Guest guest Posted December 21, 2004 Report Share Posted December 21, 2004 Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Lewis Burgess " <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > ... > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > Dear Anders, > > > > Those knots are partially formed with the emotional attachments > > demonstrated by " I want " " my mind and body " and " how I can. " > > > > The old fashioned way to cure self-absorption is to perform every > > method and ritual aimed at self-annihilation, to believe and practice > > every idea of liberation, to imitate gurus, live, love and sacrifice > > for messiahs, to offer sacrifices, donations to God and the Gods, to > > perform good works, to love others at risk of your life, to exercise > > your self-will to the fullest in the search for your true self, > > ardently search and enquire about I Am, to fast, to wear sackcloth and > > ashes, to whip the body, and other ascetic practices, to not speak, to > > pray, to chant mantras, to meditate, recollect, contemplate, to let > > thoughts flow, to stop thoughts, to be indifferent to perceptions, to > > deny the world, to intellectually turn everything into an illusion and > > so on. > > > > All these are futile. They lead nowhere. They do not bring > > self-annihilation but paradoxically increase self-centeredness. The > > more ardently these are practiced the worse it gets. What gets worse > > is the feeling of " absolute futility. " But this is key. Self-will, the > > " I want " exercised to the extreme leads to the realization of the > > " absolute futility " of self-will in reaching the (false) goals of > > enlightenment and liberation. At this point, ego is almost shattered > > and begins to fall apart. There is no where to turn, no wheels to > > turn, no place to go, no thoughts not tried so none to think, all lead > > to blind alleys, no effort makes a dfiference, all has been tried, no > > person can help, all is futile and hopeless, all is meaningless. This > > is beginning of awakening in the old fashioned way and it can be an > > exceedingly painful experience that drags on for decades. > > > > The simple way is to quickly experience the " absolute futility " of > > self-will. > > > > They say Buddha tried asceticism for several years and then found the > > middle path. > > > > Search and enquiry for I Am leads to the " absolute futility " if > > practiced ardently, earnestly by some people. Many intellectual egos > > are well-secured (trapped) in this method and only slowly or if ever > > reach " absolute futility " for they play with some of the ideas of > > Advaita Vedanta, use the passive voice, eschew personal pronouns, wave > > magic wands of intellection to declare and disappear the illusions of > > others (which is humorous because it is easily done since all is > > illusion and it is hard to make a mistake) and create a single voice > > that speaks from the " heights of awareness, " a voice that is none > > other than ego very well trained in saying " neti, neti. " > > > > > > What is Anders way to " absolute futility " of self-will? Is the > > quickest road to a high impact, unrecoverable smash up against that > > wall taken? Or is a pleasant meander picking flowers the way to go? > > > > Lewis > > So you are saying that all I do and not do is a part of the knots, and > that will only make the knots more knotty. Yes....but you can factor out the " I " who believes that it is the one who is choosing to do or not do. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 21, 2004 Report Share Posted December 21, 2004 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well.....If I had free will......I would choose lots of > > > > money....perfect health.......a stress free > > > > > life.......that lasted forever...... > > > > > > > > > > What do you choose with this free will of yours? > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > When there is conflictless flow there is no separate me having 'free > > > > will' (read: conflict), then I and the now are one, and free will is > > > > also one. I then want to do, be and feel what I do, am and feel now. > > > > > > > > > > > > Well ....that's a very nice belief structure. > > > > > > Where do you store it? > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > I guess for this to really work is has to become natural as breathing. > > Where do I store my breath? > > > > In what you believe to be your very own ......separate body. > > > t. > Breathing and all other processes in the body may be interconnected with events outside the body. A simple external input as a sudden sound can alter the breathing process. Then we have the non-locality shown by quantum mechanics to examinate. Maybe every bodily process is entangled into a cosmic web of synchronistic nature. So, some 'parts' of the breathing process may be 'located' in the body, while other parts relating to breathing are outside the body. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 21, 2004 Report Share Posted December 21, 2004 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lewis Burgess " <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > > > ... > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > > > Dear Anders, > > > > > > Those knots are partially formed with the emotional attachments > > > demonstrated by " I want " " my mind and body " and " how I can. " > > > > > > The old fashioned way to cure self-absorption is to perform every > > > method and ritual aimed at self-annihilation, to believe and practice > > > every idea of liberation, to imitate gurus, live, love and sacrifice > > > for messiahs, to offer sacrifices, donations to God and the Gods, to > > > perform good works, to love others at risk of your life, to exercise > > > your self-will to the fullest in the search for your true self, > > > ardently search and enquire about I Am, to fast, to wear sackcloth and > > > ashes, to whip the body, and other ascetic practices, to not speak, to > > > pray, to chant mantras, to meditate, recollect, contemplate, to let > > > thoughts flow, to stop thoughts, to be indifferent to perceptions, to > > > deny the world, to intellectually turn everything into an illusion and > > > so on. > > > > > > All these are futile. They lead nowhere. They do not bring > > > self-annihilation but paradoxically increase self-centeredness. The > > > more ardently these are practiced the worse it gets. What gets worse > > > is the feeling of " absolute futility. " But this is key. Self-will, the > > > " I want " exercised to the extreme leads to the realization of the > > > " absolute futility " of self-will in reaching the (false) goals of > > > enlightenment and liberation. At this point, ego is almost shattered > > > and begins to fall apart. There is no where to turn, no wheels to > > > turn, no place to go, no thoughts not tried so none to think, all lead > > > to blind alleys, no effort makes a dfiference, all has been tried, no > > > person can help, all is futile and hopeless, all is meaningless. This > > > is beginning of awakening in the old fashioned way and it can be an > > > exceedingly painful experience that drags on for decades. > > > > > > The simple way is to quickly experience the " absolute futility " of > > > self-will. > > > > > > They say Buddha tried asceticism for several years and then found the > > > middle path. > > > > > > Search and enquiry for I Am leads to the " absolute futility " if > > > practiced ardently, earnestly by some people. Many intellectual egos > > > are well-secured (trapped) in this method and only slowly or if ever > > > reach " absolute futility " for they play with some of the ideas of > > > Advaita Vedanta, use the passive voice, eschew personal pronouns, wave > > > magic wands of intellection to declare and disappear the illusions of > > > others (which is humorous because it is easily done since all is > > > illusion and it is hard to make a mistake) and create a single voice > > > that speaks from the " heights of awareness, " a voice that is none > > > other than ego very well trained in saying " neti, neti. " > > > > > > > > > What is Anders way to " absolute futility " of self-will? Is the > > > quickest road to a high impact, unrecoverable smash up against that > > > wall taken? Or is a pleasant meander picking flowers the way to go? > > > > > > Lewis > > > > So you are saying that all I do and not do is a part of the knots, and > > that will only make the knots more knotty. > > > > Yes....but you can factor out the " I " who believes that it is the one who is choosing to do or not do. > > > toombaru Isn't 'you can' a part of the 'I'? Who is doing the factoring? Is it just happening, or is there an object such as a " me " doing the factoring? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 21, 2004 Report Share Posted December 21, 2004 Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well.....If I had free will......I would choose lots of > > > > > money....perfect health.......a stress free > > > > > > life.......that lasted forever...... > > > > > > > > > > > > What do you choose with this free will of yours? > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > > When there is conflictless flow there is no separate me having > 'free > > > > > will' (read: conflict), then I and the now are one, and free > will is > > > > > also one. I then want to do, be and feel what I do, am and > feel now. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well ....that's a very nice belief structure. > > > > > > > > Where do you store it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > I guess for this to really work is has to become natural as breathing. > > > Where do I store my breath? > > > > > > > > In what you believe to be your very own ......separate body. > > > > > > t. > > > > Breathing and all other processes in the body may be interconnected > with events outside the body. A simple external input as a sudden > sound can alter the breathing process. Then we have the non-locality > shown by quantum mechanics to examinate. Maybe every bodily process is > entangled into a cosmic web of synchronistic nature. So, some 'parts' > of the breathing process may be 'located' in the body, while other > parts relating to breathing are outside the body. Indeed......and there may be space ships behind some comets. t. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 21, 2004 Report Share Posted December 21, 2004 Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lewis Burgess " <lbb10@c...