awakeningtothedream.com Forum Index awakeningtothedream.com
Non Duality: The one question to all our answers.
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

'You'
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    awakeningtothedream.com Forum Index -> Awakening to the Dream
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
toombaru



Joined: 10 May 2005
Posts: 5189
Location: There are no locations

PostPosted: Tue Dec 13, 2005 4:07 pm    Post subject: 'You' Reply with quote

You are not the wholeness.

You are not the bliss.

You are not all things.

You are not This.

You are not consciousness.

You are not Awareness.

You are not asleep

You are not awakened.

You are not the eyes of God.

You are not the I-s of God.


Quite simply...............................









You are not.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
wizdumb



Joined: 12 Oct 2004
Posts: 132

PostPosted: Tue Dec 13, 2005 6:16 pm    Post subject: you too Reply with quote

" I am" not what I do, therefore, "I AM"

Attachments to fragmentation.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sara



Joined: 21 Aug 2005
Posts: 903
Location: below sea level

PostPosted: Tue Dec 13, 2005 6:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

i am (gulp) not Crying or Very sad
_________________
There is only Love
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
heron
Guest





PostPosted: Tue Dec 13, 2005 6:53 pm    Post subject: Re: 'You' Reply with quote

toombaru wrote:
You are not the wholeness.

You are not the bliss.

You are not all things.

You are not This.

You are not consciousness.

You are not Awareness.

You are not asleep

You are not awakened.

You are not the eyes of God.

You are not the I-s of God.


Quite simply...............................









You are not.


Nothing manifests as the illusion of 'every-something-someone'.

In that illusion 'you' are 'every-something-someone'.

Lets hear it for the good'ol illusion......otherwise 'we' would'nt appear to be doing this illusory living thing.

'
Back to top
sara



Joined: 21 Aug 2005
Posts: 903
Location: below sea level

PostPosted: Tue Dec 13, 2005 7:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

whew!

i was about to 'diss'-appearance!

i"m baaaaack!

Whee!!!

love,

sara Cool
_________________
There is only Love
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sara



Joined: 21 Aug 2005
Posts: 903
Location: below sea level

PostPosted: Tue Dec 13, 2005 9:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

just kidding Razz

i'm not back

there is no turning back Cool
_________________
There is only Love
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
michael



Joined: 18 Oct 2003
Posts: 3816
Location: Melbourne, Australia

PostPosted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 6:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ain't it wonderful... the marks 'you are not' appears and meaning arises.

The meaning related to these marks (or any other marks, eg 'consciousness') is not 'who' sees the marks and knows the associated meaning.

That which is, is not the meaning that arises. It sees the marks and knows the meaning.

It does not disappear... it never appears.

It neither comes nor goes.

Here it is!

Love
_________________
From Source to Source: an Endless Spring
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
michael



Joined: 18 Oct 2003
Posts: 3816
Location: Melbourne, Australia

PostPosted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 7:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

"Here it is"

Not in the marks on the apparent screen

Not in the meaning ascribed to them.

Not in the imagined mind of some imagined poster (michael Very Happy )

But right here right now seeing these very marks and knowing the meaning ascribed to them.

Can you describe who it is who sees and knows?

You cannot?

Welcome home Very Happy

Love
_________________
From Source to Source: an Endless Spring
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
heron
Guest





PostPosted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 10:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

michael wrote:
"Here it is"

Not in the marks on the apparent screen

Not in the meaning ascribed to them.

Not in the imagined mind of some imagined poster (michael Very Happy )

But right here right now seeing these very marks and knowing the meaning ascribed to them.

Can you describe who it is who sees and knows?

You cannot?

Welcome home Very Happy

Love


Hello Micheal

What description can there be of that which cannot be described ?

Being away from home and the welcome back are part of the illusion............'we' have never been away from home..........it is impossible to be away from home.
Back to top
heron
Guest





PostPosted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 10:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="michael"]Ain't it wonderful... the marks 'you are not' appears and meaning arises.

