Guest guest Report post Posted November 17, 2009 - Tim G. Nisargadatta Tuesday, November 17, 2009 6:25 PM Re: The Absolute Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > > I think...ramesh, wine liquormen, pete, toombaru...and some others...There > are those who strive to fit " non-duality " into the one movement they call > consciousness. It somehow works out.....but it lacks the essence > -geo- Yes, 'all is consciousness' makes little sense, unless one is trying to say " there isn't such a thing as objectivity " (which is true). I used to joke on my old " Fewtchykrishnamurti " list that " All is Consciousness " is something they teach to anesthesiologists, to help them wake people up after surgery ;-). = Ha...yea. I admit that I was there at one time. It really cleans some - or most - of the mess. One is able to say there is only THIS. But if one is honest and tries to " understand " /contemplate/meditate the nature of this what is....the observer/observed thing becomes strange. It is a thing observeing itself...and then one MUST say that they are one. It is subtle and not so - at the same time. In fact one MUST " BE " in order to land.. :>) -geo- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 18, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > Tim G. > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 6:25 PM > Re: The Absolute > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > I think...ramesh, wine liquormen, pete, toombaru...and some others...There > > are those who strive to fit " non-duality " into the one movement they call > > consciousness. It somehow works out.....but it lacks the essence > > -geo- > > Yes, 'all is consciousness' makes little sense, unless one is trying to say > " there isn't such a thing as objectivity " (which is true). > > I used to joke on my old " Fewtchykrishnamurti " list that " All is > Consciousness " is something they teach to anesthesiologists, to help them > wake people up after surgery ;-). > = > Ha...yea. I admit that I was there at one time. It really cleans some - or > most - of the mess. One is able to say there is only THIS. But if one is > honest and tries to " understand " /contemplate/meditate the nature of this > what is....the observer/observed thing becomes strange. It is a thing > observeing itself...and then one MUST say that they are one. It is subtle > and not so - at the same time. In fact one MUST " BE " in order to land.. > :>) > -geo- what could be " strange " in a natural state? " being " and " non-being " are irrelevant here. This is the most " raw " and " innate " condition of all conditions. It is the truly Unconditional of any and all possible condition. It is (at it's most natural) a " being there " as " Identity " .. without " other " or " self " .. nor is This with recognition of possession or absence of same. This is Truth. but it's not possible to explain. by " Infection " It is become Awareness. No one is outside nor inside This. all talk falls flat. but..what the hell else can be done? Nothing is as Nothing does.. and It does nothing. Hark the Herald Angels sing! for This is Witness and the Bringer of Great Joy! it's a beginning of sorts... as it were. Rejoice! ..b b.b. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 18, 2009 - Tim G. Nisargadatta Tuesday, November 17, 2009 6:49 PM Re: The Absolute Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > Tim G. > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 6:25 PM > Re: The Absolute > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " inandor@ wrote: > > > > > > > > I think...ramesh, wine liquormen, pete, toombaru...and some > > others...There > > are those who strive to fit " non-duality " into the one movement they > > call > > consciousness. It somehow works out.....but it lacks the essence > > -geo- > > Yes, 'all is consciousness' makes little sense, unless one is trying to > say > " there isn't such a thing as objectivity " (which is true). > > I used to joke on my old " Fewtchykrishnamurti " list that " All is & g t; Consciousness " is something they teach to anesthesiologists, to help them > wake people up after surgery ;-). > = > Ha...yea. I admit that I was there at one time. It really cleans some - or > most - of the mess. One is able to say there is only THIS. But if one is > honest and tries to " understand " /contemplate/meditate the nature of this > what is....the observer/observed thing becomes strange. It is a thing > observeing itself...and then one MUST say that they are one. It is subtle > and not so - at the same time. In fact one MUST " BE " in order to land.. > :>) > -geo- Cool ;-) (p.s. I took this goofy pic this morning :-p). LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL LOLOLOLO Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 18, 2009 Nisargadatta , " anna " <kailashana wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > It isn't a verbal understanding. > > > > > > > > Some things, like the sugar, are non-verbal. > > > > > > > > If it's already understood, one can say " it is sweet " , and that's enough. > > > > > > > > If it isn't, ten million words aren't enough, and ten million > > > >(mental) pictures are no better :-p. > > > > > > > > > > P.S. really, the above is the whole 'trouble' with so-called nondual talk. It explains completely all the confusion and misinterpretation. > > > > > > Not to mention, there is nothing any more 'privileged' about 'nondual understanding', than the taste of sugar. It is that much open to everyone, or even more so. > > > > > > So, is there really anything to talk about? No. IMO it's just for fun. > > > > > > > non-verbal understanding, yes > > > > no need for conferences etc.... > > > > the presense of " somebody " who knows It....is already enough > > > > ... > > > > > > the imaginary individual entity can't stop to ask and ask....and then later....to answer and answer.....bubbles bubbles bubbles.... > > > > ... > > > > where there is knowledge....there is peace.... > > > > and fun, yes! > > > > ... > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > When the " imaginary individual entity " is known, is seen for who s/he is/is not...s/he is no longer imaginary. > > And like Pinocchio, become *real* humans, with the whole kit and kaboodle of human existence at our fingertips. > > As if we had been given life for the second time. > > > ~A > who is this imaginary entity " ~A " ....? it's an entity who can very well imagine to be real...ok, if you like.....up to you imagination = imaginary entity more imagination = more imaginary entity heavy imagination = heavy imaginary entity etc .... but then....all this bubbles still don't make anything real .... what is real is formless, changless and infinite ..... Marc Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 18, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > dan330033 > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 5:25 PM > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > dan330033 > > Nisargadatta > > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 4:52 PM > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > - > > > dan330033 > > > Nisargadatta > > > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 1:58 PM > > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > Tim G. > > > > Nisargadatta > > > > Monday, November 16, 2009 11:30 PM > > > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's that the relative being comes to a full stop. