Guest guest Posted October 7, 2004 Report Share Posted October 7, 2004 When a sage says: 'Nothing really happens. " What does s/he means? Most people take the statement literally, as meaning: Complete absence of everything, not a thing to be seen. Obviously, this is not the case, as long as we're conscious, perception is happening. Perception can't be denied. The true nature of perception could be endlessly discussed, whether it's purely mental, or not. But that's irrelevant, we can't scape the fact that it's there, pressing for attention. So what does the sage means by nothing really happens? 1)Perceptions lack durability. Whatever you perceive as happening, is there as long as consciousness is there. The moment the brain dies life would be as if it never happened. 2)Perception becomes Maya with interpretation. Nothing really happens as 'you' think. The meaning 'you' inject in naked perception causes most suffering and delusion. You read something on a list you view as an attack, it provokes anger and a retaliation. Nothing happened, except you saw some words in your screen. The attack, the intention to hurt you, your hurt, your retaliation was a product of interpretation. Nothing is happening. You live in an interpreted world of your own creation. Perception sans commentary is the key to Paradise lost. Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 7, 2004 Report Share Posted October 7, 2004 Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <Pedsie2@a...> wrote: > > When a sage says: 'Nothing really happens. " What does s/he > means? Most people take the statement literally, as meaning: > Complete absence of everything, not a thing to be seen. > Obviously, this is not the case, as long as we're conscious, > perception is happening. Perception can't be denied. The > true nature of perception could be endlessly discussed, > whether it's purely mental, or not. But that's irrelevant, > we can't scape the fact that it's there, pressing for > attention. > > So what does the sage means by nothing really happens? > > 1)Perceptions lack durability. Whatever you perceive as > happening, is there as long as consciousness is there. > The moment the brain dies life would be as if it never > happened. > > 2)Perception becomes Maya with interpretation. Nothing > really happens as 'you' think. The meaning 'you' inject > in naked perception causes most suffering and delusion. > > You read something on a list you view as an attack, it > provokes anger and a retaliation. Nothing happened, > except you saw some words in your screen. The attack, > the intention to hurt you, your hurt, your retaliation > was a product of interpretation. Nothing is happening. > You live in an interpreted world of your own creation. > Perception sans commentary is the key to Paradise lost. > > Pete I guess sages mean something similar to this: There is 'no thing' happening. The 'no thing' is infinite potential not yet manifested as form/things. The 'no thing' is noumenal existence, nondual existence which is the source of everything and is what we fundamentally really are. Form and things, including thoughts, brain, body, trees, birds, clouds and cars are not really real 'stuff' but rather a holographic projection/Matrix/Maya. This does not mean that form and things are illusions; they are what makes experience possible. But it does mean a reversal of how we think about existence. Often we thing of the material universe as the real 'stuff', but with this view the material universe is a 'virtual' reality. The real juice, the concrete stuff is the 'no thing' which blasts the display of the material universe into existence in a from of a gigantic 3D projection. /AL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 7, 2004 Report Share Posted October 7, 2004 Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <Pedsie2@a...> wrote: > > When a sage says: 'Nothing really happens. " What does s/he > means? Most people take the statement literally, as meaning: > Complete absence of everything, not a thing to be seen. > Obviously, this is not the case, as long as we're conscious, > perception is happening. Perception can't be denied. The > true nature of perception could be endlessly discussed, > whether it's purely mental, or not. But that's irrelevant, > we can't scape the fact that it's there, pressing for > attention. > > So what does the sage means by nothing really happens? > > 1)Perceptions lack durability. Whatever you perceive as > happening, is there as long as consciousness is there. > The moment the brain dies life would be as if it never > happened. > > 2)Perception becomes Maya with interpretation. Nothing > really happens as 'you' think. The meaning 'you' inject > in naked perception causes most suffering and delusion. > > You read something on a list you view as an attack, it > provokes anger and a retaliation. Nothing happened, > except you saw some words in your screen. The attack, > the intention to hurt you, your hurt, your retaliation > was a product of interpretation. Nothing is happening. > You live in an interpreted world of your own creation. > Perception sans commentary is the key to Paradise lost. > > Pete No thing is happening......There exists no.....isolated....autonmous.... " thing " . " Things " do not exist.......to happen........ Every " thing " is one thing......One thing....is no thing........... Nothing is happening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 8, 2004 Report Share Posted October 8, 2004 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <Pedsie2@a...> wrote: > > > > When a sage says: 'Nothing really happens. " What does s/he > > means? Most people take the statement literally, as meaning: > > Complete absence of everything, not a thing to be seen. > > Obviously, this is not the case, as long as we're conscious, > > perception is happening. Perception can't be denied. The > > true nature of perception could be endlessly discussed, > > whether it's purely mental, or not. But that's irrelevant, > > we can't scape the fact that it's there, pressing for > > attention. > > > > So what does the sage means by nothing really happens? > > > > 1)Perceptions lack durability. Whatever you perceive as > > happening, is there as long as consciousness is there. > > The moment the brain dies life would be as if it never > > happened. > > > > 2)Perception becomes Maya with interpretation. Nothing > > really happens as 'you' think. The meaning 'you' inject > > in naked perception causes most suffering and delusion. > > > > You read something on a list you view as an attack, it > > provokes anger and a retaliation. Nothing happened, > > except you saw some words in your screen. The attack, > > the intention to hurt you, your hurt, your retaliation > > was a product of interpretation. Nothing is happening. > > You live in an interpreted world of your own creation. > > Perception sans commentary is the key to Paradise lost. > > > > Pete > > > > No thing is happening......There exists no.....isolated....autonmous.... " thing " . > > " Things " do not exist.......to happen........ > > > Every " thing " is one thing......One thing....is no thing........... > > > > Nothing is happening. You, and Al have only put your spin on the message. Doing precisely what it points at not to do. Your interpretation, although not incorrect, is nevertheless a commentary added to perception. You always take the 'Absolutist' position, while I take the pragmatic one. The message is simple: move away from thoughts, rest in naked perception. Even the most exalted, unifying thought is already a falsification. Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 8, 2004 Report Share Posted October 8, 2004 Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <Pedsie2@a...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <Pedsie2@a...> > wrote: > > > > > > When a sage says: 'Nothing really happens. " What does s/he > > > means? Most people take the statement literally, as meaning: > > > Complete absence of everything, not a thing to be seen. > > > Obviously, this is not the case, as long as we're conscious, > > > perception is happening. Perception can't be denied. The > > > true nature of perception could be endlessly discussed, > > > whether it's purely mental, or not. But that's irrelevant, > > > we can't scape the fact that it's there, pressing for > > > attention. > > > > > > So what does the sage means by nothing really happens? > > > > > > 1)Perceptions lack durability. Whatever you perceive as > > > happening, is there as long as consciousness is there. > > > The moment the brain dies life would be as if it never > > > happened. > > > > > > 2)Perception becomes Maya with interpretation. Nothing > > > really happens as 'you' think. The meaning 'you' inject > > > in naked perception causes most suffering and delusion. > > > > > > You read something on a list you view as an attack, it > > > provokes anger and a retaliation. Nothing happened, > > > except you saw some words in your screen. The attack, > > > the intention to hurt you, your hurt, your retaliation > > > was a product of interpretation. Nothing is happening. > > > You live in an interpreted world of your own creation. > > > Perception sans commentary is the key to Paradise lost. > > > > > > Pete > > > > > > > > No thing is happening......There exists > no.....isolated....autonmous.... " thing " . > > > > " Things " do not exist.......to happen........ > > > > > > Every " thing " is one thing......One thing....is no thing........... > > > > > > > > Nothing is happening. > > You, and Al have only put your spin on the message. Doing precisely > what it points at not to do. Your interpretation, although not > incorrect, is nevertheless a commentary added to perception. > You always take the 'Absolutist' position, while I take the > pragmatic one. The message is simple: move away from thoughts, rest > in naked perception. Even the most exalted, unifying thought is > already a falsification. > > Pete ..........and the concept " naked perception " ...is somehow exempt from falsifecation? toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 8, 2004 Report Share Posted October 8, 2004 > > > No thing is happening......There exists > > no.....isolated....autonmous.... " thing " . > > > > > > " Things " do not exist.......to happen........ > > > > > > > > > Every " thing " is one thing......One thing....is no thing........... > > > > > > > > > > > > Nothing is happening. > > > > You, and Al have only put your spin on the message. Doing precisely > > what it points at not to do. Your interpretation, although not > > incorrect, is nevertheless a commentary added to perception. > > You always take the 'Absolutist' position, while I take the > > pragmatic one. The message is simple: move away from thoughts, rest > > in naked perception. Even the most exalted, unifying thought is > > already a falsification. > > > > Pete .........and the concept " naked perception " ...is somehow exempt from falsifecation? > > > > toombaru Ouch, Toombaru & Pete! " Falsifecation? " ...... " Defecation? " ....... " False defecation? " ..... " Naked falsification? " ....It's true, nothing happens....how about?...... " percefecation " ....naked, of course! ) Nananananaaaaaana! Kip Almazy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 8, 2004 Report Share Posted October 8, 2004 > > > > > > > > > > > > No thing is happening......There exists > > no.....isolated....autonmous.... " thing " . > > > > > > " Things " do not exist.......to happen........ > > > > > > > > > Every " thing " is one thing......One thing....is no thing........... > > > > > > > > > > > > Nothing is happening. > > > > You, and Al have only put your spin on the message. Doing precisely > > what it points at not to do. Your interpretation, although not > > incorrect, is nevertheless a commentary added to perception. > > You always take the 'Absolutist' position, while I take the > > pragmatic one. The message is simple: move away from thoughts, rest > > in naked perception. Even the most exalted, unifying thought is > > already a falsification. > > > > Pete .........and the concept " naked perception " ...is somehow exempt from falsifecation? > > > > toombaru P: No, it isn't, but there are different degrees in falsification. An injunction generally is less falsifying than speculation. So if I say to you, " Pass the gravy. " There is no possibility of falsification there, unless you don't understand English, or never heard of gravy. When I say, " move away from thought and rest in naked perception " the chances you could misunderstand are greater because the admonition refers to mental processes. Still, there is a good chance you will understand that I simply mean: When looking, just look, don't think; when hearing, just listen, don't think. Now when you say, > > Every " thing " is one thing......One thing....is no thing........... The chances of misunderstanding are almost certain because you are using nonsensical language as a philosophical meta4 to point at a mystical intuition. Even, in the case, I had a mystical intuition of unity too. I have no way of knowing if what you ar pointing at, is the same or not. It's as simple as that. Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 8, 2004 Report Share Posted October 8, 2004 Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <Pedsie2@a...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No thing is happening......There exists > > > no.....isolated....autonmous.... " thing " . > > > > > > > > " Things " do not exist.......to happen........ > > > > > > > > > > > > Every " thing " is one thing......One thing....is no > thing........... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nothing is happening. > > > > > > You, and Al have only put your spin on the message. Doing > precisely > > > what it points at not to do. Your interpretation, although not > > > incorrect, is nevertheless a commentary added to perception. > > > You always take the 'Absolutist' position, while I take the > > > pragmatic one. The message is simple: move away from thoughts, > rest > > > in naked perception. Even the most exalted, unifying thought is > > > already a falsification. > > > > > > Pete > > > > > > > > > > > > > > .........and the concept " naked perception " ...is somehow exempt > from falsifecation? > > > > > > > > toombaru > > P: No, it isn't, but there are different degrees in falsification. > An injunction generally is less falsifying than speculation. > So if I say to you, " Pass the gravy. " There is no possibility > of falsification there, unless you don't understand English, > or never heard of gravy. > > When I say, " move away from thought and rest in naked perception " > the chances you could misunderstand are greater because the > admonition refers to mental processes. Still, there is a good > chance you will understand that I simply mean: When looking, > just look, don't think; when hearing, just listen, don't think. This is reminiscent of the Shirley Maclaine school of New Ageism........another technique....to improve something that appears to itself to be inadequate in some way ......but can through a series of exercises....improve its self....... > > Now when you say, > > Every " thing " is one thing......One > thing....is no thing........... > > The chances of misunderstanding are almost certain because > you are using nonsensical language as a philosophical meta4 All philosoohical speculation is non-sense. > to point at a mystical intuition. Even, in the case, I had > a mystical intuition of unity too. I have no way of knowing > if what you ar pointing at, is the same or not. > > It's as simple as that. > > Pete What you seem to be saying that some falsifications are falser then others.... It could be said that conceptualization is itself falsification........ that anything that emerges from a false assumption (separate self)....is false.... toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 8, 2004 Report Share Posted October 8, 2004 > > > .........and the concept " naked perception " ...is somehow exempt > > from falsifecation? > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > P: No, it isn't, but there are different degrees in falsification. > > An injunction generally is less falsifying than speculation. > > So if I say to you, " Pass the gravy. " There is no possibility > > of falsification there, unless you don't understand English, > > or never heard of gravy. > > > > When I say, " move away from thought and rest in naked perception " > > the chances you could misunderstand are greater because the > > admonition refers to mental processes. Still, there is a good > > chance you will understand that I simply mean: When looking, > > just look, don't think; when hearing, just listen, don't think. > > > T: This is reminiscent of the Shirley Maclaine school of New Ageism........another technique....to improve something that appears to itself to be inadequate in some way ......but can through a series of exercises....improve its self....... > > > > >P: Now when you say, > > Every " thing " is one thing......One > > thing....is no thing...........> > > > The chances of misunderstanding are almost certain because > > you are using nonsensical language as a philosophical meta4 > > > >T: All philosoohical speculation is non-sense. > > > > >P: to point at a mystical intuition. Even, in the case, I had > > a mystical intuition of unity too. I have no way of knowing > > if what you ar pointing at, is the same or not. > > > > It's as simple as that. > > > > Pete> > >T: What you seem to be saying that some falsifications are falser then others.... > > It could be said that conceptualization is itself falsification........ > > that anything that emerges from a false assumption (separate self)....is false.... > > toombaru P: Ha! And yet, and yet. We must use a false band-aid to heal the false wound. False pain hurts like hell. I'm sure you have heard of amputees suffering excruciating phantom pain in missing limbs. Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 8, 2004 Report Share Posted October 8, 2004 Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <Pedsie2@a...> wrote: > > > > > .........and the concept " naked perception " ...is somehow exempt > > > from falsifecation? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > P: No, it isn't, but there are different degrees in > falsification. > > > An injunction generally is less falsifying than speculation. > > > So if I say to you, " Pass the gravy. " There is no possibility > > > of falsification there, unless you don't understand English, > > > or never heard of gravy. > > > > > > When I say, " move away from thought and rest in naked perception " > > > the chances you could misunderstand are greater because the > > > admonition refers to mental processes. Still, there is a good > > > chance you will understand that I simply mean: When looking, > > > just look, don't think; when hearing, just listen, don't think. > > > > > > T: This is reminiscent of the Shirley Maclaine school of New > Ageism........another technique....to improve something that appears > to itself to be inadequate in some way ......but can through a series > of exercises....improve its self....... > > > > > > > >P: Now when you say, > > Every " thing " is one thing......One > > > thing....is no thing...........> > > > > The chances of misunderstanding are almost certain because > > > you are using nonsensical language as a philosophical meta4 > > > > > > > >T: All philosoohical speculation is non-sense. > > > > > > > > >P: to point at a mystical intuition. Even, in the case, I had > > > a mystical intuition of unity too. I have no way of knowing > > > if what you ar pointing at, is the same or not. > > > > > > It's as simple as that. > > > > > > Pete> > > > >T: What you seem to be saying that some falsifications are falser > then others.... > > > > It could be said that conceptualization is itself > falsification........ > > > > that anything that emerges from a false assumption (separate > self)....is false.... > > > > toombaru > > P: Ha! And yet, and yet. We must use a false band-aid to heal > the false wound. False pain hurts like hell. I'm sure you > have heard of amputees suffering excruciating phantom pain > in missing limbs. Pete phantom pain.....is phantom pain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 8, 2004 Report Share Posted October 8, 2004 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <Pedsie2@a...