|
|
Post by zin on Nov 19, 2015 9:43:04 GMT -5
Were you quiet? Did thinking stop? yes and yes. |
|
|
|
Post by justlikeyou on Nov 19, 2015 10:00:36 GMT -5
Were you quiet? Did thinking stop? yes and yes. That's it! That's what some call meditation, which is really just being yourself. Detaching attention from the thinking mind and coming back to the present moment like that can be done anywhere anytime. Done long enough it can lead to all kinds of Adventure and Discoveries  |
|
|
|
Post by zin on Nov 19, 2015 10:03:08 GMT -5
That's it! That's what some call meditation, which is really just being yourself. Detaching attention from the thinking mind and coming back to the present moment like that can be done anywhere anytime. Done long enough it can lead to all kinds of Adventure and Discoveries Thank you! (for asking it) |
|
|
|
Post by justlikeyou on Nov 27, 2015 19:46:49 GMT -5
Niz: "Non-distinction speaks in silence. Words carry distinctions. The unmanifested (nirguna) has no name, all names refer to the manifested (saguna). It is useless to struggle with words to express what is beyond words. Unfortunately language is a mental tool and works only in opposites."
|
|
|
|
Post by justlikeyou on Dec 7, 2015 14:06:26 GMT -5
Niz: The person can stay in the darkness of ignorance forever, unless the flame of awareness touches it. Once the candle is lighted, the flame will consume the candle. Who lights the candle? The Guru, his words, his presence, the mantra; the Guru’s grace works mysteriously. The difference between the person and the witness is as between not knowing and knowing oneself. Before the spark, or flame, is lit there is no witness to perceive the difference. The person may be conscious, but is not aware of being conscious. It is completely identified with what it thinks and feels and experiences. The darkness, that is in it, is of its own creation. When the darkness is questioned, it dissolves. The desire to question is planted by the Guru.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2015 5:54:35 GMT -5
M: True words always come true.
|
|
|
|
Post by justlikeyou on Dec 11, 2015 18:33:25 GMT -5
In 1980, toward life’s end, Maharaj's body was showing all the symptoms of a virulent, painful throat cancer. This didn’t deter him from accepting into his apartment the never-ending stream of visitors from all walks of life and from all over the world who came to him to discover spiritual truth and the timeless peace of the Absolute. Though it was agony for him to speak, nevertheless, for the sake of dissolving all ignorance, Nisargadatta with great energy and vigor invited and answered their questions for three hours daily, he presided over the rousing bhajan sessions, and carried out the ritual worship of his lineage of gurus. And he still took his fairly long walks on the seashore in the mornings and evenings. Some of these activities fell off toward the last weeks of his life, but he continued to somehow courageously muster the ability to talk through the physical pain with visitors right up to his very last days.
In the last months of his earthly life, Maharaj shifted the focus of his verbal teaching more toward the purely transcendent Absolute Awareness and away from the manifest consciousness. Whereas in earlier decades he taught a process of complete disidentification from the manifest realms followed by a sagely "re-identification" with the manifest totality (sans ego) in a spirit of love, devotion, empathy, compassion and appropriate conduct, all rooted in the context of open, free Absolute Awareness— now the Maharaj usually and quite bluntly urged only final abidance as the Absolute, beyond the 'I Am,' bodymind, worlds, beings, conduct, relationship or personality (—though he did say that everyone should continue "with zest" to fulfill their duties and relationships in the world, and adopt as a guiding principle "caring for others"). In other words, whereas for many years the Maharaj's upadesha inclusively balanced both the transcendent and immanent Reality, both formless and formfull abiding, now, in his waning time, it was heavily emphasizing negation, detachment and disidentification from the fleeting and fundamentally false phenomenal realms. Whereas previously he had occasionally spoken about the play of universal consciousness as a kind of wonderful whimsy, albeit a dream-like illusion, now he regarded it as an unnecessary burden.