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It realizes that it can never comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It can't even comprehend that it can't comprehend, or what it > > > > > > > can't > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > > > Indeed... one realizes that there was never anything to > > > > > > comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > > > The 'relative being' is only thought's tendency to divide the > > > > > > indivisible, apparently as a way to ensure survival of the > > > > > > organism. > > > > > > > > > > > > Why this tends to goes so far beyond the necessary in human > > > > > > beings, > > > > > > I > > > > > > can't comprehend :-p. > > > > > > > > > > It's a puzzle within a mystery, wrapped in an enigma. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Scratching head, > > > > > > > > > > Dan > > > > > > > > It may have something to do with 'being able to project my own death', > > > > once > > > > I feel that 'I exist'. > > > > > > > > " I exist " (thus) " I will die " becomes a sort of broken thought-loop, > > > > existing only for its own continuation, and stirring up all sorts of > > > > other > > > > silliness in the process. > > > > > > > > The issue is 'time', and the associated dream. > > > > > > > > geo> Yes. This is the basic fear-program that runs time-based > > > > dream-pseudo-existence > > > > > > I have never been born, so I wouldn't know. > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > But you know you dont know? You dont know what? > > > -geo- > > > > In other words, I am not encapsulated by a fear-based program or an > > existence in time. > > > > - D - > > > > I suppose for one who feels as... and is able to say " all is > > consciousness " > > to talk about some " unborn " must sound absurd or imagination? > > -geo- > > Was this so-called consciousness that all is, something that was born? > > - D - > > I am not sure what would one of them answer - but I suppose they would say > it was born with the organism. For example pete I think says all is > happening in the brain. Toombaru something like that also. They say it is > all one selfless movement, unknown in its nature because the limited mind > can not know itself - nonetheless all was born with the body. > -geo- How can this consciousness be all that is, if it was born? All that is, includes what is, prior to birth. The consciousness that is born, that is constituted, is not all. I have no name for myself. Things that are named, have beginnings and end. Dan has a name. - D - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 18, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > - > > > dan330033 > > > Nisargadatta > > > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 4:52 PM > > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > dan330033 > > > > Nisargadatta > > > > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 1:58 PM > > > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > Tim G. > > > > > Nisargadatta > > > > > Monday, November 16, 2009 11:30 PM > > > > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's that the relative being comes to a full stop. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It realizes that it can never comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It can't even comprehend that it can't comprehend, or what it > > > > > > > > can't > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Indeed... one realizes that there was never anything to comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The 'relative being' is only thought's tendency to divide the > > > > > > > indivisible, apparently as a way to ensure survival of the organism. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why this tends to goes so far beyond the necessary in human beings, > > > > > > > I > > > > > > > can't comprehend :-p. > > > > > > > > > > > > It's a puzzle within a mystery, wrapped in an enigma. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Scratching head, > > > > > > > > > > > > Dan > > > > > > > > > > It may have something to do with 'being able to project my own death', > > > > > once > > > > > I feel that 'I exist'. > > > > > > > > > > " I exist " (thus) " I will die " becomes a sort of broken thought-loop, > > > > > existing only for its own continuation, and stirring up all sorts of > > > > > other > > > > > silliness in the process. > > > > > > > > > > The issue is 'time', and the associated dream. > > > > > > > > > > geo> Yes. This is the basic fear-program that runs time-based > > > > > dream-pseudo-existence > > > > > > > > I have never been born, so I wouldn't know. > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > But you know you dont know? You dont know what? > > > > -geo- > > > > > > In other words, I am not encapsulated by a fear-based program or an > > > existence in time. > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > I suppose for one who feels as... and is able to say " all is consciousness " > > > to talk about some " unborn " must sound absurd or imagination? > > > -geo- > > > > > > Was this so-called consciousness that all is, something that was > > born? > > > > - D - > > Fwiw, I think " all is consciousness " is a cheesy way to say " there's no such thing as objectivity " . > > Also fwiw, I don't recall you ever uttering the words " all is consciousness " . Thought that was Ramesh Balsekar's thing. Yes. Not my thing. Just seems limited, saying all is x. Maybe it's worth a try, but anything said falls short. All is consciousness. All is nothing. All is self. All is god. All is one. All is being. I guess you could say all that is, is all that is. Or, you could say is, is. Or, you could say: Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 18, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > dan330033 > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 5:23 PM > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > dan330033 > > Nisargadatta > > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 4:52 PM > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > - > > > dan330033 > > > Nisargadatta > > > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 1:58 PM > > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > Tim G. > > > > Nisargadatta > > > > Monday, November 16, 2009 11:30 PM > > > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's that the relative being comes to a full stop. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It realizes that it can never comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It can't even comprehend that it can't comprehend, or what it > > > > > > > can't > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > > > Indeed... one realizes that there was never anything to > > > > > > comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > > > The 'relative being' is only thought's tendency to divide the > > > > > > indivisible, apparently as a way to ensure survival of the > > > > > > organism. > > > > > > > > > > > > Why this tends to goes so far beyond the necessary in human > > > > > > beings, > > > > > > I > > > > > > can't comprehend :-p. > > > > > > > > > > It's a puzzle within a mystery, wrapped in an enigma. