What does it mean, I don't exist?

This is the place to post whatever questions you have related to the teachings of Eckhart Tolle. The rest of us will do whatever we can to help you achieve a better understanding :)
phil
Posts: 649
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 12:39 am
Location: Gainesville Florida USA
Contact:

Post by phil » Wed May 17, 2006 1:58 am

Hi WW, just trying to be plain and simple here, and have some fun.
Webwanderer wrote:Then it would seem reasonable, that if said rock should damage said foot to the point of a necessary amputation, then said person is no longer as much person as he was before the foots removal.
Yes, that is reasonable, if we stick with a plain and simple use of words.

I would quite literally be not quite as much a person if my foot was removed. 5 pounds less!

And if you removed my entire body, I would no longer be a person at all, if we stick with a plain and simple definition of what a person is.

Chaz said it plainer and simpler than I.

If these teachings point us towards being, being plain, being simple, and being ordinary, why bend the word "exist" around like a pretzel until we're no longer sure what it means?

My concept of myself exists.

The body my concepts point to exists.

Drop a safe on my head, and neither will exist.

JedEye
Posts: 143
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 3:21 pm
Location: Poland

Post by JedEye » Wed May 17, 2006 12:50 pm

""Simple people conceive that we are to see God as if he stood on that side and we on this.
It's not so; God and I are one in the act of my perceiving him".
wow. Thanks for that one John

It is like looking at the clouds or some space around the houses. So much beauty and space. And it is full of god. I always wonder if I am that because I feel like im that, it is so much more me there than in the body. Or I wonder if I am just awareness in which it happens.
I feel that I am that and also beyond that. And when looking- am I looking from outside or am I inside that which is looked at. Feel I`m more inside it outside it.Can`t grasp it with the mind.
no more words

Egoicmidget
Posts: 167
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2005 2:09 pm

Post by Egoicmidget » Wed May 17, 2006 2:31 pm

"Simple people conceive that we are to see God as if he stood on that side and we on this.
It's not so; God and I are one in the act of my perceiving him".
wow. Thanks for that one John
Your welcome, when I read it I had to share. I found it simple yet very profound.

You also commented:
It is like looking at the clouds or some space around the houses. So much beauty and space. And it is full of god. I always wonder if I am that because I feel like im that, it is so much more me there than in the body. Or I wonder if I am just awareness in which it happens.
I feel that I am that and also beyond that. And when looking- am I looking from outside or am I inside that which is looked at. Feel I`m more inside it outside it.Can`t grasp it with the mind.
I share exactly your observations, isn't nature a wonderful teacher?
My words would be a "felt" oneness (non-mental) with all which you have described perfectly.


John

JedEye
Posts: 143
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2006 3:21 pm
Location: Poland

Post by JedEye » Wed May 17, 2006 3:36 pm

We are nature :)
I`ve read couple pages of Meister Eckhart. And it was about giving all will to god, not to get something but just giving it. So there is nothing left, no will. There is no concept of god needed, just not having the will.
And what happens is the stop of thinking of doer who was supposed to know right state, be in now, etc. No will, no place for doer, no resposibility (it was seen that ego feels very responsible and heavy because it wants to follow spiritual teachings so much). And there is nothing left at all. Effortless silence stays and lightness. And there is no one to experience or observe or judge it because it is given away.
Very similar to what ET points to, but from different angle. Very interesting.
no more words

Chelsy
Posts: 276
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 9:41 pm

Post by Chelsy » Wed May 17, 2006 7:53 pm

Where to Meet after Death:

Dogo paid a visit to his sick fellow monk, Ungan.

"Where can I see you again if you die and leave only your corpse?"
Dogo asked.

"I will meet you where nothing dies," Ungan replied.

Dogo criticized his response saying,

"What you should have said is that there is no place
where nothing is born and nothing dies and that we need
not see each other at all."

Egoicmidget
Posts: 167
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2005 2:09 pm

Post by Egoicmidget » Thu May 18, 2006 12:56 am

Total transendence of illusion- thanks for sharing!

John

User avatar
Webwanderer
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 6842
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 12:03 am

Post by Webwanderer » Thu May 18, 2006 1:51 am

Phil Wrote:
I would quite literally be not quite as much a person if my foot was removed. 5 pounds less!

And if you removed my entire body, I would no longer be a person at all, if we stick with a plain and simple definition of what a person is.
I wonder if a 100 amputees were asked if they are less of a person than a non amputee because of the loss of an appendage, how many would say yes. And while you're checking the weight on the removed foot, is "your" shoe still on "your" foot, and is that part of your lost personhood? There are certainly more ways a person can be attached to "things" besides structurally.

I guess the concept that most needs exploration, at least in this discussion, is that the statement, a "plain and simple definition", it may not exist. What is plain an simple to one may well be something entirely different to another separate person.

What I'm suggesting, and is oft repeated here in this forum in many different ways, is that there is a falseness to a particular type of identity. That particular identity is adopted, and someone who has seen the nature of its reality, clearly, may accurately say, "I don't exist".

Let's be clear. The identity, the 'me", that doesn't exist, is the one with the name. It is the one that sees the world outside, but peceives not the world inside. It is the person-identity that fears for its safety and longs for a better future, at the expense of full participation in this moment. It is an assumption of an exclusivity that believes itself to be separate from the objects it sees "out there".

The purpose of seeing this mental clutter clearly, is that That which sees the clutter, as a pattern within Awareness, is That which we Truly are. It is the "I" that knows that all it perceives are fluid, ever changing, patterns within its Being. It is freedom from entrapment in separation-identity that the return to Conscious Awareness offers.

Chelsy
Posts: 276
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 9:41 pm

Post by Chelsy » Thu May 18, 2006 4:32 am

There are those who are not interested in answers.

They merely enjoy posing the questions.

Post Reply