Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org
Sign in to follow this  
Guest guest

Krishnamurti: Consciousness is the Past

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " wwoehr " <wwoehr wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote:

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " wwoehr " <wwoehr@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Nisargadatta , " douglasmitch1963 "

<douglasmitch1963@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Nisargadatta , " wwoehr " <wwoehr@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > What does it mean, the present? Have you ever tried to live in the

present, to

> > > > > deny the past, deny the future and live completely in the present? How

can you

> > > > > deny the past? You cannot scrub it away! The past is of time, your

memories,

> > > > > your experiences, your conditioning, your tendencies, your urges, your

> > > > > animalistic instincts, intuitions, demands, pursuits - all that is the

past. The

> > > > > whole of the consciousness is the past, the whole of it. And to say, "

I will

> > > > > deny all that and try to live in the present " has no meaning; but if

you

> > > > > understand the process of time, which is the past, all the

conditioning, all the

> > > > > background which flows through the present and forms the future - if

you

> > > > > understand this whole movement of time, then when there is no observer

as one

> > > > > who says, " I must be " or " I must not be " , then only is it possible

to live not

> > > > > in the past, not in the future, not in the " now " . Then you are living

in a

> > > > > totally different dimension which has no relationship to time.

> > > > >

> > > > > (Saanen, 1966)

> > > > >

> > >

> > >

> > > > This totally different dimension is the eternal, which is timeless,

hence NOW. NOW knows no time. NOW is the eternal present. All happens in the

NOW, including the past. When thinking of the past... the content of

consciousness as K would say...that thinking is happening in the NOW. NOW is

not the past, rather the thinking of the past happens in the NOW. This is basic

Advaita as i understand it.

> > > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Douglas,

> > >

> > > Neuroscience has proven that the brain needs for the creation of

consciousness between 200msecs and 500msecs. Which means when you seem to hear a

bang 'now' then in reality it already has passed and was gone.

> > >

> > > Therefore the NOW is an illusion we cannot solve or catch with the

instrument of consciousness. Consciousness always is to late and is in any case

the past.

> > >

> > > Therefore also this lovely idea of an erternal now remains just an idea

and nothing else. It is an idea we cannot make true.

> > >

> > > Werner

> > >

> >

> >

> >

> > How about calling it the " eternal-almost-now " ?

> >

> >

> >

> > :-0

> >

> >

> >

> > toombaru

> >

>

>

> Haha, Toomb,

>

> I hope I won't forget it again. But I must confess that I am a bit shy to use

that term you suggested.

>

> :)

>

> Werner

>

 

 

You could collect a bunch a followers........but they would always be a half

second behind you.

 

 

 

 

:-0

 

 

 

toombaru

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote:

>

> Geo,

>

> Instead of constantly posting new little 'mental suprises' better stop for a

> while your intellectual clowning and answer your questions yourself.

>

> Werner

>

> Your request - as you say - is comming from consciousness, memory,

> the past, full of prejudices and pre-conceptions. I am not interested.

> -geo-

 

Fwiw, I'd suggest to ignore the trolls, Geo. Posting even the above is

encouragement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " fewtch " <fewtch wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote:

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " fewtch " <fewtch@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Show me some now.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > toombaru

> > >

> > > Toom is reading this now.

> >

> >

> >

> > No I'm not....I'm writing this now.....

>

> Yes... it's still now, isn't it?

 

 

 

Well........it was.

 

 

 

 

 

 

>

> > All time is then.

>

> Now is not in time.

>

 

 

 

 

 

Who is that experiences this " now " thing?

Could it be the group of memories that you call Tim?

 

 

 

 

 

toombaru

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " fewtch " <fewtch wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote:

> >

> >

> > -

> > fewtch

> > Nisargadatta

> > Wednesday, September 09, 2009 10:34 AM

> > Re: Krishnamurti: Consciousness is the Past

> >

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote:

> > >

> > >

> > > True. So what is the nature of that which aknowledges change/time?

> > > -geo-

> >

> > It's just memory, isn't it? There isn't anything separate from memory to

> > " acknowedge " anything... memory arises of the past, which seems different

> > than the present, and so it seems something has changed.

> > -t-

> >

> > Memory aknowledging memory? Time seeing time? Change looking at change? Is

> > it?