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Scratching head, > > > > > > > > > > Dan > > > > > > > > It may have something to do with 'being able to project my own death', > > > > once > > > > I feel that 'I exist'. > > > > > > > > " I exist " (thus) " I will die " becomes a sort of broken thought-loop, > > > > existing only for its own continuation, and stirring up all sorts of > > > > other > > > > silliness in the process. > > > > > > > > The issue is 'time', and the associated dream. > > > > > > > > geo> Yes. This is the basic fear-program that runs time-based > > > > dream-pseudo-existence > > > > > > I have never been born, so I wouldn't know. > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > But you know you dont know? You dont know what? > > > -geo- > > > > In other words, I am not encapsulated by a fear-based program or an > > existence in time. > > > > - D - > > > > I suppose for one who feels as... and is able to say " all is > > consciousness " > > to talk about some " unborn " must sound absurd or imagination? > > -geo- > > I have never been born, so I wouldn't know. > > - D - > > You wouldn't know what would " they " say because you are unborn? Makes no > sense. > -geo- Be the unborn. Now, how much concern is there to know what someone else feels about the unborn, who says that " all is consciousness " ? Zero. - D - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 18, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Was this so-called consciousness that all is, something that was > > born? > > > > - D - > > Fwiw, I think " all is consciousness " is a cheesy way to say " there's no such thing as objectivity " . > > Also fwiw, I don't recall you ever uttering the words " all is consciousness " . Thought that was Ramesh Balsekar's thing. For what it's worth, I agree with you about " objectivity. " It seems more clear to say, " there is no basis to postulate any separately existing objects or any so-called 'objective reality' based on supposing their existence. When people refer to objective reality, they refer to a world formulated conceptually based on intersubjective agreements. And such agreements are much flimsier than often supposed, since they require a subject to agree with another subject - as if such agreement were possible. But then, that's how culture works. Based on flimsy agreements established over imaginary time. - D - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 18, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > > I have never been born, so I wouldn't know. > > - D - > > Why beeing unborn is an impediment to know anything that is known by the > limited mind that is made to know it? > -geo- There is no impediment. Trying to figure out what someone else knows, is an impediment. The unborn has no one else to figure out. - D - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 18, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > geo > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 6:46 PM > Re: Re: The Absolute > > > > > - > Tim G. > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 5:40 PM > Re: The Absolute > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > Fwiw, I think " all is consciousness " is a cheesy way to say " there's no > > such > > thing as objectivity " . > > > > Also fwiw, I don't recall you ever uttering the words " all is > > consciousness " . Thought that was Ramesh Balsekar's thing. > > > = > > I think...ramesh, wine liquormen, pete, toombaru...and some others...There > are those who strive to fit " non-duality " into the one movement they call > consciousness. It somehow works out.....but it lacks the essence > -geo- The so-called non-dual is not a philosophical position that a person puts together or makes a statement about. It is dissolution of boundary without anything being lost, including the ability to refer to boundaries in social situations. - D - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 18, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > Tim G. > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 6:25 PM > Re: The Absolute > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > I think...ramesh, wine liquormen, pete, toombaru...and some others...There > > are those who strive to fit " non-duality " into the one movement they call > > consciousness. It somehow works out.....but it lacks the essence > > -geo- > > Yes, 'all is consciousness' makes little sense, unless one is trying to say > " there isn't such a thing as objectivity " (which is true). > > I used to joke on my old " Fewtchykrishnamurti " list that " All is > Consciousness " is something they teach to anesthesiologists, to help them > wake people up after surgery ;-). > = > Ha...yea. I admit that I was there at one time. It really cleans some - or > most - of the mess. One is able to say there is only THIS. But if one is > honest and tries to " understand " /contemplate/meditate the nature of this > what is....the observer/observed thing becomes strange. It is a thing > observeing itself...and then one MUST say that they are one. It is subtle > and not so - at the same time. In fact one MUST " BE " in order to land.. > :>) > -geo- At the moment of nondivision of subject/object, nothing can be said about it. - D - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 18, 2009 - dan330033 Nisargadatta Wednesday, November 18, 2009 1:46 PM Re: The Absolute Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > dan330033 > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 5:25 PM > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > dan330033 > > Nisargadatta > > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 4:52 PM > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > - > > > dan330033 > > > Nisargadatta > > > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 1:58 PM > > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > Tim G. > > > > Nisargadatta > > > > Monday, November 16, 2009 11:30 PM > > > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's that the relative being comes to a full stop. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It realizes that it can never comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It can't even comprehend that it can't comprehend, or what it > > > > > > > can't > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > > > Indeed... one realizes that there was never anything to > > > > > > comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > > > The 'relative being' is only thought's tendency to divide the > > > > > > indivisible, apparently as a way to ensure survival of the > > > > > > organism. > > > > > > > > > > > > Why this tends to goes so far beyond the necessary in human > > > > > > beings, > > > > > > I > > > > > > can't comprehend :-p. > > > > > > > > > > It's a puzzle within a mystery, wrapped in an enigma. