If you meet a sage on the road, kill him / AL

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> <anders_lindman> wrote:

>

> >

> > Smell is a powerful way to show us that thinking is not all that we

> > are. We may think " bologna " when smelling bologna, but the thought

> is

> > not the smell itself. The map is not the territory. The menu is not

> > the dinner.

>

> The nausea is the nausea.

 

Only in the fearful mind. A dog has no problem with bologna. A dog is

smart in the area of smell, the area most important for breaking out

of intellectual thinking...

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

<anders_lindman> wrote:

 

> >

> > The nausea is the nausea.

>

> Only in the fearful mind. A dog has no problem with bologna. A dog

is

> smart in the area of smell, the area most important for breaking

out

> of intellectual thinking...

 

Oops, there you go again, into your head.

 

Can't stand the nausea, so take flight into ideas.

 

-- Dan

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> <anders_lindman> wrote:

>

> > >

> > > The nausea is the nausea.

> >

> > Only in the fearful mind. A dog has no problem with bologna. A dog

> is

> > smart in the area of smell, the area most important for breaking

> out

> > of intellectual thinking...

>

> Oops, there you go again, into your head.

>

> Can't stand the nausea, so take flight into ideas.

>

> -- Dan

 

" I am " beyond ideas.

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman>

wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> wrote:

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> >

> > > >

> > > > The nausea is the nausea.

> > >

> > > Only in the fearful mind. A dog has no problem with bologna. A dog

> > is

> > > smart in the area of smell, the area most important for breaking

> > out

> > > of intellectual thinking...

> >

> > Oops, there you go again, into your head.

> >

> > Can't stand the nausea, so take flight into ideas.

> >

> > -- Dan

>

> " I am " beyond ideas.

 

 

 

 

Nothing is beyond ideas.

 

 

 

 

toombaru

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

<anders_lindman> wrote:

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033>

wrote:

> > >

> > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > >

> > > > >

> > > > > The nausea is the nausea.

> > > >

> > > > Only in the fearful mind. A dog has no problem with bologna. A

dog

> > > is

> > > > smart in the area of smell, the area most important for breaking

> > > out

> > > > of intellectual thinking...

> > >

> > > Oops, there you go again, into your head.

> > >

> > > Can't stand the nausea, so take flight into ideas.

> > >

> > > -- Dan

> >

> > " I am " beyond ideas.

>

>

>

>

> Nothing is beyond ideas.

>

>

>

>

> toombaru

 

That nothing is not nothing but the no-thing.

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

<anders_lindman> wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033>

wrote:

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> >

> > > >

> > > > The nausea is the nausea.

> > >

> > > Only in the fearful mind. A dog has no problem with bologna. A

dog

> > is

> > > smart in the area of smell, the area most important for

breaking

> > out

> > > of intellectual thinking...

> >

> > Oops, there you go again, into your head.

> >

> > Can't stand the nausea, so take flight into ideas.

> >

> > -- Dan

>

> " I am " beyond ideas.

 

You are the nausea.

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> <anders_lindman> wrote:

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033>

> wrote:

> > >

> > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > >

> > > > >

> > > > > The nausea is the nausea.

> > > >

> > > > Only in the fearful mind. A dog has no problem with bologna. A

> dog

> > > is

> > > > smart in the area of smell, the area most important for

> breaking

> > > out

> > > > of intellectual thinking...

> > >

> > > Oops, there you go again, into your head.

> > >

> > > Can't stand the nausea, so take flight into ideas.

> > >

> > > -- Dan

> >

> > " I am " beyond ideas.

>

> You are the nausea.

 

The nausea you see are in you. Sorry for transmitting my sour mode

onto you.

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

<anders_lindman> wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033>

wrote:

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > >

> > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 "

<dan330033>

> > wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > > > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > The nausea is the nausea.

> > > > >

> > > > > Only in the fearful mind. A dog has no problem with

bologna. A

> > dog

> > > > is

> > > > > smart in the area of smell, the area most important for

> > breaking

> > > > out

> > > > > of intellectual thinking...

> > > >

> > > > Oops, there you go again, into your head.

> > > >

> > > > Can't stand the nausea, so take flight into ideas.

> > > >

> > > > -- Dan

> > >

> > > " I am " beyond ideas.

> >

> > You are the nausea.

>

> The nausea you see are in you. Sorry for transmitting my sour mode

> onto you.

 

It's not sour.

 

It just looks sour to you because you

spend so much time compulsively guru-izing

yourself.

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> <anders_lindman> wrote:

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033>

> wrote:

> > >

> > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 "

> <dan330033>

> > > wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > The nausea is the nausea.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Only in the fearful mind. A dog has no problem with

> bologna. A

> > > dog

> > > > > is

> > > > > > smart in the area of smell, the area most important for

> > > breaking

> > > > > out

> > > > > > of intellectual thinking...