> > wrote: > > > > > > > ... > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > > > > > Dear Anders, > > > > > > > > Those knots are partially formed with the emotional attachments > > > > demonstrated by " I want " " my mind and body " and " how I can. " > > > > > > > > The old fashioned way to cure self-absorption is to perform every > > > > method and ritual aimed at self-annihilation, to believe and > practice > > > > every idea of liberation, to imitate gurus, live, love and sacrifice > > > > for messiahs, to offer sacrifices, donations to God and the Gods, to > > > > perform good works, to love others at risk of your life, to exercise > > > > your self-will to the fullest in the search for your true self, > > > > ardently search and enquire about I Am, to fast, to wear > sackcloth and > > > > ashes, to whip the body, and other ascetic practices, to not > speak, to > > > > pray, to chant mantras, to meditate, recollect, contemplate, to let > > > > thoughts flow, to stop thoughts, to be indifferent to > perceptions, to > > > > deny the world, to intellectually turn everything into an > illusion and > > > > so on. > > > > > > > > All these are futile. They lead nowhere. They do not bring > > > > self-annihilation but paradoxically increase self-centeredness. The > > > > more ardently these are practiced the worse it gets. What gets worse > > > > is the feeling of " absolute futility. " But this is key. > Self-will, the > > > > " I want " exercised to the extreme leads to the realization of the > > > > " absolute futility " of self-will in reaching the (false) goals of > > > > enlightenment and liberation. At this point, ego is almost shattered > > > > and begins to fall apart. There is no where to turn, no wheels to > > > > turn, no place to go, no thoughts not tried so none to think, > all lead > > > > to blind alleys, no effort makes a dfiference, all has been > tried, no > > > > person can help, all is futile and hopeless, all is meaningless. > This > > > > is beginning of awakening in the old fashioned way and it can be an > > > > exceedingly painful experience that drags on for decades. > > > > > > > > The simple way is to quickly experience the " absolute futility " of > > > > self-will. > > > > > > > > They say Buddha tried asceticism for several years and then > found the > > > > middle path. > > > > > > > > Search and enquiry for I Am leads to the " absolute futility " if > > > > practiced ardently, earnestly by some people. Many intellectual egos > > > > are well-secured (trapped) in this method and only slowly or if ever > > > > reach " absolute futility " for they play with some of the ideas of > > > > Advaita Vedanta, use the passive voice, eschew personal > pronouns, wave > > > > magic wands of intellection to declare and disappear the > illusions of > > > > others (which is humorous because it is easily done since all is > > > > illusion and it is hard to make a mistake) and create a single voice > > > > that speaks from the " heights of awareness, " a voice that is none > > > > other than ego very well trained in saying " neti, neti. " > > > > > > > > > > > > What is Anders way to " absolute futility " of self-will? Is the > > > > quickest road to a high impact, unrecoverable smash up against that > > > > wall taken? Or is a pleasant meander picking flowers the way to go? > > > > > > > > Lewis > > > > > > So you are saying that all I do and not do is a part of the knots, and > > > that will only make the knots more knotty. > > > > > > > > Yes....but you can factor out the " I " who believes that it is the > one who is choosing to do or not do. > > > > > > toombaru > > Isn't 'you can' a part of the 'I'? Who is doing the factoring? Is it > just happening, or is there an object such as a " me " doing the factoring? .........I think you get to say " check " ...or even " checkmate " now......:-) toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 21, 2004 Report Share Posted December 21, 2004 kenj02001 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> > wrote: > > toombaru2004 wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> > wrote: > > > > toombaru2004 wrote: > > > > > > > > > > s > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Alas.....the water in a mirage...will never quench > your thirst. > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > > > > > > > > > Toombaru. Convinced? > > > > > > > > > > > > Mind is an object, a tool, like the body and used for > illusion > > > > > > perceiving and making. It is perceived and, therefore, > not > > > conscious. > > > > > > But is is known and used by what is and it can be > described as any > > > > > > " illusory object or perception. " > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no thirst to quench or material to pursue or an > > > obsession to > > > > > > control, just curiosity, exploration, experience, and > enjoyment > > > without > > > > > > attachment to transient illusions such as a charming > conversation, a > > > > > > beautiful sunset, a vigorous swim, hiking in winter, > eating a ham > > > > > > sandwich, posting to this forum. Enjoyable " mirages " all. > > > > > > > > > > > > Lewis > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Indeed. > > > > > > > > > > Everything you mentioned has a physical reference point. > > > > > > > > > > The trouble that mind has is mistaking its own > > > > > > > > > inventions...ego...self....Self...god....enlightenment...nirvana....c > hakras....mind......free- > > > > > will...etc. .etc...for reality and then looking for itself > within its > > > > > own imagination. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > It is troublesome to experience mind and its creations as one > would a > > > > sunset? Is not a sunset a percept, a transitory mental > creation? > > > > > > > > What is physical but a conceptual notion originating in mind. > > > > > > > > There is also just curiosity, exploration, experience, and > enjoyment > > > > without attachment to transient illusions such as God, Jesus, > Atman, > > > > atman, Self, Yechidah, Neshamah, fana fi 'Allah', baqa' > bi 'Allah, Dark > > > > Night of the Soul (St. John of the Cross), daemon, psyche, > > > > Buddha-nature, original self, Tao, Brahman, Holy Spirit, no- > mind, I Am, > > > > etc. There are no " physical reference points " here. > > > > > > > > There is no mistaking these as illusions. They are words, > terms, > > > > concepts. They are unreal pointers. As such, they pose no > threat or > > > > trouble. They represent experiences differentially undergone > and the > > > > attempt to then formulate and describe. Is the concept > of " God " > > > > frightening? How about the avenging concept of " God? " Or the > hell making > > > > one? If ego or a mind " believes " or is " convinced " of the > reality of > > > > concepts then trouble brews. > > > > > > > > Otherwise, seeing it as it is, there is great interest in how > these > > > > creations have come to be, how they are used and transformed > and the > > > > effects they have upon the movement of what is and how what > is uses > > > > these to become unecumbered. > > > > > > > > > > > > The totality of the assumed entity is the encumberence itself. > > > > > > There is nothing and on one to become unembumbered. > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No need to wave magic wands. Wade deep into these, embrace > them, know > > > > them, use them, and then let them be. As they are, they are > harmless. > > > > They have no life or energy except that mistakenly given to > them. > > > > > > > > > > > > Lewis > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > T. try this clarification. > > > > What is always is and is never encumbered as it is and is beyond > any > > conceptuaization or " encumberment " but in expressing through the > mind > > and body there are encumberances (egos, beliefs, illusory > realities) > > hindering the free and effortless expression of what is. What is > cannot > > be encumbered but its free and effortless expression can be. > > > > > > Lewis > > > ** How about this: > > All of it freely expressed, all of it spontaneous; > therefore, no encumbrances-- distortion, yes. > > Ken > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Yes. Lewis > > > > ** > > If you do not wish to receive individual emails, to change your > subscription, sign in with your ID and go to Edit My Groups: > > /mygroups?edit=1 > > Under the Message Delivery option, choose " No Email " for the > Nisargadatta group and click on Save Changes. > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 21, 2004 Report Share Posted December 21, 2004 anders_lindman wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Lewis Burgess " <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > ... > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > Dear Anders, > > > > Those knots are partially formed with the emotional attachments > > demonstrated by " I want " " my mind and body " and " how I can. " > > > > The old fashioned way to cure self-absorption is to perform every > > method and ritual aimed at self-annihilation, to believe and practice > > every idea of liberation, to imitate gurus, live, love and sacrifice > > for messiahs, to offer sacrifices, donations to God and the Gods, to > > perform good works, to love others at risk of your life, to exercise > > your self-will to the fullest in the search for your true self, > > ardently search and enquire about I Am, to fast, to wear sackcloth and > > ashes, to whip the body, and other ascetic practices, to not speak, to > > pray, to chant mantras, to meditate, recollect, contemplate, to let > > thoughts flow, to stop thoughts, to be indifferent to perceptions, to > > deny the world, to intellectually turn everything into an illusion and > > so on. > > > > All these are futile. They lead nowhere. They do not bring > > self-annihilation but paradoxically increase self-centeredness. The > > more ardently these are practiced the worse it gets. What gets worse > > is the feeling of " absolute futility. " But this is key. Self-will, the > > " I want " exercised to the extreme leads to the realization of the > > " absolute futility " of self-will in reaching the (false) goals of > > enlightenment and liberation. At this point, ego is almost shattered > > and begins to fall apart. There is no where to turn, no wheels to > > turn, no place to go, no thoughts not tried so none to think, all lead > > to blind alleys, no effort makes a dfiference, all has been tried, no > > person can help, all is futile and hopeless, all is meaningless. This > > is beginning of awakening in the old fashioned way and it can be an > > exceedingly painful experience that drags on for decades. > > > > The simple way is to quickly experience the " absolute futility " of > > self-will. > > > > They say Buddha tried asceticism for several years and then found the > > middle path. > > > > Search and enquiry for I Am leads to the " absolute futility " if > > practiced ardently, earnestly by some people. Many intellectual egos > > are well-secured (trapped) in this method and only slowly or if ever > > reach " absolute futility " for they play with some of the ideas of > > Advaita Vedanta, use the passive voice, eschew personal pronouns, wave > > magic wands of intellection to declare and disappear the illusions of > > others (which is humorous because it is easily done since all is > > illusion and it is hard to make a mistake) and create a single voice > > that speaks from the " heights of awareness, " a voice that is none > > other than ego very well trained in saying " neti, neti. " > > > > > > What is Anders way to " absolute futility " of self-will? Is the > > quickest road to a high impact, unrecoverable smash up against that > > wall taken? Or is a pleasant meander picking flowers the way to go? > > > > Lewis > > So you are saying that all I do and not do is a part of the knots, and > that will only make the knots more knotty. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ If the " I " you freely use in your posts " is " or refers to Your ego or egos than yes, that is so. Note that ego or egos cannot be " factored out. " Such factoring, however done, will be a mere manipulation done by an existing watcher or new ego one step removed from the ego or ego aspect being factored out. Disintegration of ego(s) is not achieved by ego's effort to end itself, but by its absolute inability to form any coherent identity or sense of continuity. If it is understood by the most ardent and obedient ego in you that wants enlightenment, freedom, clarity, peace. all those things spoken of in Anders' posts, that the ego and its forms are to end then find the quickest way to 'absolute futility " of self-will. Is this not what neti, neti is for? Ego is doing neti, neti until it is dysfunctional and begins to disintegrate. As ego works all aspects of itself in to a hole of futility and disintegration proceeds, non doing that always is present effortlessly expands until there is only that. Lewis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 21, 2004 Report Share Posted December 21, 2004 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well.....If I had free will......I would choose lots of > > > > > > money....perfect health.......a stress free > > > > > > > life.......that lasted forever...... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What do you choose with this free will of yours? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > > > > When there is conflictless flow there is no separate me having > > 'free > > > > > > will' (read: conflict), then I and the now are one, and free > > will is > > > > > > also one. I then want to do, be and feel what I do, am and > > feel now. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well ....that's a very nice belief structure. > > > > > > > > > > Where do you store it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > I guess for this to really work is has to become natural as breathing. > > > > Where do I store my breath? > > > > > > > > > > > > In what you believe to be your very own ......separate body. > > > > > > > > > t. > > > > > > > Breathing and all other processes in the body may be interconnected > > with events outside the body. A simple external input as a sudden > > sound can alter the breathing process. Then we have the non-locality > > shown by quantum mechanics to examinate. Maybe every bodily process is > > entangled into a cosmic web of synchronistic nature. So, some 'parts' > > of the breathing process may be 'located' in the body, while other > > parts relating to breathing are outside the body. > > > > Indeed......and there may be space ships behind some comets. > > > t. Yea, lurking there, controlling the human breathing process! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 21, 2004 Report Share Posted December 21, 2004 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > .... > > Isn't 'you can' a part of the 'I'? Who is doing the factoring? Is it > > just happening, or is there an object such as a " me " doing the factoring? > > > > ........I think you get to say " check " ...or even " checkmate " now......:-) > > > toombaru I have to 'check' my free will first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 21, 2004 Report Share Posted December 21, 2004 Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > .... > > > > So you are saying that all I do and not do is a part of the knots, and > > that will only make the knots more knotty. > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > If the " I " you freely use in your posts " is " or refers to Your ego or > egos than yes, that is so. > > Note that ego or egos cannot be " factored out. " Such factoring, however > done, will be a mere manipulation done by an existing watcher or new ego > one step removed from the ego or ego aspect being factored out. > Disintegration of ego(s) is not achieved by ego's effort to end itself, > but by its absolute inability to form any coherent identity or sense of > continuity. If it is understood by the most ardent and obedient ego in > you that wants enlightenment, freedom, clarity, peace. all those things > spoken of in Anders' posts, that the ego and its forms are to end then > find the quickest way to 'absolute futility " of self-will. > > Is this not what neti, neti is for? Ego is doing neti, neti until it is > dysfunctional and begins to disintegrate. As ego works all aspects of > itself in to a hole of futility and disintegration proceeds, non doing > that always is present effortlessly expands until there is only that. > > Lewis The ego is the past trying to cope with the present moment. The problem is: the past cannot quite catch up with the now, and in that there is conflict. The awareness of the now has to expand, and that, as you say, can not be done by the ego, the past, but only by the newness in the now itself. /AL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 21, 2004 Report Share Posted December 21, 2004 anders_lindman wrote: > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > > ... > > > > > > So you are saying that all I do and not do is a part of the knots, and > > > that will only make the knots more knotty. > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > If the " I " you freely use in your posts " is " or refers to Your ego or > > egos than yes, that is so. > > > > Note that ego or egos cannot be " factored out. " Such factoring, however > > done, will be a mere manipulation done by an existing watcher or new > ego > > one step removed from the ego or ego aspect being factored out. > > Disintegration of ego(s) is not achieved by ego's effort to end itself, > > but by its absolute inability to form any coherent identity or sense of > > continuity. If it is understood by the most ardent and obedient ego in > > you that wants enlightenment, freedom, clarity, peace. all those things > > spoken of in Anders' posts, that the ego and its forms are to end then > > find the quickest way to 'absolute futility " of self-will. > > > > Is this not what neti, neti is for? Ego is doing neti, neti until it is > > dysfunctional and begins to disintegrate. As ego works all aspects of > > itself in to a hole of futility and disintegration proceeds, non doing > > that always is present effortlessly expands until there is only that. > > > > Lewis > > The ego is the past trying to cope with the present moment. The > problem is: the past cannot quite catch up with the now, and in that > there is conflict. The awareness of the now has to expand, and that, > as you say, can not be done by the ego, the past, but only by the > newness in the now itself. > > /AL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ There is impossibility. Futility. The sense of conflict arises when ego tries to be in the " now " (an ego imagined state) and can't because of the continued sense of the past (an ego imagined state) and constant anticipation of the future (an ego imagined state). Ego thinks of time as linear progressions, discrete tickings, so that the best it can do is to try to ride the ticks with thoughts, " I am here, " I am now. " But as soon as this futile attempt is made, the ego thinks, but " now " is already past or the " future " is already come. So it cannot find nor ride these imagined now ticks. It is an impossibility for egotistic use of mind to be in the now. So the ego knows about being in the now and wishes to achieve this blissful state and it fails because it is an not possible for ego to do. The mind is a machine that has no off button. It is always running. How about its operation? Try this conceptual model knowing that that is all that it is, something to be set aside or discarded. There are a few basic faculties of mind: perceiving, emoting, thinking, willing, imagining and remembering. These faculties (and combinations of them), are content less, that is, they " play " perceptions, feelings, thoughts (ideas, concepts, assumptions, etc.), imaginings, and memories. but have no inherent content. The mind simply " plays " whatever is in attention. The ego is manufactured by the mind from conceptual material and the sensations and physiological systems of the body. Ego emerges from mind (this may be detailed another another time) early in life and comes to assume a separate identity as a " person " of such and such " mind " and such and such body type, temperament, personality, morality, ethics, beliefs, opinions, talents, skills, achievements, frailties, and so on. Ego is merely an actor, a fictional creation that is able to manipulate mind for its ends. In short, the mind creates a mind of its own, one that is incapable of awareness. BTW, in this model, consciousness is mental field where the products of mind and body are " seen. " There are no levels of consciousness. Think of any professional actor playing a role. It is fictional. The actor simply uses the " mind " (the faculties of attention perceiving, emoting, thinking, willing, imagining, remembering, etc.,) to play a role by interpreting and creating the perceptions, feelings, thoughts (ideas, concepts, assumptions, etc.), imaginings, and memories given to the " character " by the writers and directors. It all seems real, and the better it is done (Ego using mind to create a character) the more enjoyment is felt. But it is unreal. Woe to the actor who thinks the role is real. The name is Bond, James Bond. Similarly, the ego, the human actor, is fictional, but very durable. Now Anders, what is the weakest point in the formation of the ego, the lynch pin if pulled will bring the collapse of the fiction? It is not the faculties of mind, for it is " machinery " with no off button. The weakest point is the content. The content, the perceptions, feelings, thoughts (ideas, concepts, assumptions, etc.), imaginings, and memories are passive. They can be played or not played. If the mind's faculties are drawn away from all content, all that mental stuff and focused on " no thing " the mind faculties would produces " no thing. " Ego cannot survive as " no thing. " Its apparent " integrity " and " unity " will begin to fail. But what is holding " attention " on " no thing? so that the mind produces no thing allow ego to slowly or quickly dissipate. Ego is doing this. Why does ego participate in its own disintegration? Because it is wants the benefits of enlightenment. It is greedy and stubborn and wants to be free and superior and well off and so on. That is why " earnest " and " obedient " types due best in these matters. " Seek and ye shall find. " " You gotta want bad enough to seek it in order to get it. " As the play of content diminishes, ego feels fear and anxiety, then clarity and peace, perhaps a dashes ecstasy and bliss, and experiences other phenomena such as telepathy, clairvoyance and the like, here and there, more or less. A sense of progress, accomplishment, even triumph is felt. There is pride and sometimes arrogance in this and such things are usually coated with humble approach and mild manner. The effort on these accounts, therefore, continue. But as this happens there is another happening. In every " space " where content is obviated, what is fills it. This prevents the ego from reconstituting and and ensures its disintegration. The ego becomes singular, in one way or another, due diminishing play of content and eventually appears as " I Am " or " God. " But this false I Am, though clear, peaceful and serene, knowledgeable, calm is very dry and with little affect and no drive or purpose because it is a shell without content. So everything to the ego seems so plain, ordinary, dull, meaningless and there is no where to go and there is no satisfying way to reconstitute. The ego thinks this is what it is? The ego secretly thinks " How long will this ordinariness, dullness, purposelessness last? What content is left to abjure? Oh yes there are the possessions, material comforts, social status, power and so on. These also do not become hindrances. What shall " I " focus on now? The great " I Am " is stymied, absolute futility sets in. Such dryness, dullness, meaninglessness, purposelessness is too much for some to endure... At