2nd September 2005 - 04:54 PM
One should not imagine oneself to be one with the eye or independent of it or the owner of it.
The same with the ear and all the other senses, including the mind.
Nor should one imagine oneself to be identical with the world or contained in it or independent of it or the owner of it.
In this way, free from imagining, one no longer clings to the things of the world.
When one no longer clings,
there is no more agitation, insecurity, and worry.
Being no longer worried, one can reach into the depths of oneself and understand that where there has been loss there is now fulfillment.
11th September 2005 - 12:14 AM
If someone understands what the first post actually means, I hope that they will share it with me and, perhaps, with others whose understanding may also be lacking.
11th September 2005 - 02:21 AM
Can't help you either.
I can understand the article he refers to, but I can not link the meaning of his posted text to that article.
I probably knew what it was all about, but by reading it I probably absorbed some negative data that cancelled out that knowledge.
Negative data is common not only in the quantum world. Alot of people build a complete theorum of facts based on other facts, but the moment you provide information that removes one of the primary facts, all knowledge build on that now becomes void. They lose alot of data due to some added data.
11th September 2005 - 07:13 AM
yes,it does need further translation for the western mind.this is buddha stuff.how about and their (inner)eyes were opened and they knew good .......and evil.knowing meaning becoming.to eat is to become.that is why the christ says, eat of my knowledge.for in me is eternal life.trees, branches, roots.the christ is the tree of life?in the midst of the garden,center of the spiral,heart of the galaxie,the eye of the hurricane,the place of no spin.its all relative.it's all simple.let it be.
11th September 2005 - 07:21 AM
At Savatthi. There the Blessed One said, "Monks, whatever contemplatives or priests who assume in various ways when assuming a self, all assume the five clinging-aggregates, or a certain one of them. Which five? There is the case where an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person -- who has no regard for noble ones, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dharma; who has no regard for men of integrity, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dharma -- assumes form (the body) to be the self, or the self as possessing form, or form as in the self, or the self as in form.
"He assumes feeling to be the self, or the self as possessing feeling, or feeling as in the self, or the self as in feeling.
"He assumes perception to be the self, or the self as possessing perception, or perception as in the self, or the self as in perception.
"He assumes (mental) fabrications to be the self, or the self as possessing fabrications, or fabrications as in the self, or the self as in fabrications.
"He assumes consciousness to be the self, or the self as possessing consciousness, or consciousness as in the self, or the self as in consciousness.
"Thus, both this assumption & the understanding, 'I am,' occur to him. And so it is with reference to the understanding 'I am' that there is the appearance of the five faculties -- eye, ear, nose, tongue, & body (the senses of vision, hearing, smell, taste, & touch).
"Now, there is the intellect, there are ideas (mental qualities), there is the property of ignorance. To an uninstructed run-of-the-mill person, touched by experience born of the contact of ignorance, there occur (the thoughts): 'I am,' 'I am thus,' 'I shall be,' 'I shall not be,' 'I shall be possessed of form,' 'I shall be formless,' 'I shall be percipient (conscious),' 'I shall be non-percipient,' or 'I shall be neither percipient nor non-percipient.'
"The five faculties, monks, continue as they were. And with regard to them the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones abandons ignorance and gives rise to clear knowing. Owing to the fading of ignorance and the arising of clear knowing, (the thoughts) -- 'I am,' 'I am this,' 'I shall be,' 'I shall not be,' 'I shall be possessed of form,' 'I shall be formless,' 'I shall be percipient (conscious),' 'I shall be non-percipient,' and 'I shall be neither percipient nor non-percipient' -- do not occur to him."