> > -geo-

>

> You're trying to locate a " separate observer " that isn't there.

>

 

 

 

 

Then who lives in the " now " ?

 

 

 

toombaru

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

-

wwoehr

Nisargadatta

Wednesday, September 09, 2009 12:07 PM

Re: Krishnamurti: Consciousness is the Past

 

 

Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote:

>

> Geo,

>

> Instead of constantly posting new little 'mental suprises' better stop for

> a

> while your intellectual clowning and answer your questions yourself.

>

> Werner

>

> Your request - as you say - is comming from consciousness, memory, the

> past, full of prejudices and pre-conceptions. I am not interested.

> -geo-

>

 

Which means you will go on clowning, Geo ?

 

Werner

 

Werner, is consciousness, the past, memory, able to look at itself? Is this

looking not from the past and so meningless?

-geo-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean.

Virus Database (VPS): 090816-0, 17/08/2009

Tested on: 9/9/2009 12:11:58

avast! - copyright © 1988-2009 ALWIL Software.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

-

toombaru2006

Nisargadatta

Wednesday, September 09, 2009 12:07 PM

Re: Krishnamurti: Consciousness is the Past

 

 

Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote:

>

>

> -

> fewtch

> Nisargadatta

> Wednesday, September 09, 2009 11:45 AM

> Re: Krishnamurti: Consciousness is the Past

>

>

> Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote:

> >

> >

> > -

> > fewtch

> > Nisargadatta

> > Wednesday, September 09, 2009 10:44 AM

> > Re: Krishnamurti: Consciousness is the Past

> >

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote:

> > >

> > >

> > > -

> > > fewtch

> > > Nisargadatta

> > > Wednesday, September 09, 2009 10:34 AM

> > > Re: Krishnamurti: Consciousness is the Past

> > >

> > >

> > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > True. So what is the nature of that which aknowledges change/time?

> > > > -geo-

> > >

> > > It's just memory, isn't it? There isn't anything separate from memory

> > > to

> > > " acknowedge " anything... memory arises of the past, which seems

> > > different

> > > than the present, and so it seems something has changed.

> > > -t-

> > >

> > > Memory aknowledging memory? Time seeing time? Change looking at

> > > change?

> > > Is

> > > it?

> > > -geo-

> >

> > You're trying to locate a " separate observer " that isn't there.

> > -t-

> >

> > No I am not. How would you describe the difference between gold and a

> > golden

> > ring?

> > Consciousness is a set of golden things.

> > -geo-

>

> Describe/define " consciousness " . I really haven't a clue what you're

> talking

> about.

> -t-

>

> No. I am asking how would you describe the difference between gold and a

> golden ring. Are they different or the same?

> -geo-

>

>

>

>

 

They are samifferent.

 

toombaru

 

Thats it!! LOL

-geo-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean.

Virus Database (VPS): 090816-0, 17/08/2009

Tested on: 9/9/2009 12:11:58

avast! - copyright © 1988-2009 ALWIL Software.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

-

toombaru2006

Nisargadatta

Wednesday, September 09, 2009 12:15 PM

Re: Krishnamurti: Consciousness is the Past

 

 

Nisargadatta , " fewtch " <fewtch wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote:

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " fewtch " <fewtch@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Show me some now.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > toombaru

> > >

> > > Toom is reading this now.

> >

> >

> >

> > No I'm not....I'm writing this now.....

>

> Yes... it's still now, isn't it?

 

Well........it was.

 

>

> > All time is then.

>

> Now is not in time.

>

 

Who is that experiences this " now " thing?

Could it be the group of memories that you call Tim?

 

toombaru

 

Toomba....how can memories experience something?

-geo-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean.

Virus Database (VPS): 090816-0, 17/08/2009

Tested on: 9/9/2009 12:17:04

avast! - copyright © 1988-2009 ALWIL Software.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

-

geo

Nisargadatta

Wednesday, September 09, 2009 12:18 PM

Re: Re: Krishnamurti: Consciousness is the Past

 

 

 

-

wwoehr

Nisargadatta

Wednesday, September 09, 2009 12:07 PM

Re: Krishnamurti: Consciousness is the Past

 

Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote:

>

> Geo,

>

> Instead of constantly posting new little 'mental suprises' better stop for

> a

> while your intellectual clowning and answer your questions yourself.