this point many give up. Others stop believing they have reached the pinnacle, the goal and go on teach the world.. others lose their minds to messiahships, great callings to bring the inferior to their thrones, still others use their power of clarity to sell books and make money on helping others to be " free. " Others become lost to the world as hermits, recluses, avoiding human contact unable to endure what they see and hear while having no compassion or motivation to serve others. Some become " insane " or incoherent (There are dangers). And others endure till, in bits and pieces, in flood rushes, in a slow trickles, in one moment or in some way there is ineffable life, " God " dies, is superseded and life begins. So goes the same story that has been told for thousands of years. This version being a slight variation in the disposable conceptual packaging. Lewis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 21, 2004 Report Share Posted December 21, 2004 Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > > So you are saying that all I do and not do is a part of the knots, and > > > > that will only make the knots more knotty. > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > If the " I " you freely use in your posts " is " or refers to Your ego or > > > egos than yes, that is so. > > > > > > Note that ego or egos cannot be " factored out. " Such factoring, however > > > done, will be a mere manipulation done by an existing watcher or new > > ego > > > one step removed from the ego or ego aspect being factored out. > > > Disintegration of ego(s) is not achieved by ego's effort to end itself, > > > but by its absolute inability to form any coherent identity or sense of > > > continuity. If it is understood by the most ardent and obedient ego in > > > you that wants enlightenment, freedom, clarity, peace. all those things > > > spoken of in Anders' posts, that the ego and its forms are to end then > > > find the quickest way to 'absolute futility " of self-will. > > > > > > Is this not what neti, neti is for? Ego is doing neti, neti until it is > > > dysfunctional and begins to disintegrate. As ego works all aspects of > > > itself in to a hole of futility and disintegration proceeds, non doing > > > that always is present effortlessly expands until there is only that. > > > > > > Lewis > > > > The ego is the past trying to cope with the present moment. The > > problem is: the past cannot quite catch up with the now, and in that > > there is conflict. The awareness of the now has to expand, and that, > > as you say, can not be done by the ego, the past, but only by the > > newness in the now itself. > > > > /AL > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > There is impossibility. Futility. The sense of conflict arises when ego > tries to be in the " now " (an ego imagined state) and can't because of > the continued sense of the past (an ego imagined state) and constant > anticipation of the future (an ego imagined state). Ego thinks of time > as linear progressions, discrete tickings, so that the best it can do is > to try to ride the ticks with thoughts, " I am here, " I am now. " But as > soon as this futile attempt is made, the ego thinks, but " now " is > already past or the " future " is already come. So it cannot find nor > ride these imagined now ticks. It is an impossibility for egotistic use > of mind to be in the now. So the ego knows about being in the now and > wishes to achieve this blissful state and it fails because it is an not > possible for ego to do. > > The mind is a machine that has no off button. It is always running. How > about its operation? Try this conceptual model knowing that that is all > that it is, something to be set aside or discarded. > > There are a few basic faculties of mind: perceiving, emoting, thinking, > willing, imagining and remembering. These faculties (and combinations of > them), are content less, that is, they " play " perceptions, feelings, > thoughts (ideas, concepts, assumptions, etc.), imaginings, and memories. > but have no inherent content. The mind simply " plays " whatever is in > attention. > > The ego is manufactured by the mind from conceptual material and the > sensations and physiological systems of the body. Ego emerges from mind > (this may be detailed another another time) early in life and comes to > assume a separate identity as a " person " of such and such " mind " and > such and such body type, temperament, personality, morality, ethics, > beliefs, opinions, talents, skills, achievements, frailties, and so on. > Ego is merely an actor, a fictional creation that is able to manipulate > mind for its ends. In short, the mind creates a mind of its own, one > that is incapable of awareness. BTW, in this model, consciousness is > mental field where the products of mind and body are " seen. " There are > no levels of consciousness. > > Think of any professional actor playing a role. It is fictional. The > actor simply uses the " mind " (the faculties of attention perceiving, > emoting, thinking, willing, imagining, remembering, etc.,) to play a > role by interpreting and creating the perceptions, feelings, thoughts > (ideas, concepts, assumptions, etc.), imaginings, and memories given to > the " character " by the writers and directors. It all seems real, and the > better it is done (Ego using mind to create a character) the more > enjoyment is felt. But it is unreal. Woe to the actor who thinks the > role is real. The name is Bond, James Bond. > > Similarly, the ego, the human actor, is fictional, but very durable. > > Now Anders, what is the weakest point in the formation of the ego, the > lynch pin if pulled will bring the collapse of the fiction? > > It is not the faculties of mind, for it is " machinery " with no off button. > > The weakest point is the content. The content, the perceptions, > feelings, thoughts (ideas, concepts, assumptions, etc.), imaginings, and > memories are passive. They can be played or not played. > > If the mind's faculties are drawn away from all content, all that mental > stuff and focused on " no thing " the mind faculties would produces " no > thing. " Ego cannot survive as " no thing. " Its apparent " integrity " and > " unity " will begin to fail. > > But what is holding " attention " on " no thing? so that the mind produces > no thing allow ego to slowly or quickly dissipate. Ego is doing this. > > Why does ego participate in its own disintegration? Because it is wants > the benefits of enlightenment. It is greedy and stubborn and wants to be > free and superior and well off and so on. That is why " earnest " and > " obedient " types due best in these matters. " Seek and ye shall find. " > " You gotta want bad enough to seek it in order to get it. " > > As the play of content diminishes, ego feels fear and anxiety, then > clarity and peace, perhaps a dashes ecstasy and bliss, and experiences > other phenomena such as telepathy, clairvoyance and the like, here and > there, more or less. A sense of progress, accomplishment, even triumph > is felt. There is pride and sometimes arrogance in this and such things > are usually coated with humble approach and mild manner. The effort on > these accounts, therefore, continue. But as this happens there is > another happening. In every " space " where content is obviated, what is > fills it. This prevents the ego from reconstituting and and ensures its > disintegration. > > The ego becomes singular, in one way or another, due diminishing play of > content and eventually appears as " I Am " or " God. " But this false I Am, > though clear, peaceful and serene, knowledgeable, calm is very dry and > with little affect and no drive or purpose because it is a shell without > content. So everything to the ego seems so plain, ordinary, dull, > meaningless and there is no where to go and there is no satisfying way > to reconstitute. The ego thinks this is what it is? > > The ego secretly thinks " How long will this ordinariness, dullness, > purposelessness last? What content is left to abjure? Oh yes there are > the possessions, material comforts, social status, power and so on. > These also do not become hindrances. What shall " I " focus on now? The > great " I Am " is stymied, absolute futility sets in. Such dryness, > dullness, meaninglessness, purposelessness is too much for some to > endure... > > At this point many give up. Others stop believing they have reached the > pinnacle, the goal and go on teach the world.. others lose their minds > to messiahships, great callings to bring the inferior to their thrones, > still others use their power of clarity to sell books and make money on > helping others to be " free. " Others become lost to the world as hermits, > recluses, avoiding human contact unable to endure what they see and hear > while having no compassion or motivation to serve others. Some become > " insane " or incoherent (There are dangers). > > And others endure till, in bits and pieces, in flood rushes, in a slow > trickles, in one moment or in some way there is ineffable life, " God " > dies, is superseded and life begins. > > So goes the same story that has been told for thousands of years. This > version being a slight variation in the disposable conceptual packaging. > > Lewis Very good. One way to feel the ego is to sense the 'me'-feeling. And one can detect in that 'me'-feeling the lack of clarity. For example, when you are taking a walk, look at things around you and sense the clouded vision, the thought/emotion veil called the 'me'-feeling that acts like a diffuse center and smudges visual perception. You can also try this with other sense perceptions. This is not a spiritual practice. This is just a way to directly observe the non-clarity of ordinary perception. /AL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 21, 2004 Report Share Posted December 21, 2004 anders_lindman wrote: > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > > > > So you are saying that all I do and not do is a part of the > knots, and > > > > > that will only make the knots more knotty. > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > If the " I " you freely use in your posts " is " or refers to Your > ego or > > > > egos than yes, that is so. > > > > > > > > Note that ego or egos cannot be " factored out. " Such factoring, > however > > > > done, will be a mere manipulation done by an existing watcher > or new > > > ego > > > > one step removed from the ego or ego aspect being factored out. > > > > Disintegration of ego(s) is not achieved by ego's effort to end > itself, > > > > but by its absolute inability to form any coherent identity or > sense of > > > > continuity. If it is understood by the most ardent and obedient > ego in > > > > you that wants enlightenment, freedom, clarity, peace. all > those things > > > > spoken of in Anders' posts, that the ego and its forms are to > end then > > > > find the quickest way to 'absolute futility " of self-will. > > > > > > > > Is this not what neti, neti is for? Ego is doing neti, neti > until it is > > > > dysfunctional and begins to disintegrate. As ego works all > aspects of > > > > itself in to a hole of futility and disintegration proceeds, > non doing > > > > that always is present effortlessly expands until there is only > that. > > > > > > > > Lewis > > > > > > The ego is the past trying to cope with the present moment. The > > > problem is: the past cannot quite catch up with the now, and in that > > > there is conflict. The awareness of the now has to expand, and that, > > > as you say, can not be done by the