Guest guest Report post Posted September 17, 2009 - geo Nisargadatta Thursday, September 17, 2009 7:03 AM Re: Re: Rumi > Yes. And there is a real bang out there and consciousness, a few msecs > later > enters the scene and registers it. But remember: there is only > consciousness! > There is an initiator that is prior to consciousness but don't say there > is > anything beyond consciousness - there is only consciousness. I think I am > beginning to see the light - finally! > Geo, You make coments about something which you did not fully understand. The statement 'consciousness is all there is' just does say that if there is no cosciousness you wouldn't hear, see, sense, feel, smell etc. You would not know anything, no thought would get conscious, etc, in short there wouldn't exist anything you could know of. -w- And why do you think that what is beyond consciousness is anything to know off? The bang you talk about is " out " of consciousness and you dont know about it..but you talk about it The consciousness that neuroscientists talk about is a product of the brain...while consc. that K and we talk about is not a product of the brain. But you talk off them as if they where the same thing. Bananas are no identical to cats. To say that there are real things, events, " outside there " is ridiculous - call it bang or bing or bong -geo- avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS): 090816-0, 17/08/2009 Tested on: 17/9/2009 07:06:59 avast! - copyright © 1988-2009 ALWIL Software. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 17, 2009 My tip is before you gossip with Dan or who ever you feel driven to to lean at, use your own mind and stand on your own feet.Werner Werner...this is an oppen list. Everyone reads all messages so how on earth or heaven or hell could I gossip if you are also reading my posts? There is no way to talk about you from "behind". Those are just ideas you have in your fertile and hurt imagination. -geo- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 17, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anna " <kailashana@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " wwoehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Toomb, > > > > > > There is no sentient-conceptual consciousness. The senses are sentient and concepts are created by thought. > > > > > > And consciousness never will approach anything. Consciouness is neither a doer nor does it initiate and start any action or activity. > > > > > > Actions start and have their root in subconsciousness but never in > > > consciousness. > > > > > > There is a very simple rule to better understand consciousness, consciousness always comes later. Example: > > > > > > When you hear a bang it already happened some hundred msecs before. Same with seeing, sensing, feeling. Decisions are created up to 10 seconds before they get conscious. Any action and activity already started before it got conscious. Consciousness never is and was their initiator. > > > > > > Consciousness always comes later. > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > Consciousness is the malleable material (the building blocks of life) that morphs into what is. It is the tree, the computer keyboard, the LCD screen, the noise of the street. It is what is. > > > > Awareness of consciousness is sentience... all living things are aware according to their inherent nature. I suspect created objects such as tables may be aware... that is why its shape doesn't change > > unless the desire to uncreate it. > > > > What comes later is recognition. > > > > > > ~A > > What is, that depends not on recognition? > > It is not anything you recognize. > > It is here, now, unnoticed, unrecognized. > > It is not a feeling of being aware, not consciousness, not an experience, not a thought, not a feeling, not a memory, not a thing, not nothing. > > Recognition is of memory, is of the past. > > Recognition is knowing the table to be a table, things to be where they are, a feeling to be a feeling, a thought to be a thought. > > The recognizable takes care of itself. > > The unrecognizable is what is. > > - D - > Dan, I was addressing Werner's last sentence. And I'm not mincing words with you for the hell of it. Thank you very much. ~A Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 17, 2009 Nisargadatta , " anna " <kailashana wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " anna " <kailashana@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " wwoehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Toomb, > > > > > > > > There is no sentient-conceptual consciousness. The senses are sentient and concepts are created by thought. > > > > > > > > And consciousness never will approach anything. Consciouness is neither a doer nor does it initiate and start any action or activity. > > > > > > > > Actions start and have their root in subconsciousness but never in > > > > consciousness. > > > > > > > > There is a very simple rule to better understand consciousness, consciousness always comes later. Example: > > > > > > > > When you hear a bang it already happened some hundred msecs before. Same with seeing, sensing, feeling. Decisions are created up to 10 seconds before they get conscious. Any action and activity already started before it got conscious. Consciousness never is and was their initiator. > > > > > > > > Consciousness always comes later. > > > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > > > > > Consciousness is the malleable material (the building blocks of life) that morphs into what is. It is the tree, the computer keyboard, the LCD screen, the noise of the street. It is what is. > > > > > > Awareness of consciousness is sentience... all living things are aware according to