> > > > >

> > > > > Oops, there you go again, into your head.

> > > > >

> > > > > Can't stand the nausea, so take flight into ideas.

> > > > >

> > > > > -- Dan

> > > >

> > > > " I am " beyond ideas.

> > >

> > > You are the nausea.

> >

> > The nausea you see are in you. Sorry for transmitting my sour mode

> > onto you.

>

> It's not sour.

>

> It just looks sour to you because you

> spend so much time compulsively guru-izing

> yourself.

 

Ok, I got the impression that you were angry at me. We often get angry

or irritated when discussing things, but that I think is good in a

way. When we become bored it is almost worse. Maybe one could use

boredom as a practice of self-observation.

 

/AL

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman>

wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> wrote:

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > >

> > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033>

> > wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > > > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 "

> > <dan330033>

> > > > wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > The nausea is the nausea.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Only in the fearful mind. A dog has no problem with

> > bologna. A

> > > > dog

> > > > > > is

> > > > > > > smart in the area of smell, the area most important for

> > > > breaking

> > > > > > out

> > > > > > > of intellectual thinking...

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Oops, there you go again, into your head.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Can't stand the nausea, so take flight into ideas.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > -- Dan

> > > > >

> > > > > " I am " beyond ideas.

> > > >

> > > > You are the nausea.

> > >

> > > The nausea you see are in you. Sorry for transmitting my sour mode

> > > onto you.

> >

> > It's not sour.

> >

> > It just looks sour to you because you

> > spend so much time compulsively guru-izing

> > yourself.

>

> Ok, I got the impression that you were angry at me. We often get angry

> or irritated when discussing things, but that I think is good in a

> way. When we become bored it is almost worse. Maybe one could use

> boredom as a practice of self-observation.

>

> /AL

 

 

........if there were a self to observe.

 

 

t.

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

<anders_lindman> wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033>

wrote:

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > >

> > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 "

<dan330033>

> > wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > > > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 "

> > <dan330033>

> > > > wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > The nausea is the nausea.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Only in the fearful mind. A dog has no problem with

> > bologna. A

> > > > dog

> > > > > > is

> > > > > > > smart in the area of smell, the area most important for

> > > > breaking

> > > > > > out

> > > > > > > of intellectual thinking...

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Oops, there you go again, into your head.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Can't stand the nausea, so take flight into ideas.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > -- Dan

> > > > >

> > > > > " I am " beyond ideas.

> > > >

> > > > You are the nausea.

> > >

> > > The nausea you see are in you. Sorry for transmitting my sour

mode

> > > onto you.

> >

> > It's not sour.

> >

> > It just looks sour to you because you

> > spend so much time compulsively guru-izing

> > yourself.

>

> Ok, I got the impression that you were angry at me. We often get

angry

> or irritated when discussing things, but that I think is good in a

> way. When we become bored it is almost worse. Maybe one could use

> boredom as a practice of self-observation.

>

> /AL

 

I'm not angry at you, Anders.

 

Just trying to make a point.

 

Perhaps futilely. :-)

 

The point being that as one doesn't move

away from one's experience, as one

doesn't detach into thought, as one

is the experience of nausea, everything

stops, evens out.

 

" Guru-izing " was a term I made up, to refer

to giving oneself sermons about the way

things are, as if endless explanations

and descriptions could avail oneself of truth.

 

Not a term given in anger, but to say that

all words come up against a brick wall,

just as the self does, and then can only

stop and dissolve.

 

And yes, boredom, like nausea, is a great

place to look into " what is. "

 

The place where the " resistance " is, is the

place to be aware. Trying to evade nausea,

disgust, boredom by happy spiritual dialogue

about the nature of truth, is evasion.

 

-- Dan

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> <anders_lindman> wrote:

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033>

> wrote:

> > >

> > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 "

> <dan330033>

> > > wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 "

> > > <dan330033>

> > > > > wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > The nausea is the nausea.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Only in the fearful mind. A dog has no problem with

> > > bologna. A

> > > > > dog

> > > > > > > is

> > > > > > > > smart in the area of smell, the area most important for

> > > > > breaking

> > > > > > > out

> > > > > > > > of intellectual thinking...

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Oops, there you go again, into your head.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Can't stand the nausea, so take flight into ideas.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > -- Dan

> > > > > >

> > > > > > " I am " beyond ideas.

> > > > >

> > > > > You are the nausea.

> > > >

> > > > The nausea you see are in you. Sorry for transmitting my sour

> mode

> > > > onto you.

> > >

> > > It's not sour.

> > >

> > > It just looks sour to you because you

> > > spend so much time compulsively guru-izing

> > > yourself.

