Guest guest Report post Posted January 31, 2007 >Stefan: >I do not know what " the illusory self " is. > >Toombaru: >It is the I am.....the sense of being separate... autonomous. Toombaru, I only know of a constant flow, experienced. It is arbitrary to call it illusory or real. I know of no separate or autonomous self. Separate from what? Autonomous of what? All I understand from your phrasings Are ideas, concepts, constructions That can be found in numerous books Trying to sell problems That did never exist >When the mind mixes the substantial world with its conceptual >world.....life gets confusing enough where some seek escape. You just have created two worlds, Because you cannot explain your believes With just one world. Your original statement that all there is are conceptual objects Has already gone down the drain. I would like to invite you To look for a moment at the world Without putting what you see Into relations. Just consider for a moment that everything is equally real, or unreal That there is no external reference point Which allows you to place your judgments On everything and everybody. Everything is in constant flux Everything is as is. When it comes along it is already gone. You are trying to catch hold of it And give it labels like: Real. Conceptual. Illusory. Objective. Unreal. Measurable. When you let go of all those labels you will find: everything is still happening minus a lot of headache. >The self that imagines that it can eventually 'see' through the >illusion is itself the center of the confusion. The confusion comes The confusion will go Just as it once came. Greetings Stefan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted January 31, 2007 Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge wrote: > > >Stefan: > >I do not know what " the illusory self " is. > > > >Toombaru: > >It is the I am.....the sense of being separate... autonomous. > > Toombaru, > > I only know of a constant flow, experienced. > It is arbitrary to call it illusory or real. > I know of no separate or autonomous self. > Separate from what? > Autonomous of what? > > All I understand from your phrasings > Are ideas, concepts, constructions > That can be found in numerous books > Trying to sell problems > That did never exist > > >When the mind mixes the substantial world with its conceptual > >world.....life gets confusing enough where some seek escape. > > You just have created two worlds, > Because you cannot explain your believes > With just one world. > Your original statement > that all there is are conceptual objects > Has already gone down the drain. > > I would like to invite you > To look for a moment at the world > Without putting what you see > Into relations. > > Just consider for a moment that everything > is equally real, or unreal > That there is no external reference point > Which allows you to place your judgments > On everything and everybody. > > Everything is in constant flux > Everything is as is. > When it comes along it is already gone. > You are trying to catch hold of it > And give it labels like: > > Real. Conceptual. Illusory. Objective. Unreal. Measurable. > > When you let go of all those labels you will find: > everything is still happening minus a lot of headache. > > >The self that imagines that it can eventually 'see' through the > >illusion is itself the center of the confusion. > > The confusion comes > The confusion will go > Just as it once came. > > Greetings > Stefan > bravissimo! just so. ..b bobji baba Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted January 31, 2007 Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge wrote: > > >Stefan: > >I do not know what " the illusory self " is. > > > >Toombaru: > >It is the I am.....the sense of being separate... autonomous. > > Toombaru, > > I only know of a constant flow, experienced. > It is arbitrary to call it illusory or real. > I know of no separate or autonomous self. > Separate from what? > Autonomous of what? > > All I understand from your phrasings > Are ideas, concepts, constructions > That can be found in numerous books > Trying to sell problems > That did never exist > > >When the mind mixes the substantial world with its conceptual > >world.....life gets confusing enough where some seek escape. > > You just have created two worlds, > Because you cannot explain your believes > With just one world. > Your original statement > that all there is are conceptual objects > Has already gone down the drain. > > I would like to invite you > To look for a moment at the world > Without putting what you see > Into relations. > > Just consider for a moment that everything > is equally real, or unreal > That there is no external reference point > Which allows you to place your judgments > On everything and everybody. > > Everything is in constant flux > Everything is as is. > When it comes along it is already gone. > You are trying to catch hold of it > And give it labels like: > > Real. Conceptual. Illusory. Objective. Unreal. Measurable. > > When you let go of all those labels you will find: > everything is still happening minus a lot of headache. > > >The self that imagines that it can eventually 'see' through the > >illusion is itself the center of the confusion. > > The confusion comes > The confusion will go > Just as it once came. > > Greetings > Stefan > 'Letting go' occurs downstream from the understanding. toombaru Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted January 31, 2007 Nisargadatta , " Johan " <yohansky wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> > wrote: > > > > > > > When the mind mixes the substantial world with its conceptual > > world.....life gets confusing enough where some seek