>

> Werner

>

> Your request - as you say - is comming from consciousness, memory, the

> past, full of prejudices and pre-conceptions. I am not interested.

> -geo-

>

 

Which means you will go on clowning, Geo ?

 

Werner

 

Werner, is consciousness, the past, memory, able to look at itself? Is this

looking not from the past and so meningless?

 

See? When you say that all is consciousness, that statement is the past,

memory.....so has no value, is meaningless.

-geo-

 

avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean.

Virus Database (VPS): 090816-0, 17/08/2009

Tested on: 9/9/2009 12:11:58

avast! - copyright © 1988-2009 ALWIL Software.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean.

Virus Database (VPS): 090816-0, 17/08/2009

Tested on: 9/9/2009 12:22:37

avast! - copyright © 1988-2009 ALWIL Software.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote:

>

>

> -

> wwoehr

> Nisargadatta

> Wednesday, September 09, 2009 12:07 PM

> Re: Krishnamurti: Consciousness is the Past

>

>

> Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote:

> >

> > Geo,

> >

> > Instead of constantly posting new little 'mental suprises' better stop for

> > a

> > while your intellectual clowning and answer your questions yourself.

> >

> > Werner

> >

> > Your request - as you say - is comming from consciousness, memory, the

> > past, full of prejudices and pre-conceptions. I am not interested.

> > -geo-

> >

>

> Which means you will go on clowning, Geo ?

>

> Werner

>

> Werner, is consciousness, the past, memory, able to look at itself? Is this

> looking not from the past and so meningless?

> -geo-

>

 

 

Again a question, Geo,

 

But ok, we had that already several times: Consciousness is its content and such

a content cannot look, neither at itself nor a something else. Nor can it speak,

cry, jump, dance or whatever else. A content is just a content.

 

Now, after you have read this, you can go on clowning.

 

Werner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Nisargadatta , "toombaru2006" <lastrain wrote:>> > Show me some now. > toombaruFewtch wrote...

 

> Toom is reading this now. These words are arising in/as/through 'now'. They are not arising "then". >

 

It seems to me that nothing, even these typed words, is ever "arising"...all has always already arisen.

 

Michael A

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " Michael Adamson " <adamson wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote:

> >

> >

> > Show me some now.

>

> > toombaru

>

> Fewtch wrote...

>

> > Toom is reading this now. These words are arising in/as/through 'now'. They

are not arising " then " . >

>

> It seems to me that nothing, even these typed words, is ever " arising " ...all

has always already arisen.

>

> Michael A

 

These words are actively arising in and through 'now', as they are read and

parsed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

-

" wwoehr " <wwoehr

<Nisargadatta >

Wednesday, September 09, 2009 12:35 PM

Re: Krishnamurti: Consciousness is the Past

 

 

> Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote:

>>

>>

>> -

>> wwoehr

>> Nisargadatta

>> Wednesday, September 09, 2009 12:07 PM

>> Re: Krishnamurti: Consciousness is the Past

>>

>>

>> Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote:

>> >

>> > Geo,

>> >

>> > Instead of constantly posting new little 'mental suprises' better stop

>> > for

>> > a

>> > while your intellectual clowning and answer your questions yourself.

>> >

>> > Werner

>> >

>> > Your request - as you say - is comming from consciousness, memory, the

>> > past, full of prejudices and pre-conceptions. I am not interested.

>> > -geo-

>> >

>>

>> Which means you will go on clowning, Geo ?

>>

>> Werner

>>

>> Werner, is consciousness, the past, memory, able to look at itself? Is

>> this

>> looking not from the past and so meningless?

>> -geo-

>>

>

>

> Again a question, Geo,

>

> But ok, we had that already several times: Consciousness is its content

> and such a content cannot look, neither at itself nor a something else.

> Nor can it speak, cry, jump, dance or whatever else. A content is just a

> content.

>

> Now, after you have read this, you can go on clowning.

>

> Werner

 

So who or what is writing then? Who or what says consciousness is its

content?