> >

> > Ok, I got the impression that you were angry at me. We often get

> angry

> > or irritated when discussing things, but that I think is good in a

> > way. When we become bored it is almost worse. Maybe one could use

> > boredom as a practice of self-observation.

> >

> > /AL

>

> I'm not angry at you, Anders.

>

> Just trying to make a point.

>

> Perhaps futilely. :-)

>

> The point being that as one doesn't move

> away from one's experience, as one

> doesn't detach into thought, as one

> is the experience of nausea, everything

> stops, evens out.

>

> " Guru-izing " was a term I made up, to refer

> to giving oneself sermons about the way

> things are, as if endless explanations

> and descriptions could avail oneself of truth.

>

> Not a term given in anger, but to say that

> all words come up against a brick wall,

> just as the self does, and then can only

> stop and dissolve.

>

> And yes, boredom, like nausea, is a great

> place to look into " what is. "

>

> The place where the " resistance " is, is the

> place to be aware. Trying to evade nausea,

> disgust, boredom by happy spiritual dialogue

> about the nature of truth, is evasion.

>

> -- Dan

 

The mind seemingly has to try evasion for a while to find its limits,

the borders of its thought-world. Then when seeing that limitation it

knows that it must look in another direction for resolving the inner

conflict.

 

/AL

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman>

wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> wrote:

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > >

> > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033>

> > wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > > > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 "

> > <dan330033>

> > > > wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 "

> > > > <dan330033>

> > > > > > wrote:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > The nausea is the nausea.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Only in the fearful mind. A dog has no problem with

> > > > bologna. A

> > > > > > dog

> > > > > > > > is

> > > > > > > > > smart in the area of smell, the area most important for

> > > > > > breaking

> > > > > > > > out

> > > > > > > > > of intellectual thinking...

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Oops, there you go again, into your head.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Can't stand the nausea, so take flight into ideas.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > -- Dan

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > " I am " beyond ideas.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > You are the nausea.

> > > > >

> > > > > The nausea you see are in you. Sorry for transmitting my sour

> > mode

> > > > > onto you.

> > > >

> > > > It's not sour.

> > > >

> > > > It just looks sour to you because you

> > > > spend so much time compulsively guru-izing

> > > > yourself.

> > >

> > > Ok, I got the impression that you were angry at me. We often get

> > angry

> > > or irritated when discussing things, but that I think is good in a

> > > way. When we become bored it is almost worse. Maybe one could use

> > > boredom as a practice of self-observation.

> > >

> > > /AL

> >

> > I'm not angry at you, Anders.

> >

> > Just trying to make a point.

> >

> > Perhaps futilely. :-)

> >

> > The point being that as one doesn't move

> > away from one's experience, as one

> > doesn't detach into thought, as one

> > is the experience of nausea, everything

> > stops, evens out.

> >

> > " Guru-izing " was a term I made up, to refer

> > to giving oneself sermons about the way

> > things are, as if endless explanations

> > and descriptions could avail oneself of truth.

> >

> > Not a term given in anger, but to say that

> > all words come up against a brick wall,

> > just as the self does, and then can only

> > stop and dissolve.

> >

> > And yes, boredom, like nausea, is a great

> > place to look into " what is. "

> >

> > The place where the " resistance " is, is the

> > place to be aware. Trying to evade nausea,

> > disgust, boredom by happy spiritual dialogue

> > about the nature of truth, is evasion.

> >

> > -- Dan

>

> The mind seemingly has to try evasion for a while to find its limits,

> the borders of its thought-world. Then when seeing that limitation it

> knows that it must look in another direction for resolving the inner

> conflict.

>

> /AL

 

 

 

It is nothing other then its own looking.

The mother of mind......is conflict.

A peaceful mind......in no mind.

A peaceful wind.......is no wind.

 

 

t.

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

<anders_lindman> wrote:

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033>

wrote:

> > >

> > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033>

> > > wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 "

> > > <dan330033>

> > > > > wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 "

> > > > > <dan330033>

> > > > > > > wrote:

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > > > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > The nausea is the nausea.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Only in the fearful mind. A dog has no problem with

> > > > > bologna. A

> > > > > > > dog

> > > > > > > > > is

> > > > > > > > > > smart in the area of smell, the area most

important for

> > > > > > > breaking

> > > > > > > > > out

> > > > > > > > > > of intellectual thinking...

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Oops, there you go again, into your head.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Can't stand the nausea, so take flight into ideas.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > -- Dan

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > " I am " beyond ideas.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > You are the nausea.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > The nausea you see are in you. Sorry for transmitting my sour

> > > mode

> > > > > > onto you.

> > > > >

> > > > > It's not sour.

> > > > >

> > > > > It just looks sour to you because you

> > > > > spend so much time compulsively guru-izing

> > > > > yourself.