The meaning related to these marks (or any other marks, eg 'consciousness') is not 'who' sees the marks and knows the associated meaning.

That which is, is not the meaning that arises. It sees the marks and knows the meaning.

It does not disappear... it never appears.

It neither comes nor goes.

Here it is!

'It' appears as the very convincing illusion of solidity which we, as part of that illusion, see all around us. Dont you see it as well Micheal ?

What a wonderful, fantastic illusion it is. Imagine being in an illusory non-physical state on some other equally illusory non-physical dimention and someone says "hey, there is this other illusory dimention where there is stuff you can see, hear, touch, smell, and taste. Would'nt you want to give it a go ?
Back to top
michael



Joined: 18 Oct 2003
Posts: 3816
Location: Melbourne, Australia

PostPosted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 9:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, 'It' appears 'as' the illusion (which is not separate from it), yet the illusion is not 'It'.

The illusion changes, what 'is' does not.

Seeing is constant, even as 'the seen' changes.

How to describe seeing (the faculty to see) as opposed to the 'objects seen'? It cannot be done. Seeing cannot see 'seeing'.

Seeing is simply 'self evident'.

In combination with the other facutlties and the knowing, they are together called 'consciousness'... the undivided reality (by whatever name it is called).

Of course, there is no 'going out' nor 'coming in'.

Let's say that 'Welcome Home' is just a playful greeting to the Self... in need of no greeting to know that it is...

Seeing, hearing, tasting, feeling, smelling and knowing.

As for 'giving it a go'... no choice in the matter. Cool

Here it is! Surprised Very Happy

Love
_________________
From Source to Source: an Endless Spring
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
heron
Guest





PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 4:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

michael wrote:
Yes, 'It' appears 'as' the illusion (which is not separate from it), yet the illusion is not 'It'.

The illusion changes, what 'is' does not.

Seeing is constant, even as 'the seen' changes.

How to describe seeing (the faculty to see) as opposed to the 'objects seen'? It cannot be done. Seeing cannot see 'seeing'.

Seeing is simply 'self evident'.

In combination with the other facutlties and the knowing, they are together called 'consciousness'... the undivided reality (by whatever name it is called).

Of course, there is no 'going out' nor 'coming in'.

Let's say that 'Welcome Home' is just a playful greeting to the Self... in need of no greeting to know that it is...

Seeing, hearing, tasting, feeling, smelling and knowing.

As for 'giving it a go'... no choice in the matter. Cool

Here it is! Surprised Very Happy

Love


The illusion is 'it' illusioning. So how could the illusion not be 'it'? What else could the illusion be ?
Back to top
toombaru



Joined: 10 May 2005
Posts: 5189
Location: There are no locations

PostPosted: Thu Dec 15, 2005 4:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

heron wrote:
michael wrote:
Yes, 'It' appears 'as' the illusion (which is not separate from it), yet the illusion is not 'It'.

The illusion changes, what 'is' does not.

Seeing is constant, even as 'the seen' changes.

How to describe seeing (the faculty to see) as opposed to the 'objects seen'? It cannot be done. Seeing cannot see 'seeing'.

Seeing is simply 'self evident'.

In combination with the other facutlties and the knowing, they are together called 'consciousness'... the undivided reality (by whatever name it is called).

Of course, there is no 'going out' nor 'coming in'.

Let's say that 'Welcome Home' is just a playful greeting to the Self... in need of no greeting to know that it is...

Seeing, hearing, tasting, feeling, smelling and knowing.

As for 'giving it a go'... no choice in the matter. 8)

Here it is! :o :D

Love


The illusion is 'it' illusioning. So how could the illusion not be 'it'? What else could the illusion be ?




The illusion of a mirage is a misinterpretation.....as is the illusion of a separate self.

