Guest guest Posted January 28, 2005 Report Share Posted January 28, 2005 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> wrote: Hi Kip, It is not clear why you are mentioning speech and language but you must have a reason. Maybe because language is also an conditioning factor the discussion if language could me made more neutral is interesting for teachers, pschologists, sociologists, antroploologists, social reformers etc.but that is not our job here. But tell me why at the moment are you so interested in language, why are you giving that importance to it? Lieber Werner, I expected these questions. Have you read my post at AtoZ " Collage on Lacan " ? Read it, if you like. You wrote: Are you separate from thought? When you are conscious of thought, who is conscious of thought ? Or is there only thought ? If there is only thought but no separate " me " then YOU ARE THOUGHT. And when you are thought then you will realize that you are lost, that you have no chance: Either thought or the ending of " you " . Then there is no longer an alternative. (end of the quote) Is thought graspable without word or language or speech? You are not saying to Anders that he isn't separated from thought. You said to him, actually and maybe unconsciously, that he isn't separate from language. What I say, based on Lacanian notions, is that identity, subjectivity, ego isn't based neither on thought or consciousness generally nor affect. I say it is based on language. Why do I say this? It has several implications. I find it amusing how in non-dual circles some concepts and notions get demonised almost " tabooized " . Take for example Toombaru's notion that the " I am " is the culprit or, whatever, life itself, perhaps, or Cartesian thinking and only God knows, what else gets " stigmatisiert " as " Original sin " . Experience has shown me that there is no " original sin " . We are not born separate from the universe. Separateness, thus dukkha, emerges when we enter subjectivity and subjectivity is intrinsically coupled to the apprehension of language. We are born into a discourse and we get trapped right at the moment when we begin partially to understand this discourse. A discourse, we never will be able to understand completely because the subject " an sich " isn't nothing else but discourse. Maya or Samsara is this discourse, the discourse of the Other. A superimposed conceptual reality. A product of phantasy at the end. A Tiger, pure consciousness, roaming through the forests near the artic circle. He thinks but there are no thoughts. Kip Almazy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 28, 2005 Report Share Posted January 28, 2005 Hi Kip, I realized that in my text there was a mistyping: > if language could me made more neutral is interesting for teachers, The " me " should be read as " be " I haven't read anything of the thread in AdvaitaToZen list concerning language or speech. I realized already that you at the moment are on the Lacan trip which fascinates you and gives you some hopeful oulooks. And I wish you that it will help to bring order into your conceptual thinking. But I personally have a problem with all these, no matter how fascinating, after I have read it I forget it. And mostly I just can read parts of it and then my mind blocks and instead of reading I am looking out of the window, listening to the sounds of the streets and watching the clouds moving in the sky. I wish I could share with you all those great ideas and writings you see as important, but my mind doesn't care. Maybe when reading my postings you got the impression that in some way I am passionate but within three days I already have forgotten what I have written myself. Werner Nisargadatta , " kipalmazy " <kipalmazy> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> > wrote: > > Hi Kip, > > It is not clear why you are mentioning speech and language but you > must have a reason. > > Maybe because language is also an conditioning factor the discussion > if language could me made more neutral is interesting for teachers, > pschologists, sociologists, antroploologists, social reformers > etc.but that is not our job here. > > But tell me why at the moment are you so interested in language, why > are you giving that importance to it? > > > Lieber Werner, > > I expected these questions. Have you read my post at AtoZ " Collage on > Lacan " ? Read it, if you like. > > > You wrote: > > Are you separate from thought? When you are conscious of thought, > who is conscious of thought ? Or is there only thought ? If there is > only thought but no separate " me " then YOU ARE THOUGHT. And when you > are thought then you will realize that you are lost, that you have no > chance: Either thought or the ending of " you " . Then there is no > longer an alternative. (end of the quote) > > Is thought graspable without word or language or speech? You are not > saying to Anders that he isn't separated from thought. You said to > him, actually and maybe unconsciously, that he isn't separate from > language. What I say, based on Lacanian notions, is that identity, > subjectivity, ego isn't based neither on thought or consciousness > generally nor affect. I say it is based on language. > > Why do I say this? It has several