|
|
Post by onehandclapping on Jul 24, 2013 2:51:11 GMT -5
Greetings.. Above is the difference between understanding a message and hearing a message beyond mind..... Your post is a good example of using mind to pretend you hear something 'beyond mind', you don't.. mind is the medium upon which 'that' which 'is' is revealed.. whatever might be "beyond mind" is unknown, and you/me/we/us/Life are the occasion through which the unknown is made known through the experience of 'it', and.. 'it' is the experience itself, revealed to and through 'mind'.. there's nothing you can say, express, do, or be, that is not sourced from, to, and through mind.. try it, even the still mind is the clear and clean window through which the unknown is revealed and made known.. when the insight happens, it wasn't known then is is, and.. even the urge to deny the actuality is revealed through the mind's inspiration to reject the threat, to conjure a contrary challenge.. mind is the interface between 'you' and what 'you are'.. Be well.. Zzzzzzzz..... Zzzzzzzzz..... Zzzzzzz..... *hand slips off chin and head just about hits desk* Lots of minding going on in your post there mantis. So are you saying that you've never heard/seen something beyond mind? That might be why we are having communication problems. I'm talking about where the words point and you are stuck on the pointers them selves. Or maybe you just have to be right and Niz and all the other people who teach similar stuff have to be wrong for this to work in your story? I go back to the old saying "This is simple. The more complicated it becomes means the more mind has snuck in and is covering up the truth." Your paragraph there takes the cake for complicated. But I'm sure you like sweets...... |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jul 24, 2013 3:31:30 GMT -5
''With the transcendence of the knowledge ‘I am’, the Absolute prevails. The state is called ‘Parabrahman’, while the knowledge ‘I am’ is termed Brahman. This knowledge ‘I am’ or the beingness is illusion only. Therefore, when Brahman is transcended, only the ‘Parabrahman’ is, in which there is not even a trace of the knowledge ‘I am’.''
''This primary concept, ‘I amness’ is dishonest, because it is still a concept only. Finally one has to transcend that also and be in the ‘nirvikalpa’ state, which means the concept-free state. Then you have no concept at all, not even of ‘I am’. In that state one does not know that one is. This state is known as ‘Parabrahman’: ‘Brahman’ transcended. ‘Brahman’ is manifest; ‘Parabrahman’ is beyond that, prior to that; the Absolute.''
|
|
|
|
Post by onehandclapping on Jul 24, 2013 14:28:04 GMT -5
''With the transcendence of the knowledge ‘I am’, the Absolute prevails. The state is called ‘Parabrahman’, while the knowledge ‘I am’ is termed Brahman. This knowledge ‘I am’ or the beingness is illusion only. Therefore, when Brahman is transcended, only the ‘Parabrahman’ is, in which there is not even a trace of the knowledge ‘I am’.'' ''This primary concept, ‘I amness’ is dishonest, because it is still a concept only. Finally one has to transcend that also and be in the ‘nirvikalpa’ state, which means the concept-free state. Then you have no concept at all, not even of ‘I am’. In that state one does not know that one is. This state is known as ‘Parabrahman’: ‘Brahman’ transcended. ‘Brahman’ is manifest; ‘Parabrahman’ is beyond that, prior to that; the Absolute.'' Thank you for attending the first session of Professor Andrew's Complicating THIS 101....... Please don't forget your shoes on the way out... And your checks can be made payable to "The Concept Trapeze Group"........  |
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Jul 24, 2013 17:42:21 GMT -5
''With the transcendence of the knowledge ‘I am’, the Absolute prevails. The state is called ‘Parabrahman’, while the knowledge ‘I am’ is termed Brahman. This knowledge ‘I am’ or the beingness is illusion only. Therefore, when Brahman is transcended, only the ‘Parabrahman’ is, in which there is not even a trace of the knowledge ‘I am’.'' ''This primary concept, ‘I amness’ is dishonest, because it is still a concept only. Finally one has to transcend that also and be in the ‘nirvikalpa’ state, which means the concept-free state. Then you have no concept at all, not even of ‘I am’. In that state one does not know that one is. This state is known as ‘Parabrahman’: ‘Brahman’ transcended. ‘Brahman’ is manifest; ‘Parabrahman’ is beyond that, prior to that; the Absolute.'' Are you saying that you're beyond the I am, prior to it? Are you saying that you're the Absolute? |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jul 24, 2013 17:58:27 GMT -5