Any illusion evaporates when its underpinnings are removed.

toombaru
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
michael



Joined: 18 Oct 2003
Posts: 3816
Location: Melbourne, Australia

PostPosted: Fri Dec 16, 2005 8:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

toombaru slightly amended Very Happy wrote:
heron wrote:
michael wrote:
Yes, 'It' appears 'as' the illusion (which is not separate from it), yet the illusion is not 'It'.

The illusion changes, what 'is' does not.

Seeing is constant, even as 'the seen' changes.

How to describe seeing (the faculty to see) as opposed to the 'objects seen'? It cannot be done. Seeing cannot see 'seeing'.

Seeing is simply 'self evident'.

In combination with the other facutlties and the knowing, they are together called 'consciousness'... the undivided reality (by whatever name it is called).

Of course, there is no 'going out' nor 'coming in'.

Let's say that 'Welcome Home' is just a playful greeting to the Self... in need of no greeting to know that it is...

Seeing, hearing, tasting, feeling, smelling and knowing.

As for 'giving it a go'... no choice in the matter. Cool

Here it is! Surprised Very Happy

Love


The illusion is 'it' illusioning. So how could the illusion not be 'it'? What else could the illusion be ?




The illusion of a mirage is a (mis)interpretation.....as is the illusion of a separate self.

Any illusion evaporates when its underpinnings are removed.

toombaru


It depends what you mean by the illusion being it.

From the human perspective when you dream a 'nightly dream'. It seems that 'you' are doing things, meeting people 'in the dream'.

Yet the whole dream (every person and thing, including your own 'dream body' and 'dream thoughts' and 'dream feelings' and the 'dream sounds' you hear as other 'dream characters' speak, etc.) are all 'in the dream'.

It could be said from this perspective: "I am the dream and the dream is me".

It is true that the dream is 'me'... who 'I' seem to be.

That is to say, the 'dream me' is not just the 'dream body', it is the whole 'dream experience'... it includes the feeling of the warm sun and the look and feel and sounds as 'I' catch a smooth wave off the tip of some idyllic island. My strong bronzed arms digging into the translucent water.

This 'me' is very different to the 'me' that seems to be imprisoned in a fetid hole in some ghastly nightmare: sallow skin and decaying body, with strange thoughts and terrifying feelings.

It is impossible to separate 'me' from the dream experience.

If 'I' identify with the content, as the content constantly changes, then 'I' too am constantly changing... constantly becoming 'new things'.

On this view, I am not any single 'thing'... I am everything. Yet as these 'dream things' are all 'illusory', so the 'Universal Self who is all things' is an illusion.

On 'waking' both the 'dream things' and the 'dream self' that appears to be 'all things' is no more... as they/it never really is.

But, "Am 'I' the dream"?

What of the 'underlying' reality that remains the same even as the content changes? This is not a question for the intellect. It is 'self evident'.

Where the dream is located, and of what it is composed, are unknowns... it just appears. It is 'one with the dreamer', yet it is not 'the dreamer'.

'The dreamer' wakes, and the dream is no more.

'Dreamer'? Such 'dreamer' cannot be located any more than the dream itself, yet...

Here it is!

As the content of the dream changes, the seeing, hearing, feeling, tasting, smelling and knowing of it does not.

The dream (the content) is not separate from awareness of it, but the content is not the awareness (seeing, hearing etc.).

The content is the illusion. It is not misinterpreted, it is simply 'known'. As it is known, so it appears to be: the senses giving apparent form and substance (colour/shape, odour, flavour, feel and sound) to what is known, constantly changing 'moment to moment'.

All the 'while', awareness/knowing (consciousness) remains ever unchanging... in itself entirely one...

Love
_________________
From Source to Source: an Endless Spring
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
heron
Guest





PostPosted: Fri Dec 16, 2005 3:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

michael wrote:
toombaru slightly amended Very Happy wrote:
heron wrote:
michael wrote:
Yes, 'It' appears 'as' the illusion (which is not separate from it), yet the illusion is not 'It'.