-geo-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote:

>

>

> -

> toombaru2006

> Nisargadatta

> Wednesday, September 09, 2009 12:15 PM

> Re: Krishnamurti: Consciousness is the Past

>

>

> Nisargadatta , " fewtch " <fewtch@> wrote:

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Nisargadatta , " fewtch " <fewtch@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Show me some now.

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > toombaru

> > > >

> > > > Toom is reading this now.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > No I'm not....I'm writing this now.....

> >

> > Yes... it's still now, isn't it?

>

> Well........it was.

>

> >

> > > All time is then.

> >

> > Now is not in time.

> >

>

> Who is that experiences this " now " thing?

> Could it be the group of memories that you call Tim?

>

> toombaru

>

> Toomba....how can memories experience something?

> -geo-

>

>

>

>

>

>

 

 

 

It is the synaptic self that is the repository of mnemonic experience.

 

.....a virtual hall of mirrors.......

 

toombaru

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " fewtch " <fewtch wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " Michael Adamson " <adamson@> wrote:

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote:

> > >

> > >

> > > Show me some now.

> >

> > > toombaru

> >

> > Fewtch wrote...

> >

> > > Toom is reading this now. These words are arising in/as/through 'now'.

They are not arising " then " . >

> >

> > It seems to me that nothing, even these typed words, is ever " arising " ...all

has always already arisen.

> >

> > Michael A

>

> These words are actively arising in and through 'now', as they are read and

parsed.

>

 

 

 

So.....maybe we could say that " now " is the sphinkter between the two worlds?

 

 

 

:-)

 

 

 

 

toombaru

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote:

>

>

> -

> " wwoehr " <wwoehr

> <Nisargadatta >

> Wednesday, September 09, 2009 12:35 PM

> Re: Krishnamurti: Consciousness is the Past

>

>

> > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote:

> >>

> >>

> >> -

> >> wwoehr

> >> Nisargadatta

> >> Wednesday, September 09, 2009 12:07 PM

> >> Re: Krishnamurti: Consciousness is the Past

> >>

> >>

> >> Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote:

> >> >

> >> > Geo,

> >> >

> >> > Instead of constantly posting new little 'mental suprises' better stop

> >> > for

> >> > a

> >> > while your intellectual clowning and answer your questions yourself.

> >> >

> >> > Werner

> >> >

> >> > Your request - as you say - is comming from consciousness, memory, the

> >> > past, full of prejudices and pre-conceptions. I am not interested.

> >> > -geo-

> >> >

> >>

> >> Which means you will go on clowning, Geo ?

> >>

> >> Werner

> >>

> >> Werner, is consciousness, the past, memory, able to look at itself? Is

> >> this

> >> looking not from the past and so meningless?

> >> -geo-

> >>

> >

> >

> > Again a question, Geo,

> >

> > But ok, we had that already several times: Consciousness is its content

> > and such a content cannot look, neither at itself nor a something else.

> > Nor can it speak, cry, jump, dance or whatever else. A content is just a

> > content.

> >

> > Now, after you have read this, you can go on clowning.

> >

> > Werner

>

> So who or what is writing then? Who or what says consciousness is its

> content?

> -geo-

>

 

 

Again a question, geo, questions, questions, endlessly ...

 

What do you think is saying that consciousness is its content ?

 

Werner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " wwoehr " <wwoehr wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote:

> >

> >

> > -

> > " wwoehr " <wwoehr@>

> > <Nisargadatta >

> > Wednesday, September 09, 2009 12:35 PM

> > Re: Krishnamurti: Consciousness is the Past

> >

> >

> > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote:

> > >>

> > >>

> > >> -

> > >> wwoehr

> > >> Nisargadatta

> > >> Wednesday, September 09, 2009 12:07 PM

> > >> Re: Krishnamurti: Consciousness is the Past

> > >>

> > >>

> > >> Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote:

> > >> >

> > >> > Geo,

> > >> >

> > >> > Instead of constantly posting new little 'mental suprises' better stop

> > >> > for

> > >> > a

> > >> > while your intellectual clowning and answer your questions yourself.

> > >> >

> > >> > Werner

> > >> >

> > >> > Your request - as you say - is comming from consciousness, memory, the

> > >> > past, full of prejudices and pre-conceptions. I am not interested.

