens to my lap when I stand up or to my

fist when

> I open my hand.

>

 

Or as pointed! Those are great questions. But the next question is, I

guess, who asks them? Certainly not the lap or the fist?

 

Love and Peace,

S (sitting, clenching)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who else?

To whom would the need to know, be relevant?

 

Cheers

 

Sandeep

 

 

-

<sugandolf

<Nisargadatta >

Monday, October 08, 2001 09:05 AM

Re: A Net of Jewels October 6

> > > > The question of what will happen to me when I die is indeed as > misconceived> > as the question of what happens to my lap when I stand up or to my > fist when> > I open my hand.> > > > Or as pointed! Those are great questions. But the next question is, I > guess, who asks them? Certainly not the lap or the fist? > > Love and Peace,> S (sitting, clenching)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nisargadatta, " Sandeep Chatterjee " <sandeepc@b...> wrote:

> Who else?

> To whom would the need to know, be relevant?

 

Exactly. If I understand you correctly. Except, I would ask, to whom

would the need to *ask* be relevant.

Not even be relevant, just occur.

 

With open hand,

S

 

>

> Cheers

>

> Sandeep

>

>

> -

> <sugandolf@h...>

> <Nisargadatta>

> Monday, October 08, 2001 09:05 AM

> Re: A Net of Jewels October 6

>

>

> > >

> > > The question of what will happen to me when I die is indeed as

> > misconceived

> > > as the question of what happens to my lap when I stand up or to

my

> > fist when

> > > I open my hand.

> > >

> >

> > Or as pointed! Those are great questions. But the next question

is, I

> > guess, who asks them? Certainly not the lap or the fist?

> >

> > Love and Peace,

> > S (sitting, clenching)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indeed.

And yet the question as to what will happen next, occurs.

 

If it occurs, it can only occur to a 'lap' or to a "fist" who in it's quest for continuity, believes a "next", exists.

Not only exist, but exists for itself as an entity in continuity.

 

Thus the occurring of the question needed a "lap" or a "fist" and thus a "lap" or a "fist" comes to be.

 

All fun and games.

 

 

Cheers

 

Sandeep

 

 

 

 

-

sugandolf

Nisargadatta

Monday, October 08, 2001 10:35 AM

Re: A Net of Jewels October 6

Nisargadatta, "Sandeep Chatterjee" <sandeepc@b...> wrote:> Who else?> To whom would the need to know, be relevant?Exactly. If I understand you correctly. Except, I would ask, to whom would the need to *ask* be relevant. Not even be relevant, just occur.With open hand,S> > Cheers> > Sandeep> > > - > <sugandolf@h...>> <Nisargadatta>> Monday, October 08, 2001 09:05 AM> Re: A Net of Jewels October 6> > > > > > > > The question of what will happen to me when I die is indeed as > > misconceived> > > as the question of what happens to my lap when I stand up or to my > > fist when> > > I open my hand.> > > > > > > Or as pointed! Those are great questions. But the next question is, I > > guess, who asks them? Certainly not the lap or the fist? > > > > Love and Peace,> > S (sitting, clenching)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

--- sugandolf wrote:

> >

> > The question of what will happen to me when I die

> is indeed as

> misconceived

> > as the question of what happens to my lap when I

> stand up or to my

> fist when

> > I open my hand.

> >

>

> Or as pointed! Those are great questions. But the

> next question is, I

> guess, who asks them? Certainly not the lap or the

> fist?

>

> Love and Peace,

> S (sitting, clenching)

 

Yes.

 

And ...

Being able to

ask a question, such as " what happens

to me when I die " , or " who am I? "

requires a being who is there to ask.

 

How will I speak when I have no mouth?

What will be seen without any eye?

 

-- Dan

 

 

 

 

 

NEW from GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month.

http://geocities./ps/info1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was not originally thinking of the fist and the lap as metaphors,

but as themselves. Laps and fists don't ask questions about laps and

fists. Who does?

 

It seems apparent that Ramesh is pointing to the fact that there is

no separate " lap " or " fist " entity. They only appeared to exist,

while there was sitting or clenching. Where did they go when the

standing or opening occurred? Nowhere. The conditions that made them

manifest changed. That is all. It may be helpful to consider this

analogy when contemplating the nature of the self. But the nature of

the self is not *directly* reflected in the nature of the lap or

fist. Because there is self-consciousness, but not lap-consciousness

or fist-consciousness (though there is a state where there is no

distinction. And it's not Montana.)