ego, the past, but only by the > > > newness in the now itself. > > > > > > /AL > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > There is impossibility. Futility. The sense of conflict arises when ego > > tries to be in the " now " (an ego imagined state) and can't because of > > the continued sense of the past (an ego imagined state) and constant > > anticipation of the future (an ego imagined state). Ego thinks of time > > as linear progressions, discrete tickings, so that the best it can > do is > > to try to ride the ticks with thoughts, " I am here, " I am now. " But as > > soon as this futile attempt is made, the ego thinks, but " now " is > > already past or the " future " is already come. So it cannot find nor > > ride these imagined now ticks. It is an impossibility for egotistic use > > of mind to be in the now. So the ego knows about being in the now and > > wishes to achieve this blissful state and it fails because it is an not > > possible for ego to do. > > > > The mind is a machine that has no off button. It is always running. How > > about its operation? Try this conceptual model knowing that that is all > > that it is, something to be set aside or discarded. > > > > There are a few basic faculties of mind: perceiving, emoting, thinking, > > willing, imagining and remembering. These faculties (and > combinations of > > them), are content less, that is, they " play " perceptions, feelings, > > thoughts (ideas, concepts, assumptions, etc.), imaginings, and > memories. > > but have no inherent content. The mind simply " plays " whatever is in > > attention. > > > > The ego is manufactured by the mind from conceptual material and the > > sensations and physiological systems of the body. Ego emerges from mind > > (this may be detailed another another time) early in life and comes to > > assume a separate identity as a " person " of such and such " mind " and > > such and such body type, temperament, personality, morality, ethics, > > beliefs, opinions, talents, skills, achievements, frailties, and so on. > > Ego is merely an actor, a fictional creation that is able to manipulate > > mind for its ends. In short, the mind creates a mind of its own, one > > that is incapable of awareness. BTW, in this model, consciousness is > > mental field where the products of mind and body are " seen. " There are > > no levels of consciousness. > > > > Think of any professional actor playing a role. It is fictional. The > > actor simply uses the " mind " (the faculties of attention perceiving, > > emoting, thinking, willing, imagining, remembering, etc.,) to play a > > role by interpreting and creating the perceptions, feelings, thoughts > > (ideas, concepts, assumptions, etc.), imaginings, and memories given to > > the " character " by the writers and directors. It all seems real, and > the > > better it is done (Ego using mind to create a character) the more > > enjoyment is felt. But it is unreal. Woe to the actor who thinks the > > role is real. The name is Bond, James Bond. > > > > Similarly, the ego, the human actor, is fictional, but very durable. > > > > Now Anders, what is the weakest point in the formation of the ego, the > > lynch pin if pulled will bring the collapse of the fiction? > > > > It is not the faculties of mind, for it is " machinery " with no off > button. > > > > The weakest point is the content. The content, the perceptions, > > feelings, thoughts (ideas, concepts, assumptions, etc.), imaginings, > and > > memories are passive. They can be played or not played. > > > > If the mind's faculties are drawn away from all content, all that > mental > > stuff and focused on " no thing " the mind faculties would produces " no > > thing. " Ego cannot survive as " no thing. " Its apparent " integrity " and > > " unity " will begin to fail. > > > > But what is holding " attention " on " no thing? so that the mind produces > > no thing allow ego to slowly or quickly dissipate. Ego is doing this. > > > > Why does ego participate in its own disintegration? Because it is wants > > the benefits of enlightenment. It is greedy and stubborn and wants > to be > > free and superior and well off and so on. That is why " earnest " and > > " obedient " types due best in these matters. " Seek and ye shall find. " > > " You gotta want bad enough to seek it in order to get it. " > > > > As the play of content diminishes, ego feels fear and anxiety, then > > clarity and peace, perhaps a dashes ecstasy and bliss, and experiences > > other phenomena such as telepathy, clairvoyance and the like, here and > > there, more or less. A sense of progress, accomplishment, even triumph > > is felt. There is pride and sometimes arrogance in this and such things > > are usually coated with humble approach and mild manner. The effort on > > these accounts, therefore, continue. But as this happens there is > > another happening. In every " space " where content is obviated, what is > > fills it. This prevents the ego from reconstituting and and ensures its > > disintegration. > > > > The ego becomes singular, in one way or another, due diminishing > play of > > content and eventually appears as " I Am " or " God. " But this false I Am, > > though clear, peaceful and serene, knowledgeable, calm is very dry and > > with little affect and no drive or purpose because it is a shell > without > > content. So everything to the ego seems so plain, ordinary, dull, > > meaningless and there is no where to go and there is no satisfying way > > to reconstitute. The ego thinks this is what it is? > > > > The ego secretly thinks " How long will this ordinariness, dullness, > > purposelessness last? What content is left to abjure? Oh yes there are > > the possessions, material comforts, social status, power and so on. > > These also do not become hindrances. What shall " I " focus on now? The > > great " I Am " is stymied, absolute futility sets in. Such dryness, > > dullness, meaninglessness, purposelessness is too much for some to > > endure... > > > > At this point many give up. Others stop believing they have reached the > > pinnacle, the goal and go on teach the world.. others lose their minds > > to messiahships, great callings to bring the inferior to their thrones, > > still others use their power of clarity to sell books and make money on > > helping others to be " free. " Others become lost to the world as > hermits, > > recluses, avoiding human contact unable to endure what they see and > hear > > while having no compassion or motivation to serve others. Some become > > " insane " or incoherent (There are dangers). > > > > And others endure till, in bits and pieces, in flood rushes, in a slow > > trickles, in one moment or in some way there is ineffable life, " God " > > dies, is superseded and life begins. > > > > So goes the same story that has been told for thousands of years. This > > version being a slight variation in the disposable conceptual packaging. > > > > Lewis > > Very good. > > One way to feel the ego is to sense the 'me'-feeling. And one can > detect in that 'me'-feeling the lack of clarity. For example, when you > are taking a walk, look at things around you and sense the clouded > vision, the thought/emotion veil called the 'me'-feeling that acts > like a diffuse center and smudges visual perception. You can also try > this with other sense perceptions. This is not a spiritual practice. > This is just a way to directly observe the non-clarity of ordinary > perception. > > /AL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Another way to feel ego is to fully comply with these demands: Give all the cash you currently have to the next homeless person you meet, post all of your secrets acts in full color on this forum and recite the Metta Sutra in a clear loud voice looking at no one whenever three or more people are within 10 feet of you for the month of January. Do it now! ;-) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ A note: Nisargadatta is considered to be Self-realized as thought of in the tradition of Advaita Vedanta. Before joining this group in December, prior knowledge of him was nil. Nevertheless, he is a curious fellow in making this statement as found in " Excerpts from Consciousness and the Absolute: The Final Talks of Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj " (http://www.prahlad.org/gallery/consciousness_absolute.htm ): ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ December 22, 1980 Maharaj: Just now I was lying down in the waking state, but with no perceiving or receiving of any words, something like a prior-to-words state. Now the last traces of personality or individuality have left me. Last year I used to talk to people with a certain affection, but that is not available now. My dwelling place in the grosser world is gone now; presently it is in the subtler sphere, as in space. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Here, if the translation is accurate, Nisargadatta reports an interior prior-to-words state and that the last traces of ego have left him. This is nearly five decades after the reported year of Self-realization and very near to the time of passing in 1981. This is lovely. It is rare to hear or read reports of " interior states " experienced by venerated teachers such as Nisargadatta. Lewis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 22, 2004 Report Share Posted December 22, 2004 Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > > > > > > So you are saying that all I do and not do is a part of the > > knots, and > > > > > > that will only make the knots more knotty. > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > > If the " I " you freely use in your posts " is " or refers to Your > > ego or > > > > > egos than yes, that is so. > > > > > > > > > > Note that ego or egos cannot be " factored out. " Such factoring, > > however > > > > > done, will be a mere manipulation done by an existing watcher > > or new > > > > ego > > > > > one step removed from the ego or ego aspect being factored out. > > > > > Disintegration of ego(s) is not achieved by ego's effort to end > > itself, > > > > > but by its absolute inability to form any coherent identity or > > sense of > > > > > continuity. If it is understood by the most ardent and obedient > > ego in > > > > > you that wants enlightenment, freedom, clarity, peace. all > > those things > > > > > spoken of in Anders' posts, that the ego and its forms are to > > end then > > > > > find the quickest way to 'absolute futility " of self-will. > > > > > > > > > > Is this not what neti, neti is for? Ego is doing neti, neti > > until it is > > > > > dysfunctional and begins to disintegrate. As ego works all > > aspects of > > > > > itself in to a hole of futility and disintegration proceeds, > > non doing > > > > > that always is present effortlessly expands until there is only > > that. > > > > > > > > > > Lewis > > > > > > > > The ego is the past trying to cope with the present moment. The > > > > problem is: the past cannot quite catch up with the now, and in that > > > > there is conflict. The awareness of the now has to expand, and that, > > > > as you say, can not be done by the ego, the past, but only by the > > > > newness in the now itself. > > > > > > > > /AL > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > > > There is impossibility. Futility. The sense of conflict arises when ego > > > tries to be in the " now " (an ego imagined state) and can't because of > > > the continued sense of the past (an ego imagined state) and constant > > > anticipation of the future (an ego imagined state). Ego