> > > >

> > > > Ok, I got the impression that you were angry at me. We often get

> > > angry

> > > > or irritated when discussing things, but that I think is good in a

> > > > way. When we become bored it is almost worse. Maybe one could use

> > > > boredom as a practice of self-observation.

> > > >

> > > > /AL

> > >

> > > I'm not angry at you, Anders.

> > >

> > > Just trying to make a point.

> > >

> > > Perhaps futilely. :-)

> > >

> > > The point being that as one doesn't move

> > > away from one's experience, as one

> > > doesn't detach into thought, as one

> > > is the experience of nausea, everything

> > > stops, evens out.

> > >

> > > " Guru-izing " was a term I made up, to refer

> > > to giving oneself sermons about the way

> > > things are, as if endless explanations

> > > and descriptions could avail oneself of truth.

> > >

> > > Not a term given in anger, but to say that

> > > all words come up against a brick wall,

> > > just as the self does, and then can only

> > > stop and dissolve.

> > >

> > > And yes, boredom, like nausea, is a great

> > > place to look into " what is. "

> > >

> > > The place where the " resistance " is, is the

> > > place to be aware. Trying to evade nausea,

> > > disgust, boredom by happy spiritual dialogue

> > > about the nature of truth, is evasion.

> > >

> > > -- Dan

> >

> > The mind seemingly has to try evasion for a while to find its limits,

> > the borders of its thought-world. Then when seeing that limitation it

> > knows that it must look in another direction for resolving the inner

> > conflict.

> >

> > /AL

>

>

>

> It is nothing other then its own looking.

> The mother of mind......is conflict.

> A peaceful mind......in no mind.

> A peaceful wind.......is no wind.

>

>

> t.

 

The dualistic mind, that is. The problem with the dualistic mind is

this: it has two categories to wrestle with; (a) the known, and (b)

the unknown. The known may not seem to be a problem, but in fact is

_THE_ Problem. From the known the dualistic mind creates a future, and

while the known contains the " bad " stuff and the " good " stuff, it is

in reality " all gone bad " . The known can only be utilized in an

imagined future! Oh, see this already! Since the known only can be of

some use in an imagined future, _ALL_ knowledge - wether about what is

good or what is bad - inevitably creates an automatic conflict between

what is and ideas about the future (which is a redundant addition part

of what is).

 

If you saw my post about nondual logic, then you might be interested

in the following addendum:

 

AXIOM 4: Ideas about uncertainty are parts of what is.

 

This means that uncertainty exists as ideas, not as actual

possibilities of variation between what is and what is not.

 

Nondual logic, taken to the heart, can cut through all nasty feelings

about uncertainty like a laser sword cutting a man in two.

 

/AL

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

<anders_lindman> wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033>

wrote:

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > >

> > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 "

<dan330033>

> > wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > > > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 "

> > <dan330033>

> > > > wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 "

> > > > <dan330033>

> > > > > > wrote:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > --- In

Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > The nausea is the nausea.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Only in the fearful mind. A dog has no problem

with

> > > > bologna. A

> > > > > > dog

> > > > > > > > is

> > > > > > > > > smart in the area of smell, the area most

important for

> > > > > > breaking

> > > > > > > > out

> > > > > > > > > of intellectual thinking...

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Oops, there you go again, into your head.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Can't stand the nausea, so take flight into ideas.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > -- Dan

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > " I am " beyond ideas.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > You are the nausea.

> > > > >

> > > > > The nausea you see are in you. Sorry for transmitting my

sour

> > mode

> > > > > onto you.

> > > >

> > > > It's not sour.

> > > >

> > > > It just looks sour to you because you

> > > > spend so much time compulsively guru-izing

> > > > yourself.

> > >

> > > Ok, I got the impression that you were angry at me. We often

get

> > angry

> > > or irritated when discussing things, but that I think is good

in a

> > > way. When we become bored it is almost worse. Maybe one could

use

> > > boredom as a practice of self-observation.

> > >

> > > /AL

> >

> > I'm not angry at you, Anders.

> >

> > Just trying to make a point.

> >

> > Perhaps futilely. :-)

> >

> > The point being that as one doesn't move

> > away from one's experience, as one

> > doesn't detach into thought, as one

> > is the experience of nausea, everything

> > stops, evens out.

> >

> > " Guru-izing " was a term I made up, to refer

> > to giving oneself sermons about the way

> > things are, as if endless explanations

> > and descriptions could avail oneself of truth.

> >

> > Not a term given in anger, but to say that

> > all words come up against a brick wall,

> > just as the self does, and then can only

> > stop and dissolve.

> >

> > And yes, boredom, like nausea, is a great

> > place to look into " what is. "

> >

> > The place where the " resistance " is, is the

> > place to be aware. Trying to evade nausea,

> > disgust, boredom by happy spiritual dialogue

> > about the nature of truth, is evasion.

