Guest guest Posted December 7, 2003 Report Share Posted December 7, 2003 Greetings, If there is nothing one can " do " to attain Self-Realisation and all efforts to unseat the ego and it's concepts just strengthen the ego and concepts ....AND.. if I already posses this Self (and " Steve " can never experience it)... isn't it enough to have Faith that I do in fact already posses the Self even though the " i " , the temporary personality that is writing this e-mail, can never " know " this Self? In time this body/mind will die anyway ... so does it really matter if I " attain " while occupying this mind/body unit? Niz said he had Faith in his Guru and Trusted his instruction. Can't this also be applied to Trusting that this mind/body is not real, " I " am not the mind/body, and that which is not real can not attain " Self- Realisation " ? Steve Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 7, 2003 Report Share Posted December 7, 2003 Nisargadatta , " yacobyisrael " <yacobyisrael> wrote: > Greetings, > If there is nothing one can " do " to attain Self-Realisation and all > efforts to unseat the ego and it's concepts just strengthen the ego > and concepts ....AND.. if I already posses this Self (and " Steve " can > never experience it)... isn't it enough to have Faith that I do in > fact already posses the Self even though the " i " , the temporary > personality that is writing this e-mail, can never " know " this Self? > In time this body/mind will die anyway ... so does it really matter > if I " attain " while occupying this mind/body unit? > > Niz said he had Faith in his Guru and Trusted his instruction. Can't > this also be applied to Trusting that this mind/body is not real, " I " > am not the mind/body, and that which is not real can not attain " Self- > Realisation " ? > > Steve dear Steve, this is a sharp observation, from what i read here and on other lists it seems that only you won't 'make it' to realization, so it would be a good starting point to use hopelessness as you personal guru :-) erix Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 7, 2003 Report Share Posted December 7, 2003 Nisargadatta , " yacobyisrael " <yacobyisrael> wrote: > Greetings, > If there is nothing one can " do " to attain Self-Realisation and all > efforts to unseat the ego and it's concepts just strengthen the ego > and concepts ....AND.. if I already posses this Self (and " Steve " can > never experience it)... isn't it enough to have Faith that I do in > fact already posses the Self even though the " i " , the temporary > personality that is writing this e-mail, can never " know " this Self? > In time this body/mind will die anyway ... so does it really matter > if I " attain " while occupying this mind/body unit? > > Niz said he had Faith in his Guru and Trusted his instruction. Can't > this also be applied to Trusting that this mind/body is not real, " I " > am not the mind/body, and that which is not real can not attain " Self- > Realisation " ? > > Steve Steve, by turning the puzzle inside-out, I think there is a 'clever' solution to it. If we let self-realization be the ending of an activity, and not the finding of something, we can let that activity be the activity that strengthens the ego; in other words the effort to unseat the ego is the continuation of the activity, and, in fact, the doubling of it. This would change the instructions of 'doing nothing' from doing nothing to watching the way of the activity, including any doubling efforts. At the least, it would put the observer to work doing what it does best, observing. Anyway, that solution may be too clever by half, but it is at least a possibility. ----willy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 7, 2003 Report Share Posted December 7, 2003 Nisargadatta , " eric paroissien " <vertvetiver> wrote: > Nisargadatta , " yacobyisrael " > <yacobyisrael> wrote: > > Greetings, > > If there is nothing one can " do " to attain Self-Realisation and all > > efforts to unseat the ego and it's concepts just strengthen the ego > > and concepts ....AND.. if I already posses this Self (and " Steve " > can > > never experience it)... isn't it enough to have Faith that I do in > > fact already posses the Self even though the " i " , the temporary > > personality that is writing this e-mail, can never " know " this > Self? > > In time this body/mind will die anyway ... so does it really matter > > if I " attain " while occupying this mind/body unit? > > > > Niz said he had Faith in his Guru and Trusted his instruction. > Can't > > this also be applied to Trusting that this mind/body is not > real, " I " > > am not the mind/body, and that which is not real can not > attain " Self- > > Realisation " ? > > > > Steve > > dear Steve, > this is a sharp observation, from what i read here and on other lists > it seems that only you won't 'make it' to realization, so it would be > a good starting point to use hopelessness as you personal guru :-) > erix Yeah, It doesn't matter, but some brains are compelled to search, and search happens, when search sees itself as search, and understands that 'finding' can't happen to 'search' because finding is non-search, then non-search=what is. Clear as mud or... clear mud from ass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 7, 2003 Report Share Posted December 7, 2003 erix, Here is where " i " short-circut: you said: you won't 'make it' to realization " me " : from what I have gathered here from chatting with you all is the " you " can not and never will 'make it' to realization. Also, if I Trust what I have read here and in " I AM THAT " then " I " already posses the Self so I can't find what I already have and have never lost. The " me " that is hopelessly looking is a " me " that exists only in the illusion of duality. If I " understand " the paradox correctly this " me " is the same " you " that is listed in your statement above which will never 'make it' to realization. That's OK.. that " i " is not built for that?? On the obverse, all of the above 'reckoning' may just be because I have been filling " my " mind with nondual readings.. but then again.. they say illusion is needed to understand the illusion that all is illusion.. so... if I can have Faith that " steve " is a dualistic illusion then " steve " need not be dropped because " steve " is not real to begin with.. and what is left is just " Being " (with an illusion of " steve " super-impossed on " Being " )... If that makes any sense... Nisargadatta , " eric paroissien " <vertvetiver> wrote: > Nisargadatta , " yacobyisrael " > <yacobyisrael> wrote: > > Greetings, > > If there is nothing one can " do " to attain Self-Realisation and all > > efforts to unseat the ego and it's concepts just strengthen the ego > > and concepts ....AND.. if I already posses this Self (and " Steve " > can > > never experience it)... isn't it enough to have Faith that I do in > > fact