> wrote: > > > > > > > .........and the concept " naked perception " ...is somehow exempt > > > > from falsifecation? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > P: No, it isn't, but there are different degrees in > > falsification. > > > > An injunction generally is less falsifying than speculation. > > > > So if I say to you, " Pass the gravy. " There is no possibility > > > > of falsification there, unless you don't understand English, > > > > or never heard of gravy. > > > > > > > > When I say, " move away from thought and rest in naked perception " > > > > the chances you could misunderstand are greater because the > > > > admonition refers to mental processes. Still, there is a good > > > > chance you will understand that I simply mean: When looking, > > > > just look, don't think; when hearing, just listen, don't think. > > > > > > > > > T: This is reminiscent of the Shirley Maclaine school of New > > Ageism........another technique....to improve something that appears > > to itself to be inadequate in some way ......but can through a series > > of exercises....improve its self....... > > > > > > > > > > >P: Now when you say, > > Every " thing " is one thing......One > > > > thing....is no thing...........> > > > > > The chances of misunderstanding are almost certain because > > > > you are using nonsensical language as a philosophical meta4 > > > > > > > > > > > >T: All philosoohical speculation is non-sense. > > > > > > > > > > > > >P: to point at a mystical intuition. Even, in the case, I had > > > > a mystical intuition of unity too. I have no way of knowing > > > > if what you ar pointing at, is the same or not. > > > > > > > > It's as simple as that. > > > > > > > > Pete> > > > > > >T: What you seem to be saying that some falsifications are falser > > then others.... > > > > > > It could be said that conceptualization is itself > > falsification........ > > > > > > that anything that emerges from a false assumption (separate > > self)....is false.... > > > > > > toombaru > > > > P: Ha! And yet, and yet. We must use a false band-aid to heal > > the false wound. False pain hurts like hell. I'm sure you > > have heard of amputees suffering excruciating phantom pain > > in missing limbs. > > Pete > > phantom pain.....is phantom pain. You are a phantom pain in a phantom ass, Toom. ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 8, 2004 Report Share Posted October 8, 2004 Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <Pedsie2@a...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <Pedsie2@a...> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > .........and the concept " naked perception " ...is somehow > exempt > > > > > from falsifecation? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > > P: No, it isn't, but there are different degrees in > > > falsification. > > > > > An injunction generally is less falsifying than speculation. > > > > > So if I say to you, " Pass the gravy. " There is no possibility > > > > > of falsification there, unless you don't understand English, > > > > > or never heard of gravy. > > > > > > > > > > When I say, " move away from thought and rest in naked > perception " > > > > > the chances you could misunderstand are greater because the > > > > > admonition refers to mental processes. Still, there is a good > > > > > chance you will understand that I simply mean: When looking, > > > > > just look, don't think; when hearing, just listen, don't > think. > > > > > > > > > > > > T: This is reminiscent of the Shirley Maclaine school of New > > > Ageism........another technique....to improve something that > appears > > > to itself to be inadequate in some way ......but can through a > series > > > of exercises....improve its self....... > > > > > > > > > > > > > >P: Now when you say, > > Every " thing " is one thing......One > > > > > thing....is no thing...........> > > > > > > The chances of misunderstanding are almost certain because > > > > > you are using nonsensical language as a philosophical meta4 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >T: All philosoohical speculation is non-sense. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >P: to point at a mystical intuition. Even, in the case, I had > > > > > a mystical intuition of unity too. I have no way of knowing > > > > > if what you ar pointing at, is the same or not. > > > > > > > > > > It's as simple as that. > > > > > > > > > > Pete> > > > > > > > >T: What you seem to be saying that some falsifications are > falser > > > then others.... > > > > > > > > It could be said that conceptualization is itself > > > falsification........ > > > > > > > > that anything that emerges from a false assumption (separate > > > self)....is false.... > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > P: Ha! And yet, and yet. We must use a false band-aid to heal > > > the false wound. False pain hurts like hell. I'm sure you > > > have heard of amputees suffering excruciating phantom pain > > > in missing limbs. > > > > Pete > > > > phantom pain.....is phantom pain. > > > You are a phantom pain in a phantom ass, Toom. ) LOL 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.