> >

> > -- Dan

>

> The mind seemingly has to try evasion for a while to find its

limits,

> the borders of its thought-world. Then when seeing that

limitation it

> knows that it must look in another direction for resolving the

inner

> conflict.

>

> /AL

 

 

*** Hmm, I see your still wasting " B " influences.

 

(a little Gurdjieff joke)

 

Ken

[Guest guest]

The dualistic mind, that is. The problem with the dualistic mind is

this: it has two categories to wrestle with; (a) the known, and (b)

the unknown. The known may not seem to be a problem, but in fact is

_THE_ Problem. From the known the dualistic mind creates a future,

and

while the known contains the " bad " stuff and the " good " stuff, it is

in reality " all gone bad " . The known can only be utilized in an

imagined future! Oh, see this already! Since the known only can be of

some use in an imagined future, _ALL_ knowledge - wether about what

is

good or what is bad - inevitably creates an automatic conflict

between

what is and ideas about the future (which is a redundant addition

part

of what is).

 

If you saw my post about nondual logic, then you might be interested

in the following addendum:

 

AXIOM 4: Ideas about uncertainty are parts of what is.

 

This means that uncertainty exists as ideas, not as actual

possibilities of variation between what is and what is not.

 

Nondual logic, taken to the heart, can cut through all nasty feelings

about uncertainty like a laser sword cutting a man in two.

 

/AL

 

--------------------------

 

I can see why your heavily into the " killing thought " mode.

 

You are perhaps a little unbalanced -- very much in your head at

the moment thinking it all out.

 

That's o.k. It's all a part of working itself out and eventually

it will. It's all good. That's just the thing.

 

best wishes

 

~G.

------

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " goldenrainbowrider "

<laughterx8@h...> wrote:

>

> The dualistic mind, that is. The problem with the dualistic mind is

> this: it has two categories to wrestle with; (a) the known, and (b)

> the unknown. The known may not seem to be a problem, but in fact is

> _THE_ Problem. From the known the dualistic mind creates a future,

> and

> while the known contains the " bad " stuff and the " good " stuff, it is

> in reality " all gone bad " . The known can only be utilized in an

> imagined future! Oh, see this already! Since the known only can be of

> some use in an imagined future, _ALL_ knowledge - wether about what

> is

> good or what is bad - inevitably creates an automatic conflict

> between

> what is and ideas about the future (which is a redundant addition

> part

> of what is).

>

> If you saw my post about nondual logic, then you might be interested

> in the following addendum:

>

> AXIOM 4: Ideas about uncertainty are parts of what is.

>

> This means that uncertainty exists as ideas, not as actual

> possibilities of variation between what is and what is not.

>

> Nondual logic, taken to the heart, can cut through all nasty feelings

> about uncertainty like a laser sword cutting a man in two.

>

> /AL

>

> --------------------------

>

> I can see why your heavily into the " killing thought " mode.

>

> You are perhaps a little unbalanced -- very much in your head at

> the moment thinking it all out.

>

> That's o.k. It's all a part of working itself out and eventually

> it will. It's all good. That's just the thing.

>

> best wishes

>

> ~G.

> ------

 

The phrase " killing thought " is in my view not a good description of

what must happen for a person to become enlightened. It's the

separate-creating process that must be healed by an act of embracing

the unknown for enlightenment to dawn.

 

/AL

[Guest guest]

> >

> > I can see why your heavily into the " killing thought " mode.

> >

> > You are perhaps a little unbalanced -- very much in your head

at

> > the moment thinking it all out.

> >

> > That's o.k. It's all a part of working itself out and

eventually

> > it will. It's all good. That's just the thing.

> >

> >

> >

> > ~G.

> > ------

>

> The phrase " killing thought " is in my view not a good description

of

> what must happen for a person to become enlightened. It's the

> separate-creating process that must be healed by an act of

embracing

> the unknown for enlightenment to dawn.

>

> /AL

--

 

I can see that you've done a 360 from your recent posts stating that

you don't adhere to acceptance (embracing?) but rather adhered to

the concept of non-acceptance.

 

Or perhaps you're looking at experimenting with both at the same

time?

 

That could be an interesting experiment.

 

Please report back on your findings if that should be your choice of

experimentation. Your honesty about yourself is refreshing to say

the least.

 

~G.

 

------

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

<anders_lindman> wrote:

> The phrase " killing thought " is in my view not a good description

of

> what must happen for a person to become enlightened. It's the

> separate-creating process that must be healed by an act of

embracing

> the unknown for enlightenment to dawn.

>

> /AL

--------

 

---

 

Good luck to you finding that in a non-dual religion/forum/group.

 

The method of most non-dualists (see countless posts on this board)

is to focus on the separate by insisting that they are not real.

 

It engages in a " separate-creating process " by it's very act.