their inherent nature. I suspect created objects such as tables may be aware... that is why its shape doesn't change > > > unless the desire to uncreate it. > > > > > > What comes later is recognition. > > > > > > > > > ~A > > > > What is, that depends not on recognition? > > > > It is not anything you recognize. > > > > It is here, now, unnoticed, unrecognized. > > > > It is not a feeling of being aware, not consciousness, not an experience, not a thought, not a feeling, not a memory, not a thing, not nothing. > > > > Recognition is of memory, is of the past. > > > > Recognition is knowing the table to be a table, things to be where they are, a feeling to be a feeling, a thought to be a thought. > > > > The recognizable takes care of itself. > > > > The unrecognizable is what is. > > > > - D - > > > > > Dan, I was addressing Werner's last sentence. And I'm not mincing words with you for the hell of it. > > Thank you very much. > > ~A > Ok. I'll bite. Recognition happens in the present presceme. It is awareness without conditions save one... " mine " . ~A Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 17, 2009 Nisargadatta , " anna " <kailashana wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anna " <kailashana@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anna " <kailashana@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " wwoehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Toomb, > > > > > > > > > > There is no sentient-conceptual consciousness. The senses are sentient and concepts are created by thought. > > > > > > > > > > And consciousness never will approach anything. Consciouness is neither a doer nor does it initiate and start any action or activity. > > > > > > > > > > Actions start and have their root in subconsciousness but never in > > > > > consciousness. > > > > > > > > > > There is a very simple rule to better understand consciousness, consciousness always comes later. Example: > > > > > > > > > > When you hear a bang it already happened some hundred msecs before. Same with seeing, sensing, feeling. Decisions are created up to 10 seconds before they get conscious. Any action and activity already started before it got conscious. Consciousness never is and was their initiator. > > > > > > > > > > Consciousness always comes later. > > > > > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Consciousness is the malleable material (the building blocks of life) that morphs into what is. It is the tree, the computer keyboard, the LCD screen, the noise of the street. It is what is. > > > > > > > > Awareness of consciousness is sentience... all living things are aware according to their inherent nature. I suspect created objects such as tables may be aware... that is why its shape doesn't change > > > > unless the desire to uncreate it. > > > > > > > > What comes later is recognition. > > > > > > > > > > > > ~A > > > > > > What is, that depends not on recognition? > > > > > > It is not anything you recognize. > > > > > > It is here, now, unnoticed, unrecognized. > > > > > > It is not a feeling of being aware, not consciousness, not an experience, not a thought, not a feeling, not a memory, not a thing, not nothing. > > > > > > Recognition is of memory, is of the past. > > > > > > Recognition is knowing the table to be a table, things to be where they are, a feeling to be a feeling, a thought to be a thought. > > > > > > The recognizable takes care of itself. > > > > > > The unrecognizable is what is. > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > > Dan, I was addressing Werner's last sentence. And I'm not mincing words with you for the hell of it. > > > > Thank you very much. > > > > ~A > > > > > Ok. I'll bite. Recognition happens in the present presceme. It is awareness without conditions save one... " mine " . > > ~A > Cognition always is recognition. There exists word recognition, pattern recognition, voice recognition, facial recognition and facial expression recognition, sound recognition and more, covering all the sensory spectrum. And it is not consciousness which is recognizing something. The recognition work is done subconsciously and then the result is made consious. What please is 'presceme' ? I only know 'prescene' which is the title of an album from Led Zeppelin. Werner Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 17, 2009 Nisargadatta , " wwoehr " <wwoehr wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > dan330033 > > Nisargadatta > > Wednesday, September 16, 2009 8:42 PM > > Re: Rumi > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " wwoehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And I will repeat again. My thoughts, at least til now, haven't > > > > > > > categorized any sensation or emotion as oneness. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > > > P: I have, and when I feel oneness coming on, > > > > > it's as if I have seen a woman's open mouth > > > > > closing on my dick. ) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pete.....you are something else. > > > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > > > There is and edge that the sentient-conceptual-consciousness can > > > > approach but never transcend. > > > > > > > > > Toomb, > > > > > > There is no sentient-conceptual consciousness. The senses are sentient and > > > concepts are created by thought. > > > > > > And consciousness never will approach anything. Consciouness is neither a > > > doer nor does it initiate and start any action or activity. > > > > > > Actions start and have their root in subconsciousness but never in > > > consciousness. > > > > > > There is a very simple rule to better understand consciousness, > > > consciousness always comes later. Example: > > > > > > When you