already posses the Self even though the " i " , the temporary > > personality that is writing this e-mail, can never " know " this > Self? > > In time this body/mind will die anyway ... so does it really matter > > if I " attain " while occupying this mind/body unit? > > > > Niz said he had Faith in his Guru and Trusted his instruction. > Can't > > this also be applied to Trusting that this mind/body is not > real, " I " > > am not the mind/body, and that which is not real can not > attain " Self- > > Realisation " ? > > > > Steve > > dear Steve, > this is a sharp observation, from what i read here and on other lists > it seems that only you won't 'make it' to realization, so it would be > a good starting point to use hopelessness as you personal guru :-) > erix Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 7, 2003 Report Share Posted December 7, 2003 " math is hard... let's go shopping " Barbie Nisargadatta , " seesaw1us " <seesaw1us> wrote: > Nisargadatta , " eric paroissien " > <vertvetiver> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " yacobyisrael " > > <yacobyisrael> wrote: > > > Greetings, > > > If there is nothing one can " do " to attain Self-Realisation and > all > > > efforts to unseat the ego and it's concepts just strengthen the > ego > > > and concepts ....AND.. if I already posses this Self (and " Steve " > > can > > > never experience it)... isn't it enough to have Faith that I do > in > > > fact already posses the Self even though the " i " , the temporary > > > personality that is writing this e-mail, can never " know " this > > Self? > > > In time this body/mind will die anyway ... so does it really > matter > > > if I " attain " while occupying this mind/body unit? > > > > > > Niz said he had Faith in his Guru and Trusted his instruction. > > Can't > > > this also be applied to Trusting that this mind/body is not > > real, " I " > > > am not the mind/body, and that which is not real can not > > attain " Self- > > > Realisation " ? > > > > > > Steve > > > > dear Steve, > > this is a sharp observation, from what i read here and on other > lists > > it seems that only you won't 'make it' to realization, so it would > be > > a good starting point to use hopelessness as you personal guru :-) > > erix > > Yeah, It doesn't matter, but some brains are compelled to search, > and search happens, when search sees itself as search, and > understands that 'finding' can't happen to 'search' because finding > is non-search, then non-search=what is. > > Clear as mud or... clear mud from ass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 7, 2003 Report Share Posted December 7, 2003 Willie, maybe like watching a movie of " yourself " playing all of the charecters in a three stooges flick.. as Sandeep says... all trying to pull themselves up by their own boot straps.. Nisargadatta , " Will Brown " <wilbro99> wrote: > Nisargadatta , " yacobyisrael " > <yacobyisrael> wrote: > > Greetings, > > If there is nothing one can " do " to attain Self-Realisation and all > > efforts to unseat the ego and it's concepts just strengthen the ego > > and concepts ....AND.. if I already posses this Self (and " Steve " can > > never experience it)... isn't it enough to have Faith that I do in > > fact already posses the Self even though the " i " , the temporary > > personality that is writing this e-mail, can never " know " this Self? > > In time this body/mind will die anyway ... so does it really matter > > if I " attain " while occupying this mind/body unit? > > > > Niz said he had Faith in his Guru and Trusted his instruction. Can't > > this also be applied to Trusting that this mind/body is not real, " I " > > am not the mind/body, and that which is not real can not attain " Self- > > Realisation " ? > > > > Steve > > Steve, by turning the puzzle inside-out, I think there is a 'clever' > solution to it. If we let self-realization be the ending of an > activity, and not the finding of something, we can let that activity > be the activity that strengthens the ego; in other words the effort to > unseat the ego is the continuation of the activity, and, in fact, the > doubling of it. This would change the instructions of 'doing nothing' > from doing nothing to watching the way of the activity, including any > doubling efforts. At the least, it would put the observer to work > doing what it does best, observing. > > Anyway, that solution may be too clever by half, but it is at least a > possibility. ----willy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 7, 2003 Report Share Posted December 7, 2003 Hi. There IS something that one can do. Observe oneself AS one is, without analysis.. Only when a person sees the condition of the world AT THE SAME TIME he sees THE GREAT CONTRADICTION of his own behavior in relationship to this, will CONSCIENCE come into effect and the problems of humanity by solved. What contradictions? Contradictions such as--I say I " love " people, but I am not in full relationship, or I think I am a boddhisattva or a real Christian, or spiritual, or whatever, and am holding this image in my mind at the exact same moment I am feeling competition or hate, or I am content to use my free time going to movies, concerts, playing instruments, reading magazines, hating George Bush, watching t.v., buying more and more stereo equipment, digital cameras,and other electronic gadgets, picking my toes or whatever, while all around me is great, incredible, horrendous suffering See below. - yacobyisrael Nisargadatta Sunday, December 07, 2003 10:06 AM Nothing to " do " Greetings, If there is nothing one can " do " to attain Self-Realisation and all efforts to unseat the ego and it's concepts just strengthen the ego and concepts ....AND.. if I already posses this Self ---------- Wry: This is a posit, in that that thought functioning as a part of a psychological complex based on pain and pleasure, projects the existence of itself as an awareness (entity) and then believes it in by trying not to grasp it, or grasps at it or whatever. It is sad. Of course one cannot think oneself out of negative emotions in this way. It is not necessary to believe in an already existant " Self " to be in full relationship, and any form of belief, even such a seemingly benign thought of " Self " is a movement away seeing another human being and being specifically in full relationship with a specific person or people, at a specif time and place, and responding, specifically, as a fully living and not half alive human being, to whatever a specific situation requires. ------------- (and " Steve " can never experience it)... ---------- Wry: I appreciate your enquiring into this, but what you are saying above is just a thought. It is thought with all of its great slp (slip) and no grp (grip). It is true, right? I know all too well from my own experience. An act of conscience involves a certain kind and quality of grip. It is