 

There is not so much of an embracing but rather a pre-occupation

of " pushing " ideas away that do not fit their concept of " non-

dualism " . This is why it doesn't surprise me that your past

statements in posts consisted of a need to reject and push away/non-

acceptance.

 

 

It's all fine, I mean all roads lead to your destination.

 

There are many roads to lead to your goal. Non-dualism is one

of the hardest roads simply because people hide behind cloaks of

notions that almost make it impossible for them to question.

How can you ever question something that " is not " .

 

And so the merry-go-round goes round and round. It just sounds so

fabulous and enlightened though.

And so the banging of the head against the illusory wall

continues.

Same old wall, different name.

 

If enlightenment is your goal it will eventually work for you

though. Of that you can be certain regardless of what wall you use

to bang your head against.

 

But the hardest part of your quest may be to define what you mean by

enlightened? Otherwise you may be searching for something that you

already have. Or, you may not even recognize it once you reach it.

 

~G.

----

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " goldenrainbowrider " <laughterx8@h...>

wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > The phrase " killing thought " is in my view not a good description

> of

> > what must happen for a person to become enlightened. It's the

> > separate-creating process that must be healed by an act of

> embracing

> > the unknown for enlightenment to dawn.

> >

> > /AL

> --------

>

> ---

>

> Good luck to you finding that in a non-dual religion/forum/group.

>

> The method of most non-dualists (see countless posts on this board)

> is to focus on the separate by insisting that they are not real.

>

> It engages in a " separate-creating process " by it's very act.

>

> There is not so much of an embracing but rather a pre-occupation

> of " pushing " ideas away that do not fit their concept of " non-

> dualism " . This is why it doesn't surprise me that your past

> statements in posts consisted of a need to reject and push away/non-

> acceptance.

>

>

> It's all fine, I mean all roads lead to your destination.

>

> There are many roads to lead to your goal.

 

 

There are many roads.......but none that lead to a place that does not exist.

 

 

 

 

Non-dualism is one

> of the hardest roads simply because people hide behind cloaks of

> notions that almost make it impossible for them to question.

 

 

 

 

No people hiding......only meat-puppets in this play.

 

 

 

> How can you ever question something that " is not " .

 

 

" You " can't......but you can queswtion you.

 

 

 

>

> And so the merry-go-round goes round and round. It just sounds so

> fabulous and enlightened though.

> And so the banging of the head against the illusory wall

> continues.

> Same old wall, different name.

>

> If enlightenment is your goal it will eventually work for you

> though.

 

 

No....it won't.

 

If you believ that.......I have some tickets to Shangra La for sale.

 

 

 

Of that you can be certain regardless of what wall you use

> to bang your head against.

>

> But the hardest part of your quest may be to define what you mean by

> enlightened? Otherwise you may be searching for something that you

> already have.

 

 

Something that doesn't exist cannot have something that doesn't exist.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

> Or, you may not even recognize it once you reach it.

 

 

" It " and " you " cannot exist together.

 

One excludes the other...........

 

You are simply never going to become enlightened.

 

No one ever has.

 

This is as close as you are ever going to be.

 

Sorry.........

 

 

toombaru

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...>

wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " goldenrainbowrider "

<laughterx8@h...> wrote:

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > > The phrase " killing thought " is in my view not a good

description

> > of

> > > what must happen for a person to become enlightened. It's the

> > > separate-creating process that must be healed by an act of

> > embracing

> > > the unknown for enlightenment to dawn.

> > >

> > > /AL

> > --------

> >

> > ---

> >

> > Good luck to you finding that in a non-dual religion/forum/group.

> >

> > The method of most non-dualists (see countless posts on this

board)

> > is to focus on the separate by insisting that they are not real.

> >

> > It engages in a " separate-creating process " by it's very act.

> >

> > There is not so much of an embracing but rather a pre-occupation

> > of " pushing " ideas away that do not fit their concept of " non-

> > dualism " . This is why it doesn't surprise me that your past

> > statements in posts consisted of a need to reject and push

away/non-

> > acceptance.

> >

> >

> > It's all fine, I mean all roads lead to your destination.

> >

> > There are many roads to lead to your goal.

>

>

> There are many roads.......but none that lead to a place that does

not exist.

>

>

>

>

> Non-dualism is one

> > of the hardest roads simply because people hide behind cloaks of

> > notions that almost make it impossible for them to question.

>

>

>

>

> No people hiding......only meat-puppets in this play.

>

>

>

> > How can you ever question something that " is not " .

>

>

> " You " can't......but you can queswtion you.

>

>

>

> >

> > And so the merry-go-round goes round and round. It just sounds so

> > fabulous and enlightened though.

> > And so the banging of the head against the illusory wall

> > continues.

> > Same old wall, different name.

> >

> > If enlightenment is your goal it will eventually work for you

> > though.