escape. > > > > They call themselves 'seekers'. > > > > What does this forum means to you? > It is used as a sounding board....an echo-location device....in my personal hall of mirrors. toombaru Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted January 31, 2007 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@> wrote: > > > > >Stefan: > > >I do not know what " the illusory self " is. > > > > > >Toombaru: > > >It is the I am.....the sense of being separate... autonomous. > > > > Toombaru, > > > > I only know of a constant flow, experienced. > > It is arbitrary to call it illusory or real. > > I know of no separate or autonomous self. > > Separate from what? > > Autonomous of what? > > > > All I understand from your phrasings > > Are ideas, concepts, constructions > > That can be found in numerous books > > Trying to sell problems > > That did never exist > > > > >When the mind mixes the substantial world with its conceptual > > >world.....life gets confusing enough where some seek escape. > > > > You just have created two worlds, > > Because you cannot explain your believes > > With just one world. > > Your original statement > > that all there is are conceptual objects > > Has already gone down the drain. > > > > I would like to invite you > > To look for a moment at the world > > Without putting what you see > > Into relations. > > > > Just consider for a moment that everything > > is equally real, or unreal > > That there is no external reference point > > Which allows you to place your judgments > > On everything and everybody. > > > > Everything is in constant flux > > Everything is as is. > > When it comes along it is already gone. > > You are trying to catch hold of it > > And give it labels like: > > > > Real. Conceptual. Illusory. Objective. Unreal. Measurable. > > > > When you let go of all those labels you will find: > > everything is still happening minus a lot of headache. > > > > >The self that imagines that it can eventually 'see' through the > > >illusion is itself the center of the confusion. > > > > The confusion comes > > The confusion will go > > Just as it once came. > > > > Greetings > > Stefan > > > > > > > 'Letting go' occurs downstream from the understanding. > > > > > toombaru nothing 'occurs' outside of, nor downstream from, the understanding. it is the beginning-less beginning and the absolute finality, wherein is found all and any 'occurrences or occurrings'. but there is nothing away from nor separate from 'it' ever. it is the 'letting go' as much and as thoroughly as it is anything, and everything, and nothing. ..b bobji baba Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted January 31, 2007 that really resonates here stefan,when theres a letting go of lables apparently happens,there will be less headach and maybe more ease here,but theres no controll really from this puppet whos lost,its just whats presently happening,thanks,diana Stefan <s.petersilge wrote: >Stefan: >I do not know what " the illusory self " is. > >Toombaru: >It is the I am.....the sense of being separate... autonomous. Toombaru, I only know of a constant flow, experienced. It is arbitrary to call it illusory or real. I know of no separate or autonomous self. Separate from what? Autonomous of what? All I understand from your phrasings Are ideas, concepts, constructions That can be found in numerous books Trying to sell problems That did never exist >When the mind mixes the substantial world with its conceptual >world.....life gets confusing enough where some seek escape. You just have created two worlds, Because you cannot explain your believes With just one world. Your original statement that all there is are conceptual objects Has already gone down the drain. I would like to invite you To look for a moment at the world Without putting what you see Into relations. Just consider for a moment that everything is equally real, or unreal That there is no external reference point Which allows you to place your judgments On everything and everybody. Everything is in constant flux Everything is as is. When it comes along it is already gone. You are trying to catch hold of it And give it labels like: Real. Conceptual. Illusory. Objective. Unreal. Measurable. When you let go of all those labels you will find: everything is still happening minus a lot of headache. >The self that imagines that it can eventually 'see' through the >illusion is itself the center of the confusion. The confusion comes The confusion will go Just as it once came. Greetings Stefan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted January 31, 2007 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: >'Letting go' occurs downstream from the understanding. I can see that you believe understanding needs effort. This is true as long as " understanding " is confused with " maintaining personal beliefs " . Through effort you can at the most exchange one belief with another. They will only go when you let them go, through effortlessness. Hard to believe, hmmm? Stefan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted January 31, 2007 Nisargadatta , diana shellam <diana.shellam wrote: > >that really resonates here stefan,when theres a letting go of lables apparently happens,there will be less headach and maybe more ease here,but theres no controll really from this puppet whos lost,its just whats presently happening,thanks,diana Thank you so much, Diana. No control... this sounds good. Things can take care for themselves quite naturally. Greetings Stefan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted February 1, 2007 Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > >'Letting go' occurs downstream from the understanding. > > I can see that you