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Scratching head, > > > > > > > > > > Dan > > > > > > > > It may have something to do with 'being able to project my own > > > > death', > > > > once > > > > I feel that 'I exist'. > > > > > > > > " I exist " (thus) " I will die " becomes a sort of broken thought-loop, > > > > existing only for its own continuation, and stirring up all sorts of > > > > other > > > > silliness in the process. > > > > > > > > The issue is 'time', and the associated dream. > > > > > > > > geo> Yes. This is the basic fear-program that runs time-based > > > > dream-pseudo-existence > > > > > > I have never been born, so I wouldn't know. > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > But you know you dont know? You dont know what? > > > -geo- > > > > In other words, I am not encapsulated by a fear-based program or an > > existence in time. > > > > - D - > > > > I suppose for one who feels as... and is able to say " all is > > consciousness " > > to talk about some " unborn " must sound absurd or imagination? > > -geo- > > Was this so-called consciousness that all is, something that was born? > > - D - > > I am not sure what would one of them answer - but I suppose they would say > it was born with the organism. For example pete I think says all is > happening in the brain. Toombaru something like that also. They say it is > all one selfless movement, unknown in its nature because the limited mind > can not know itself - nonetheless all was born with the body. > -geo- How can this consciousness be all that is, if it was born? All that is, includes what is, prior to birth. The consciousness that is born, that is constituted, is not all. -d- It is clear - but not a matter of logic, I guess -geo- I have no name for myself. Things that are named, have beginnings and end. Dan has a name. - D - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 18, 2009 - dan330033 Nisargadatta Wednesday, November 18, 2009 1:48 PM Re: The Absolute Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > - > > > dan330033 > > > Nisargadatta > > > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 4:52 PM > > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > dan330033 > > > > Nisargadatta > > > > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 1:58 PM > > > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > Tim G. > > > > > Nisargadatta > > > > > Monday, November 16, 2009 11:30 PM > > > > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's that the relative being comes to a full stop. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It realizes that it can never comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It can't even comprehend that it can't comprehend, or what > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > can't > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Indeed... one realizes that there was never anything to > > > > > > > comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The 'relative being' is only thought's tendency to divide the > > > > > > > indivisible, apparently as a way to ensure survival of the > > > > > > > organism. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why this tends to goes so far beyond the necessary in human > > > > > > > beings, > > > > > > > I > > > > > > > can't comprehend :-p. > > > > > > > > > > > > It's a puzzle within a mystery, wrapped in an enigma. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Scratching head, > > > > > > > > > > > > Dan > > > > > > > > > > It may have something to do with 'being able to project my own > > > > > death', > > > > > once > > > > > I feel that 'I exist'. > > > > > > > > > > " I exist " (thus) " I will die " becomes a sort of broken > > > > > thought-loop, > > > > > existing only for its own continuation, and stirring up all sorts > > > > > of > > > > > other > > > > > silliness in the process. > > > > > > > > > > The issue is 'time', and the associated dream. > > > > > > > > > > geo> Yes. This is the basic fear-program that runs time-based > > > > > dream-pseudo-existence > > > > > > > > I have never been born, so I wouldn't know. > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > But you know you dont know? You dont know what? > > > > -geo- > > > > > > In other words, I am not encapsulated by a fear-based program or an > > > existence in time. > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > I suppose for one who feels as... and is able to say " all is > > > consciousness " > > > to talk about some " unborn " must sound absurd or imagination? > > > -geo- > > > > > > Was this so-called consciousness that all is, something that was > > born? > > > > - D - > > Fwiw, I think " all is consciousness " is a cheesy way to say " there's no > such thing as objectivity " . > > Also fwiw, I don't recall you ever uttering the words " all is > consciousness " . Thought that was Ramesh Balsekar's thing. Yes. Not my thing. Just seems limited, saying all is x. Maybe it's worth a try, but anything said falls short. All is consciousness. -d- Well...usually, people refer to consciousness as manifestation, the world, or mind/body, or all of those together. Hardly ever something unborn -geo- All is nothing. All is self. All is god. All is one. All is being. I guess you could say all that is, is all that is. Or, you could say is, is. Or, you could say: Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 18, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > dan330033 > Nisargadatta > Wednesday, November 18, 2009 1:48 PM > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > dan330033 > > > > Nisargadatta > > > > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 4:52 PM > > > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > dan330033 > > > > > Nisargadatta > > > > > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 1:58 PM > > > > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > Tim G. > > > > > > Nisargadatta > > > > > > Monday, November 16, 2009 11:30 PM > > > > > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's that the relative being comes to a full stop. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It realizes that it can never comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It can't even comprehend that it can't comprehend, or what > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > can't > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Indeed... one realizes that there was never anything to > > > > > > > > comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The 'relative being' is only thought's tendency to divide the > > > > > > > > indivisible, apparently as a way to ensure survival of the > > > > > > > > organism. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why this tends to goes so far beyond the necessary in human > > > > > > > > beings, > > > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > can't comprehend :-p. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's a puzzle within a mystery, wrapped in an enigma. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Scratching head, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dan > > > > > > > > > > > > It may have something to do with 'being able to project my own > > > > > > death', > > > > > > once > > > > > > I feel that 'I exist'. > > > > > > > > > > > > " I exist " (thus) " I will die " becomes a sort of broken > > > > > > thought-loop, > > > > > > existing only for its own continuation, and stirring up all sorts > > > > > > of > > > > > > other > > > > > > silliness in the process. > > > > > > > > > > > > The issue is 'time', and the associated dream. > > > > > > > > > > > > geo> Yes. This is the basic fear-program that runs time-based > > > > > > dream-pseudo-existence > > > > > > > > > > I have never been born, so I wouldn't know. > > > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > > > But you know you dont know? You dont know what? > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > In other words, I am not encapsulated by a fear-based program or an > > > > existence in time. > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > I suppose for one who feels as... and is able to say " all is > > > > consciousness " > > > > to talk about some " unborn " must sound absurd or imagination? > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > > Was this so-called consciousness that all is, something that was > > > born? > > > > > > - D - > > > > Fwiw, I think " all is consciousness " is a cheesy way to say " there's no > > such thing as objectivity " . > > > > Also fwiw, I don't recall you ever uttering the words " all is > > consciousness " . Thought that was Ramesh Balsekar's thing. > > Yes. Not my thing. > > Just seems limited, saying all is x. > > Maybe it's worth a try, but anything said falls short. > > All is consciousness. > -d- > > Well...usually, people refer to consciousness as manifestation, the world, > or mind/body, or all of those together. Hardly ever something unborn > -geo- Yes, the born consciousness can't know the unborn. Trying to give a name to the unborn (like Self, Consciousness, Being, God) gives the impression something is known about it by the consciousness of a limited (born) individual. The born can't know the unborn. Hence the advaita teaching about the child of a barren mother - the child being the born consciousness, or body-mind-consciousness. The knowing which is unborn, is not commented upon, not languaged. Yet this unborn is how language can be known. The unborn is not experienced. Yet is how experience can be experienced. I suppose this is why Nis. referred to " awareness. " To show that the unborn is how the body-mind consciousness can know, but is never known by the body-mind consciousness. - D - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 18, 2009 - dan330033 Nisargadatta Wednesday, November 18, 2009 1:51 PM Re: The Absolute Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > dan330033 > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 5:23 PM > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > dan330033 > > Nisargadatta > > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 4:52 PM > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > - > > > dan330033 > > > Nisargadatta > > > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 1:58 PM > > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > Tim G. > > > > Nisargadatta > > > > Monday, November 16, 2009 11:30 PM > > > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's that the relative being comes to a full stop. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It realizes that it can never comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It can't even comprehend that it can't comprehend, or what it > > > > > > > can't > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > > > Indeed... one realizes that there was never anything to > > > > > > comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > > > The 'relative being' is only thought's tendency to divide the > > > > > > indivisible, apparently as a way to ensure survival of the > > > > > > organism. > > > > > > > > > > > > Why this tends to goes so far beyond the necessary in human > > > > > > beings, > > > > > > I > > > > > > can't comprehend :-p. > > > > > > > > > > It's a puzzle within a mystery, wrapped in an enigma. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Scratching head, > > > > > > > > > > Dan > > > > > > > > It may have something to do with 'being able to project my own > > > > death', > > > > once > > > > I feel that 'I exist'. > > > > > > > > " I exist " (thus) " I will die " becomes a sort of broken thought-loop, > > > > existing only for its own continuation, and stirring up all sorts of > > > > other > > > > silliness in the process. > > > > > > > > The issue is 'time', and the associated dream. > > > > > > > > geo> Yes. This is the basic fear-program that runs time-based > > > > dream-pseudo-existence > > > > > > I have never been born, so I wouldn't know. > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > But you know you dont know? You dont know what? > > > -geo- > > > > In other words, I am not encapsulated by a fear-based program or an > > existence in time. > > > > - D - > > > > I suppose for one who feels as... and is able to say " all is > > consciousness " > > to talk about some " unborn " must sound absurd or imagination? > > -geo- > > I have never been born, so I wouldn't know. > > - D - > > You wouldn't know what would " they " say because you are unborn? Makes no > sense. > -geo- Be the unborn. Now, how much concern is there to know what someone else feels about the unborn, who says that " all is consciousness " ? Zero. - D - Ah..that. The same amount of concern that makes me respond to posts in a list. Not necessarily interesting. -geo- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 18, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > Be the unborn. > > Now, how much concern is there to know what someone else feels about the unborn, who says that " all is consciousness " ? > > Zero. > > - D - > > But I am not sure I get that. You are the unborn - as you say - and you write and discuss several issues in several lists. > Are unborn sometimes? :>) > -geo- No. You've brought this issue up many times, in different ways. It shows that Geo wants to know something. Geo doesn't, nor does Dan - except in terms of society. In which case, yes, I know where my driver's license is if a cop stops me on the highway. It boils down to this: Dan is a creature who writes and responds, and produces a license if stopped on a highway to show who he is. The unborn has no name. The unborn is not ever known by Dan or any other nameable creature. Dan writes about the unborn. This doesn't mean that the unborn is something Dan knows about. The unborn is how Dan can know anything and write about anything. Dan has no actual being of its own. Dan is a function, so to speak, not a being in its own right. - D - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 18, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > dan330033 > Nisargadatta > Wednesday, November 18, 2009 3:06 PM > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > geo > > Nisargadatta > > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 6:46 PM > > Re: Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > - > > Tim G. > > Nisargadatta > > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 5:40 PM > > Re: The Absolute > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Fwiw, I think " all is consciousness " is a cheesy way to say " there's no > > > such > > > thing as objectivity " . > > > > > > Also fwiw, I don't recall you ever uttering the words " all is > > > consciousness " . Thought that was Ramesh Balsekar's thing. > > > > > = > > > > I think...ramesh, wine liquormen, pete, toombaru...and some others...There > > are those who strive to fit " non-duality " into the one movement they call > > consciousness. It somehow works out.....but it lacks the essence > > -geo- > > The so-called non-dual is not a philosophical position that a person puts > together or makes a statement about. > > It is dissolution of boundary without anything being lost, including the > ability to refer to boundaries in social situations. > > - D - > > Sure. But if I believe that the manifested is all there is..... > -geo- If I believe even one thing ... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 18, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > dan330033 > Nisargadatta > Wednesday, November 18, 2009 3:15 PM > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > dan330033 > > Nisargadatta > > Wednesday, November 18, 2009 1:48 PM > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > dan330033 > > > > > Nisargadatta > > > > > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 4:52 PM > > > > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > dan330033 > > > > > > Nisargadatta > > > > > > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 1:58 PM > > > > > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > Tim G. > > > > > > > Nisargadatta > > > > > > > Monday, November 16, 2009 11:30 PM > > > > > > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " > > > > > > > > > <dan330033@> > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's that the relative being comes to a full stop. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It realizes that it can never comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It can't even comprehend that it can't comprehend, or what > > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > > can't > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Indeed... one realizes that there was never anything to > > > > > > > > > comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The 'relative being' is only thought's tendency to divide > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > indivisible, apparently as a way to ensure survival of the > > > > > > > > > organism. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why this tends to goes so far beyond the necessary in human > > > > > > > > > beings, > > > > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > > can't comprehend :-p. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's a puzzle within a mystery, wrapped in an enigma. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Scratching head, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It may have something to do with 'being able to project my own > > > > > > > death', > > > > > > > once > > > > > > > I feel that 'I exist'. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " I exist " (thus) " I will die " becomes a sort of broken > > > > > > > thought-loop, > > > > > > > existing only for its own continuation, and stirring up all > > > > > > > sorts > > > > > > > of > > > > > > > other > > > > > > > silliness in the process. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The issue is 'time', and the associated dream. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > geo> Yes. This is the basic fear-program that runs time-based > > > > > > > dream-pseudo-existence > > > > > > > > > > > > I have never been born, so I wouldn't know. > > > > > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > > > > > But you know you dont know? You dont know what? > > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > > > In other words, I am not encapsulated by a fear-based program or an > > > > > existence in time. > > > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > > > I suppose for one who feels as... and is able to say " all is > > > > > consciousness " > > > > > to talk about some " unborn " must sound absurd or imagination? > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > > > > > Was this so-called consciousness that all is, something that was > > > > born? > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > Fwiw, I think " all is consciousness " is a cheesy way to say " there's no > > > such thing as objectivity " . > > > > > > Also fwiw, I don't recall you ever uttering the words " all is > > > consciousness " . Thought that was Ramesh Balsekar's thing. > > > > Yes. Not my thing. > > > > Just seems limited, saying all is x. > > > > Maybe it's worth a try, but anything said falls short. > > > > All is consciousness. > > -d- > > > > Well...usually, people refer to consciousness as manifestation, the world, > > or mind/body, or all of those together. Hardly ever something unborn > > -geo- > > Yes, the born consciousness can't know the unborn. > > Trying to give a name to the unborn (like Self, Consciousness, Being, God) > gives the impression something is known about it by the consciousness of a > limited (born) individual. > > The born can't know the unborn. > > Hence the advaita teaching about the child of a barren mother - the child > being the born consciousness, or body-mind-consciousness. > > The knowing which is unborn, is not commented upon, not languaged. > > Yet this unborn is how language can be known. > > The unborn is not experienced. > > Yet is how experience can be experienced. > > I suppose this is why Nis. referred to " awareness. " > > To show that the unborn is how the body-mind consciousness can know, but is > never known by the body-mind consciousness. > > - D - > > And without consciousness nothing is - nonetheless there is. > -geo- Distinguishing between is and is not is an activity of conceptual mind. - D - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 18, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > dan330033 > Nisargadatta > Wednesday, November 18, 2009 1:46 PM > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > dan330033 > > Nisargadatta > > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 5:25 PM > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > - > > > dan330033 > > > Nisargadatta > > > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 4:52 PM > > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > dan330033 > > > > Nisargadatta > > > > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 1:58 PM > > > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > Tim G. > > > > > Nisargadatta > > > > > Monday, November 16, 2009 11:30 PM > > > > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's that the relative being comes to a full stop. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It realizes that it can never comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It can't even comprehend that it can't comprehend, or what it > > > > > > > > can't > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Indeed... one realizes that there was never anything to > > > > > > > comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The 'relative being' is only thought's tendency to divide the > > > > > > > indivisible, apparently as a way to ensure survival of the > > > > > > > organism. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why this tends to goes so far beyond the necessary in human > > > > > > > beings, > > > > > > > I > > > > > > > can't comprehend :-p. > > > > > > > > > > > > It's a puzzle within a mystery, wrapped in an enigma. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Scratching head, > > > > > > > > > > > > Dan > > > > > > > > > > It may have something to do with 'being able to project my own > > > > > death', > > > > > once > > > > > I feel that 'I exist'. > > > > > > > > > > " I exist " (thus) " I will die " becomes a sort of broken thought-loop, > > > > > existing only for its own continuation, and stirring up all sorts of > > > > > other > > > > > silliness in the process. > > > > > > > > > > The issue is 'time', and the associated dream. > > > > > > > > > > geo> Yes. This is the basic fear-program that runs time-based > > > > > dream-pseudo-existence > > > > > > > > I have never been born, so I wouldn't know. > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > But you know you dont know? You dont know what? > > > > -geo- > > > > > > In other words, I am not encapsulated by a fear-based program or an > > > existence in time. > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > I suppose for one who feels as... and is able to say " all is > > > consciousness " > > > to talk about some " unborn " must sound absurd or imagination? > > > -geo- > > > > Was this so-called consciousness that all is, something that was born? > > > > - D - > > > > I am not sure what would one of them answer - but I suppose they would say > > it was born with the organism. For example pete I think says all is > > happening in the brain. Toombaru something like that also. They say it is > > all one selfless movement, unknown in its nature because the limited mind > > can not know itself - nonetheless all was born with the body. > > -geo- > > How can this consciousness be all that is, if it was born? > > All that is, includes what is, prior to birth. > > The consciousness that is born, that is constituted, is not all. > -d- > > It is clear - but not a matter of logic, I guess > -geo- > > I have no name for myself. > > Things that are named, have beginnings and end. > > Dan has a name. > > - D - if there is a " myself " .. for which you say " YOU " have not given a " name " .. you have given " it " a name by saying so much. there is no such thing as a self. what do 'you' suppose is the situation with " Dan " ? there are neither beginnings nor endings of or for illusions. to suggest that there is.. is itself false premise and illusory. Dan.. you don't make any sense. but it's cut stuff anyway. ..b b.b. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 18, 2009 Be the unborn.Now, how much concern is there to know what someone else feels about the unborn, who says that "all is consciousness"?Zero.- D - But I am not sure I get that. You are the unborn - as you say - and you write and discuss several issues in several lists. Are unborn sometimes? :>) -geo- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 18, 2009 - dan330033 Nisargadatta Wednesday, November 18, 2009 3:06 PM Re: The Absolute Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > geo > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 6:46 PM > Re: Re: The Absolute > > > > > - > Tim G. > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 5:40 PM > Re: The Absolute > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > Fwiw, I think " all is consciousness " is a cheesy way to say " there's no > > such > > thing as objectivity " . > > > > Also fwiw, I don't recall you ever uttering the words " all is > > consciousness " . Thought that was Ramesh Balsekar's thing. > > > = > > I think...ramesh, wine liquormen, pete, toombaru...and some others...There > are those who strive to fit " non-duality " into the one movement they call > consciousness. It somehow works out.....but it lacks the essence > -geo- The so-called non-dual is not a philosophical position that a person puts together or makes a statement about. It is dissolution of boundary without anything being lost, including the ability to refer to boundaries in social situations. - D - Sure. But if I believe that the manifested is all there is..... -geo- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 18, 2009 - dan330033 Nisargadatta Wednesday, November 18, 2009 3:15 PM Re: The Absolute Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > dan330033 > Nisargadatta > Wednesday, November 18, 2009 1:48 PM > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > dan330033 > > > > Nisargadatta > > > > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 4:52 PM > > > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > dan330033 > > > > > Nisargadatta > > > > > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 1:58 PM > > > > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > Tim G. > > > > > > Nisargadatta > > > > > > Monday, November 16, 2009 11:30 PM > > > > > > Re: The Absolute > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " > > > > > > > > <dan330033@> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's that the relative being comes to a full stop. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It realizes that it can never comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It can't even comprehend that it can't comprehend, or what > > > > > > > > > it > > > > > > > > > can't > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Indeed... one realizes that there was never anything to > > > > > > > > comprehend. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The 'relative being' is only thought's tendency to divide > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > indivisible, apparently as a way to ensure survival of the > > > > > > > > organism. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why this tends to goes so far beyond the necessary in human > > > > > > > > beings, > > > > > > > > I > > > > > > > > can't comprehend :-p. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's a puzzle within a mystery, wrapped in an enigma. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Scratching head, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dan > > > > > > > > > > > > It may have something to do with 'being able to project my own > > > > > > death', > > > > > > once > > > > > > I feel that 'I exist'. > > > > > > > > > > > > " I exist " (thus) " I will die " becomes a sort of broken > > > > > > thought-loop, > > > > > > existing only for its own continuation, and stirring up all > > > > > > sorts > > > > > > of > > > > > > other > > > > > > silliness in the process. > > > > > > > > > > > > The issue is 'time', and the associated dream. > > > > > > > > > > > > geo> Yes. This is the basic fear-program that runs time-based > > > > > > dream-pseudo-existence > > > > > > > > > > I have never been born, so I wouldn't know. > > > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > > > But you know you dont know? You dont know what? > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > In other words, I am not encapsulated by a fear-based program or an > > > > existence in time. > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > I suppose for one who feels as... and is able to say " all is > > > > consciousness " > > > > to talk about some " unborn " must sound absurd or imagination? > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > > Was this so-called consciousness that all is, something that was > > > born? > > > > > > - D - > > > > Fwiw, I think " all is consciousness " is a cheesy way to say " there's no > > such thing as objectivity " . > > > > Also fwiw, I don't recall you ever uttering the words " all is > > consciousness " . Thought that was Ramesh Balsekar's thing. > > Yes. Not my thing. > > Just seems limited, saying all is x. > > Maybe it's worth a try, but anything said falls short. > > All is consciousness. > -d- > > Well...usually, people refer to consciousness as manifestation, the world, > or mind/body, or all of those together. Hardly ever something unborn > -geo- Yes, the born consciousness can't know the unborn. Trying to give a name to the unborn (like Self, Consciousness, Being, God) gives the impression something is known about it by the consciousness of a limited (born) individual. The born can't know the unborn. Hence the advaita teaching about the child of a barren mother - the child being the born consciousness, or body-mind-consciousness. The knowing which is unborn, is not commented upon, not languaged. Yet this unborn is how language can be known. The unborn is not experienced. Yet is how experience can be experienced. I suppose this is why Nis. referred to " awareness. " To show that the unborn is how the body-mind consciousness can know, but is never known by the body-mind consciousness. - D - And without consciousness nothing is - nonetheless there is. -geo- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 18, 2009 Re: The Absolute Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > Distinguishing between is and is not is an activity of conceptual mind. > > - D - > > > Yes it is. > > -geo- > No, it is not. 