implications. I find it amusing how > in non-dual circles some concepts and notions get demonised > almost " tabooized " . Take for example Toombaru's notion that the " I > am " is the culprit or, whatever, life itself, perhaps, or Cartesian > thinking and only God knows, what else gets " stigmatisiert " > as " Original sin " . > > Experience has shown me that there is no " original sin " . We are not > born separate from the universe. Separateness, thus dukkha, emerges > when we enter subjectivity and subjectivity is intrinsically coupled > to the apprehension of language. We are born into a discourse and we > get trapped right at the moment when we begin partially to understand > this discourse. A discourse, we never will be able to understand > completely because the subject " an sich " isn't nothing else but > discourse. Maya or Samsara is this discourse, the discourse of the > Other. A superimposed conceptual reality. A product of phantasy at > the end. > > > A Tiger, pure consciousness, roaming through the forests near the > artic circle. He thinks but there are no thoughts. > > > > Kip Almazy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 28, 2005 Report Share Posted January 28, 2005 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> wrote: > > Hi Kip, > > I realized that in my text there was a mistyping: > > if language could me made more neutral is interesting for teachers, > > The " me " should be read as " be " > > I haven't read anything of the thread in AdvaitaToZen list concerning > language or speech. > > I realized already that you at the moment are on the Lacan trip which > fascinates you and gives you some hopeful oulooks. And I wish you > that it will help to bring order into your conceptual thinking. > > But I personally have a problem with all these, no matter how > fascinating, after I have read it I forget it. And mostly I just can > read parts of it and then my mind blocks and instead of reading I am > looking out of the window, listening to the sounds of the streets and > watching the clouds moving in the sky. > > I wish I could share with you all those great ideas and writings you > see as important, but my mind doesn't care. > > Maybe when reading my postings you got the impression that in some > way I am passionate but within three days I already have forgotten > what I have written myself. > > Werner Kein Problem, Werner. What you wrote to Anders was fine and actually exhaustive. I don't know which " Teufel " has " geritten " me to give my " Senf " too. I have fun constrasting different models, that's it. A passtime. I don't care too about all this " Hokus-Pokus " a bow Kip Almazy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 28, 2005 Report Share Posted January 28, 2005 Thanks Kip, for your understanding. And I bow to you too. Our mutual bowing is like two people meeting knowing that in reality they are idiots Werner Nisargadatta , " kipalmazy " <kipalmazy> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> > wrote: > > > > Hi Kip, > > > > I realized that in my text there was a mistyping: > > > if language could me made more neutral is interesting for > teachers, > > > > The " me " should be read as " be " > > > > I haven't read anything of the thread in AdvaitaToZen list > concerning > > language or speech. > > > > I realized already that you at the moment are on the Lacan trip > which > > fascinates you and gives you some hopeful oulooks. And I wish you > > that it will help to bring order into your conceptual thinking. > > > > But I personally have a problem with all these, no matter how > > fascinating, after I have read it I forget it. And mostly I just > can > > read parts of it and then my mind blocks and instead of reading I > am > > looking out of the window, listening to the sounds of the streets > and > > watching the clouds moving in the sky. > > > > I wish I could share with you all those great ideas and writings > you > > see as important, but my mind doesn't care. > > > > Maybe when reading my postings you got the impression that in some > > way I am passionate but within three days I already have forgotten > > what I have written myself. > > > > Werner > > > Kein Problem, Werner. What you wrote to Anders was fine and actually > exhaustive. I don't know which " Teufel " has " geritten " me to give > my " Senf " too. I have fun constrasting different models, that's it. A > passtime. I don't care too about all this " Hokus-Pokus " > > > a bow > Kip Almazy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 29, 2005 Report Share Posted January 29, 2005 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> wrote: > > Hi Pete, > > I am pleased that you feel the same. > > Especially trucks when they are driving in the distance and their > tires are singing then this sound is touching deeply, hmm, let me say > touching deeply my essence. One cannot describe it but it is there. > > But also some smells have a similar quality. In spring time when the > snow is gone, I love to stick my nose into the damp grass and moss > and inhale its smell. > > Werner This is not fair! When I hear noise such as in busy traffic I become annoyed and/or disharmonious. But I see what you are pointing at. I have felt a slight reduction