believe understanding needs effort. This is true as > long as " understanding " is confused with " maintaining personal > beliefs " . Through effort you can at the most exchange one belief with > another. They will only go when you let them go, through effortlessness. > > Hard to believe, hmmm? > > Stefan > Hi Stefan, Is it really effortlessnes which will cause you to let go something or isn't effortlessness already the result of having let gone ? If you let go something then it will be gone, it no longer will drain any energy from your system - off and gone, the mind is empty of it. What is the factor which causes the mind to let go and to get empty of something which til now occupied it ? Isn't it resignation which will end it ? But also by forgetting more and more what til now attracted and forced one's attention to it ? It is resignation and a fading into oblivion what generally is called letting go and efforlessness will be the result but it is not the cause. To avoid some misunderstanding I should add that the root meaning of resignation (Latin, resignare) simply means to take back one's signature and it doesn't mean to act out of despair and depression. If you resign then you end it, you are finished with it, and that means letting go. When you are not finished with something then you also don't let it go. Werner Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted February 1, 2007 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> > wrote: > > > > >'Letting go' occurs downstream from the understanding. > > > > I can see that you believe understanding needs effort. This is true > as > > long as " understanding " is confused with " maintaining personal > > beliefs " . Through effort you can at the most exchange one belief > with > > another. They will only go when you let them go, through > effortlessness. > > > > Hard to believe, hmmm? > > > > Stefan > > > > > Hi Stefan, > > Is it really effortlessnes which will cause you to let go something or > isn't effortlessness already the result of having let gone ? > > If you let go something then it will be gone, it no longer will drain > any energy from your system - off and gone, the mind is empty of it. > > What is the factor which causes the mind to let go and to get empty of > something which til now occupied it ? Isn't it resignation which will > end it ? But also by forgetting more and more what til now attracted > and forced one's attention to it ? > > It is resignation and a fading into oblivion what generally is called > letting go and efforlessness will be the result but it is not the > cause. > > To avoid some misunderstanding I should add that the root meaning of > resignation (Latin, resignare) simply means to take back one's > signature and it doesn't mean to act out of despair and depression. > > If you resign then you end it, you are finished with it, and that > means letting go. When you are not finished with something then you > also don't let it go. > > Werner > actually 'it' lets 'you' go.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted February 1, 2007 Nisargadatta , " anabebe57 " <kailashana wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> > > wrote: > > > > > > >'Letting go' occurs downstream from the understanding. > > > > > > I can see that you believe understanding needs effort. This is > true > > as > > > long as " understanding " is confused with " maintaining personal > > > beliefs " . Through effort you can at the most exchange one belief > > with > > > another. They will only go when you let them go, through > > effortlessness. > > > > > > Hard to believe, hmmm? > > > > > > Stefan > > > > > > > > > Hi Stefan, > > > > Is it really effortlessnes which will cause you to let go something > or > > isn't effortlessness already the result of having let gone ? > > > > If you let go something then it will be gone, it no longer will > drain > > any energy from your system - off and gone, the mind is empty of it. > > > > What is the factor which causes the mind to let go and to get empty > of > > something which til now occupied it ? Isn't it resignation which > will > > end it ? But also by forgetting more and more what til now attracted > > and forced one's attention to it ? > > > > It is resignation and a fading into oblivion what generally is > called > > letting go and efforlessness will be the result but it is not the > > cause. > > > > To avoid some misunderstanding I should add that the root meaning of > > resignation (Latin, resignare) simply means to take back one's > > signature and it doesn't mean to act out of despair and depression. > > > > If you resign then you end it, you are finished with it, and that > > means letting go. When you are not finished with something then you > > also don't let it go. > > > > Werner > > > > > > actually 'it' lets 'you' go.... > Hi Anaji, I just used common language in that post to Stefan which naturally will be an open door to all specialists who know better. Now, to be more precise " it " doesn't let " you " go because there is no " you " which is caught by " it " - there is only " it " . And second what one senses as " me " and as " it " is the same thing: me = it = that. Werner Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted February 1, 2007 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr wrote: >Hi Stefan, > >Is it really effortlessnes which will cause you to let go something or >isn't effortlessness already the result of having let gone ? >If you let go something then it will be gone, it no longer will drain >any energy from your system - off and gone, the mind is empty of it. >What is the factor which causes the mind to let go and to get empty of >something which til now