Readers can and should be careful with these exclusive, rather "stark"-sounding teachings from Nisargadatta's last year lest they fall into mere nihilism, quietism, intellectualism, or hedonism instead of the mature, authentic liberation and awakening that Maharaj exemplified and promoted. Had not the sage declared: "This knowledge is for those who have no desires"? (Dec. 30, 1980) And, as "impersonal" or "supra-personal" as these teachings of the final years may sound, we can also recall the sage's attitude of love and compassion toward persons during this time, such as when a questioner asked him "if Maharaj thinks of his disciples." The sage quickly replied, "I think of them more than you know." (Dec. 26, 1980)
The Maharaj had once been told by someone, "You will die." He retorted: "I am dead already. Physical death will make no difference in my case. I am timeless being." (I Am That, dialogue 55) On the morning of Tuesday, September 8, 1981, the Maharaj, knowing that the end of the physical body was near, invited a few close associates to come visit him later in the evening. That night he went into the “no-mind” state: his breathing grew shallower and shallower, finally stopping altogether at 7:32 p.m.
|
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 15, 2015 20:02:21 GMT -5
The peeps who use the "not limited to this body"++ idea will say that it's an after-the-fact description. Not an identity that they're tied to. This can either be an unconscious self-deception or not, but there's no way to tell just from the statement alone. 'I am the body +++' is most certainly a story, and so is 'I am not this body'. I can't understand what these sentences even mean. Fact is, there are senses acknowledged, and I prefer to say it's about the entire life-form, body, mind and spirit. Being and not being this and that and more isn't actually observable. lolz I bumped a few of the Niz quotes that really rezzed on this topic when I came across them.  |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jan 11, 2017 23:28:36 GMT -5
The mind is regenerated every moment, and so is the body at a quantum level. In the Buddhist teachings, the process by which the mind continues from moment to moment, and the similar process of reincarnation, are outlined in a reasonable way. When the process by which regeneration occurs ceases, there will not be any more incarnations, in the next moment's body, nor the 'next life'. Niz said on past lives .. I do not say that the same person is reborn. It dies and dies for good. But its memories remain and their desires and fears. They supply the energy for the new person.I would agree in that memories are retained from lifetime to lifetime that why I was able to recall imprints of those specific lives . Your mind regeneration in every moment is the environment for the new person that niz refers too . So where, exactly did you read that? He's made it quite clear what he thinks about reincarnation in other talks, like this one for instance (one of several): seeker: Yet, you must believe in having lived before. Niz: The scriptures say so, but I know nothing about it. I know myself as I am; as I appeared or will appear is not within my experience. It is not that I do not remember. In fact there is nothing to remember. Reincarnation implies a reincarnating self. There is no such thing.
(para 10, chapter 56 from "I AM THAT": "Consciousness Arising, World Arises") ... which is very surprising, given his cultural roots. |
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Jan 12, 2017 2:41:38 GMT -5
Niz said on past lives .. I do not say that the same person is reborn. It dies and dies for good. But its memories remain and their desires and fears. They supply the energy for the new person.I would agree in that memories are retained from lifetime to lifetime that why I was able to recall imprints of those specific lives . Your mind regeneration in every moment is the environment for the new person that niz refers too . So where, exactly did you read that? He's made it quite clear what he thinks about reincarnation in other talks, like this one for instance (one of several): seeker: Yet, you must believe in having lived before. Niz: The scriptures say so, but I know nothing about it. I know myself as I am; as I appeared or will appear is not within my experience. It is not that I do not remember. In fact there is nothing to remember. Reincarnation implies a reincarnating self. There is no such thing.