thinks of time > > > as linear progressions, discrete tickings, so that the best it can > > do is > > > to try to ride the ticks with thoughts, " I am here, " I am now. " But as > > > soon as this futile attempt is made, the ego thinks, but " now " is > > > already past or the " future " is already come. So it cannot find nor > > > ride these imagined now ticks. It is an impossibility for egotistic use > > > of mind to be in the now. So the ego knows about being in the now and > > > wishes to achieve this blissful state and it fails because it is an not > > > possible for ego to do. > > > > > > The mind is a machine that has no off button. It is always running. How > > > about its operation? Try this conceptual model knowing that that is all > > > that it is, something to be set aside or discarded. > > > > > > There are a few basic faculties of mind: perceiving, emoting, thinking, > > > willing, imagining and remembering. These faculties (and > > combinations of > > > them), are content less, that is, they " play " perceptions, feelings, > > > thoughts (ideas, concepts, assumptions, etc.), imaginings, and > > memories. > > > but have no inherent content. The mind simply " plays " whatever is in > > > attention. > > > > > > The ego is manufactured by the mind from conceptual material and the > > > sensations and physiological systems of the body. Ego emerges from mind > > > (this may be detailed another another time) early in life and comes to > > > assume a separate identity as a " person " of such and such " mind " and > > > such and such body type, temperament, personality, morality, ethics, > > > beliefs, opinions, talents, skills, achievements, frailties, and so on. > > > Ego is merely an actor, a fictional creation that is able to manipulate > > > mind for its ends. In short, the mind creates a mind of its own, one > > > that is incapable of awareness. BTW, in this model, consciousness is > > > mental field where the products of mind and body are " seen. " There are > > > no levels of consciousness. > > > > > > Think of any professional actor playing a role. It is fictional. The > > > actor simply uses the " mind " (the faculties of attention perceiving, > > > emoting, thinking, willing, imagining, remembering, etc.,) to play a > > > role by interpreting and creating the perceptions, feelings, thoughts > > > (ideas, concepts, assumptions, etc.), imaginings, and memories given to > > > the " character " by the writers and directors. It all seems real, and > > the > > > better it is done (Ego using mind to create a character) the more > > > enjoyment is felt. But it is unreal. Woe to the actor who thinks the > > > role is real. The name is Bond, James Bond. > > > > > > Similarly, the ego, the human actor, is fictional, but very durable. > > > > > > Now Anders, what is the weakest point in the formation of the ego, the > > > lynch pin if pulled will bring the collapse of the fiction? > > > > > > It is not the faculties of mind, for it is " machinery " with no off > > button. > > > > > > The weakest point is the content. The content, the perceptions, > > > feelings, thoughts (ideas, concepts, assumptions, etc.), imaginings, > > and > > > memories are passive. They can be played or not played. > > > > > > If the mind's faculties are drawn away from all content, all that > > mental > > > stuff and focused on " no thing " the mind faculties would produces " no > > > thing. " Ego cannot survive as " no thing. " Its apparent " integrity " and > > > " unity " will begin to fail. > > > > > > But what is holding " attention " on " no thing? so that the mind produces > > > no thing allow ego to slowly or quickly dissipate. Ego is doing this. > > > > > > Why does ego participate in its own disintegration? Because it is wants > > > the benefits of enlightenment. It is greedy and stubborn and wants > > to be > > > free and superior and well off and so on. That is why " earnest " and > > > " obedient " types due best in these matters. " Seek and ye shall find. " > > > " You gotta want bad enough to seek it in order to get it. " > > > > > > As the play of content diminishes, ego feels fear and anxiety, then > > > clarity and peace, perhaps a dashes ecstasy and bliss, and experiences > > > other phenomena such as telepathy, clairvoyance and the like, here and > > > there, more or less. A sense of progress, accomplishment, even triumph > > > is felt. There is pride and sometimes arrogance in this and such things > > > are usually coated with humble approach and mild manner. The effort on > > > these accounts, therefore, continue. But as this happens there is > > > another happening. In every " space " where content is obviated, what is > > > fills it. This prevents the ego from reconstituting and and ensures its > > > disintegration. > > > > > > The ego becomes singular, in one way or another, due diminishing > > play of > > > content and eventually appears as " I Am " or " God. " But this false I Am, > > > though clear, peaceful and serene, knowledgeable, calm is very dry and > > > with little affect and no drive or purpose because it is a shell > > without > > > content. So everything to the ego seems so plain, ordinary, dull, > > > meaningless and there is no where to go and there is no satisfying way > > > to reconstitute. The ego thinks this is what it is? > > > > > > The ego secretly thinks " How long will this ordinariness, dullness, > > > purposelessness last? What content is left to abjure? Oh yes there are > > > the possessions, material comforts, social status, power and so on. > > > These also do not become hindrances. What shall " I " focus on now? The > > > great " I Am " is stymied, absolute futility sets in. Such dryness, > > > dullness, meaninglessness, purposelessness is too much for some to > > > endure... > > > > > > At this point many give up. Others stop believing they have reached the > > > pinnacle, the goal and go on teach the world.. others lose their minds > > > to messiahships, great callings to bring the inferior to their thrones, > > > still others use their power of clarity to sell books and make money on > > > helping others to be " free. " Others become lost to the world as > > hermits, > > > recluses, avoiding human contact unable to endure what they see and > > hear > > > while having no compassion or motivation to serve others. Some become > > > " insane " or incoherent (There are dangers). > > > > > > And others endure till, in bits and pieces, in flood rushes, in a slow > > > trickles, in one moment or in some way there is ineffable life, " God " > > > dies, is superseded and life begins. > > > > > > So goes the same story that has been told for thousands of years. This > > > version being a slight variation in the disposable conceptual packaging. > > > > > > Lewis > > > > Very good. > > > > One way to feel the ego is to sense the 'me'-feeling. And one can > > detect in that 'me'-feeling the lack of clarity. For example, when you > > are taking a walk, look at things around you and sense the clouded > > vision, the thought/emotion veil called the 'me'-feeling that acts > > like a diffuse center and smudges visual perception. You can also try > > this with other sense perceptions. This is not a spiritual practice. > > This is just a way to directly observe the non-clarity of ordinary > > perception. > > > > /AL > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > Another way to feel ego is to fully comply with these demands: Give all > the cash you currently have to the next homeless person you meet, post > all of your secrets acts in full color on this forum and recite the > Metta Sutra in a clear loud voice looking at no one whenever three or > more people are within 10 feet of you for the month of January. Do it now! > > ;-) > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > A note: Nisargadatta is considered to be Self-realized as thought of in > the tradition of Advaita Vedanta. Before joining this group in December, > prior knowledge of him was nil. Nevertheless, he is a curious fellow in > making this statement as found in " Excerpts from Consciousness and the > Absolute: The Final Talks of Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj " > (http://www.prahlad.org/gallery/consciousness_absolute.htm ): > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > December 22, 1980 > > Maharaj: Just now I was lying down in the waking state, but with no > perceiving or receiving of any words, something like a prior-to-words state. > > Now the last traces of personality or individuality have left me. Last > year I used to talk to people with a certain affection, but that is not > available now. My dwelling place in the grosser world is gone now; > presently it is in the subtler sphere, as in space. > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > Here, if the translation is accurate, Nisargadatta reports an interior > prior-to-words state and that the last traces of ego have left him. This > is nearly five decades after the reported year of Self-realization and > very near to the time of passing in 1981. > > This is lovely. It is rare to hear or read reports of " interior states " > experienced by venerated teachers such as Nisargadatta. > > Lewis ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Anders, just found out about U. G. Krishnamurti. Heard of him? Read his autobio. Reads like the enactment of the ancient story in the first person. He relates his interior life and is unafraid to do so. Seems to be venerated, even though he scoffs and actively rejects such behavior. Take a look, if unfamiliar. http://www.realization.org/page/namedoc0/moe/moe_1.htm See the whole book at: http://www.well.com/user/jct/mystiq.htm Still reading.....same story, version #..edgy words and prose... Lewis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 22, 2004 Report Share Posted December 22, 2004 Nisargadatta , " Lewis Burgess " <lbb10@c...