>

>

> No....it won't.

>

> If you believ that.......I have some tickets to Shangra La for

sale.

>

>

>

> Of that you can be certain regardless of what wall you use

> > to bang your head against.

> >

> > But the hardest part of your quest may be to define what you

mean by

> > enlightened? Otherwise you may be searching for something that

you

> > already have.

>

>

> Something that doesn't exist cannot have something that doesn't

exist.

>

>

>

>

> Or, you may not even recognize it once you reach it.

>

>

> " It " and " you " cannot exist together.

>

> One excludes the other...........

>

> You are simply never going to become enlightened.

>

> No one ever has.

>

> This is as close as you are ever going to be.

>

> Sorry.........

>

>

> toombaru

 

------------------------

 

I'm not the one asking the enlightenment questions,,,it's Al.

 

I'm only assuring him that he will get all the answers he needs or

wants, but if he doesn't know what his questions are then he'll

really be on a merry go round ride.

 

However, Toombaru, if this is your enlightenment destination then

whew!!!!

I'm sure glad I've got the prozac at the ready because your

definition of enlightenment is my definition of insane.

 

~G.

---------------

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " goldenrainbowrider "

<laughterx8@h...> wrote:

>

> > >

> > > I can see why your heavily into the " killing thought " mode.

> > >

> > > You are perhaps a little unbalanced -- very much in your head

> at

> > > the moment thinking it all out.

> > >

> > > That's o.k. It's all a part of working itself out and

> eventually

> > > it will. It's all good. That's just the thing.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > ~G.

> > > ------

> >

> > The phrase " killing thought " is in my view not a good description

> of

> > what must happen for a person to become enlightened. It's the

> > separate-creating process that must be healed by an act of

> embracing

> > the unknown for enlightenment to dawn.

> >

> > /AL

> --

>

> I can see that you've done a 360 from your recent posts stating that

> you don't adhere to acceptance (embracing?) but rather adhered to

> the concept of non-acceptance.

>

> Or perhaps you're looking at experimenting with both at the same

> time?

>

> That could be an interesting experiment.

>

> Please report back on your findings if that should be your choice of

> experimentation. Your honesty about yourself is refreshing to say

> the least.

>

> ~G.

>

> ------

 

O no, I don't adhere to non-acceptance, it is only that I find myself

trapped in such condition. Also I have found acceptance a dubious

occupation. Why spend energy going around accepting things? True

acceptance must come effortlessly, from a state of knowing, I think.

 

/AL

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " goldenrainbowrider "

<laughterx8@h...> wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > The phrase " killing thought " is in my view not a good description

> of

> > what must happen for a person to become enlightened. It's the

> > separate-creating process that must be healed by an act of

> embracing

> > the unknown for enlightenment to dawn.

> >

> > /AL

> --------

>

> ---

>

> Good luck to you finding that in a non-dual religion/forum/group.

>

> The method of most non-dualists (see countless posts on this board)

> is to focus on the separate by insisting that they are not real.

>

> It engages in a " separate-creating process " by it's very act.

>

> There is not so much of an embracing but rather a pre-occupation

> of " pushing " ideas away that do not fit their concept of " non-

> dualism " . This is why it doesn't surprise me that your past

> statements in posts consisted of a need to reject and push away/non-

> acceptance.

>

>

> It's all fine, I mean all roads lead to your destination.

>

> There are many roads to lead to your goal. Non-dualism is one

> of the hardest roads simply because people hide behind cloaks of

> notions that almost make it impossible for them to question.

> How can you ever question something that " is not " .

>

> And so the merry-go-round goes round and round. It just sounds so

> fabulous and enlightened though.

> And so the banging of the head against the illusory wall

> continues.

> Same old wall, different name.

>

> If enlightenment is your goal it will eventually work for you

> though. Of that you can be certain regardless of what wall you use

> to bang your head against.

>

> But the hardest part of your quest may be to define what you mean by

> enlightened? Otherwise you may be searching for something that you

> already have. Or, you may not even recognize it once you reach it.

>

> ~G.

> ----

 

My idea of enlightenment is to be conflictless, totally conflictless.

That does not mean to never become angry, or not to have different

opinions of things, but rather a state of true clarity and peace, to

really feel fearless (even when one is being afraid :-). To be able to

be angry without any negative feeling. To have anxiety but not feel it

as a burden. To have a body and mind that is light, almost as if

defying gravity.

 

/AL

[Guest guest]

Hi Anders,

 

Another definition of enligtenment:

 

" Enlightenment is already here, but you are thinking it is not here

but you are here. Without this nonsense of " I am here " enlightenment

would not be veiled but obvious " .

