Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

15178[Meditation Society of America] Re: Meditation Advice

Expand Messages
  • dan330033
    Jan 18, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      "It is enough to know what you are not. You need not know what you
      are. For as long as knowledge means description in terms of what is
      already known, perceptual, or conceptual, there can be no such thing
      as self-knowledge, for what you are cannot be described, except as
      except as total negation. All you can say is: "I am not this, I am not
      that." You cannot meaningfully say "this is what I am." It just makes
      no sense. What you can point out as 'this' or 'that' cannot be
      yourself. Surely, you cannot be 'something' else. You are nothing
      perceivable, or imaginable. Yet, without you there can be neither
      perception nor imagination. You observe the heart feeling, the mind
      thinking, the body acting; the very act of perceiving shows that you
      are not what you perceive. " - Nisargadatta Maharaj

      Who is the one who is aware, who is the meditator?

      One may assume that one knows who the meditator is. Then, meditation
      is a process to get for the meditator the benefits of meditation.

      Or, meditation may throw into question any assumptions about the
      nature of the one who is aware during meditation.

      In which case, meditation may not be a means for acquiring anything,
      but rather for dissolving previously maintained assumptions,
      particularly assumptions of self-identity.

      Is the previously assumed meditator the one who is actually aware
      during meditation?

      Is meditation a technique for uprooting assumptions, or is meditation
      itself "what is" when assumptions (about a situated self which is
      aware) are not?

      -- Dan
    • Show all 18 messages in this topic