(para 10, chapter 56 from "I AM THAT": "Consciousness Arising, World Arises") ... which is very surprising, given his cultural roots. I put up 2 quotes from I am That as well, can't exactly remember what they were, but the message was basically, I don't care about that. And I have had no past life recall personally, and I'm indifferent about that. I just consider the possibility that the memory of what has occured in this life may actually extend to bodies which have died in the past as well, in a similar way recall extends to the body one dreams with, as so many people have claimed to have experienced past life recall. |
|
|
|
Post by tenka on Jan 12, 2017 2:58:35 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by sadsack on Jan 12, 2017 3:16:58 GMT -5
"But, you never know if you never go," then he passes it off to his favorite bible.  |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jan 12, 2017 10:59:51 GMT -5
So where, exactly did you read that? He's made it quite clear what he thinks about reincarnation in other talks, like this one for instance (one of several): ... which is very surprising, given his cultural roots. I put up 2 quotes from I am That as well, can't exactly remember what they were, but the message was basically, I don't care about that. And I have had no past life recall personally, and I'm indifferent about that. I just consider the possibility that the memory of what has occured in this life may actually extend to bodies which have died in the past as well, in a similar way recall extends to the body one dreams with, as so many people have claimed to have experienced past life recall. Scientific thinking and magical thinking are two sides to the same coin. Let's say we accept some cases of past life recollections as fact. Of course it's tempting, and perhaps even logical, to infer that the peep with the current memory is the same as the dead peep who had the experience that is remembered. But if one insists on an explanation, there is an alternate, and it's found in U.G.'s metaphor of the brain as an antenna. Our physical experience creates the convincing impression that our thoughts originate from our brains, but the brain isn't really separate from the rest of our body, which isn't really separate from the the rest of all of physicality, past, present and future. The source of thoughts and memories is ultimately non-local, and only appears otherwise. Most thoughts and memories aren't of past lives, and to infer a theory of reincarnation based on a few that are is not only unnecessary, but it obscures the true nature of death, which in turn, obscures the true nature of the person, which that it is a cognitive illusion. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jan 12, 2017 11:08:04 GMT -5
From the same dialog: Niz: "I know myself as I am -- timeless, spaceless, causeless. You happen not to know, being engrossed as you are in other things." --- The "trapped energy" which causes the memory, is not what you are. Peeps can be seen to be caused, what you are, is eternal, with no beginning, no impetus, and no end. Note that Tom Stine directly contradicts Niz from the very dialog he quotes when he writes: "the Absolute is the source of all, but it is not the cause. What is, you may ask? No way to know, at least not from what Nisargadatta has to say (nor, I think, from anything he has written)." Niz didn't say that you can't know the cause. He very explicitly and specifically denied that there was one. |
|
|
|
Post by lolly on Jan 13, 2017 2:10:07 GMT -5
I put up 2 quotes from I am That as well, can't exactly remember what they were, but the message was basically, I don't care about that. And I have had no past life recall personally, and I'm indifferent about that. I just consider the possibility that the memory of what has occured in this life may actually extend to bodies which have died in the past as well, in a similar way recall extends to the body one dreams with, as so many people have claimed to have experienced past life recall. Scientific thinking and magical thinking are two sides to the same coin. Let's say we accept some cases of past life recollections as fact. Of course it's tempting, and perhaps even logical, to infer that the peep with the current memory is the same as the dead peep who had the experience that is remembered. But if one insists on an explanation, there is an alternate, and it's found in U.G.'s metaphor of the brain as an antenna. Our physical experience creates the convincing impression that our thoughts originate from our brains, but the brain isn't really separate from the rest of our body, which isn't really separate from the the rest of all of physicality, past, present and future. The source of thoughts and memories is ultimately non-local, and only appears otherwise. Most thoughts and memories aren't of past lives, and to infer a theory of reincarnation based on a few that are is not only unnecessary, but it obscures the true nature of death, which in turn, obscures the true nature of the person, which that it is a cognitive illusion. Firstly, the way I explained the mind as 'fleeting states' where this moment's state transmuted into the next moment's state is to say that the mind is regenerated is each moment. This is to say, your mind in this moment is not the 'same mind' as was a second ago. There is no substance which continuous but this moment's mind still bears some characteristcs of the mind that has since desisted, so you experience the continuity of thought (which includes all perceptions), but you can not experience any mind apart from that which exists momentartily. However, you can recall events that have already passed because this mind bears the hallmarks of the minds which preceded it. It's not the 'same peep', but it is the same stream of thought. I like the antennae theory! Personally I can't claim there is reincarnation or there isn't, and it just doesn't concern me, so I merely recant a probably less than accurate version of the Buddhist premise. |
|