> > >> > -geo-

> > >> >

> > >>

> > >> Which means you will go on clowning, Geo ?

> > >>

> > >> Werner

> > >>

> > >> Werner, is consciousness, the past, memory, able to look at itself? Is

> > >> this

> > >> looking not from the past and so meningless?

> > >> -geo-

> > >>

> > >

> > >

> > > Again a question, Geo,

> > >

> > > But ok, we had that already several times: Consciousness is its content

> > > and such a content cannot look, neither at itself nor a something else.

> > > Nor can it speak, cry, jump, dance or whatever else. A content is just a

> > > content.

> > >

> > > Now, after you have read this, you can go on clowning.

> > >

> > > Werner

> >

> > So who or what is writing then? Who or what says consciousness is its

> > content?

> > -geo-

> >

>

>

> Again a question, geo, questions, questions, endlessly ...

>

> What do you think is saying that consciousness is its content ?

>

> Werner

>

 

 

 

 

The content is saying that.

 

 

 

toombaru

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote:

snipping learned to make content easier to read...

 

 

> > > So who or what is writing then? Who or what says consciousness is its

> > > content?

> > > -geo-

> > >

> >

> >

> > Again a question, geo, questions, questions, endlessly ...

> >

> > What do you think is saying that consciousness is its content ?

> >

> > Werner

> >

>

>

>

>

> The content is saying that.

>

>

>

> toombaru

>

 

 

However, it is never content with that.

 

~A

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " anabebe57 " <kailashana wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote:

> snipping learned to make content easier to read...

>

>

> > > > So who or what is writing then? Who or what says consciousness is its

> > > > content?

> > > > -geo-

> > > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Again a question, geo, questions, questions, endlessly ...

> > >

> > > What do you think is saying that consciousness is its content ?

> > >

> > > Werner

> > >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > The content is saying that.

> >

> >

> >

> > toombaru

> >

>

>

> However, it is never content with that.

>

> ~A

>

 

 

It is The Magnificent Discontent.

 

 

 

 

 

toombaru

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " wwoehr " <wwoehr@> wrote:

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote:

> > >

> > >

> > > -

> > > " wwoehr " <wwoehr@>

> > > <Nisargadatta >

> > > Wednesday, September 09, 2009 12:35 PM

> > > Re: Krishnamurti: Consciousness is the Past

> > >

> > >

> > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote:

> > > >>

> > > >>

> > > >> -

> > > >> wwoehr

> > > >> Nisargadatta

> > > >> Wednesday, September 09, 2009 12:07 PM

> > > >> Re: Krishnamurti: Consciousness is the Past

> > > >>

> > > >>

> > > >> Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote:

> > > >> >

> > > >> > Geo,

> > > >> >

> > > >> > Instead of constantly posting new little 'mental suprises' better

stop

> > > >> > for

> > > >> > a

> > > >> > while your intellectual clowning and answer your questions yourself.

> > > >> >

> > > >> > Werner

> > > >> >

> > > >> > Your request - as you say - is comming from consciousness, memory,

the

> > > >> > past, full of prejudices and pre-conceptions. I am not interested.

> > > >> > -geo-

> > > >> >

> > > >>

> > > >> Which means you will go on clowning, Geo ?

> > > >>

> > > >> Werner

> > > >>

> > > >> Werner, is consciousness, the past, memory, able to look at itself? Is

> > > >> this

> > > >> looking not from the past and so meningless?

> > > >> -geo-

> > > >>

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Again a question, Geo,

> > > >

> > > > But ok, we had that already several times: Consciousness is its content

> > > > and such a content cannot look, neither at itself nor a something else.

> > > > Nor can it speak, cry, jump, dance or whatever else. A content is just a

> > > > content.

> > > >

> > > > Now, after you have read this, you can go on clowning.

> > > >

> > > > Werner

> > >

> > > So who or what is writing then? Who or what says consciousness is its

> > > content?

> > > -geo-

> > >

> >

> >

> > Again a question, geo, questions, questions, endlessly ...

> >

> > What do you think is saying that consciousness is its content ?

> >

> > Werner

> >

>

>

>

>

> The content is saying that.