> wrote: > .... > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > Anders, just found out about U. G. Krishnamurti. Heard of him? Read > his autobio. Reads like the enactment of the ancient story in the > first person. He relates his interior life and is unafraid to do so. > Seems to be venerated, even though he scoffs and actively rejects such > behavior. Take a look, if unfamiliar. > > http://www.realization.org/page/namedoc0/moe/moe_1.htm > > See the whole book at: > > http://www.well.com/user/jct/mystiq.htm > > Still reading.....same story, version #..edgy words and prose... > > Lewis I have read some of his works. Interesting contrast to other spiritual teachers. /AL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 22, 2004 Report Share Posted December 22, 2004 anders_lindman wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Lewis Burgess " <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > ... > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > Anders, just found out about U. G. Krishnamurti. Heard of him? Read > > his autobio. Reads like the enactment of the ancient story in the > > first person. He relates his interior life and is unafraid to do so. > > Seems to be venerated, even though he scoffs and actively rejects such > > behavior. Take a look, if unfamiliar. > > > > http://www.realization.org/page/namedoc0/moe/moe_1.htm > > > > See the whole book at: > > > > http://www.well.com/user/jct/mystiq.htm > > > > Still reading.....same story, version #..edgy words and prose... > > > > Lewis > > I have read some of his works. Interesting contrast to other spiritual > teachers. > > /AL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Is his concept of " natural state " by biological mutation chilling? Lewis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 22, 2004 Report Share Posted December 22, 2004 Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lewis Burgess " <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > > > ... > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > > > Anders, just found out about U. G. Krishnamurti. Heard of him? Read > > > his autobio. Reads like the enactment of the ancient story in the > > > first person. He relates his interior life and is unafraid to do so. > > > Seems to be venerated, even though he scoffs and actively rejects such > > > behavior. Take a look, if unfamiliar. > > > > > > http://www.realization.org/page/namedoc0/moe/moe_1.htm > > > > > > See the whole book at: > > > > > > http://www.well.com/user/jct/mystiq.htm > > > > > > Still reading.....same story, version #..edgy words and prose... > > > > > > Lewis > > > > I have read some of his works. Interesting contrast to other spiritual > > teachers. > > > > /AL > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > Is his concept of " natural state " by biological mutation chilling? > > Lewis Ruben Feldman Gonzalez also talks about a biological change along with what he calls Unitary Perception. J. Krishnamurti talked about a mutation in the brain. I believe biology and spirituality are the same thing but seen from different levels. The placebo effect shows a mental (spiritual) capability to heal the body. " Today's brain imagery techniques do lend support, though, to the theory that thoughts and beliefs not only affect one's psychological state, but also cause the body to undergo actual biological changes. " http://www.fda.gov/fdac/features/2000/100_heal.html /AL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 22, 2004 Report Share Posted December 22, 2004 anders_lindman wrote: > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lewis Burgess " <lbb10@c...> > wrote: > > > > > > > ... > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > > > > > Anders, just found out about U. G. Krishnamurti. Heard of him? Read > > > > his autobio. Reads like the enactment of the ancient story in the > > > > first person. He relates his interior life and is unafraid to > do so. > > > > Seems to be venerated, even though he scoffs and actively > rejects such > > > > behavior. Take a look, if unfamiliar. > > > > > > > > http://www.realization.org/page/namedoc0/moe/moe_1.htm > > > > > > > > See the whole book at: > > > > > > > > http://www.well.com/user/jct/mystiq.htm > > > > > > > > Still reading.....same story, version #..edgy words and prose... > > > > > > > > Lewis > > > > > > I have read some of his works. Interesting contrast to other spiritual > > > teachers. > > > > > > /AL > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > Is his concept of " natural state " by biological mutation chilling? > > > > Lewis > > Ruben Feldman Gonzalez also talks about a biological change along with > what he calls Unitary Perception. J. Krishnamurti talked about a > mutation in the brain. I believe biology and spirituality are the same > thing but seen from different levels. The placebo effect shows a > mental (spiritual) capability to heal the body. > > " Today's brain imagery techniques do lend support, though, to the > theory that thoughts and beliefs not only affect one's psychological > state, but also cause the body to undergo actual biological changes. " > > http://www.fda.gov/fdac/features/2000/100_heal.html > > /AL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ A concept that matches current experiencing is of " variegated light. " Physical sensations indicating hardness or density and discrete objects dissolve to the sensation of the movement and flow of " colored light. The sensation of location dissolves more slowly in wakefulness and indicates ego attachment to experience " location, " " position " in imagined space; " Letting go completely " to where? is disconcerting. To " there " " where " Anders is " located " is instantaneous but the sensation is one of gentle but still " retracting extension. " Lewis Lewis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 22, 2004 Report Share Posted December 22, 2004 Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: .... > > > > > > Is his concept of " natural state " by biological mutation chilling? > > > > > > Lewis > > > > Ruben Feldman Gonzalez also talks about a biological change along with > > what he calls Unitary Perception. J. Krishnamurti talked about a > > mutation in the brain. I believe biology and spirituality are the same > > thing but seen from different levels. The placebo effect shows a > > mental (spiritual) capability to heal the body. > > > > " Today's brain imagery techniques do lend support, though, to the > > theory that thoughts and beliefs not only affect one's psychological > > state, but also cause the body to undergo actual biological changes. " > > > > http://www.fda.gov/fdac/features/2000/100_heal.html > > > > /AL > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > A concept that matches current experiencing is of " variegated light. " > Physical sensations indicating hardness or density and discrete objects > dissolve to the sensation of the movement and flow of " colored light. > The sensation of location dissolves more slowly in wakefulness and > indicates ego attachment to experience " location, " " position " in > imagined space; " Letting go completely " to where? is disconcerting. To > " there " " where " Anders is " located " is instantaneous but the sensation > is one of gentle but still " retracting extension. " > > Lewis > Location is tricky! I can imagine myself being somewhere, but I can't _really_ run away from the present moment, nor from my relative location in the present moment. My mind can create time, and so I can make a virtual travel in space, but I cannot really go anywhere! What do you mean by " retracting extension " . Do you mean that I can imagine myself being in different locations, while in reality I can only be here and now? An interesting thing is the relation between location and fear. Fear is always about the future (1 second, 1 minute, an hour, a year...), but the future has only a virtual location in space, not a real location. Thus, fear is always virtual, not solid reality! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 22, 2004 Report Share Posted December 22, 2004 anders_lindman wrote: > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > ... > > > > > > > > Is his concept of " natural state " by biological mutation chilling? > > > > > > > > Lewis > > > > > > Ruben Feldman Gonzalez also talks about a biological change along with > > > what he calls Unitary Perception. J. Krishnamurti talked about a > > > mutation in the brain. I believe biology and spirituality are the same > > > thing but seen from different levels. The placebo effect shows a > > > mental (spiritual) capability to heal the body. > > > > > > " Today's brain imagery techniques do lend support, though, to the > > > theory that thoughts and beliefs not only affect one's psychological > > > state, but also cause the body to undergo actual biological changes. " > > > > > > http://www.fda.gov/fdac/features/2000/100_heal.html > > > > > > /AL > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > A concept that matches current experiencing is of " variegated light. " > > Physical sensations indicating hardness or density and discrete objects > > dissolve to the sensation of the movement and flow of " colored light. > > The sensation of location dissolves more slowly in wakefulness and > > indicates ego attachment to experience " location, " " position " in > > imagined space; " Letting go completely " to where? is disconcerting. To > > " there " " where " Anders is " located " is instantaneous but the sensation > > is one of gentle but still " retracting extension. " > > > > Lewis > > > > Location is tricky! I can imagine myself being somewhere, but I can't > _really_ run away from the present moment, nor from my relative > location in the present moment. My mind can create time, and so I can > make a virtual travel in space, but I cannot really go anywhere! > > What do you mean by " retracting extension " . Do you mean that I can > imagine myself being in different locations, while in reality I can > only be here and now? > > An interesting thing is the relation between location and fear. Fear > is always about the future (1 second, 1 minute, an hour, a year...), > but the future has only a virtual location in space, not a real > location. Thus, fear is always virtual, not solid reality! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ " Retracting extension " refers to experience not to " you " or imagination. Imagination comes in when the attempt is made to describe " what it is " using the mind to create words and concepts to represent experience. The pointer is an imaginative mind product. " You, " who thinks it imagines, is an operative function of mind that has emerged as an identity claiming power to mentate and do, an ego. The operative function of mind is, the identity is not. The experience of Anders is a an " instantaneous flow to active mingling of energy " when attention is in " communicating Anders. " A flow to " quiescence " occurs when attention is other than. These are descriptions of continuous sensation flows. The sensation flow to mingling, the flow to quiescence underlies the concept " retracting extension. " Experience is. These two description of that are just levels of description. The sensation flows are a less " hardened " or more conceptually abstract descriptions that " opens up " the concept of " retracting extension " which is a less refined or crude description of the experience of communicating Anders. There is no time involved, Anders, just continuous differential sensation flows. The best that can be done in describing experiencing through this mind/body is more or less " continuous differential sensation flows. " Mind words and concepts like refined, crude, ethereal, light, dark, vibrant, still, erotic, violent, etc. all can be used even though such words may or may not stimulate the sense of recognition of comparable concepts of sensation flows in the listener or stimulate the creation of such concepts. This is usually called " resonance " which is a misnomer; experience is and descriptions of it are not. Posting is simply the exchange of imaginative mind products. Approximations are good enough for posting and conversation and enjoyable to create and exchange and discard. They are recyclable. Fear is a mind/body product created by mind/body identity, " ego " . The products are attachments to this or that and the fear arises when those attachments are " threatened, " more or less, with loss or extinction. Experience has no location, but ego does have " location in time and space " and ego is attached to its location or location in the mind/body and the conceptual world of its imagination. When the sensation flow of non-locatable experience occurs " location in time and space " ego's " ontology " begins to dissolve and ego generates the mental/physical components of fear because of the " impending " loss of a major foundation of its existence ( " I don't know where I am, how can this be. " " Shit, what's happening to me, " or " I am going crazy, I am crazy. " or " Oh my God help me! " or the horrors of what some egos through on a bad acid or mescaline trip). Such conceptualities underlie the overwhelming fear of " loss, " " discontinuance " or " death, " all of which are concepts that do not exist except as reified conceptual entities. To avoid the fear of " loss, discontinuance and death, " in its " time and space " ego creates itself as eternal or immortal, erects places to go after death, makes death an honor, declares " I am God " or other self-trickery or just keeps busy suppressing and repressing so there is no " time or space " in which feel the ever lurking fear. Lewis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 22, 2004 Report Share Posted December 22, 2004 Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > anders_lindman wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > > ... > > > > > > > > > > Is his concept of " natural state " by biological mutation chilling? > > > > > > > > > > Lewis > > > > > > > > Ruben Feldman Gonzalez also talks about a biological change along with > > > > what he calls Unitary Perception. J. Krishnamurti talked about a > > > > mutation in the brain. I believe biology and spirituality are the same > > > > thing but seen from different levels. The placebo effect shows a > > > > mental (spiritual) capability to heal the body. > > > > > > > > " Today's brain imagery techniques do lend support, though, to the > > > > theory that thoughts and beliefs not only affect one's psychological > > > > state, but also cause the body to undergo actual biological changes. " > > > > > > > > http://www.fda.gov/fdac/features/2000/100_heal.html > > > > > > > > /AL > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > > > A concept that matches current experiencing is of " variegated light. " > > > Physical sensations indicating hardness or density and discrete objects > > > dissolve to the sensation of the movement and flow of " colored light. > > > The sensation of location dissolves more slowly in wakefulness and > > > indicates ego attachment to experience " location, " " position " in > > > imagined space; " Letting go completely " to where? is disconcerting. To > > > " there " " where " Anders is " located " is instantaneous but the sensation > > > is one of gentle but still " retracting extension. " > > > > > > Lewis > > > > > > > Location is tricky! I can imagine myself being somewhere, but I can't > > _really_ run away from the present moment, nor from my relative > > location in the present moment. My mind can create time, and so I can > > make a virtual travel in space, but I cannot really go anywhere! > > > > What do you mean by " retracting extension " . Do you mean that I can > > imagine myself being in different locations, while in reality I can > > only be here and now? > > > > An interesting thing is the relation between location and fear. Fear > > is always about the future (1 second, 1 minute, an hour, a year...), > > but the future has only a virtual location in space, not a real > > location. Thus, fear is always virtual, not solid reality! > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > " Retracting extension " refers to experience not to " you " or imagination. > Imagination comes in when the attempt is made to describe " what it is " > using the mind to create words and concepts to represent experience. The > pointer is an imaginative mind product. " You, " who thinks it imagines, > is an operative function of mind that has emerged as an identity > claiming power to mentate and do, an ego. The operative function of mind > is, the identity is not. > > The experience of Anders is a an " instantaneous flow to active mingling > of energy " when attention is in " communicating Anders. " A flow to > " quiescence " occurs when attention is other than. These are descriptions > of continuous sensation flows. The sensation flow to mingling, the flow > to quiescence underlies the concept " retracting extension. " > > Experience is. These two description of that are just levels of > description. The sensation flows are a less " hardened " or more > conceptually abstract descriptions that " opens up " the concept of > " retracting extension " which is a less refined or crude description of > the experience of communicating Anders. > > There is no time involved, Anders, just continuous differential > sensation flows. The best that can be done in describing experiencing > through this mind/body is more or less " continuous differential > sensation flows. " Mind words and concepts like refined, crude, ethereal, > light, dark, vibrant, still, erotic, violent, etc. all can be used even > though such words may or may not stimulate the sense of recognition of > comparable concepts of sensation flows in the listener or stimulate the > creation of such concepts. This is usually called " resonance " which is a > misnomer; experience is and descriptions of it are not. Posting is > simply the exchange of imaginative mind products. Approximations are > good enough for posting and conversation and enjoyable to create and > exchange and discard. They are recyclable. > > Fear is a mind/body product created by mind/body identity, " ego " . The > products are attachments to this or that and the fear arises when those > attachments are " threatened, " more or less, with loss or extinction. > > Experience has no location, but ego does have " location in time and > space " and ego is attached to its location or location in the mind/body > and the conceptual world of its imagination. When the sensation flow of > non-locatable experience occurs " location in time and space " ego's > " ontology " begins to dissolve and ego generates the mental/physical > components of fear because of the " impending " loss of a major foundation > of its existence ( " I don't know where I am, how can this be. " " Shit, > what's happening to me, " or " I am going crazy, I am crazy. " or " Oh my > God help me! " or the horrors of what some egos through on a bad acid or > mescaline trip). Such conceptualities underlie the overwhelming fear of > " loss, " " discontinuance " or " death, " all of which are concepts that do > not exist except as reified conceptual entities. To avoid the fear of > " loss, discontinuance and death, " in its " time and space " ego creates > itself as eternal or immortal, erects places to go after death, makes > death an honor, declares " I am God " or other self-trickery or just keeps > busy suppressing and repressing so there is no " time or space " in which > feel the ever lurking fear. > > Lewis ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Correction: feel the ever lurking self-created and self-sustained fear Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 22, 2004 Report Share Posted December 22, 2004 Nisargadatta , Lewis Burgess <lbb10@c...> wrote: > .... > > " Retracting extension " refers to experience not to " you " or imagination. > Imagination comes in when the attempt is made to describe " what it is " > using the mind to create words and concepts to represent experience. The > pointer is an imaginative mind product. " You, " who thinks it imagines, > is an operative function of mind that has emerged as an identity > claiming power to mentate and do, an ego. The operative function of mind > is, the identity is not. > > The experience of Anders is a an " instantaneous flow to active mingling > of energy " when attention is in " communicating Anders. " A flow to > " quiescence " occurs when attention is other than. These are descriptions > of continuous sensation flows. The sensation flow to mingling, the flow > to quiescence underlies the concept " retracting extension. " > > Experience is. These two description of that are just levels of > description. The sensation flows are a less " hardened " or more > conceptually abstract descriptions that " opens up " the concept of > " retracting extension " which is a less refined or crude description of > the experience of communicating Anders. > > There is no time involved, Anders, just continuous differential > sensation flows. The best that can be done in describing experiencing > through this mind/body is more or less " continuous differential > sensation flows. " Mind words and concepts like refined, crude, ethereal, > light, dark, vibrant, still, erotic, violent, etc. all can be used even > though such words may or may not stimulate the sense of recognition of > comparable concepts of sensation flows in the listener or stimulate the > creation of such concepts. This is usually called " resonance " which is a > misnomer; experience is and descriptions of it are not. Posting is > simply the exchange of imaginative mind products. Approximations are > good enough for posting and conversation and enjoyable to create and > exchange and discard. They are recyclable. > > Fear is a mind/body product created by mind/body identity, " ego " . The > products are attachments to this or that and the fear arises when those > attachments are " threatened, " more or less, with loss or extinction. > > Experience has no location, but ego does have " location in time and > space " and ego is attached to its location or location in the mind/body > and the conceptual world of its imagination. When the sensation flow of > non-locatable experience occurs " location in time and space " ego's > " ontology " begins to dissolve and ego generates the mental/physical > components of fear because of the " impending " loss of a major foundation > of its existence ( " I don't know where I am, how can this be. " " Shit, > what's happening to me, " or " I am going crazy, I am crazy. " or " Oh my > God help me! " or the horrors of what some egos through on a bad acid or > mescaline trip). Such conceptualities underlie the overwhelming fear of > " loss, " " discontinuance " or " death, " all of which are concepts that do > not exist except as reified conceptual entities. To avoid the fear of > " loss, discontinuance and death, " in its " time and space " ego creates > itself as eternal or immortal, erects places to go after death, makes > death an honor, declares " I am God " or other self-trickery or just keeps > busy suppressing and repressing so there is no " time or space " in which > feel the ever lurking fear. > > Lewis But surely there is at least a relative location in time and space even without the ego? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 22, 2004 Report Share Posted December 22, 2004 Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: .... > But surely there is at least a relative location in time and space > even without the ego? no can do anders, you are the only point of reference in the universe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 22, 2004 Report Share Posted December 22, 2004 Nisargadatta , " Eric Paroissien " <ericparoissien@g...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > ... > > > But surely there is at least a relative location in time and space > > even without the ego? > > no can do anders, you are the only point of reference in the > universe. My body has a relative location in relation to Earth and the solar system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 22, 2004 Report Share Posted December 22, 2004 Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Eric Paroissien " > <ericparoissien@g...> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > ... > > > > > But surely there is at least a relative location in time and space > > > even without the ego? > > > > no can do anders, you are the only point of reference in the > > universe. > > My body has a relative location in relation to Earth and the solar system. Can you tell me please to what you oppose this concept? 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.