Guest guest Posted July 2, 2009 Report Share Posted July 2, 2009 -As long as one is conscious, there will be pain and pleasure. You cannot fight pain and pleasure on the level of consciousness. To go beyond them, you must go beyond consciousness, which is possible only when you look at consciousness as something that happens to you, and not in you, as something external, alien, superimposed. Then, suddenly you are free of consciousness, really alone, with nothing to intrude. And that is your true state. Consciousness is an itching rash that makes you scratch. Of course, you cannot step out of consciousness, for the very stepping out is in consciousness. But if you learn to look at your consciousness as a sort of fever, personal and private, in which you are enclosed like a chick in its shell, out of this very attitude will come the crisis which will break the shell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 2, 2009 Report Share Posted July 2, 2009 Nisargadatta , "dan330033" <dan330033 wrote:>> -As long as one is conscious, there will be pain and pleasure. You cannot fight pain and pleasure on the level of consciousness. To go beyond them, you must go beyond consciousness, which is possible only when you look at consciousness as something that happens to you, and not in you, as something external, alien, superimposed. Then, suddenly you are free of consciousness, really alone, with nothing to intrude. And that is your true state. Consciousness is an itching rash that makes you scratch. Of course, you cannot step out of consciousness, for the very stepping out is in consciousness. But if you learn to look at your consciousness as a sort of fever, personal and private, in which you are enclosed like a chick in its shell, out of this very attitude will come the crisis which will break the> shell.>Dan,Below follows a link to a conversation of Krishnamurti with Pupul Jayakar at Brockwood ParkThe text is pretty long but worth to be read. Therefore, PLEASE read it.Wernerhttp://www.jkrishnamurti.org/krishnamurti-teachings/view-text.php?tid=1553 & chid=1250 & w=conditioning Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 2, 2009 Report Share Posted July 2, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr wrote: > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > -As long as one is conscious, there will be pain and pleasure. You > cannot fight pain and pleasure on the level of consciousness. To go > beyond them, you must go beyond consciousness, which is possible only > when you look at consciousness as something that happens to you, and not > in you, as something external, alien, superimposed. Then, suddenly you > are free of consciousness, really alone, with nothing to intrude. And > that is your true state. Consciousness is an itching rash that makes you > scratch. Of course, you cannot step out of consciousness, for the very > stepping out is in consciousness. But if you learn to look at your > consciousness as a sort of fever, personal and private, in which you are > enclosed like a chick in its shell, out of this very attitude will come > the crisis which will break the > > shell. > > > > > > Dan, > > Below follows a link to a conversation of Krishnamurti with Pupul > Jayakar at Brockwood Park > > The text is pretty long but worth to be read. Therefore, PLEASE read it. > > Werner It's a nice dialogue, Werner. Covers K's main ideas in a succinct manner. Shows he connected his ideas with other ideas from other thinkers, such as Nagarjuna. That's interesting, haven't seen that before. Thought is never new, including his. Thanks for sharing it. -- D -- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 2, 2009 Report Share Posted July 2, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > -As long as one is conscious, there will be pain and pleasure. You > > cannot fight pain and pleasure on the level of consciousness. To go > > beyond them, you must go beyond consciousness, which is possible only > > when you look at consciousness as something that happens to you, and not > > in you, as something external, alien, superimposed. Then, suddenly you > > are free of consciousness, really alone, with nothing to intrude. And > > that is your true state. Consciousness is an itching rash that makes you > > scratch. Of course, you cannot step out of consciousness, for the very > > stepping out is in consciousness. But if you learn to look at your > > consciousness as a sort of fever, personal and private, in which you are > > enclosed like a chick in its shell, out of this very attitude will come > > the crisis which will break the > > > shell. > > > > > > > > > > > Dan, > > > > Below follows a link to a conversation of Krishnamurti with Pupul > > Jayakar at Brockwood Park > > > > The text is pretty long but worth to be read. Therefore, PLEASE read it. > > > > Werner > > > It's a nice dialogue, Werner. > > Covers K's main ideas in a succinct manner. > > Shows he connected his ideas with other ideas from other thinkers, such as Nagarjuna. That's interesting, haven't seen that before. > > Thought is never new, including his. > > Thanks for sharing it. > > > -- D -- > Dan, I don't think that K had any 'ideas' or derived them from others. I rather think what he discussed were his own insights. But what he told to PJ is exactly how I see and understood the