>

>

>

> toombaru

>

 

 

Quite an interesting topic isn't it toomb, and worth a try. But you guessed

wrong.

 

A hint: Consciousness never is a doer or initiator. It is just kinda reporter.

 

Next try, Toomb.

 

Werner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " wwoehr " <wwoehr wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote:

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " wwoehr " <wwoehr@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > -

> > > > " wwoehr " <wwoehr@>

> > > > <Nisargadatta >

> > > > Wednesday, September 09, 2009 12:35 PM

> > > > Re: Krishnamurti: Consciousness is the Past

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote:

> > > > >>

> > > > >>

> > > > >> -

> > > > >> wwoehr

> > > > >> Nisargadatta

> > > > >> Wednesday, September 09, 2009 12:07 PM

> > > > >> Re: Krishnamurti: Consciousness is the Past

> > > > >>

> > > > >>

> > > > >> Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote:

> > > > >> >

> > > > >> > Geo,

> > > > >> >

> > > > >> > Instead of constantly posting new little 'mental suprises' better

stop

> > > > >> > for

> > > > >> > a

> > > > >> > while your intellectual clowning and answer your questions

yourself.

> > > > >> >

> > > > >> > Werner

> > > > >> >

> > > > >> > Your request - as you say - is comming from consciousness, memory,

the

> > > > >> > past, full of prejudices and pre-conceptions. I am not interested.

> > > > >> > -geo-

> > > > >> >

> > > > >>

> > > > >> Which means you will go on clowning, Geo ?

> > > > >>

> > > > >> Werner

> > > > >>

> > > > >> Werner, is consciousness, the past, memory, able to look at itself?

Is

> > > > >> this

> > > > >> looking not from the past and so meningless?

> > > > >> -geo-

> > > > >>

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Again a question, Geo,

> > > > >

> > > > > But ok, we had that already several times: Consciousness is its

content

> > > > > and such a content cannot look, neither at itself nor a something

else.

> > > > > Nor can it speak, cry, jump, dance or whatever else. A content is just

a

> > > > > content.

> > > > >

> > > > > Now, after you have read this, you can go on clowning.

> > > > >

> > > > > Werner

> > > >

> > > > So who or what is writing then? Who or what says consciousness is its

> > > > content?

> > > > -geo-

> > > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Again a question, geo, questions, questions, endlessly ...

> > >

> > > What do you think is saying that consciousness is its content ?

> > >

> > > Werner

> > >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > The content is saying that.

> >

> >

> >

> > toombaru

> >

>

>

> Quite an interesting topic isn't it toomb, and worth a try. But you guessed

wrong.

>

> A hint: Consciousness never is a doer or initiator. It is just kinda reporter.

>

> Next try, Toomb.

>

> Werner

>

 

 

 

 

The synaptic self is saying that.

 

 

 

 

toombaru

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

 

Nisargadatta , "Michael Adamson" <adamson wrote:>> Nisargadatta , "toombaru2006" <lastrain@> wrote:> >> > > > Show me some now.> > > toombaru> > Fewtch wrote...> > > Toom is reading this now. These words are arising in/as/through 'now'. They are not arising "then". >> > It seems to me that nothing, even these typed words, is ever "arising"...all has always already arisen. > > Michael AFewtch wrote...

 

< These words are actively arising in and through 'now', as they are read and parsed.>

 

If "these words" (or anything for that matter) are seen as "arising" that "arising-ness" (which is noticed) has already "arisen"...is already present. In other words, these words have "already risen". I never see what is arising...only what is already here/there or is. Saying that something is arising is simply a way of talking or thinking about something. It is conjecture, speculation, conceptualization...which also doesn't arise...it is already present. I don't know about you, but can't notice what isn't there to be noticed. For me there is no "before arising" and "after arising"...there's merely what's present. Speaking in terms of before and after is simply a pragmatic or useful way of communicating and functioning in the every-day world, such as "before the sun rises" it's difficult to see the terrain!

