|
|
Post by andrew on May 1, 2017 16:26:12 GMT -5
The snail, which has no sense of separate self, doesn't sense 'I am', it's more subtle that that, it's not a sensory experience. For us self-conscious and self-reflective humans the sense of 'I am' can be sensed, but it's because we are self-conscious/reflective. In the abidance of what we are, we are more like the snail again. To put it another way, sensing I am requires a witness construct. It's that construct that is ultimately surrendered, so without that construct, there's no 'sense' of I am. I would still agree that the absolute 'knows' I am but the word 'know' is a little deceptive because it implies a bit of separation, it implies one thing knows another thing. They are closer than that..almost as if the 'I am' appears in the absolute, so the absolute has no way of NOT knowing it. I think this adds to the confusion of this subject...it's true that the absolute knows I am, but if it is being sensed, that's actually the false witness construct coming into play. That's consciousness coming into play. Is that because the witness into which observer and observed collapses, isn't a construct? What the construct collapses into, isn't a construct, no. |
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on May 1, 2017 16:29:00 GMT -5
Most won't recognize it? I don't mean that in a tricky sense. It's always here, always available, never needing an attaining, but nonetheless unrecognized. Not recognizeable in the cognize sense. But recognizeable in the familiar sense. Too obvious, too simple. Believing the thought that you are unrecognized is what you will experience. But is the befief true? Can you the observer be veiled? It's easy to find out for yourself if you go to the place that is empty of belief. It's that place that you won't go. Already there, just without all that imagined stuff. That includes needing to go. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2017 16:30:45 GMT -5
Believing the thought that you are unrecognized is what you will experience. But is the befief true? Can you the observer be veiled? It's easy to find out for yourself if you go to the place that is empty of belief. It's that place that you won't go. Is it won't go or can't go? As in, there is only being and thoughts/belief about it. Won't...as in you don't want to. There isn't anything there for Mr Mind. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2017 16:35:21 GMT -5
Believing the thought that you are unrecognized is what you will experience. But is the befief true? Can you the observer be veiled? It's easy to find out for yourself if you go to the place that is empty of belief. It's that place that you won't go. Already there, just without all that imagined stuff. That includes needing to go. Ahhh, finally someone who speaks from that place...so please tell Satch if anything that arises in front of you, can or seem to veil you? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2017 16:37:45 GMT -5
Is that because the witness into which observer and observed collapses, isn't a construct? What the construct collapses into, isn't a construct, no. Yeah, and it can only loosely be called a witness, as it's unidentifiable and indivisible. |
|
|
|
Post by zendancer on May 1, 2017 16:39:20 GMT -5
Believing the thought that you are unrecognized is what you will experience. But is the befief true? Can you the observer be veiled? It's easy to find out for yourself if you go to the place that is empty of belief. It's that place that you won't go. Already there, just without all that imagined stuff. That includes needing to go.  |
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on May 1, 2017 17:00:18 GMT -5
Already there, just without all that imagined stuff. That includes needing to go. Ahhh, finally someone who speaks from that place...so please tell Satch if anything that arises in front of you, can or seem to veil you? As in "is the illusion real". |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2017 17:43:15 GMT -5
Ahhh, finally someone who speaks from that place...so please tell Satch if anything that arises in front of you, can or seem to veil you? As in "is the illusion real". Wether the illusion is real or not, can it veil you? |
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on May 1, 2017 17:45:17 GMT -5
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? The one on page 4 was Niz. I have posted a lot of Niz quotes over the years and the great majority are from his later works, like 'The Ultimate Medicine'. It seems to me that as his teaching unfolded over the years he became more drawn to pointing beyond I am, and this is where my interest has lain. Interesting you would make such a statement. |
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on May 1, 2017 17:51:30 GMT -5
As in "is the illusion real". Wether the illusion is real or not, can it veil you? Are there two sides to a mobius strip? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2017 18:23:22 GMT -5
Wether the illusion is real or not, can it veil you? Are there two sides to a mobius strip? Sorry, I thought you were speaking from the place that is empty of a mobius strip. |
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on May 1, 2017 18:44:22 GMT -5
Are there two sides to a mobius strip? Sorry, I thought you were speaking from the place that is empty of a mobius strip. You asked a question. You are forgiven. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on May 1, 2017 23:06:07 GMT -5
"What do you mean by study? That means you are only trying to remember the concepts. What I am saying is that you become concept-free. Put an ax to the concepts, including the concept ‘I am’." Ah okay. I Am as a concept only. Not 'experienced.' That makes sense. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on May 1, 2017 23:15:24 GMT -5
"What do you mean by study? That means you are only trying to remember the concepts. What I am saying is that you become concept-free. Put an ax to the concepts, including the concept ‘I am’." Ah okay. I Am as a concept only. Not 'experienced.' The I Am interpretation and concept arises from the experience of the 'sense' of existing. But they are both observable. Which means you are there prior to their arising. The question is can you live in a world abiding in a place which is only conscious of consciousness, without mixing it with the arising of the sense of I AM, a person that exists in a world of other things that exist?What need not be mixed is the sense of existing and the belief in being a person. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on May 1, 2017 23:23:35 GMT -5
I am is a sense. So you are there 'prior' to 'observe' that sense. You perceive the sense I am from a place that is empty of all sense perception. That is your true home. You can either look outward at the sense of I am or you can look at it from the outside. You determine where you want to look from. Yes I agree it is a sense, and also that the Absolute knows I am, but I don't see this knowing as observational or perceptive in its nature, it is more 'natural' than that. The knowing is too instantaneous to be observational/perceptive in it's nature. So I would say the sense of I am is observed through a process of self-reflection, introspection, or turning attention inwards in a particular way. Isn't 'a process of self-reflection, introspection, or turning attention inwards', 'observational/perceptive in it's nature and not instantaneous'? |
|
