THE by RajWilAdi

Author:RajWilAdi [RajWilAdi]
Language: fra
Format: epub
Published: 0101-01-01T00:00:00+00:00

141

`Thinking'

is the conceiving

of percepts,

Àcting'

is the conating

of concepts,

Èvents'

are the being conscious of conation.

Affectivity is inherent in volitional acting, as Intellection is inherent in thinking.

None of the skandha has other than a conceptual existence : they are an analytical apparatus that seeks to demonstrate that phenomenal life and the so-called `Cosmos' are the being conscious of living in an apparent Cosmos subject to time and space which themselves represent what, dimensionally regarded, we are.

Therefore there can be no question of their being five separatèthings' : they are not separated, nor are they òne'. They, also, are a phenomenalised aspect of what we are, which is I.

The five senses are concerned with perceiving, and the sixth with cognising perception. The five skandha cover the resulting total psychic mechanism, analytically, up to and including consciousness of events. In general the skandha represent both perceiving and the interpretation of perception.

Form or appearing is a functioning prajnaic functioning whose static aspect is dhyanic—

whereby `mind' objectifies itself by means of subjective and objective alternation. Basically there is only perceiving and cognising, which are this functioning which is all that we can be said to be.

`There is neither creation nor destruction,

Neither destiny nor free-will,

Neither path nor achievement:

This is the final truth.'

- Sri Ramona Maharshi

68. The Nature of the Cosmos

WE ARE the nature of the cosmos, and it has no other.

There is nothing religious about the cosmos,

Because there is nothing religious about what we are.

That is the fact of the matter. `We', of course, are all sentient beings, And what we are is I.

The simple truth is that :

Temporality is not separate from Intemporality, and vice versa.

Nothing temporal is separate from what intemporally we are.

Which is totally devoid of appearance.

Difference is apparent (phenomenal) only.

Phenomenally all difference seems to be absolute : that is the difference of all dualities; but non-dually, in total conceptual absence, no such `difference' can appear, for difference itself is a concept.

In this total conceptual absence there is neither object conceived nor subject conceiving: I-functioning am no longer functioning as subject of object. I am no longer split. Split, I am temporality; whole, I know no time,.

Conceptual negation cannot be conceived, nor can it be 'one'—which is a concept: it is just not at all as anything that can be conceived as any thing. Why? Because what it is, is what I am who am not conceiving.

It is what we are, neither anything nor nothing. It is just I—not even I-ness. We, as I, are this time-less in-finity. But what timeless infinity? What infinite intemporality could we be but Ì am (THIS) that I am'?

Comment

It is apt to take people a long time to see this. Perhaps it is too obvious to be seen easily. But, once seen, should it not be difficult indeed not to see it?

The phrase ìs too obvious' really implies that it is here all the time, `just in front of your eyes'

as the Masters said it : like the spectacles through which you look without seeing them.

More accurately, since ìt' cannot

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.