 

Michael A

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " wwoehr " <wwoehr@> wrote:

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Nisargadatta , " wwoehr " <wwoehr@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > -

> > > > > " wwoehr " <wwoehr@>

> > > > > <Nisargadatta >

> > > > > Wednesday, September 09, 2009 12:35 PM

> > > > > Re: Krishnamurti: Consciousness is the Past

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote:

> > > > > >>

> > > > > >>

> > > > > >> -

> > > > > >> wwoehr

> > > > > >> Nisargadatta

> > > > > >> Wednesday, September 09, 2009 12:07 PM

> > > > > >> Re: Krishnamurti: Consciousness is the Past

> > > > > >>

> > > > > >>

> > > > > >> Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote:

> > > > > >> >

> > > > > >> > Geo,

> > > > > >> >

> > > > > >> > Instead of constantly posting new little 'mental suprises' better

stop

> > > > > >> > for

> > > > > >> > a

> > > > > >> > while your intellectual clowning and answer your questions

yourself.

> > > > > >> >

> > > > > >> > Werner

> > > > > >> >

> > > > > >> > Your request - as you say - is comming from consciousness,

memory, the

> > > > > >> > past, full of prejudices and pre-conceptions. I am not

interested.

> > > > > >> > -geo-

> > > > > >> >

> > > > > >>

> > > > > >> Which means you will go on clowning, Geo ?

> > > > > >>

> > > > > >> Werner

> > > > > >>

> > > > > >> Werner, is consciousness, the past, memory, able to look at itself?

Is

> > > > > >> this

> > > > > >> looking not from the past and so meningless?

> > > > > >> -geo-

> > > > > >>

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Again a question, Geo,

> > > > > >

> > > > > > But ok, we had that already several times: Consciousness is its

content

> > > > > > and such a content cannot look, neither at itself nor a something

else.

> > > > > > Nor can it speak, cry, jump, dance or whatever else. A content is

just a

> > > > > > content.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Now, after you have read this, you can go on clowning.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Werner

> > > > >

> > > > > So who or what is writing then? Who or what says consciousness is its

> > > > > content?

> > > > > -geo-

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Again a question, geo, questions, questions, endlessly ...

> > > >

> > > > What do you think is saying that consciousness is its content ?

> > > >

> > > > Werner

> > > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > The content is saying that.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > toombaru

> > >

> >

> >

> > Quite an interesting topic isn't it toomb, and worth a try. But you guessed

wrong.

> >

> > A hint: Consciousness never is a doer or initiator. It is just kinda

reporter.

> >

> > Next try, Toomb.

> >

> > Werner

> >

>

>

>

>

> The synaptic self is saying that.

>

>

>

>

> toombaru

>

 

 

Ok, Toomb, you won ! Not bad, not bad ...

 

And therefore no more try.

 

The quiz has closed.

 

Werner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " Michael Adamson " <adamson wrote:

>

>

>

> Nisargadatta , " Michael Adamson " <adamson@> wrote:

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote:

> > >

> > >

> > > Show me some now.

> >

> > > toombaru

> >

> > Fewtch wrote...

> >

> > > Toom is reading this now. These words are arising in/as/through 'now'.

They are not arising " then " . >

> >

> > It seems to me that nothing, even these typed words, is ever " arising " ...all

has always already arisen.

> >

> > Michael A

>

> Fewtch wrote...

>

> < These words are actively arising in and through 'now', as they are read and

parsed.>

>

> If " these words " (or anything for that matter) are seen as " arising " that

" arising-ness " (which is noticed) has already " arisen " ...is already present. In

other words, these words have " already risen " . I never see what is

arising...only what is already here/there or is. Saying that something is

arising is simply a way of talking or thinking about something. It is

conjecture, speculation, conceptualization...which also doesn't arise...it is

already present. I don't know about you, but can't notice what isn't there to be

noticed. For me there is no " before arising " and " after arising " ...there's

merely what's present. Speaking in terms of before and after is simply a

pragmatic or useful way of communicating and functioning in the every-day world,

such as " before the sun rises " it's difficult to see the terrain!

>

> Michael A

>

 

 

Nice Michael

 

The synaptic self emerges within the process of " freeze-framing " the

perceptual-sentient input.

 

It is never privy to the moment in which that occurs but surfaces downstream

from from the processing plant.

 

The only way it can experience its own concept of " this-moment " is by naming its

dog " Now " .