 

To whom does the lap or fist appear? And what exactly is the nature

of the non-existence of the lap or the fist? Does the lap not exist

for the child bouncing on her father's knee? And the fist, for the

woman punched hard in the face by her lover? Do they not continue a

sort of existence for those they have touched, even when no longer

manifest? Asking what happens does not necessarily mean asserting the

continued existence of the entity as such. The question matters to

the entity (the self) now, not " after " or " before " its manifestation.

 

To fun and games!

 

L'Chaim,

S

 

 

Nisargadatta, " Sandeep Chatterjee " <sandeepc@b...> wrote:

> Indeed.

> And yet the question as to what will happen next, occurs.

>

> If it occurs, it can only occur to a 'lap' or to a " fist " who in

it's quest for continuity, believes a " next " , exists.

> Not only exist, but exists for itself as an entity in continuity.

>

> Thus the occurring of the question needed a " lap " or a " fist " and

thus a " lap " or a " fist " comes to be.

>

> All fun and games.

>

>

> Cheers

>

> Sandeep

>

>

>

> -

> sugandolf@h...

> Nisargadatta

> Monday, October 08, 2001 10:35 AM

> Re: A Net of Jewels October 6

>

>

> Nisargadatta, " Sandeep Chatterjee " <sandeepc@b...>

wrote:

> > Who else?

> > To whom would the need to know, be relevant?

>

> Exactly. If I understand you correctly. Except, I would ask, to

whom

> would the need to *ask* be relevant.

> Not even be relevant, just occur.

>

> With open hand,

> S

>

> >

> > Cheers

> >

> > Sandeep

> >

> >

> > -

> > <sugandolf@h...>

> > <Nisargadatta>

> > Monday, October 08, 2001 09:05 AM

> > Re: A Net of Jewels October 6

> >

> >

> > > >

> > > > The question of what will happen to me when I die is indeed

as

> > > misconceived

> > > > as the question of what happens to my lap when I stand up

or to

> my

> > > fist when

> > > > I open my hand.

> > > >

> > >

> > > Or as pointed! Those are great questions. But the next

question

> is, I

> > > guess, who asks them? Certainly not the lap or the fist?

> > >

> > > Love and Peace,

> > > S (sitting, clenching)

>

>

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nisargadatta, d b <dan330033> wrote:

>

> Yes.

>

> And ...

> Being able to

> ask a question, such as " what happens

> to me when I die " , or " who am I? "

> requires a being who is there to ask.

>

> How will I speak when I have no mouth?

> What will be seen without any eye?

>

> -- Dan

>

>

 

:-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

-

sugandolf

Nisargadatta

Tuesday, October 09, 2001 09:41 AM

Re: A Net of Jewels October 6

 

I was not originally thinking of the fist and the lap as metaphors, but as themselves. Laps and fists don't ask questions about laps and fists. Who does?

 

 

San:

 

Well I may be completely off-base (wouldn't be the first time) but laps and fists refer to the notional "me-entity" to which all this is of relevance and hence to which the question would arise.

 

------

It seems apparent that Ramesh is pointing to the fact that there is no separate "lap" or "fist" entity. They only appeared to exist, while there was sitting or clenching. Where did they go when the standing or opening occurred? Nowhere.

 

 

San:

 

May I suggest for your consideration, that they do not go anywhere for they never existed in the first place.

As you say, only appear to.

 

 

The conditions that made them manifest changed.

 

San:

 

Again, I would prattle, appear to manifest.

 

 

 

That is all. It may be helpful to consider this analogy when contemplating the nature of the self. But the nature of the self is not *directly* reflected in the nature of the lap or fist. Because there is self-consciousness,

 

San:

 

I am suggesting there is none.

 

 

 

 

but not lap-consciousness or fist-consciousness (though there is a state where there is no distinction. And it's not Montana.)

 

 

San;

 

LOL.

 

To whom does the lap or fist appear? And what exactly is the nature of the non-existence of the lap or the fist? Does the lap not exist for the child bouncing on her father's knee? And the fist, for the woman punched hard in the face by her lover? Do they not continue a sort of existence for those they have touched, even when no longer manifest?

 

 

San:

 

It's not the physicality that is being referred by these metaphors.

 

 

 

Asking what happens does not necessarily mean asserting the continued existence of the entity as such. The question matters to the entity (the self) now, not "after" or "before" its manifestation.

 

 

San:

 

Sure.

And in this "now" is the wondering about the "after".

 

Which presupposes the apriori belief of A) self-existence in the now which questions and B) continuity of the questioning self in the "after"

 

The wondering is misconcieved but not inappropriate.

 

 

Some conceptual two bits...........

To fun and games!L'Chaim,

 

Yes to Life.

 

 

Salud

 

 

Sandeep

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...