The illusion changes, what 'is' does not.

Seeing is constant, even as 'the seen' changes.

How to describe seeing (the faculty to see) as opposed to the 'objects seen'? It cannot be done. Seeing cannot see 'seeing'.

Seeing is simply 'self evident'.

In combination with the other facutlties and the knowing, they are together called 'consciousness'... the undivided reality (by whatever name it is called).

Of course, there is no 'going out' nor 'coming in'.

Let's say that 'Welcome Home' is just a playful greeting to the Self... in need of no greeting to know that it is...

Seeing, hearing, tasting, feeling, smelling and knowing.

As for 'giving it a go'... no choice in the matter. Cool

Here it is! Surprised Very Happy

Love


The illusion is 'it' illusioning. So how could the illusion not be 'it'? What else could the illusion be ?




The illusion of a mirage is a (mis)interpretation.....as is the illusion of a separate self.

Any illusion evaporates when its underpinnings are removed.

toombaru


It depends what you mean by the illusion being it.

From the human perspective when you dream a 'nightly dream'. It seems that 'you' are doing things, meeting people 'in the dream'.

Yet the whole dream (every person and thing, including your own 'dream body' and 'dream thoughts' and 'dream feelings' and the 'dream sounds' you hear as other 'dream characters' speak, etc.) are all 'in the dream'.

It could be said from this perspective: "I am the dream and the dream is me".

It is true that the dream is 'me'... who 'I' seem to be.

That is to say, the 'dream me' is not just the 'dream body', it is the whole 'dream experience'... it includes the feeling of the warm sun and the look and feel and sounds as 'I' catch a smooth wave off the tip of some idyllic island. My strong bronzed arms digging into the translucent water.

This 'me' is very different to the 'me' that seems to be imprisoned in a fetid hole in some ghastly nightmare: sallow skin and decaying body, with strange thoughts and terrifying feelings.

It is impossible to separate 'me' from the dream experience.

If 'I' identify with the content, as the content constantly changes, then 'I' too am constantly changing... constantly becoming 'new things'.

On this view, I am not any single 'thing'... I am everything. Yet as these 'dream things' are all 'illusory', so the 'Universal Self who is all things' is an illusion.

On 'waking' both the 'dream things' and the 'dream self' that appears to be 'all things' is no more... as they/it never really is.

But, "Am 'I' the dream"?

What of the 'underlying' reality that remains the same even as the content changes? This is not a question for the intellect. It is 'self evident'.

Where the dream is located, and of what it is composed, are unknowns... it just appears. It is 'one with the dreamer', yet it is not 'the dreamer'.

'The dreamer' wakes, and the dream is no more.

'Dreamer'? Such 'dreamer' cannot be located any more than the dream itself, yet...

Here it is!

As the content of the dream changes, the seeing, hearing, feeling, tasting, smelling and knowing of it does not.

The dream (the content) is not separate from awareness of it, but the content is not the awareness (seeing, hearing etc.).

The content is the illusion. It is not misinterpreted, it is simply 'known'. As it is known, so it appears to be: the senses giving apparent form and substance (colour/shape, odour, flavour, feel and sound) to what is known, constantly changing 'moment to moment'.

All the 'while', awareness/knowing (consciousness) remains ever unchanging... in itself entirely one...

Love


Ah........so that which is unchanging awareness/consciousness is the NOT the dream you were talking about earlier..........it was'nt that much of a secret afterall. It was simply another name like Oneness, nothing, or the source, that we use in a dream story about an assumed 'that' which cannot be described.

In this dream story there is absolutely no separation or difference. No line can be drawn between the dream and the unchanging Oneness from which the dream arises. The One is the apparant other. The One and the other are One.

All is dream.......the dream of Oneness
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    awakeningtothedream.com Forum Index -> Awakening to the Dream All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group