in my irritaition about noises around me, and that is a tremendous relief. /AL > > > Nisargadatta , Pedsie2@a... wrote: > > > > In a message dated 1/28/05 1:45:12 AM, wwoehr@p... writes: > > > > > > > W: >But I personally have a problem with all these, no matter how > > > fascinating, after I have read it I forget it. And mostly I just > can > > > >read parts of it and then my mind blocks and instead of reading > I am > > > looking out of the window, listening to the sounds of the streets > and > > > >watching the clouds moving in the sky. > > > > > P: Yeah (smile) I'm the same way. I love listening to traffic, > picking > > the sound of one particular bus, or truck, and with eyes closed, > > following that sound until it fades into silence. It can teach you > > more that most books. It can reveal space and distance (as not > outside) > > like nothing else can for me. And what can one say of watching > clouds! > > They are the best gurus around! Those who know how really watch > clouds > > need no other teacher. > > > > Pete > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 29, 2005 Report Share Posted January 29, 2005 Smile, Anders, if I would be a wizzard with powerful spell, I would, lets say for a span of three days, spell you over-indulgence in your intellect away. And when these three days are gone and you have learned to enjoy the marvels of your being, you will become a treasure hunter hunting your own depths. Werner Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> wrote: > > > > Hi Pete, > > > > I am pleased that you feel the same. > > > > Especially trucks when they are driving in the distance and their > > tires are singing then this sound is touching deeply, hmm, let me say > > touching deeply my essence. One cannot describe it but it is there. > > > > But also some smells have a similar quality. In spring time when the > > snow is gone, I love to stick my nose into the damp grass and moss > > and inhale its smell. > > > > Werner > > This is not fair! When I hear noise such as in busy traffic I become > annoyed and/or disharmonious. But I see what you are pointing at. I > have felt a slight reduction in my irritaition about noises around me, > and that is a tremendous relief. > > /AL > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Pedsie2@a... wrote: > > > > > > In a message dated 1/28/05 1:45:12 AM, wwoehr@p... writes: > > > > > > > > > > W: >But I personally have a problem with all these, no matter how > > > > fascinating, after I have read it I forget it. And mostly I just > > can > > > > >read parts of it and then my mind blocks and instead of reading > > I am > > > > looking out of the window, listening to the sounds of the streets > > and > > > > >watching the clouds moving in the sky. > > > > > > > P: Yeah (smile) I'm the same way. I love listening to traffic, > > picking > > > the sound of one particular bus, or truck, and with eyes closed, > > > following that sound until it fades into silence. It can teach you > > > more that most books. It can reveal space and distance (as not > > outside) > > > like nothing else can for me. And what can one say of watching > > clouds! > > > They are the best gurus around! Those who know how really watch > > clouds > > > need no other teacher. > > > > > > Pete > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 29, 2005 Report Share Posted January 29, 2005 Nisargadatta , Pedsie2@a... wrote: > > In a message dated 1/29/05 2:53:01 AM, anders_lindman writes: > > > > >This is not fair! When I hear noise such as in busy traffic I become > > annoyed and/or disharmonious. But I see what you are pointing at. I > > have felt a slight reduction in my irritaition about noises around me, > > >and that is a tremendous relief. > > > > /AL > > > Well, Al, it's very simple. If you know how to listen to music, and enjoy > doing so, do this exercise: > Sit down, close your eyes, and listen to any random noises you hear, > in the same way you would to music. > Thoughts, of course, will come and take your attention away, but > go back to the listening as soon as you notice. I did this for a few > months, and then one day, noises became as pleasurable and more > meaningful than music. > > Pete > Pete, you are not pulling my leg here, are you? What you say here sounds almost more miraculous than what Nisargadatta said. How is it possible to enjoy noise? It seems impossible. But it 'sounds' like an interesting experience. An easy form of sadhana, sort of. /AL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 30, 2005 Report Share Posted January 30, 2005 Nisargadatta , Pedsie2@a... wrote: > > In a message dated 1/29/05 10:34:05 AM, anders_lindman writes: > > > > >Pete, you are not pulling my leg here, are you? What you say here > > sounds almost more miraculous than what Nisargadatta said. How is it > > possible to enjoy noise? It seems impossible. But it 'sounds' like an > > >interesting experience. An easy form of sadhana, sort of. > > > > /AL > > > P: I'm not pulling your leg, at all. That is what I did, and that is what > I got. If it sounds good to you, just do it. What do you have to lose? Ok, maybe better to enjoy noise than being irritated by it all the time. 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.