 

 

 

 

 

toombaru

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

-

toombaru2006

Nisargadatta

Wednesday, September 09, 2009 1:39 PM

Re: Krishnamurti: Consciousness is the Past

 

 

Nisargadatta , " wwoehr " <wwoehr wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote:

> >

> >

> > -

> > " wwoehr " <wwoehr@>

> > <Nisargadatta >

> > Wednesday, September 09, 2009 12:35 PM

> > Re: Krishnamurti: Consciousness is the Past

> >

> >

> > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote:

> > >>

> > >>

> > >> -

> > >> wwoehr

> > >> Nisargadatta

> > >> Wednesday, September 09, 2009 12:07 PM

> > >> Re: Krishnamurti: Consciousness is the Past

> > >>

> > >>

> > >> Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote:

> > >> >

> > >> > Geo,

> > >> >

> > >> > Instead of constantly posting new little 'mental suprises' better

> > >> > stop

> > >> > for

> > >> > a

> > >> > while your intellectual clowning and answer your questions

> > >> > yourself.

> > >> >

> > >> > Werner

> > >> >

> > >> > Your request - as you say - is comming from consciousness, memory,

> > >> > the

> > >> > past, full of prejudices and pre-conceptions. I am not interested.

> > >> > -geo-

> > >> >

> > >>

> > >> Which means you will go on clowning, Geo ?

> > >>

> > >> Werner

> > >>

> > >> Werner, is consciousness, the past, memory, able to look at itself?

> > >> Is

> > >> this

> > >> looking not from the past and so meningless?

> > >> -geo-

> > >>

> > >

> > >

> > > Again a question, Geo,

> > >

> > > But ok, we had that already several times: Consciousness is its

> > > content

> > > and such a content cannot look, neither at itself nor a something

> > > else.

> > > Nor can it speak, cry, jump, dance or whatever else. A content is just

> > > a

> > > content.

> > >

> > > Now, after you have read this, you can go on clowning.

> > >

> > > Werner

> >

> > So who or what is writing then? Who or what says consciousness is its

> > content?

> > -geo-

> >

>

>

> Again a question, geo, questions, questions, endlessly ...

>

> What do you think is saying that consciousness is its content ?

>

> Werner

>

 

The content is saying that.

 

toombaru

 

As per his own understanding, yes. So it is just a belief

-geo-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean.

Virus Database (VPS): 090816-0, 17/08/2009

Tested on: 9/9/2009 15:23:47

avast! - copyright © 1988-2009 ALWIL Software.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

-

Michael Adamson

Nisargadatta

Wednesday, September 09, 2009 2:19 PM

Re: Krishnamurti: Consciousness is the Past

 

 

 

 

Nisargadatta , " Michael Adamson " <adamson wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote:

> >

> >

> > Show me some now.

>

> > toombaru

>

> Fewtch wrote...

>

> > Toom is reading this now. These words are arising in/as/through 'now'.

> > They are not arising " then " . >

>

> It seems to me that nothing, even these typed words, is ever

> " arising " ...all has always already arisen.

>

> Michael A

 

Fewtch wrote...

 

< These words are actively arising in and through 'now', as they are read

and parsed.>

 

If " these words " (or anything for that matter) are seen as " arising " that

" arising-ness " (which is noticed) has already " arisen " ...is already present.

In other words, these words have " already risen " . I never see what is

arising...only what is already here/there or is. Saying that something is

arising is simply a way of talking or thinking about something. It is

conjecture, speculation, conceptualization...which also doesn't arise...it

is already present. I don't know about you, but can't notice what isn't

there to be noticed. For me there is no " before arising " and " after

arising " ...there's merely what's present. Speaking in terms of before and

after is simply a pragmatic or useful way of communicating and functioning

in the every-day world, such as " before the sun rises " it's difficult to see

the terrain!

 

Michael A

 

Trying to get rid of memory is ridiculous. Many have tried and are still

trying. One must not abdicate the world in the sense of loosing the basic

sense of recognition. Nothing must be dropped in order to understand time.

On the contrary: full understanding, awareness, seeing of this field of

time/world is what is. It is timeless.

-geo-

 

 

 

 

 

 

avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean.

Virus Database (VPS): 090816-0, 17/08/2009

Tested on: 9/9/2009 15:23:49

avast! - copyright © 1988-2009 ALWIL Software.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...