''With the transcendence of the knowledge ‘I am’, the Absolute prevails. The state is called ‘Parabrahman’, while the knowledge ‘I am’ is termed Brahman. This knowledge ‘I am’ or the beingness is illusion only. Therefore, when Brahman is transcended, only the ‘Parabrahman’ is, in which there is not even a trace of the knowledge ‘I am’.'' ''This primary concept, ‘I amness’ is dishonest, because it is still a concept only. Finally one has to transcend that also and be in the ‘nirvikalpa’ state, which means the concept-free state. Then you have no concept at all, not even of ‘I am’. In that state one does not know that one is. This state is known as ‘Parabrahman’: ‘Brahman’ transcended. ‘Brahman’ is manifest; ‘Parabrahman’ is beyond that, prior to that; the Absolute.'' Are you saying that you're beyond the I am, prior to it? Are you saying that you're the Absolute? I'm not willing to say 'yes' and its not because my as.s will be hauled in front of the forum jury for more scrutiny, its because it doesn't resonate with me to make a statement which implies a total finality. For me, the door is open to deeper depths of not-knowing. I am willing to say that 'Brahman' has been transcended here. Incidentally, this is also a main reason why, although I like Niz and cite him, I talk in a quite different way to him. He points in a very direct way to a final state, a fixed position. I have reservations about pointing in that way because the mind that needs to attach always seeks a final state, a fixed position. It takes comfort in that idea. I don't always like giving the seeking mind that kind of comfort. I would make a very very very bad guru. |
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Jul 24, 2013 18:00:17 GMT -5
Are you saying that you're beyond the I am, prior to it? Are you saying that you're the Absolute? I'm not willing to say 'yes' and its not because my as.s will be hauled in front of the forum jury for more scrutiny, its because it doesn't resonate with me to make a statement which implies a total finality. For me, the door is open to deeper depths of not-knowing. I am willing to say that 'Brahman' has been transcended here. Incidentally, this is also a main reason why, although I like Niz and cite him, I talk in a quite different way to him. He points in a very direct way to a final state, a fixed position. I have reservations about pointing in that way because the mind that needs to attach always seeks a final state, a fixed position. It takes comfort in that idea. I don't always like giving the seeking mind that kind of comfort. I would make a very very very bad guru. Okey dokey. Thanks for answering directly.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2013 18:43:30 GMT -5
Are you saying that you're beyond the I am, prior to it? Are you saying that you're the Absolute? I'm not willing to say 'yes' and its not because my as.s will be hauled in front of the forum jury for more scrutiny, its because it doesn't resonate with me to make a statement which implies a total finality. For me, the door is open to deeper depths of not-knowing. I am willing to say that 'Brahman' has been transcended here. Incidentally, this is also a main reason why, although I like Niz and cite him, I talk in a quite different way to him. He points in a very direct way to a final state, a fixed position. I have reservations about pointing in that way because the mind that needs to attach always seeks a final state, a fixed position. It takes comfort in that idea. I don't always like giving the seeking mind that kind of comfort. I would make a very very very bad guru. Niz doesn't point to a final state or fixed position... He points to the perceiver to which final states or fixed positions are perceptions... Just like the perception of andrew isn't a final state or fixed position... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2013 18:46:11 GMT -5
I'm not willing to say 'yes' and its not because my as.s will be hauled in front of the forum jury for more scrutiny, its because it doesn't resonate with me to make a statement which implies a total finality. For me, the door is open to deeper depths of not-knowing. I am willing to say that 'Brahman' has been transcended here. Incidentally, this is also a main reason why, although I like Niz and cite him, I talk in a quite different way to him. He points in a very direct way to a final state, a fixed position. I have reservations about pointing in that way because the mind that needs to attach always seeks a final state, a fixed position. It takes comfort in that idea. I don't always like giving the seeking mind that kind of comfort. I would make a very very very bad guru. Niz doesn't point to a final state or fixed position... He points to the perceiver to which final states or fixed positions are perceptions... Just like the perception of andrew isn't a final state or fixed position... yes |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jul 24, 2013 19:00:02 GMT -5