most fascinating. ---------------- isn't it enough to have Faith that I do in fact already posses the Self even though the " i " , the temporary personality that is writing this e-mail, can never " know " this Self? In time this body/mind will die anyway ... so does it really matter if I " attain " while occupying this mind/body unit? ------------ Wry: If you care about the horrendous suffering of this world-innocent children being burned up in fires--stuff like that-if really does matter. I really appreciate you writing this message, as it is a first step. ---------------- Niz said he had Faith in his Guru and Trusted his instruction. Can't this also be applied to Trusting that this mind/body is not real, " I " am not the mind/body, and that which is not real can not attain " Self- Realisation " ? --------- Wry: If you (I) realize that phenomena including the " self " are empty, then we are free to do what makes sense. After a person realizes this, he can presumably enter into true relationship. In my opinion, until we realize that we and others are suffering, how deeply we are suffering, there is no hope. If you ever have negative emotions, if either of us do, this means we are subject to the afflictive mind. When a person really begins to have a realization of no self and to begin to awaken to the deluded conditons of his own mind and his great suffering, then he is overcome with the motivation to help others not suffer, as he begins to experience the great suffering of others, this great problem as his own problem. This is when the person begins to have real faith, and not just " thought " faith, but the physical substance of faith, as it becomes obvious that the more fully one experiences the void, the more fully one experiences the emptiness of self and external phenomena, the more fully will one be able to generate the intelligient mind of great loving kindness that is the remedy to the suffering of sentient creatures. This is the faith that connects one to ones brothers in such a way as to overcome all obstacles. It is for ones brother as well as for onseself, and all of the suffering and misery of this world, including ones own, becomes a means to the realization of this path. Sincerely, Wry Steve Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 7, 2003 Report Share Posted December 7, 2003 Wry, Thank you for your response. I will read it again with more attention but a few questions comes up from the first reading.. Is not " suffering " itself an illusion of imagined duality? Isn't this " fictional me " the one cognizing the suffering world? And if that line of thinking is " correct " then " the world " really needs to be saved from " me " , no? This post and my previous post could very well be seen as a cop out when put against the backdrop of your post which speaks of helping those who suffer. Why get worked up at all if.... nothing ever happened anyway?? s Nisargadatta , " wry " <wry1111@e...> wrote: > Hi. There IS something that one can do. Observe oneself AS one is, without analysis.. Only when a person sees the condition of the world AT THE SAME TIME he sees THE GREAT CONTRADICTION of his own behavior in relationship to this, will CONSCIENCE come into effect and the problems of humanity by solved. What contradictions? Contradictions such as--I say I " love " people, but I am not in full relationship, or I think I am a boddhisattva or a real Christian, or spiritual, or whatever, and am holding this image in my mind at the exact same moment I am feeling competition or hate, or I am content to use my free time going to movies, concerts, playing instruments, reading magazines, hating George Bush, watching t.v., buying more and more stereo equipment, digital cameras,and other electronic gadgets, picking my toes or whatever, while all around me is great, incredible, horrendous suffering See below. > - > yacobyisrael > Nisargadatta > Sunday, December 07, 2003 10:06 AM > Nothing to " do " > > > Greetings, > If there is nothing one can " do " to attain Self-Realisation and all > efforts to unseat the ego and it's concepts just strengthen the ego > and concepts ....AND.. if I already posses this Self > ---------- > > Wry: This is a posit, in that that thought functioning as a part of a psychological complex based on pain and pleasure, projects the existence of itself as an awareness (entity) and then believes it in by trying not to grasp it, or grasps at it or whatever. It is sad. Of course one cannot think oneself out of negative emotions in this way. It is not necessary to believe in an already existant " Self " to be in full relationship, and any form of belief, even such a seemingly benign thought of " Self " is a movement away seeing another human being and being specifically in full relationship with a specific person or people, at a specif time and place, and responding, specifically, as a fully living and not half alive human being, to whatever a specific situation requires. > ------------- > (and " Steve " can > never experience it)... > ---------- > Wry: I appreciate your enquiring into this, but what you are saying above is just a thought. It is thought with all of its great slp (slip) and no grp (grip). It is true, right? I know all too well from my own experience. An act of conscience involves a certain kind and quality of grip. It is most fascinating. > ---------------- > isn't it enough to have Faith that I do in > fact already posses the Self even though the " i " , the temporary > personality that is writing this e-mail, can never " know " this Self? > In time this body/mind will die anyway ... so does it really matter > if I " attain " while occupying this mind/body unit? > ------------ > Wry: If you care about the horrendous suffering of this world- innocent children being burned up in fires--stuff like that-if really does matter. I really appreciate you writing this message, as it is a first step. > ---------------- > > Niz said he had Faith in his Guru and Trusted his instruction. Can't > this also be applied to Trusting that this mind/body is not real, " I " > am not the mind/body, and that which is not real can not attain " Self- > Realisation " ? > --------- > Wry: If you (I) realize that phenomena including the " self " are empty, then we are free to do what makes sense. After a person realizes this, he can presumably enter into true relationship. In my opinion, until we realize that we and others are suffering, how deeply we are suffering, there is no hope. If you ever have negative emotions, if either of us do, this means we are subject to the afflictive mind. When a person really begins to have a realization of no self and to begin to awaken to the deluded conditons of his own mind and his great suffering, then he is overcome with the motivation to help others not suffer, as he begins to experience the great suffering of others, this great problem as his own problem. This is when