occupied it ? Isn't it resignation which will >end it ? But also by forgetting more and more what til now attracted >and forced one's attention to it ? >It is resignation and a fading into oblivion what generally is called >letting go and efforlessness will be the result but it is not the >cause. >To avoid some misunderstanding I should add that the root meaning of >resignation (Latin, resignare) simply means to take back one's >signature and it doesn't mean to act out of despair and depression. >If you resign then you end it, you are finished with it, and that >means letting go. When you are not finished with something then you >also don't let it go. Hi Werner, nice to see you here. As far as effortlessness is concerned, I have observed that effort can only create, it cannot un-create. It especially likes to create mental constructions. An effort (the en-forcing) to " understand " will not result in a solution of the " problem " . It only can replace one belief by another. For a short time a solution is felt, but later the problem comes back, only viewed from a different angle. Maybe when one has done this kind of effort for one million times the chance is increasing that resignation can happen, in the sense as you have described it. But if one resigns without the understanding that there was nothing to resign from in the first place - there is the danger that the resignation becomes an agony. One may appear from the outside like a holy resigned monk but effort and disappointment are still there in the underground, nagging and nagging. There is nothing to be given up except the idea, that something has to be given up. But that idea about giving up something is the very effort! Thats why I said effortlessness has to come first. In the Mahamudra Tilopa says: " the void needs no buttresses " (die Leere braucht keine Stützen)... this pretty much says it all. Greetings Stefan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted February 1, 2007 Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > >'Letting go' occurs downstream from the understanding. > > I can see that you believe understanding needs effort. This is true as > long as " understanding " is confused with " maintaining personal > beliefs " . Through effort you can at the most exchange one belief with > another. They will only go when you let them go, through effortlessness. > > Hard to believe, hmmm? > > Stefan no. it's easy to believe but i believe nothing....effortlessly...can you believe that? hmmm? ..b bobji baba Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted February 1, 2007 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anabebe57 " <kailashana@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > >'Letting go' occurs downstream from the understanding. > > > > > > > > I can see that you believe understanding needs effort. This is > > true > > > as > > > > long as " understanding " is confused with " maintaining personal > > > > beliefs " . Through effort you can at the most exchange one > belief > > > with > > > > another. They will only go when you let them go, through > > > effortlessness. > > > > > > > > Hard to believe, hmmm? > > > > > > > > Stefan > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Stefan, > > > > > > Is it really effortlessnes which will cause you to let go > something > > or > > > isn't effortlessness already the result of having let gone ? > > > > > > If you let go something then it will be gone, it no longer will > > drain > > > any energy from your system - off and gone, the mind is empty of > it. > > > > > > What is the factor which causes the mind to let go and to get > empty > > of > > > something which til now occupied it ? Isn't it resignation which > > will > > > end it ? But also by forgetting more and more what til now > attracted > > > and forced one's attention to it ? > > > > > > It is resignation and a fading into oblivion what generally is > > called > > > letting go and efforlessness will be the result but it is not the > > > cause. > > > > > > To avoid some misunderstanding I should add that the root meaning > of > > > resignation (Latin, resignare) simply means to take back one's > > > signature and it doesn't mean to act out of despair and > depression. > > > > > > If you resign then you end it, you are finished with it, and that > > > means letting go. When you are not finished with something then > you > > > also don't let it go. > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > > > > actually 'it' lets 'you' go.... > > > > > Hi Anaji, > > I just used common language in that post to Stefan which naturally > will be an open door to all specialists who know better. > > Now, to be more precise " it " doesn't let " you " go because there is > no " you " which is caught by " it " - there is only " it " . > > And second what one senses as " me " and as " it " is the same thing: me > = it = that. > > Werner > notheless, we still dance with 'it' to the rhythm of our heartbeat. wink. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted February 1, 2007 Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111 wrote: >>Hard to believe, hmmm? >> >>Stefan > >no. it's easy to believe but i believe nothing....effortlessly...can >you believe that? hmmm? Haha! When I wrote " hard to believe, hmmm " I believe I was taken away... Hmmm... Srefan :-) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted February 1, 2007 Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > >Hi Stefan, > > > >Is it really effortlessnes which will cause you to let go something or > >isn't effortlessness already the result of having let gone ? > >If you let go something then it will be gone, it no longer will drain > >any energy from your system - off and gone, the mind is empty of it. > >What is the factor which causes the mind to let go and to get empty of > >something which til now occupied it ? Isn't it resignation which will > >end it ? But also by forgetting more and more what til now attracted > >and forced one's attention to it ? > >It is resignation and a fading into oblivion what generally is called > >letting go and efforlessness will be the result but it is not the > >cause. > >To avoid some misunderstanding I should add that the root meaning of > >resignation (Latin, resignare) simply means to take back one's > >signature and it doesn't mean to act out of despair and depression. > >If you resign then you end it, you are finished with it, and that > >means letting go. When you are not finished with something then you > >also don't let it go. > > Hi Werner, > > nice to see you here. As far as effortlessness is concerned, I have > observed that effort can only create, it cannot un-create. It > especially likes to create mental constructions. An effort (the > en-forcing) to " understand " will not result in a solution of the > " problem " . It only can replace one belief by another. For a short time > a solution is felt, but later the problem comes back, only viewed from > a different angle. > > Maybe when one has done this kind of effort for one million times the > chance is increasing that resignation can happen, in the sense as you > have described it. But if one resigns without the understanding that > there was nothing to resign from in the first place - there is the > danger that the resignation becomes an agony. One may appear from the > outside like a holy resigned monk but effort and disappointment are > still there in the underground, nagging and nagging. > > There is nothing to be given up except the idea, that something has to > be given up. But that idea about giving up something is the very > effort! Thats why I said effortlessness has to come first. In the > Mahamudra Tilopa says: " the void needs no buttresses " (die Leere > braucht keine Stützen)... this pretty much says it all. > > Greetings > Stefan > Ok, Stefan, but that's all way to complicated. To stay simple, effortlessness never will end effort. Effortlessness which is doing something no longer is effortlessness, it is effort. Effortlessness happens when there is no longer effort. And to let go is a dieing to an effort til it ended. Have you ever tried to be effortless ? Can one at all be conscious of effortlessness or can one only be conscious of effort ? Do you see the fallacy now of the idea of " effortlessness " ? Werner Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted February 1, 2007 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr wrote: >Ok, Stefan, but that's all way to complicated. > >To stay simple, effortlessness never will end effort. Effortlessness >which is doing something no longer is effortlessness, it is effort. >Effortlessness happens when there is no longer effort. And to let go >is a dieing to an effort til it ended. >Have you ever tried to be effortless ? Can one at all be conscious of >effortlessness or can one only be conscious of effort ? Do you see >the fallacy now of the idea of " effortlessness " ? Yes, the way you put it, I can see it. But I did not advice anybody to be effortlessness. I said that " understanding needs no effort, it happens through effortlessness " . I also could have said: it happens on its own. Effortlessness is not the cause of ending the effort, nor is it caused by the end of effort. It is actually the way how things go, no matter what effort I undertake. Greetings Stefan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted February 1, 2007 Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > >Ok, Stefan, but that's all way to complicated. > > > >To stay simple, effortlessness never will end effort. Effortlessness > >which is doing something no longer is effortlessness, it is effort. > >Effortlessness happens when there is no longer effort. And to let go > >is a dieing to an effort til it ended. > >Have you ever tried to be effortless ? Can one at all be conscious of > >effortlessness or can one only be conscious of effort ? Do you see > >the fallacy now of the idea of " effortlessness " ? > > Yes, the way you put it, I can see it. But I did not advice anybody to > be effortlessness. I said that " understanding needs no effort, it > happens through effortlessness " . I also could have said: it happens on > its own. > > Effortlessness is not the cause of ending the effort, nor is it caused > by the end of effort. It is actually the way how things go, no matter > what effort I undertake. > > Greetings > Stefan > Effortlessness is like surrender in the act of making love. It's easy when you know the 'outcome'. ;-0 Hi Stefan. I love your presence. Anna Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted February 2, 2007 Nisargadatta , " anabebe57 " <kailashana wrote: >Effortlessness is like surrender in the act of making love. It's >easy when you know the 'outcome'. ;-0 > >Hi Stefan. I love your presence. some call orgasm the " small death " S. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted February 2, 2007 Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anabebe57 " <kailashana@> wrote: > > >Effortlessness is like surrender in the act of making love. It's > >easy when you know the 'outcome'. ;-0 > > > >Hi Stefan. I love your presence. > > some call orgasm the " small death " > S. which may lead to a 'big birth', if one or the other doesn't watch it. here the two are not 'one'...they are 'three'. ..b bobji baba (population control officer) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