I'm not willing to say 'yes' and its not because my as.s will be hauled in front of the forum jury for more scrutiny, its because it doesn't resonate with me to make a statement which implies a total finality. For me, the door is open to deeper depths of not-knowing. I am willing to say that 'Brahman' has been transcended here. Incidentally, this is also a main reason why, although I like Niz and cite him, I talk in a quite different way to him. He points in a very direct way to a final state, a fixed position. I have reservations about pointing in that way because the mind that needs to attach always seeks a final state, a fixed position. It takes comfort in that idea. I don't always like giving the seeking mind that kind of comfort. I would make a very very very bad guru. Niz doesn't point to a final state or fixed position... He points to the perceiver to which final states or fixed positions are perceptions... Just like the perception of andrew isn't a final state or fixed position... The seeking mind takes Niz's pointer to 'the absolute' to be a final state or fixed position and that's what matters. |
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Jul 24, 2013 19:03:10 GMT -5
Niz doesn't point to a final state or fixed position... He points to the perceiver to which final states or fixed positions are perceptions... Just like the perception of andrew isn't a final state or fixed position... The seeking mind takes Niz's pointer to 'the absolute' to be a fixed state or fixed position and that's what matters. Yeah, I've read plenty of Niz, and must attest that more than once he refers to a state of 'absolute'. Seems pretty fixed to me. (Not that there's anything wrong with that). |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jul 24, 2013 19:05:21 GMT -5
The seeking mind takes Niz's pointer to 'the absolute' to be a fixed state or fixed position and that's what matters. Yeah, I've read plenty of Niz, and must attest that more than once he refers to a state of 'absolute'. Seems pretty fixed to me. ( Not that there's anything wrong with that). No, there's nothing wrong with it. He points directly, its just his way, and that's cool. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2013 19:42:48 GMT -5
Niz doesn't point to a final state or fixed position... He points to the perceiver to which final states or fixed positions are perceptions... Just like the perception of andrew isn't a final state or fixed position... The seeking mind takes Niz's pointer to 'the absolute' to be a final state or fixed position and that's what matters. It only matters to perceptions and not to what you are... That's Niz's point... |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Jul 25, 2013 1:36:40 GMT -5
Greetings.. It's the use of the word "person".  ... the both/and lecture will follow soon if it hasn't come already ... LOL.. starting' to get it, eh.. now you see how it applies.. stay with it, Bill.. there may be hope for you, yet.. Be well.. How defensive of you. What he posted is simple clarity, you oppose that as it reveals your indefensible attachments.  |
|
|
|
Post by maxdprophet on Apr 29, 2017 17:22:50 GMT -5
IAM --The complete ‘I am’ quotes of Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj
stillnessspeaks.com/images/uploaded/file/iamquotesofnisargadatta.pdf"The ‘I am’ is a useful pointer; it shows where to seek, but not what to seek. Just have a good look at it. Once you are convinced that you cannot say truthfully about yourself anything except ‘I am’, and that nothing can be pointed at, can be your self, the need for the ‘I am’ is over..." Maybe the whole axe thing is about this. It's basically a way of saying: move along, now, nothing more to see. |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on Apr 30, 2017 18:56:21 GMT -5
IAM --The complete ‘I am’ quotes of Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj
stillnessspeaks.com/images/uploaded/file/iamquotesofnisargadatta.pdf"The ‘I am’ is a useful pointer; it shows where to seek, but not what to seek. Just have a good look at it. Once you are convinced that you cannot say truthfully about yourself anything except ‘I am’, and that nothing can be pointed at, can be your self, the need for the ‘I am’ is over..." Maybe the whole axe thing is about this. It's basically a way of saying: move along, now, nothing more to see. I agree that the 'I am' thingy is useful, but I suggest that it's a doorway to what lies beyond. I didn't remember this thread, and I'd be interested to know where the quote Andrew posted came from. Was it from Niz or Ramana? |
|