the person begins to have real faith, and not just " thought " faith, but the physical substance of faith, as it becomes obvious that the more fully one experiences the void, the more fully one experiences the emptiness of self and external phenomena, the more fully will one be able to generate the intelligient mind of great loving kindness that is the remedy to the suffering of sentient creatures. This is the faith that connects one to ones brothers in such a way as to overcome all obstacles. It is for ones brother as well as for onseself, and all of the suffering and misery of this world, including ones own, becomes a means to the realization of this path. Sincerely, Wry > > Steve > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 7, 2003 Report Share Posted December 7, 2003 Perhaps that explains why I am still addicted to their flicks... Nisargadatta , " yacobyisrael " <yacobyisrael> wrote: > Willie, maybe like watching a movie of " yourself " playing all of the > charecters in a three stooges flick.. as Sandeep says... all trying > to pull themselves up by their own boot straps.. > > Nisargadatta , " Will Brown " <wilbro99> > wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " yacobyisrael " > > <yacobyisrael> wrote: > > > Greetings, > > > If there is nothing one can " do " to attain Self-Realisation and > all > > > efforts to unseat the ego and it's concepts just strengthen the > ego > > > and concepts ....AND.. if I already posses this Self (and " Steve " > can > > > never experience it)... isn't it enough to have Faith that I do > in > > > fact already posses the Self even though the " i " , the temporary > > > personality that is writing this e-mail, can never " know " this > Self? > > > In time this body/mind will die anyway ... so does it really > matter > > > if I " attain " while occupying this mind/body unit? > > > > > > Niz said he had Faith in his Guru and Trusted his instruction. > Can't > > > this also be applied to Trusting that this mind/body is not > real, " I " > > > am not the mind/body, and that which is not real can not > attain " Self- > > > Realisation " ? > > > > > > Steve > > > > Steve, by turning the puzzle inside-out, I think there is a 'clever' > > solution to it. If we let self-realization be the ending of an > > activity, and not the finding of something, we can let that activity > > be the activity that strengthens the ego; in other words the effort > to > > unseat the ego is the continuation of the activity, and, in fact, > the > > doubling of it. This would change the instructions of 'doing > nothing' > > from doing nothing to watching the way of the activity, including > any > > doubling efforts. At the least, it would put the observer to work > > doing what it does best, observing. > > > > Anyway, that solution may be too clever by half, but it is at least > a > > possibility. ----willy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 7, 2003 Report Share Posted December 7, 2003 Nisargadatta , " yacobyisrael " <yacobyisrael> wrote: > Greetings, > If there is nothing one can " do " to attain Self-Realisation and all > efforts to unseat the ego and it's concepts just strengthen the ego > and concepts ....AND.. if I already posses this Self (and " Steve " can > never experience it)... isn't it enough to have Faith that I do in > fact already posses the Self even though the " i " , the temporary > personality that is writing this e-mail, can never " know " this Self? > In time this body/mind will die anyway ... so does it really matter > if I " attain " while occupying this mind/body unit? > > Niz said he had Faith in his Guru and Trusted his instruction. Can't > this also be applied to Trusting that this mind/body is not real, " I " > am not the mind/body, and that which is not real can not attain " Self- > Realisation " ? > > Steve Steve -- If you know who you are, what words or ideas will you need to trust which someone else said about who you are? If you don't know who you are, immediately -- what good will statements about who you are, coming from someone else, do? -- Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 7, 2003 Report Share Posted December 7, 2003 Nisargadatta , " yacobyisrael " <yacobyisrael> wrote: > " math is hard... let's go shopping " > Barbie " You have to dress up to go shopping, and bring a credit card. Let's eat this honey. " Winnie the Pooh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 7, 2003 Report Share Posted December 7, 2003 - " yacobyisrael " <yacobyisrael <Nisargadatta > Sunday, December 07, 2003 11:36 PM Nothing to " do " > Greetings, > If there is nothing one can " do " to attain Self-Realisation and all > efforts to unseat the ego and it's concepts just strengthen the ego > and concepts ....AND.. if I already posses this Self There is no possession. When I am all there IS,...........what can I possibly own, possess, obtain, or attain. (and " Steve " can > never experience it)... isn't it enough to have Faith that I do in > fact already posses the Self even though the " i " , the temporary > personality that is writing this e-mail, can never " know " this Self? > In time this body/mind will die anyway ... so does it really matter > if I " attain " while occupying this mind/body unit? If it truly did not matter, Steve, you would have not written that email.:-) > > Niz said he had Faith in his Guru and Trusted his instruction. Can't > this also be applied to Trusting that this mind/body is not real, " I " > am not the mind/body, and that which is not real can not attain " Self- > Realisation " ? Sure. Trust and drop everything. Do not-Trust and do everything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 8, 2003 Report Share Posted December 8, 2003 Dan said: > If you know who you are, what words > or ideas will you need to trust > which someone else said about who you are? It seems, from what I have gathered here, " i " can't know who " I Am " but rather just understand " I Am " as a concept (which is the boat you get off of when True Realization takes " you " .. so I am told). So.. as " steve " there is some Trust involved while on the boat. The initial " inspiration " comes from that still small nagging that is there when I read " Dan " , " Sandeep " , " Niz " , etc. " i " just have to follow " that " knowing it's not " That " . All it seems " i " can do is learn " what I am not " .. all negatives... but that is all " i " am going to get anyway. So.. for now " i'll " just have Faith that " steve " is false and see if " i " can become ripe. > > If you don't know who you are, immediately -- > what good will statements > about who you are, coming from someone else, do? > > -- Dan Here is where I get hung up.. I may have this all wrong... but it seems Absolute " i " can't know anyway... can't be discussed, can't be typed, etc...just have to keep up the observation and keep verifying the false.. which " i " am not letting " get me down " ... Steve Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> wrote: > Nisargadatta , " yacobyisrael " > <yacobyisrael> wrote: > > Greetings, > > If there is nothing one can " do " to attain Self-Realisation and all > > efforts to unseat the ego and it's concepts just strengthen the ego > > and concepts ....AND.. if I already posses this Self (and " Steve " > can > > never experience it)... isn't it enough to have Faith that I do in > > fact already posses the Self even though the " i " , the temporary > > personality that is writing this e-mail, can never " know " this > Self? > > In time this body/mind will die anyway ... so does it really matter > > if I " attain " while occupying this mind/body unit? > > > > Niz said he had Faith in his Guru and Trusted his instruction. > Can't > > this also be applied to Trusting that this mind/body is not > real, " I " > > am not the mind/body, and that which is not real can not > attain " Self- > > Realisation " ? > > > > Steve > > Steve -- > > If you know who you are, what words > or ideas will you need to trust > which someone else said about who you are? > > If you don't know who you are, immediately -- > what good will statements > about who you are, coming from someone else, do? > > -- Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 8, 2003 Report Share Posted December 8, 2003 Sandeep said: There is no possession. > When I am all there IS,...........what can I possibly own, possess, obtain, or attain. Thank you for that. San: > > If it truly did not matter, Steve, you would have not written that email.:-) Yes, there seems to be some place that it really does matter but, ironically, it turns into a search as long as " steve " is involved. I'll take that " place " on Faith and try to know that " steve " can not know even though it matters to " steve " .... insert the whole bit here about not being able to know what is True but being able to know what is false.. which is enough to liberate from the false.. I'll have to Trust those words are True... so far it seems " i " can verify what is false... maybe the ripening will come.. Nisargadatta , Sandeep <sandeepc@b...> wrote: > > - > " yacobyisrael " <yacobyisrael> > <Nisargadatta > > Sunday, December 07, 2003 11:36 PM > Nothing to " do " > > > > Greetings, > > If there is nothing one can " do " to attain Self-Realisation and all > > efforts to unseat the ego and it's concepts just strengthen the ego > > and concepts ....AND.. if I already posses this Self > > > There is no possession. > When I am all there IS,...........what can I possibly own, possess, obtain, or attain. > > > (and " Steve " can > > never experience it)... isn't it enough to have Faith that I do in > > fact already posses the Self even though the " i " , the temporary > > personality that is writing this e-mail, can never " know " this Self? > > In time this body/mind will die anyway ... so does it really matter > > if I " attain " while occupying this mind/body unit? > > > > If it truly did not matter, Steve, you would have not written that email.:-) > > > > > > > Niz said he had Faith in his Guru and Trusted his instruction. Can't > > this also be applied to Trusting that this mind/body is not real, " I " > > am not the mind/body, and that which is not real can not attain " Self- > > Realisation " ? > > > Sure. > > Trust and drop everything. > > Do not-Trust and do everything. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 8, 2003 Report Share Posted December 8, 2003 Nisargadatta , " yacobyisrael " <yacobyisrael> wrote: > Sandeep said: > There is no possession. > > When I am all there IS,...........what can I possibly own, possess, > obtain, or attain. > > Thank you for that. > > San: > > > > If it truly did not matter, Steve, you would have not written that > email.:-) > > > Yes, there seems to be some place that it really does matter but, > ironically, it turns into a search as long as " steve " is involved. > I'll take that " place " on Faith and try to know that " steve " can not > know even though it matters to " steve " .... insert the whole bit here > about not being able to know what is True but being able to know what > is false.. which is enough to liberate from the false.. I'll have to > Trust those words are True... so far it seems " i " can verify what is > false... maybe the ripening will come.. > You are eight years old. It is Sunday evening. You have been granted an extra hour before bed. The family is playing Monopoly. You have been told that you are big enough to join them. You lose. You are losing continuously. Your stomach cramps with fear. Nearly all your possessions are gone. The money pile in front of you is almost gone. Your brothers are snatching all the houses from your streets. The last street is being sold. You have to give in. You have lost. And suddenly you know that it is only a game. You jump up with joy and you knock the big lamp over. It falls on the floor and drags the teapot with it. The others are angry with you, but you laugh when you go upstairs. You know you are nothing and know you have nothing. And you know that not-to-have give an immeasurable freedom. ~Janwillem van de Wetering > > > Nisargadatta , Sandeep <sandeepc@b...> wrote: > > > > - > > " yacobyisrael " <yacobyisrael> > > <Nisargadatta > > > Sunday, December 07, 2003 11:36 PM > > Nothing to " do " > > > > > > > Greetings, > > > If there is nothing one can " do " to attain Self-Realisation and > all > > > efforts to unseat the ego and it's concepts just strengthen the > ego > > > and concepts ....AND.. if I already posses this Self > > > > > > There is no possession. > > When I am all there IS,...........what can I possibly own, possess, > obtain, or attain. > > > > > > (and " Steve " can > > > never experience it)... isn't it enough to have Faith that I do > in > > > fact already posses the Self even though the " i " , the temporary > > > personality that is writing this e-mail, can never " know " this > Self? > > > In time this body/mind will die anyway ... so does it really > matter > > > if I " attain " while occupying this mind/body unit? > > > > > > > > If it truly did not matter, Steve, you would have not written that > email.:-) > > > > > > > > > > > > Niz said he had Faith in his Guru and Trusted his instruction. > Can't > > > this also be applied to Trusting that this mind/body is not > real, " I " > > > am not the mind/body, and that which is not real can not > attain " Self- > > > Realisation " ? > > > > > > Sure. > > > > Trust and drop everything. > > > > Do not-Trust and do everything. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 8, 2003 Report Share Posted December 8, 2003 - " yacobyisrael " <yacobyisrael <Nisargadatta > Monday, December 08, 2003 05:50 PM Re: Nothing to " do " > Sandeep said: > There is no possession. > > When I am all there IS,...........what can I possibly own, possess, > obtain, or attain. > > Thank you for that. > > San: > > > > If it truly did not matter, Steve, you would have not written that > email.:-) > > > Yes, there seems to be some place that it really does matter but, > ironically, it turns into a search as long as " steve " is involved. Yes. So long a sense of the " me " , ...........the sense of a searching, the sense of a seeking. It's only a sense,.........for the unmulched grass, grows unconcerned. > I'll take that " place " on Faith and try to know that " steve " can not > know even though it matters to " steve " .... insert the whole bit here > about not being able to know what is True but being able to know what > is false.. which is enough to liberate from the false.. I'll have to > Trust those words are True... so far it seems " i " can verify what is > false... maybe the ripening will come.. Yes. In the meanwhile, either trust and drop everything...............or do not-Trust and do everything. What could be more simple? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 8, 2003 Report Share Posted December 8, 2003 Hi Steve -- > > If you know who you are, what words > > or ideas will you need to trust > > which someone else said about who you are? > > It seems, from what I have gathered here, " i " can't know who " I Am " > but rather just understand " I Am " as a concept (which is the boat you > get off of when True Realization takes " you " .. so I am told). You are talking about second-hand reporting, that is, information you've assimilated from " outside " of your experience, about " possible experience that can be had " and others' reports about this. Such involves processing of information, possibly along with trying to imagine such experiences, and speculation about what these mean, or confer, or how they change someone, and so on. Of course, none of this is immediate, present to one. It is mediated, through symbols and communications from others. Is there truth that is immediate? Is there truth that doesn't require or involve any mediating variables (such as symbols or another person)? So.. > as " steve " there is some Trust involved while on the boat. The > initial " inspiration " comes from that still small nagging that is > there when I read " Dan " , " Sandeep " , " Niz " , etc. " i " just have to > follow " that " knowing it's not " That " . All it seems " i " can do is > learn " what I am not " .. all negatives... but that is all " i " am going > to get anyway. So.. for now " i'll " just have Faith that " steve " is > false and see if " i " can become ripe. Then, who is having the faith that Steve is false? It can't be Steve, because if it were Steve, then that wouldn't be honest faith at all, just some kind of trick to keep Steve going as a center of knowing and believing. And if there is clarity that who you are isn't " Steve " then what faith is needed at this point? > > If you don't know who you are, immediately -- > > what good will statements > > about who you are, coming from someone else, do? > > > > -- Dan > > Here is where I get hung up.. I may have this all wrong... but it > seems Absolute " i " can't know anyway... What makes it seem like that? And what do you mean by the term " Absolute " ? > can't be discussed, can't be > typed, etc... Yes, there's something that has never been conveyed, not through talking, postures, being silent, reading, chanting, visualizing. > just have to keep up the observation and keep verifying > the false.. which " i " am not letting " get me down " ... Okay. I'm glad you're not getting down. How do you " verify the false " ? Nice talking with you, Dan > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> > wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " yacobyisrael " > > <yacobyisrael> wrote: > > > Greetings, > > > If there is nothing one can " do " to attain Self-Realisation and > all > > > efforts to unseat the ego and it's concepts just strengthen the > ego > > > and concepts ....AND.. if I already posses this Self (and " Steve " > > can > > > never experience it)... isn't it enough to have Faith that I do > in > > > fact already posses the Self even though the " i " , the temporary > > > personality that is writing this e-mail, can never " know " this > > Self? > > > In time this body/mind will die anyway ... so does it really > matter > > > if I " attain " while occupying this mind/body unit? > > > > > > Niz said he had Faith in his Guru and Trusted his instruction. > > Can't > > > this also be applied to Trusting that this mind/body is not > > real, " I " > > > am not the mind/body, and that which is not real can not > > attain " Self- > > > Realisation " ? > > > > > > Steve > > > > Steve -- > > > > If you know who you are, what words > > or ideas will you need to trust > > which someone else said about who you are? > > > > If you don't know who you are, immediately -- > > what good will statements > > about who you are, coming from someone else, do? > > > > -- Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 8, 2003 Report Share Posted December 8, 2003 Dear Readers, can't hardly resist the temptation, to throw my one cent worth in here. The answer, how to verify the false, what does it help your question? To collect and store informations in your mind, can this bring you one step further to yourself? What are your motivations, to ask: How do you " verify the false " ? Could you explore some greed for knowledge, achievment? Could you somehow ''verify the false'' - there, now, this moment? with your n0by in love n0by/ http://n0by.de > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> > wrote: > Hi Steve -- > .............. > > Okay. I'm glad you're not getting down. > > How do you " verify the false " ? > > > Nice talking with you, > Dan > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 8, 2003 Report Share Posted December 8, 2003 Hello Dan, You said: Is there truth that is immediate? > > Is there truth that doesn't require or involve any > mediating variables (such as symbols or another person)? This is the quandry. From studying second hand the words and symbols on this list and in the books I am reading it seems that, yes, there is Truth available immediatly but this self-image of " me " can't get it. This " me " has to die in order to realize the Truth of now. However, I have read that no amount of effort on my part can achieve it. No effort in the receiving of the Truth or the death of " me " . This seems correct only because of past short comings in the various phases in the trying game.. However, there is an element of faith involved because of the second hand nature of the information. Of course, I am always open to hearing any second hand information from you or any other who has been around the block in this arena. Perhaps this attitude is a hinderence? You said: Then, who is having the faith that Steve is false? > > It can't be Steve, because if it were Steve, then > that wouldn't