hear a bang it already happened some hundred msecs before. Same > > > with seeing, sensing, feeling. Decisions are created up to 10 seconds > > > before they get conscious. Any action and activity already started before > > > it got conscious. Consciousness never is and was their initiator. > > > > > > Consciousness always comes later. > > > > > > Werner > > > > So, according to Werner, there is only consciousness. > > > > And consciousness always comes later. > > > > Later than something else that isn't consciousness. > > > > But, Werner says there is only consciousness. > > > > Hmmmm .... > > > > - D - > > > > Yes. And there is a real bang out there and consciousness, a few msecs later > > enters the scene and registers it. But remember: there is only > > consciousness! > > There is an initiator that is prior to consciousness but don't say there is > > anything beyond consciousness - there is only consciousness. I think I am > > beginning to see the light - finally! > > > > > Geo, > > You make coments about something which you did not fully understand. > > The statement 'consciousness is all there is' just does say that if there is no cosciousness you wouldn't hear, see, sense, feel, smell etc. You would not know anything, no thought would get conscious, etc, in short there wouldn't exist anything you could know of. > > All the 'beyond' you are so proud of is just knowledge, learned stuff. And also that knowledge needs to get conscious else you would not know it. > > My tip is before you gossip with Dan or who ever you feel driven to to lean at, use your own mind and stand on your own feet. > > Werner I'm sure Geo will benefit immensely from your lectures, Werner. It's not everyday that someone can be lectured by a person who is always passively aware of things after they happen, but can still instigate claims of knowing where someone else is coming from. The hilarity never ends on the Nisargadatta list ... -- D -- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 17, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " wwoehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And I will repeat again. My thoughts, at least til now, haven't > > > > > > > categorized any sensation or emotion as oneness. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > > > P: I have, and when I feel oneness coming on, > > > > > it's as if I have seen a woman's open mouth > > > > > closing on my dick. ) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pete.....you are something else. > > > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > > > There is and edge that the sentient-conceptual-consciousness can approach but never transcend. > > > > > > > > > Toomb, > > > > > > There is no sentient-conceptual consciousness. The senses are sentient and concepts are created by thought. > > > > > > And consciousness never will approach anything. Consciouness is neither a doer nor does it initiate and start any action or activity. > > > > > > Actions start and have their root in subconsciousness but never in > > > consciousness. > > > > > > There is a very simple rule to better understand consciousness, consciousness always comes later. Example: > > > > > > When you hear a bang it already happened some hundred msecs before. Same with seeing, sensing, feeling. Decisions are created up to 10 seconds before they get conscious. Any action and activity already started before it got conscious. Consciousness never is and was their initiator. > > > > > > Consciousness always comes later. > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > So, according to Werner, there is only consciousness. > > > > And consciousness always comes later. > > > > Later than something else that isn't consciousness. > > > > But, Werner says there is only consciousness. > > > > Hmmmm .... > > > > - D - > > > > > he will understand....later... > > > > > Marc he will understand only after it happens. unfortunately, there is no " after " it happens ... the phrase " shit out of luck " comes to mind ... - D - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 17, 2009 Nisargadatta , " anna " <kailashana wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " anna " <kailashana@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " wwoehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Toomb, > > > > > > > > There is no sentient-conceptual consciousness. The senses are sentient and concepts are created by thought. > > > > > > > > And consciousness never will approach anything. Consciouness is neither a doer nor does it initiate and start any action or activity. > > > > > > > > Actions start and have their root in subconsciousness but never in > > > > consciousness. > > > > > > > > There is a very simple rule to better understand consciousness, consciousness always comes later. Example: > > > > > > > > When you hear a bang it already happened some hundred msecs before. Same with seeing, sensing, feeling. Decisions are created up to 10 seconds before they get conscious. Any action and activity already started before it got conscious. Consciousness never is and was their initiator. > > > > > > > > Consciousness always comes later. > > > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > > > > > Consciousness is the malleable material (the building blocks of life) that morphs into what is. It is the tree, the computer keyboard, the LCD screen, the noise of the street. It is what is. > > > > > > Awareness of consciousness is sentience... all living things are aware according to their inherent nature. I suspect created objects such as tables may be aware... that is why its shape doesn't change > > > unless the desire to uncreate it. > > > > > > What comes later is recognition. > > > > > > > > > ~A > > > > What is, that depends not on recognition? > > > > It is not anything you recognize. > > > > It is here, now, unnoticed, unrecognized. > > > > It is not a feeling of being aware, not consciousness, not an experience, not a thought, not a feeling, not a memory, not a thing, not nothing. > > > > Recognition is of memory, is of the past. > > > > Recognition is knowing the table to be a table, things to be where they are, a feeling to be a feeling, a thought to be a thought. > > > > The recognizable takes care of itself. > > > > The unrecognizable is what is. > > > > - D - > > > > > Dan, I was addressing Werner's last sentence. And I'm not mincing words with you for the hell of it. > > Thank you very much. > > ~A Hi Anna - Yes, and I was addressing what you wrote. And I'm not mincing words with you for the hell of it. To live as the unrecognized ends any speculation about whether known objects have sentience. They don't. You're welcome. - D - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 17, 2009 Nisargadatta , " anna " <kailashana wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anna " <kailashana@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Consciousness is the malleable material (the building blocks of life) that morphs into what is. It is the tree, the computer keyboard, the LCD screen, the noise of the street. It is what is. > > > > > > > > Awareness of consciousness is sentience... all living things are aware according to their inherent nature. I suspect created objects such as tables may be aware... that is why its shape doesn't change > > > > unless the desire to uncreate it. > > > > > > > > What comes later is recognition. > > > > > > > > > > > > ~A > > > > > > What is, that depends not on recognition? > > > > > > It is not anything you recognize. > > > > > > It is here, now, unnoticed, unrecognized. > > > > > > It is not a feeling of being aware, not consciousness, not an experience, not a thought, not a feeling, not a memory, not a thing, not nothing. > > > > > > Recognition is of memory, is of the past. > > > > > > Recognition is knowing the table to be a table, things to be where they are, a feeling to be a feeling, a thought to be a thought. > > > > > > The recognizable takes care of itself. > > > > > > The unrecognizable is what is. > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > > Dan, I was addressing Werner's last sentence. And I'm not mincing words with you for the hell of it. > > > > Thank you very much. > > > > ~A > > > > > Ok. I'll bite. Recognition happens in the present presceme. It is awareness without conditions save one... " mine " . > > ~A Recognition is the operation of the past, the movement of memory. Memory assumes a present that is apart from it, with which it interacts. The result is recognized objects, persons, feelings, experiences, perceptions, and the sense of time and individual life. When neither awareness nor reality is linked to the operation of memory, " what is " freely reveals itself (not as or to a self). Memory still functions, objects and experiences appear. That takes care of itself. Awareness and reality are not linked to memory operations. Memory is understood as always arising " now " ... The unrecognized unknown one is, is " self-evident " ... - D - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 17, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " wwoehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And I will repeat again. My thoughts, at least til now, haven't > > > > > > > > categorized any sensation or emotion as oneness. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > > > > > P: I have, and when I feel oneness coming on, > > > > > > it's as if I have seen a woman's open mouth > > > > > > closing on my dick. ) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Pete.....you are something else. > > > > > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > > > > > There is and edge that the sentient-conceptual-consciousness can approach but never transcend. > > > > > > > > > > > > Toomb, > > > > > > > > There is no sentient-conceptual consciousness. The senses are sentient and concepts are created by thought. > > > > > > > > And consciousness never will approach anything. Consciouness is neither a doer nor does it initiate and start any action or activity. > > > > > > > > Actions start and have their root in subconsciousness but never in > > > > consciousness. > > > > > > > > There is a very simple rule to better understand consciousness, consciousness always comes later. Example: > > > > > > > > When you hear a bang it already happened some hundred msecs before. Same with seeing, sensing, feeling. Decisions are created up to 10 seconds before they get conscious. Any action and activity already started before it got conscious. Consciousness never is and was their initiator. > > > > > > > > Consciousness always comes later. > > > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > > So, according to Werner, there is only consciousness. > > > > > > And consciousness always comes later. > > > > > > Later than something else that isn't consciousness. > > > > > > But, Werner says there is only consciousness. > > > > > > Hmmmm .... > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > > he will understand....later... > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > he will understand only after it happens. > > unfortunately, there is no " after " it happens ... > > > the phrase " shit out of luck " comes to mind ... > > > - D - Does anybody really know what time it is? Does anybody really care? -- Chicago Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 17, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anna " <kailashana@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " anna " <kailashana@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Consciousness is the malleable material (the building blocks of life) that morphs into what is. It is the tree, the computer keyboard, the LCD screen, the noise of the street. It is what is. > > > > > > > > > > Awareness of consciousness is sentience... all living things are aware according to their inherent nature. I suspect created objects such as tables may be aware... that is why its shape doesn't change > > > > > unless the desire to uncreate it. > > > > > > > > > > What comes later is recognition. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ~A > > > > > > > > What is, that depends not on recognition? > > > > > > > > It is not anything you recognize. > > > > > > > > It is here, now, unnoticed, unrecognized. > > > > > > > > It is not a feeling of being aware, not consciousness, not an experience, not a thought, not a feeling, not a memory, not a thing, not nothing. > > > > > > > > Recognition is of memory, is of the past. > > > > > > > > Recognition is knowing the table to be a table, things to be where they are, a feeling to be a feeling, a thought to be a thought. > > > > > > > > The recognizable takes care of itself. > > > > > > > > The unrecognizable is what is. > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dan, I was addressing Werner's last sentence. And I'm not mincing words with you for the hell of it. > > > > > > Thank you very much. > > > > > > ~A > > > > > > > > > Ok. I'll bite. Recognition happens in the present presceme. It is awareness without conditions save one... " mine " . > > > > ~A > > Recognition is the operation of the past, the movement of memory. > > Memory assumes a present that is apart from it, with which it interacts. > > The result is recognized objects, persons, feelings, experiences, perceptions, and the sense of time and individual life. > > When neither awareness nor reality is linked to the operation of memory, " what is " freely reveals itself (not as or to a self). > > Memory still functions, objects and experiences appear. > > That takes care of itself. > > Awareness and reality are not linked to memory operations. > > Memory is understood as always arising " now " ... > > The unrecognized unknown one is, is " self-evident " ... > > - D - > Dan, your explanations of memory, awareness and reality--all your viewpoints, your words, mean what to YOU, exactly? ~A Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 17, 2009 Dan, your explanations of memory, awareness and reality--all your viewpoints, your words, mean what to YOU, exactly?~AMeans the ending of somethng enclosed and limited and the beguining of timlessness or any sense of limitation - freedom from the known. -geo- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 17, 2009 Nisargadatta , " anna " <kailashana wrote: > > Dan, your explanations of memory, awareness and reality--all your > viewpoints, your words, mean what to YOU, exactly? > > ~A One only wishes there were a 'you', eh? ;-). Then there would be somebody to 'love me' and 'help me'. But there is only this aloneness, absent both self and other. Well, one can pretend. What does that mean to " you " , exactly? ;-). Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 17, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anna " <kailashana@> wrote: > > > > Dan, your explanations of memory, awareness and reality--all your > > viewpoints, your words, mean what to YOU, exactly? > > > > ~A > > One only wishes there were a 'you', eh? ;-). > > Then there would be somebody to 'love me' and 'help me'. > > But there is only this aloneness, absent both self and other. > > Well, one can pretend. > > What does that mean to " you " , exactly? ;-). > Tim, The brain has built in faculties to see diffences between two people. And it also is able to see the differeneces between me and you. For example it can distinquish 'me' and Mr. Miller. Only brain damaged people cannot differentiate me and you. Werner Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 18, 2009 Nisargadatta , " anna " <kailashana wrote: > > Dan, your explanations of memory, awareness and reality--all your viewpoints, your words, mean what to YOU, exactly? > > ~A Anna - They are past. There would be no point to carrying them around with me. - D - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 18, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anna " <kailashana@> wrote: > > > > > Dan, your explanations of memory, awareness and reality--all your viewpoints, your words, mean what to YOU, exactly? > > > > ~A > > Anna - > > They are past. > > There would be no point to carrying them around with me. > > > - D - > " There would be no point to carrying them around with me. " But you do. I do too. It's just not that important, though, is it? They're photographs in an album. ~A Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 18, 2009 Nisargadatta , " anna " <kailashana wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " anna " <kailashana@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Dan, your explanations of memory, awareness and reality--all your viewpoints, your words, mean what to YOU, exactly? > > > > > > ~A > > > > Anna - > > > > They are past. > > > > There would be no point to carrying them around with me. > > > > > > - D - > > > > > " There would be no point to carrying them around with me. " > > But you do. I do too. What a silly assumption. Transient thoughts that arise only 'now' (or not at all) are not carried around. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 18, 2009 Nisargadatta , " anna " <kailashana wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " anna " <kailashana@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Dan, your explanations of memory, awareness and reality--all your viewpoints, your words, mean what to YOU, exactly? > > > > > > ~A > > > > Anna - > > > > They are past. > > > > There would be no point to carrying them around with me. > > > > > > - D - > > > > > " There would be no point to carrying them around with me. " > > But you do. I do too. It's just not that important, though, is it? > They're photographs in an album. > > ~A No, I don't. Neither do you. You are a picture that never came together all the way. It's always changing and fuzzy. The same with me. We don't get to carry anything. What a drag. We just partially materialize and dematerialize, without any choice in the matter. Silly, huh? - D - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 18, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anna " <kailashana@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anna " <kailashana@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Dan, your explanations of memory, awareness and reality--all your viewpoints, your words, mean what to YOU, exactly? > > > > > > > > ~A > > > > > > Anna - > > > > > > They are past. > > > > > > There would be no point to carrying them around with me. > > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > > " There would be no point to carrying them around with me. " > > > > But you do. I do too. It's just not that important, though, is it? > > They're photographs in an album. > > > > ~A > > No, I don't. > > Neither do you. > > You are a picture that never came together all the way. > > It's always changing and fuzzy. > > The same with me. > > We don't get to carry anything. > > What a drag. > > We just partially materialize and dematerialize, without any choice in the matter. > > Silly, huh? > > - D - Nicely said. Reminds of something I wrote in late 2007, before returning to the 'spiritual lists'. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 18, 2009 < Recognition is the operation of the past, the movement of memory.< Memory assumes a present that is apart from it, with which it interacts.< The result is recognized objects, persons, feelings, experiences, perceptions, and the sense of time and individual life.< When neither awareness nor reality is linked to the operation of memory, "what is" freely reveals itself (not as or to a self).< Memory still functions, objects and experiences appear.< That takes care of itself.< Awareness and reality are not linked to memory operations.< Memory is understood as always arising "now" ...< The unrecognized unknown one is, is "self-evident" ...< - D - Extremely clear and very well put! Michael A Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 18, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Michael Adamson " <adamson wrote: > > > < Recognition is the operation of the past, the movement of memory. > < Memory assumes a present that is apart from it, with which it interacts. > < The result is recognized objects, persons, feelings, experiences, perceptions, and the sense of time and individual life. > < When neither awareness nor reality is linked to the operation of memory, " what is " freely reveals itself (not as or to a self). > < Memory still functions, objects and experiences appear. > < That takes care of itself. > < Awareness and reality are not linked to memory operations. > < Memory is understood as always arising " now " ... > < The unrecognized unknown one is, is " self-evident " ... > < - D - > > > Extremely clear and very well put! > > Michael A Hey, hey, hey! Nice to hear ... And if it is clear, this is because you are now clearly you. Nothing standing between you and you. - D - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 18, 2009 < Recognition is the operation of the past, the movement of memory.< Memory assumes a present that is apart from it, with which it interacts.< The result is recognized objects, persons, feelings, experiences, perceptions, and the sense of time and individual life.< When neither awareness nor reality is linked to the operation of memory, "what is" freely reveals itself (not as or to a self).< Memory still functions, objects and experiences appear.< That takes care of itself.< Awareness and reality are not linked to memory operations.< Memory is understood as always arising "now" ...< The unrecognized unknown one is, is "self-evident" ...< - D - Extremely clear and very well put! Michael A Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 18, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Michael Adamson " <adamson@> wrote: > > > > > > < Recognition is the operation of the past, the movement of memory. > > < Memory assumes a present that is apart from it, with which it interacts. > > < The result is recognized objects, persons, feelings, experiences, perceptions, and the sense of time and individual life. > > < When neither awareness nor reality is linked to the operation of memory, " what is " freely reveals itself (not as or to a self). > > < Memory still functions, objects and experiences appear. > > < That takes care of itself. > > < Awareness and reality are not linked to memory operations. > > < Memory is understood as always arising " now " ... > > < The unrecognized unknown one is, is " self-evident " ... > > < - D - > > > > > > Extremely clear and very well put! > > > > Michael A > > Hey, hey, hey! > > Nice to hear ... > > And if it is clear, this is because you are now clearly you. > > Nothing standing between you and you. > > - D - > Some years ago I heard " Get out of your own Way!! " , seemingly from both the inside and outside. Yup. Clearly there is nothing standing between me and me now. ~A Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