'Today it is cold' and 'today it is not cold', is that a concept or a classification ? Werner Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 18, 2009 - dan330033 Nisargadatta Wednesday, November 18, 2009 3:40 PM Re: The Absolute Nisargadatta , "geo" <inandor wrote:>> > - > dan330033> Nisargadatta > Wednesday, November 18, 2009 3:15 PM> Re: The Absolute> > > > > > Nisargadatta , "geo" <inandor@> wrote:> >> >> > - > > dan330033> > Nisargadatta > > Wednesday, November 18, 2009 1:48 PM> > Re: The Absolute> >> >> >> >> >> > Nisargadatta , "Tim G." <fewtch@> wrote:> > >> > > Nisargadatta , "dan330033" <dan330033@> wrote:> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > Nisargadatta , "geo" <inandor@> wrote:> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > - > > > > > dan330033> > > > > Nisargadatta > > > > > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 4:52 PM> > > > > Re: The Absolute> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > Nisargadatta , "geo" <inandor@> wrote:> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > - > > > > > > dan330033> > > > > > Nisargadatta > > > > > > Tuesday, November 17, 2009 1:58 PM> > > > > > Re: The Absolute> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > Nisargadatta , "geo" <inandor@> wrote:> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > - > > > > > > > Tim G.> > > > > > > Nisargadatta > > > > > > > Monday, November 16, 2009 11:30 PM> > > > > > > Re: The Absolute> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > Nisargadatta , "dan330033" <dan330033@>> > > > > > > wrote:> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , "Tim G." <fewtch@> wrote:> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , "dan330033" > > > > > > > > > <dan330033@>> > > > > > > > > wrote:> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > No.> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > It's that the relative being comes to a full stop.> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > It realizes that it can never comprehend.> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > It can't even comprehend that it can't comprehend, or what> > > > > > > > > > it> > > > > > > > > > can't> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > comprehend.> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Indeed... one realizes that there was never anything to> > > > > > > > > comprehend.> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > The 'relative being' is only thought's tendency to divide > > > > > > > > > the> > > > > > > > > indivisible, apparently as a way to ensure survival of the> > > > > > > > > organism.> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Why this tends to goes so far beyond the necessary in human> > > > > > > > > beings,> > > > > > > > > I> > > > > > > > > can't comprehend :-p.> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > It's a puzzle within a mystery, wrapped in an enigma.> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Scratching head,> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Dan> > > > > > >> > > > > > > It may have something to do with 'being able to project my own> > > > > > > death',> > > > > > > once> > > > > > > I feel that 'I exist'.> > > > > > >> > > > > > > "I exist" (thus) "I will die" becomes a sort of broken> > > > > > > thought-loop,> > > > > > > existing only for its own continuation, and stirring up all > > > > > > > sorts> > > > > > > of> > > > > > > other> > > > > > > silliness in the process.> > > > > > >> > > > > > > The issue is 'time', and the associated dream.> > > > > > >> > > > > > > geo> Yes. This is the basic fear-program that runs time-based> > > > > > > dream-pseudo-existence> > > > > >> > > > > > I have never been born, so I wouldn't know.> > > > > >> > > > > > - D -> > > > > >> > > > > > But you know you dont know? You dont know what?> > > > > > -geo-> > > > >> > > > > In other words, I am not encapsulated by a fear-based program or an> > > > > existence in time.> > > > >> > > > > - D -> > > > >> > > > > I suppose for one who feels as... and is able to say "all is> > > > > consciousness"> > > > > to talk about some "unborn" must sound absurd or imagination?> > > > > -geo-> > > >> > > >> > > > Was this so-called consciousness that all is, something that was> > > > born?> > > >> > > > - D -> > >> > > Fwiw, I think "all is consciousness" is a cheesy way to say "there's no> > > such thing as objectivity".> > >> > > Also fwiw, I don't recall you ever uttering the words "all is> > > consciousness". Thought that was Ramesh Balsekar's thing.> >> > Yes. Not my thing.> >> > Just seems limited, saying all is x.> >> > Maybe it's worth a try, but anything said falls short.> >> > All is consciousness.> > -d-> >> > Well...usually, people refer to consciousness as manifestation, the world,> > or mind/body, or all of those together. Hardly ever something unborn> > -geo-> > Yes, the born consciousness can't know the unborn.> > Trying to give a name to the unborn (like Self, Consciousness, Being, God) > gives the impression something is known about it by the consciousness of a > limited (born) individual.> > The born can't know the unborn.> > Hence the advaita teaching about the child of a barren mother - the child > being the born consciousness, or body-mind-consciousness.> > The knowing which is unborn, is not commented upon, not languaged.> > Yet this unborn is how language can be known.> > The unborn is not experienced.> > Yet is how experience can be experienced.> > I suppose this is why Nis. referred to "awareness."> > To show that the unborn is how the body-mind consciousness can know, but is > never known by the body-mind consciousness.> > - D -> > And without consciousness nothing is - nonetheless there is.> -geo-Distinguishing between is and is not is an activity of conceptual mind.- D - Yes it is. -geo- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 18, 2009 - dan330033 Nisargadatta Wednesday, November 18, 2009 3:04 PM Re: The Absolute Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > > I have never been born, so I wouldn't know. > > - D - > > Why beeing unborn is an impediment to know anything that is known by the > limited mind that is made to know it? > -geo- There is no impediment. Trying to figure out what someone else knows, is an impediment. The unborn has no one else to figure out. - D - Well... it sounded a bit personal I admit - jsut sounded, though. I was thinking in general impersonal terms. -geo- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