be honest faith at all, just some > kind of trick to keep Steve going as a center of > knowing and believing. I was just pondering this point today while on a long drive. My question is, is Steve capable of honest Faith? I can't tell but you may very well be right on the trick. However when I pondered this I concluded that the mind's very nature is to trick, no? This I have verified because in the past I had seen this happen to me.. many times.. the conclusion was.. expect tricks. Is it possible to have any conclusions that are not of the mind.. if not, then the conclusion 'expect tricks' is itself a trick? round and round it goes.. trick or treat. And if there is clarity that who you are isn't " Steve " > then what faith is needed at this point? Yes, I determined that this clarity, if you can call it that, is itself a concept.. I had to question the honesty of this attitude. I just kept coming back to Faith and the words I read concering Trust from Niz. and also Ranjit Maharaj. It seems they ask for Trust on these issues that can't be verified by the questioning individual. You said: > Here is where I get hung up.. I may have this all wrong... but it > > seems Absolute " i " can't know anyway... > > What makes it seem like that? Because these words I am Trusting in that tell me Steve can't experience the now are mixed in with the same clarity as the thoughts which include my likes and dislikes of the moment.. > > And what do you mean by the term " Absolute " ? The now that we know we can't discuss but try to anyway. You said: How do you " verify the false " ? By noticing the ever-changing likes,dislikes and moods of me. I'd like to know of better observation tecniques.. Steve Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> wrote: > Hi Steve -- > > > > If you know who you are, what words > > > or ideas will you need to trust > > > which someone else said about who you are? > > > > It seems, from what I have gathered here, " i " can't know who " I Am " > > but rather just understand " I Am " as a concept (which is the boat > you > > get off of when True Realization takes " you " .. so I am told). > > You are talking about second-hand reporting, > that is, information you've assimilated > from " outside " of your experience, about " possible experience > that can be had " and others' reports about this. > > Such involves processing of information, possibly > along with trying to imagine such experiences, and > speculation about what these mean, or confer, or > how they change someone, and so on. > > Of course, none of this is immediate, present to one. > It is mediated, through symbols and communications > from others. > > Is there truth that is immediate? > > Is there truth that doesn't require or involve any > mediating variables (such as symbols or another person)? > > So.. > > as " steve " there is some Trust involved while on the boat. The > > initial " inspiration " comes from that still small nagging that is > > there when I read " Dan " , " Sandeep " , " Niz " , etc. " i " just have to > > follow " that " knowing it's not " That " . All it seems " i " can do is > > learn " what I am not " .. all negatives... but that is all " i " am > going > > to get anyway. So.. for now " i'll " just have Faith that " steve " is > > false and see if " i " can become ripe. > > Then, who is having the faith that Steve is false? > > It can't be Steve, because if it were Steve, then > that wouldn't be honest faith at all, just some > kind of trick to keep Steve going as a center of > knowing and believing. > > And if there is clarity that who you are isn't " Steve " > then what faith is needed at this point? > > > > If you don't know who you are, immediately -- > > > what good will statements > > > about who you are, coming from someone else, do? > > > > > > -- Dan > > > > Here is where I get hung up.. I may have this all wrong... but it > > seems Absolute " i " can't know anyway... > > What makes it seem like that? > > And what do you mean by the term " Absolute " ? > > > can't be discussed, can't be > > typed, etc... > > Yes, there's something that has never been conveyed, > not through talking, postures, being silent, reading, > chanting, visualizing. > > > just have to keep up the observation and keep verifying > > the false.. which " i " am not letting " get me down " ... > > Okay. I'm glad you're not getting down. > > How do you " verify the false " ? > > > Nice talking with you, > Dan > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> > > wrote: > > > Nisargadatta , " yacobyisrael " > > > <yacobyisrael> wrote: > > > > Greetings, > > > > If there is nothing one can " do " to attain Self-Realisation and > > all > > > > efforts to unseat the ego and it's concepts just strengthen the > > ego > > > > and concepts ....AND.. if I already posses this Self > (and " Steve " > > > can > > > > never experience it)... isn't it enough to have Faith that I do > > in > > > > fact already posses the Self even though the " i " , the > temporary > > > > personality that is writing this e-mail, can never " know " this > > > Self? > > > > In time this body/mind will die anyway ... so does it really > > matter > > > > if I " attain " while occupying this mind/body unit? > > > > > > > > Niz said he had Faith in his Guru and Trusted his instruction. > > > Can't > > > > this also be applied to Trusting that this mind/body is not > > > real, " I " > > > > am not the mind/body, and that which is not real can not > > > attain " Self- > > > > Realisation " ? > > > > > > > > Steve > > > > > > Steve -- > > > > > > If you know who you are, what words > > > or ideas will you need to trust > > > which someone else said about who you are? > > > > > > If you don't know who you are, immediately -- > > > what good will statements > > > about who you are, coming from someone else, do? > > > > > > -- Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 8, 2003 Report Share Posted December 8, 2003 Nisargadatta , " yacobyisrael " <yacobyisrael> wrote: Hey Steve, what exactly do you think this 'me' is you're trying to get rid of? Is it there when you are engrosed in doing something? So maybe the title of this thread is very appropo- you have nothing [better]to " do. " It remind me of a case I read about in a shrink journal: This otherwise, perfectly normal guy got obssesed with the idea that he was crazy. He had no symtoms whatsoever, only this constant preocupation not to feel and think he was crazy. He could not stop trying to find a way not to think and feel this way. It used all his mental energy. It went on until someone told him. " Ok, you say you are crazy, prove it! Do something crazy, act crazy, stop trying not to be crazy, be as crazy as you can. And when he tried to act crazy, he started laughing and was cured. Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 8, 2003 Report Share Posted December 8, 2003 Nisargadatta , " seesaw1us " <seesaw1us> wrote: > Nisargadatta , " yacobyisrael " > <yacobyisrael> wrote: > > Hey Steve, what exactly do you think this 'me' is you're trying to > get rid of? Is it there when you are engrosed in doing something? So > maybe the title of this thread is very appropo- you have nothing > [better]to " do. " > > It remind me of a case I read about in a shrink journal: This > otherwise, perfectly normal guy got obssesed with the idea that he > was crazy. He had no symtoms whatsoever, only this constant > preocupation not to feel and think he was crazy. He could not stop > trying to find a way not to think and feel this way. It used all his > mental energy. > It went on until someone told him. " Ok, you say you are crazy, > prove it! Do something crazy, act crazy, stop trying not to be crazy, > be as crazy as you can. And when he tried to act crazy, he started > laughing and was cured. > > Pete one of the biggest brainy phoneys of our times (died 1965?) Carl Gustave Jung, said that he often had patients comming to him and say " i'm gonna have a cancer, i dream of it all the time, i can feel the pain already altough my doctor can't see it yet " .. and Jung said they'd have the dreams for years but never the cancer.. some of Carl Gustave Jung's observations were of great help to humankind so were woody allen's pun, ever heard of that about the two elderly ladies having a cake in a dinner - these cakes are just like life, they taste awfull - yes, and such small portions -eric gaston paroissien- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 9, 2003 Report Share Posted December 9, 2003 Real quick before I leave for a two day trip: Pete said: Hey Steve, what exactly do you think this 'me' is you're trying to > get rid of? Not trying to get rid of 'me'.. just trying to understand that if 'me' is not real, then there is nothing to get rid of. You all set me strait in the first week on this list about this this type of knee-jerk reaction.. getting rid of 'me'.. living with the contradictions would be a better definition... not taking 'me' to be real.... :-)... being able to view the contradictions and thoughts as people passing by on a street. I look forward to reply and reading all of the posts when I get back from my two day trip.. Steve Nisargadatta , " seesaw1us " <seesaw1us> wrote: > Nisargadatta , " yacobyisrael " > <yacobyisrael> wrote: > > Hey Steve, what exactly do you think this 'me' is you're trying to > get rid of? Is it there when you are engrosed in doing something? So > maybe the title of this thread is very appropo- you have nothing > [better]to " do. " > > It remind me of a case I read about in a shrink journal: This > otherwise, perfectly normal guy got obssesed with the idea that he > was crazy. He had no symtoms whatsoever, only this constant > preocupation not to feel and think he was crazy. He could not stop > trying to find a way not to think and feel this way. It used all his > mental energy. > It went on until someone told him. " Ok, you say you are crazy, > prove it! Do something crazy, act crazy, stop trying not to be crazy, > be as crazy as you can. And when he tried to act crazy, he started > laughing and was cured. > > Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 9, 2003 Report Share Posted December 9, 2003 Hey guys, if there is a 'me' to get shut of, and that 'me' is me, which, if it isn't, it's just another possession of mine, then the only way to know what it is is to know what it was, and that means a /Gestalt/ shift in one's sense of self of such a nature that it would reveal the 'me' as that sense of self that no longer is. This seeing could be termed an insight and of such things might self-understanding be comprised. Anyway, I toss this thought on the table for whatever you want to make of it. If you choose to turn it to chopped liver, don't forget the Schmaltz. ;>} ----willy Nisargadatta , " yacobyisrael " <yacobyisrael> wrote: > Real quick before I leave for a two day trip: > > Pete said: Hey Steve, what exactly do you think this 'me' is you're > trying to > > get rid of? > > Not trying to get rid of 'me'.. just trying to understand that > if 'me' is not real, then there is nothing to get rid of. You all > set me strait in the first week on this list about this this type of > knee-jerk reaction.. getting rid of 'me'.. living with the > contradictions would be a better definition... not taking 'me' to be > real.... :-)... being able to view the contradictions and thoughts as > people passing by on a street. > > I look forward to reply and reading all of the posts when I get back > from my two day trip.. > > Steve > > > Nisargadatta , " seesaw1us " <seesaw1us> > wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " yacobyisrael " > > <yacobyisrael> wrote: > > > > Hey Steve, what exactly do you think this 'me' is you're trying to > > get rid of? Is it there when you are engrosed in doing something? > So > > maybe the title of this thread is very appropo- you have nothing > > [better]to " do. " > > > > It remind me of a case I read about in a shrink journal: This > > otherwise, perfectly normal guy got obssesed with the idea that he > > was crazy. He had no symtoms whatsoever, only this constant > > preocupation not to feel and think he was crazy. He could not stop > > trying to find a way not to think and feel this way. It used all > his > > mental energy. > > It went on until someone told him. " Ok, you say you are crazy, > > prove it! Do something crazy, act crazy, stop trying not to be > crazy, > > be as crazy as you can. And when he tried to act crazy, he started > > laughing and was cured. > > > > Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 9, 2003 Report Share Posted December 9, 2003 Nisargadatta , " Will Brown " <wilbro99> wrote: > Hey guys, if there is a 'me' to get shut of, and that 'me' is me, > which, if it isn't, it's just another possession of mine, then the > only way to know what it is is to know what it was, and that means a > /Gestalt/ shift in one's sense of self of such a nature that it would > reveal the 'me' as that sense of self that no longer is. This seeing > could be termed an insight and of such things might self- understanding > be comprised. Anyway, I toss this thought on the table for whatever > you want to make of it. If you choose to turn it to chopped liver, > don't forget the Schmaltz. ;>} ----willy Your words point here: Clarity is simply to distinguish between what was and this which is. What was has never been the case -- what is has never not been the case. You can attribute all kinds of things to what was(which is not, nor will be): things that memory observed, experiences that were had and stored, the basis for personality or self, knowledge of various things. Yet, all those attributions also are " the past. " What is, no one has ever communicated, which is " thus " : all. -- 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.