teaching of Nis: That the constant attention or concentration on the I am (which is consciousness) will sooner or later lead to the resalization of one's own non-existence, that one never was born. Btw, Nis himself said that he and Krishnamurti are just telling the same. Werner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > -As long as one is conscious, there will be pain and pleasure. You > > > cannot fight pain and pleasure on the level of consciousness. To go > > > beyond them, you must go beyond consciousness, which is possible only > > > when you look at consciousness as something that happens to you, and not > > > in you, as something external, alien, superimposed. Then, suddenly you > > > are free of consciousness, really alone, with nothing to intrude. And > > > that is your true state. Consciousness is an itching rash that makes you > > > scratch. Of course, you cannot step out of consciousness, for the very > > > stepping out is in consciousness. But if you learn to look at your > > > consciousness as a sort of fever, personal and private, in which you are > > > enclosed like a chick in its shell, out of this very attitude will come > > > the crisis which will break the > > > > shell. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dan, > > > > > > Below follows a link to a conversation of Krishnamurti with Pupul > > > Jayakar at Brockwood Park > > > > > > The text is pretty long but worth to be read. Therefore, PLEASE read it. > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > It's a nice dialogue, Werner. > > > > Covers K's main ideas in a succinct manner. > > > > Shows he connected his ideas with other ideas from other thinkers, such as Nagarjuna. That's interesting, haven't seen that before. > > > > Thought is never new, including his. > > > > Thanks for sharing it. > > > > > > -- D -- > > > > > Dan, I don't think that K had any 'ideas' or derived them from others. I rather think what he discussed were his own insights. > > But what he told to PJ is exactly how I see and understood the teaching of Nis: That the constant attention or concentration on the I am (which is consciousness) will sooner or later lead to the resalization of one's own non-existence, that one never was born. > > Btw, Nis himself said that he and Krishnamurti are just telling the same. > > Werner Werner - Anyone who talks expresses ideas. If, as K says, there is no " me, " then the ideas are just thought. Not " my " thought or " your " thought, just human thought arising in a brain, as he put it. By the way, if you re-read the K dialogue, he didn't accept the term " attention " or the idea of focusing when P suggested using that. I think K's idea was simply to observe the movement of thought-time and realize that it can never do anything but perpetuate conflict. It seems a bit different than Nis. to me. But yes, the commonalities in their teachings are big. Particularly the idea of " nothingness " or " being nothing " which Nis. didn't mention as much or in the same way as K. And Nis. used the term " absolute " whereas K. would question why someone wants an " absolute. " I like this about K. But Nis. was very similar in suggesting one is no-thing, one is not identifiable or identified. So indeed - one is not identifiable or identified. Anything one talks about is thought, and thought repeats the past and is not who one is. At this point, the conceptualities don't apply to " what is " or " who one is " or " reality " - whatever word one uses. The word can't possibly convey anything at this point. One sees directly. The seer is the seen. There is neither seer nor seen. - D - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > -As long as one is conscious, there will be pain and pleasure. You > > > cannot fight pain and pleasure on the level of consciousness. To go > > > beyond them, you must go beyond consciousness, which is possible only > > > when you look at consciousness as something that happens to you, and not > > > in you, as something external, alien, superimposed. Then, suddenly you > > > are free of consciousness, really alone, with nothing to intrude. And > > > that is your true state. Consciousness is an itching rash that makes you > > > scratch. Of course, you cannot step out of consciousness, for the very > > > stepping out is in consciousness. But if you learn to look at your > > > consciousness as a sort of fever, personal and private, in which you are > > > enclosed like a chick in its shell, out of this very attitude will come > > > the crisis which will break the > > > > shell. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dan, > > > > > > Below follows a link to a conversation of Krishnamurti with Pupul > > > Jayakar at Brockwood Park > > > > > > The text is pretty long but worth to be read. Therefore, PLEASE read it. > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > It's a nice dialogue, Werner. > > > > Covers K's main ideas in a succinct manner. > > > > Shows he connected his ideas with other ideas from other thinkers, such as Nagarjuna. That's interesting, haven't seen that before. > > > > Thought is never new, including his. > > > > Thanks for sharing it. > > > > > > -- D -- > > > > > Dan, I don't think that K had any 'ideas' or derived them from others. I rather think what he discussed were his own insights. > > But what he told to PJ is exactly how I see and understood the teaching of Nis: That the constant attention or concentration on the I am (which is consciousness) will sooner or later lead to the resalization of one's own non-existence, that one never was born. > > Btw, Nis himself said that he and Krishnamurti are just telling the same. > > Werner Btw, never born ... It is over without ever having begun. - d - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 - dan330033 Nisargadatta Thursday, July 02, 2009 7:54 PM Re: Free of Consciousness - From Nis. Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > -As long as one is conscious, there will be pain and pleasure. You > > > cannot fight pain and pleasure on the level of consciousness. To go > > > beyond them, you must go beyond consciousness, which is possible only > > > when you look at consciousness as something that happens to you, and > > > not > > > in you, as something external, alien, superimposed. Then, suddenly you > > > are free of consciousness, really alone, with nothing to intrude. And > > > that is your true state. Consciousness is an itching rash that makes > > > you > > > scratch. Of course, you cannot step out of consciousness, for the very > > > stepping out is in consciousness. But if you learn to look at your > > > consciousness as a sort of fever, personal and private, in which you > > > are > > > enclosed like a chick in its shell, out of this very attitude will > > > come > > > the crisis which will break the > > > > shell. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dan, > > > > > > Below follows a link to a conversation of Krishnamurti with Pupul > > > Jayakar at Brockwood Park > > > > > > The text is pretty long but worth to be read. Therefore, PLEASE read > > > it. > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > It's a nice dialogue, Werner. > > > > Covers K's main ideas in a succinct manner. > > > > Shows he connected his ideas with other ideas from other thinkers, such > > as Nagarjuna. That's interesting, haven't seen that before. > > > > Thought is never new, including his. > > > > Thanks for sharing it. > > > > > > -- D -- > > > > > Dan, I don't think that K had any 'ideas' or derived them from others. I > rather think what he discussed were his own insights. > > But what he told to PJ is exactly how I see and understood the teaching of > Nis: That the constant attention or concentration on the I am (which is > consciousness) will sooner or later lead to the resalization of one's own > non-existence, that one never was born. > > Btw, Nis himself said that he and Krishnamurti are just telling the same. > > Werner Werner - Anyone who talks expresses ideas. If, as K says, there is no " me, " then the ideas are just thought. Not " my " thought or " your " thought, just human thought arising in a brain, as he put it. By the way, if you re-read the K dialogue, he didn't accept the term " attention " or the idea of focusing when P suggested using that. I think K's idea was simply to observe the movement of thought-time and realize that it can never do anything but perpetuate conflict. It seems a bit different than Nis. to me. But yes, the commonalities in their teachings are big. Particularly the idea of " nothingness " or " being nothing " which Nis. didn't mention as much or in the same way as K. And Nis. used the term " absolute " whereas K. would question why someone wants an " absolute. " I like this about K. But Nis. was very similar in suggesting one is no-thing, one is not identifiable or identified. So indeed - one is not identifiable or identified. Anything one talks about is thought, and thought repeats the past and is not who one is. At this point, the conceptualities don't apply to " what is " or " who one is " or " reality " - whatever word one uses. The word can't possibly convey anything at this point. One sees directly. The seer is the seen. There is neither seer nor seen. - D - There are hundreds of other dialogues between K and people....One interesting available free in audio and video and text is the set of 18 dialogues between K and Anderson. A few between K and David Bohm...etc...If one goes through them all it is clear that they say the same thing (K and NIs) - of course, after all it IS the same. : >() -gge- avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS): 090526-0, 26/05/2009 Tested on: 2/7/2009 20:03:26 avast! - copyright © 1988-2009 ALWIL Software. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > dan330033 > Nisargadatta > Thursday, July 02, 2009 7:54 PM > Re: Free of Consciousness - From Nis. > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > -As long as one is conscious, there will be pain and pleasure. You > > > > cannot fight pain and pleasure on the level of consciousness. To go > > > > beyond them, you must go beyond consciousness, which is possible only > > > > when you look at consciousness as something that happens to you, and > > > > not > > > > in you, as something external, alien, superimposed. Then, suddenly you > > > > are free of consciousness, really alone, with nothing to intrude. And > > > > that is your true state. Consciousness is an itching rash that makes > > > > you > > > > scratch. Of course, you cannot step out of consciousness, for the very > > > > stepping out is in consciousness. But if you learn to look at your > > > > consciousness as a sort of fever, personal and private, in which you > > > > are > > > > enclosed like a chick in its shell, out of this very attitude will > > > > come > > > > the crisis which will break the > > > > > shell. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dan, > > > > > > > > Below follows a link to a conversation of Krishnamurti with Pupul > > > > Jayakar at Brockwood Park > > > > > > > > The text is pretty long but worth to be read. Therefore, PLEASE read > > > > it. > > > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > > It's a nice dialogue, Werner. > > > > > > Covers K's main ideas in a succinct manner. > > > > > > Shows he connected his ideas with other ideas from other thinkers, such > > > as Nagarjuna. That's interesting, haven't seen that before. > > > > > > Thought is never new, including his. > > > > > > Thanks for sharing it. > > > > > > > > > -- D -- > > > > > > > > > Dan, I don't think that K had any 'ideas' or derived them from others. I > > rather think what he discussed were his own insights. > > > > But what he told to PJ is exactly how I see and understood the teaching of > > Nis: That the constant attention or concentration on the I am (which is > > consciousness) will sooner or later lead to the resalization of one's own > > non-existence, that one never was born. > > > > Btw, Nis himself said that he and Krishnamurti are just telling the same. > > > > Werner > > Werner - > > Anyone who talks expresses ideas. > > If, as K says, there is no " me, " then the ideas are just thought. Not " my " > thought or " your " thought, just human thought arising in a brain, as he put > it. > > By the way, if you re-read the K dialogue, he didn't accept the term > " attention " or the idea of focusing when P suggested using that. > > I think K's idea was simply to observe the movement of thought-time and > realize that it can never do anything but perpetuate conflict. > > It seems a bit different than Nis. to me. > > But yes, the commonalities in their teachings are big. > > Particularly the idea of " nothingness " or " being nothing " which Nis. didn't > mention as much or in the same way as K. And Nis. used the term " absolute " > whereas K. would question why someone wants an " absolute. " I like this about > K. But Nis. was very similar in suggesting one is no-thing, one is not > identifiable or identified. > > So indeed - one is not identifiable or identified. > > Anything one talks about is thought, and thought repeats the past and is not > who one is. > > At this point, the conceptualities don't apply to " what is " or " who one is " > or " reality " - whatever word one uses. The word can't possibly convey > anything at this point. > > One sees directly. > > The seer is the seen. > > There is neither seer nor seen. > > - D - > > There are hundreds of other dialogues between K and people....One > interesting available free in audio and video and text is the set of 18 > dialogues between K and Anderson. A few between K and David Bohm...etc...If > one goes through them all it is clear that they say the same thing (K and > NIs) - of course, after all it IS the same. : >() > -gge- Yes, in a certain sense, it's all the same. Because any of it gets you to a point where words don't convey. Because that always is so, no matter what is happening. If you never start to identify, you never are born. And everything is saying, there is nothing to identify with, never has been. It's all the same because it's everything. You listen, you hear the sound of everything, with no sound. Everything is saying this, Nis., K., you, too, the bird on the tree, the asparagus I ate for dinner. - D - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Yes, in a certain sense, it's all the same. > > Because any of it gets you to a point where words don't convey. > > Because that always is so, no matter what is happening. Indeed... This is it, here and now. This is what is. The tendency to want to escape into dreams of the past, and hopes/plans for the future, dissolves. Now becomes acceptable, as it is. There isn't anything else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > Yes, in a certain sense, it's all the same. > > > > Because any of it gets you to a point where words don't convey. > > > > Because that always is so, no matter what is happening. > > Indeed... > > This is it, here and now. This is what is. > > The tendency to want to escape into dreams of the past, and hopes/plans for the future, dissolves. > > Now becomes acceptable, as it is. > > There isn't anything else. How wet is water to itself? -- Dan -- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > Yes, in a certain sense, it's all the same. > > > > > > Because any of it gets you to a point where words don't convey. > > > > > > Because that always is so, no matter what is happening. > > > > Indeed... > > > > This is it, here and now. This is what is. > > > > The tendency to want to escape into dreams of the past, and hopes/plans for the future, dissolves. > > > > Now becomes acceptable, as it is. > > > > There isn't anything else. > > > How wet is water to itself? > > -- Dan -- Ask water :-). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Yes, in a certain sense, it's all the same. > > > > > > > > Because any of it gets you to a point where words don't convey. > > > > > > > > Because that always is so, no matter what is happening. > > > > > > Indeed... > > > > > > This is it, here and now. This is what is. > > > > > > The tendency to want to escape into dreams of the past, and hopes/plans for the future, dissolves. > > > > > > Now becomes acceptable, as it is. > > > > > > There isn't anything else. > > > > > > How wet is water to itself? > > > > -- Dan -- > > Ask water :-). P.S. and yes, sensations 'perceive themselves'. And in fact, 'recognize themselves' as 'not-other', although how that can be, I don't know. Water ain't talkin'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 - Tim G. Nisargadatta Friday, July 03, 2009 4:22 AM Re: Free of Consciousness - From Nis. Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Yes, in a certain sense, it's all the same. > > > > > > > > Because any of it gets you to a point where words don't convey. > > > > > > > > Because that always is so, no matter what is happening. > > > > > > Indeed... > > > > > > This is it, here and now. This is what is. > > > > > > The tendency to want to escape into dreams of the past, and > > > hopes/plans for the future, dissolves. > > > > > > Now becomes acceptable, as it is. > > > > > > There isn't anything else. > > > > > > How wet is water to itself? > > > > -- Dan -- > > Ask water :-). P.S. and yes, sensations 'perceive themselves'. And in fact, 'recognize themselves' as 'not-other', although how that can be, I don't know. Water ain't talkin'. -t- Water is not talking? Who is talking then? -geo- avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS): 090526-0, 26/05/2009 Tested on: 3/7/2009 07:33:49 avast! - copyright © 1988-2009 ALWIL Software. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Yes, in a certain sense, it's all the same. > > > > > > > > Because any of it gets you to a point where words don't convey. > > > > > > > > Because that always is so, no matter what is happening. > > > > > > Indeed... > > > > > > This is it, here and now. This is what is. > > > > > > The tendency to want to escape into dreams of the past, and hopes/plans for the future, dissolves. > > > > > > Now becomes acceptable, as it is. > > > > > > There isn't anything else. > > > > > > How wet is water to itself? > > > > -- Dan -- > > Ask water :-). i'm too busy being wet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Yes, in a certain sense, it's all the same. > > > > > > > > > > Because any of it gets you to a point where words don't convey. > > > > > > > > > > Because that always is so, no matter what is happening. > > > > > > > > Indeed... > > > > > > > > This is it, here and now. This is what is. > > > > > > > > The tendency to want to escape into dreams of the past, and hopes/plans for the future, dissolves. > > > > > > > > Now becomes acceptable, as it is. > > > > > > > > There isn't anything else. > > > > > > > > > How wet is water to itself? > > > > > > -- Dan -- > > > > Ask water :-). > > P.S. and yes, sensations 'perceive themselves'. > > And in fact, 'recognize themselves' as 'not-other', although how that can be, I don't know. > > Water ain't talkin'. sensing seems a unitary event not divided as separate sensations just sensing, multitextured sensing the sensing is the aware-ing the " how " is " directly " too direct for words no time for a single concept how does one sense words happening and no conceptualizing happening separately? the conceptualizing is sensing so concept and no-concept are one Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > Tim G. > Nisargadatta > Friday, July 03, 2009 4:22 AM > Re: Free of Consciousness - From Nis. > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Yes, in a certain sense, it's all the same. > > > > > > > > > > Because any of it gets you to a point where words don't convey. > > > > > > > > > > Because that always is so, no matter what is happening. > > > > > > > > Indeed... > > > > > > > > This is it, here and now. This is what is. > > > > > > > > The tendency to want to escape into dreams of the past, and > > > > hopes/plans for the future, dissolves. > > > > > > > > Now becomes acceptable, as it is. > > > > > > > > There isn't anything else. > > > > > > > > > How wet is water to itself? > > > > > > -- Dan -- > > > > Ask water :-). > > P.S. and yes, sensations 'perceive themselves'. > > And in fact, 'recognize themselves' as 'not-other', although how that can > be, I don't know. > > Water ain't talkin'. > -t- > Water is not talking? Who is talking then? > -geo- yes. the talking is just a current of the water the water is not wet to itself it has no quality whatsoever Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > > Water ain't talkin'. > -t- > Water is not talking? Who is talking then? > -geo- Always, the 'other' is asked. So, the question keeps coming up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > > yes. > > the talking is just a current of the water > > the water is not wet to itself > > it has no quality whatsoever How in the heck would the water 'know' it has no quality whatsoever? What to compare to, to derive 'no quality'? 'No quality' is a lack of quality. Does this water lack something? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 - Tim G. Nisargadatta Friday, July 03, 2009 12:20 PM Re: Free of Consciousness - From Nis. Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > > Water ain't talkin'. > -t- > Water is not talking? Who is talking then? > -geo- Always, the 'other' is asked. So, the question keeps coming up. -t- The question is not to another. What other is there who can talk? -geo- avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS): 090526-0, 26/05/2009 Tested on: 3/7/2009 12:29:24 avast! - copyright © 1988-2009 ALWIL Software. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > > Water is not talking? Who is talking then? > > -geo- > > Always, the 'other' is asked. > > So, the question keeps coming up. > -t- > > The question is not to another. What other is there who can talk? > -geo- See? The same question just came up, again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 - Tim G. Nisargadatta Friday, July 03, 2009 12:40 PM Re: Free of Consciousness - From Nis. Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > Tim G. > Nisargadatta > Friday, July 03, 2009 12:20 PM > Re: Free of Consciousness - From Nis. > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Water ain't talkin'. > > -t- > > Water is not talking? Who is talking then? > > -geo- > > Always, the 'other' is asked. > > So, the question keeps coming up. > -t- > > The question is not to another. What other is there who can talk? > -geo- When one is looking for an answer, and not just sitting with the question, it's to another. -t- Yes. So who othere is there that can talk? -ego- avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS): 090526-0, 26/05/2009 Tested on: 3/7/2009 12:58:15 avast! - copyright © 1988-2009 ALWIL Software. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > Tim G. > Nisargadatta > Friday, July 03, 2009 12:40 PM > Re: Free of Consciousness - From Nis. > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > Tim G. > > Nisargadatta > > Friday, July 03, 2009 12:20 PM > > Re: Free of Consciousness - From Nis. > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Water ain't talkin'. > > > -t- > > > Water is not talking? Who is talking then? > > > -geo- > > > > Always, the 'other' is asked. > > > > So, the question keeps coming up. > > -t- > > > > The question is not to another. What other is there who can talk? > > -geo- > > When one is looking for an answer, and not just sitting with the question, > it's to another. > -t- > Yes. So who othere is there that can talk? > -ego- Sorry, there's just no way a perceived 'someone else' can answer this. Any answer one gets simply raises the question again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 - Tim G. Nisargadatta Friday, July 03, 2009 12:43 PM Re: Free of Consciousness - From Nis. Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > > Water is not talking? Who is talking then? > > -geo- > > Always, the 'other' is asked. > > So, the question keeps coming up. > -t- > > The question is not to another. What other is there who can talk? > -geo- See? The same question just came up, again. -t- Why are you saying this again? -geo- avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS): 090526-0, 26/05/2009 Tested on: 3/7/2009 12:58:15 avast! - copyright © 1988-2009 ALWIL Software. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > Tim G. > > Nisargadatta > > Friday, July 03, 2009 12:40 PM > > Re: Free of Consciousness - From Nis. > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > - > > > Tim G. > > > Nisargadatta > > > Friday, July 03, 2009 12:20 PM > > > Re: Free of Consciousness - From Nis. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Water ain't talkin'. > > > > -t- > > > > Water is not talking? Who is talking then? > > > > -geo- > > > > > > Always, the 'other' is asked. > > > > > > So, the question keeps coming up. > > > -t- > > > > > > The question is not to another. What other is there who can talk? > > > -geo- > > > > When one is looking for an answer, and not just sitting with the question, > > it's to another. > > -t- > > Yes. So who othere is there that can talk? > > -ego- > > Sorry, there's just no way a perceived 'someone else' can answer this. > > Any answer one gets simply raises the question again. Nisargadatta: " If in the state of witnessing you ask yourself: 'Who am I?', the answer comes at once, though it is wordless and silent. Cease to be the object and become the subject of all that happens; once having turned within, you will find yourself beyond the subject. When you have found yourself, you will find that you are also beyond the object, that both the subject and the object exist in you, but you are neither. " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 3, 2009 Report Share Posted July 3, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > Tim G. > Nisargadatta > Friday, July 03, 2009 12:43 PM > Re: Free of Consciousness - From Nis. > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > Water is not talking? Who is talking then? > > > -geo- > > > > Always, the 'other' is asked. > > > > So, the question keeps coming up. > > -t- > > > > The question is not to another. What other is there who can talk? > > -geo- > > See? > > The same question just came up, again. > -t- > > Why are you saying this again? > -geo- Give it up. Self-enquiry is *not* other-enquiry, whether there are 'no others' or not. Asking others questions that only oneself can answer is fruitless. 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.