 

Werner

 

Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

<anders_lindman> wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " goldenrainbowrider "

> <laughterx8@h...> wrote:

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > > The phrase " killing thought " is in my view not a good

description

> > of

> > > what must happen for a person to become enlightened. It's the

> > > separate-creating process that must be healed by an act of

> > embracing

> > > the unknown for enlightenment to dawn.

> > >

> > > /AL

> > --------

> >

> > ---

> >

> > Good luck to you finding that in a non-dual religion/forum/group.

> >

> > The method of most non-dualists (see countless posts on this

board)

> > is to focus on the separate by insisting that they are not real.

> >

> > It engages in a " separate-creating process " by it's very act.

> >

> > There is not so much of an embracing but rather a pre-occupation

> > of " pushing " ideas away that do not fit their concept of " non-

> > dualism " . This is why it doesn't surprise me that your past

> > statements in posts consisted of a need to reject and push

away/non-

> > acceptance.

> >

> >

> > It's all fine, I mean all roads lead to your destination.

> >

> > There are many roads to lead to your goal. Non-dualism is one

> > of the hardest roads simply because people hide behind cloaks of

> > notions that almost make it impossible for them to question.

> > How can you ever question something that " is not " .

> >

> > And so the merry-go-round goes round and round. It just sounds so

> > fabulous and enlightened though.

> > And so the banging of the head against the illusory wall

> > continues.

> > Same old wall, different name.

> >

> > If enlightenment is your goal it will eventually work for you

> > though. Of that you can be certain regardless of what wall you use

> > to bang your head against.

> >

> > But the hardest part of your quest may be to define what you mean

by

> > enlightened? Otherwise you may be searching for something that you

> > already have. Or, you may not even recognize it once you reach

it.

> >

> > ~G.

> > ----

>

> My idea of enlightenment is to be conflictless, totally

conflictless.

> That does not mean to never become angry, or not to have different

> opinions of things, but rather a state of true clarity and peace, to

> really feel fearless (even when one is being afraid :-). To be able

to

> be angry without any negative feeling. To have anxiety but not feel

it

> as a burden. To have a body and mind that is light, almost as if

> defying gravity.

>

> /AL

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@p...> wrote:

>

> Hi Anders,

>

> Another definition of enligtenment:

>

> " Enlightenment is already here, but you are thinking it is not here

> but you are here. Without this nonsense of " I am here " enlightenment

> would not be veiled but obvious " .

>

> Werner

 

Infinite love penetrating infinite darkness. That's not an easy ride,

but the winner is always love. Darkness cannot darken out light, while

light can outshine darkness. There's your clue.

 

/AL

 

>

> Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> <anders_lindman> wrote:

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " goldenrainbowrider "

> > <laughterx8@h...> wrote:

> > >

> > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > > > The phrase " killing thought " is in my view not a good

> description

> > > of

> > > > what must happen for a person to become enlightened. It's the

> > > > separate-creating process that must be healed by an act of

> > > embracing

> > > > the unknown for enlightenment to dawn.

> > > >

> > > > /AL

> > > --------

> > >

> > > ---

> > >

> > > Good luck to you finding that in a non-dual religion/forum/group.

> > >

> > > The method of most non-dualists (see countless posts on this

> board)

> > > is to focus on the separate by insisting that they are not real.

> > >

> > > It engages in a " separate-creating process " by it's very act.

> > >

> > > There is not so much of an embracing but rather a pre-occupation

> > > of " pushing " ideas away that do not fit their concept of " non-

> > > dualism " . This is why it doesn't surprise me that your past

> > > statements in posts consisted of a need to reject and push

> away/non-

> > > acceptance.

> > >

> > >

> > > It's all fine, I mean all roads lead to your destination.

> > >

> > > There are many roads to lead to your goal. Non-dualism is one

> > > of the hardest roads simply because people hide behind cloaks of

> > > notions that almost make it impossible for them to question.

> > > How can you ever question something that " is not " .

> > >

> > > And so the merry-go-round goes round and round. It just sounds so

> > > fabulous and enlightened though.

> > > And so the banging of the head against the illusory wall

> > > continues.

> > > Same old wall, different name.

> > >

> > > If enlightenment is your goal it will eventually work for you

> > > though. Of that you can be certain regardless of what wall you use

> > > to bang your head against.

> > >

> > > But the hardest part of your quest may be to define what you mean

> by

> > > enlightened? Otherwise you may be searching for something that you

> > > already have. Or, you may not even recognize it once you reach

> it.

> > >

> > > ~G.

> > > ----

> >

> > My idea of enlightenment is to be conflictless, totally

> conflictless.

> > That does not mean to never become angry, or not to have different

> > opinions of things, but rather a state of true clarity and peace, to

> > really feel fearless (even when one is being afraid :-). To be able

> to

> > be angry without any negative feeling. To have anxiety but not feel

> it

> > as a burden. To have a body and mind that is light, almost as if

> > defying gravity.

> >

> > /AL