Ending psychological time

[Guest guest]

I have been thinking that there are mainly three forms of time:

physical time, calendar time and psychological time. Physical time is

for example earth's orbit around the sun (one year) and earth's

rotation around its own axis (one day and night). Calendar time is for

example time according to the Gregorian calendar, which most of the

world's countries are using. Psychological time is how we experience

time subjectively.

 

Physical time flows steadily in the now. Calendar time proceeds with

exact discrete steps, and psychological time varies depending on the

situation: for example, when we are waiting in a queue in the

supermarket time feels much slower than when we are involved in some

activity we find interesting.

 

My idea is that maybe it is possible to separate emotions from the

intellect, and thereby make psychological time entering the flow in

the now. The intellect is basically blind to the present moment and

can only see its self-constructed mental images about time which is

only past or future. Therefore, in relation to time, the intellect can

only create two types of emotions: waiting or stress. Waiting is

created by the intellect when there is something more important in the

future it wants to do or experience so the present moment becomes a

blockage, an obstacle. Stress is created when the intellect creates

mental images about outward pressures on itself.

 

Therefore, the intellect is always in conflict with physical time and

calendar time and that conflict is felt in the body as stress and/or

waiting.

 

When we separate emotions from the intellect in all aspects relating

to time, then inner conflict ceases and energy is released so that the

negative emotions are melted into peace in the present moment. We can

then still use the intellect for practical purposes regarding time,

such as planning e t c, but our own sense of self is no longer dragged

along into an imagined future that previously only gave us waiting

and/or stress.

 

That will create a fearless natural flow in the now, and hopefully

also a natural high, so that one feels gooooood in body and mind all

the time. :-)

 

al.

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

<anders_lindman> wrote:

>

> I have been thinking that there are mainly three forms of time:

> physical time, calendar time and psychological time. Physical time

is

> for example earth's orbit around the sun (one year) and earth's

> rotation around its own axis (one day and night). Calendar time is

for

> example time according to the Gregorian calendar, which most of the

> world's countries are using. Psychological time is how we experience

> time subjectively.

>

> Physical time flows steadily in the now. Calendar time proceeds with

> exact discrete steps, and psychological time varies depending on the

> situation: for example, when we are waiting in a queue in the

> supermarket time feels much slower than when we are involved in some

> activity we find interesting.

>

> My idea is that maybe it is possible to separate emotions from the

> intellect, and thereby make psychological time entering the flow in

> the now. The intellect is basically blind to the present moment and

> can only see its self-constructed mental images about time which is

> only past or future. Therefore, in relation to time, the intellect

can

> only create two types of emotions: waiting or stress. Waiting is

> created by the intellect when there is something more important in

the

> future it wants to do or experience so the present moment becomes a

> blockage, an obstacle. Stress is created when the intellect creates

> mental images about outward pressures on itself.

>

> Therefore, the intellect is always in conflict with physical time

and

> calendar time and that conflict is felt in the body as stress and/or

> waiting.

>

> When we separate emotions from the intellect in all aspects relating

> to time, then inner conflict ceases and energy is released so that

the

> negative emotions are melted into peace in the present moment. We

can

> then still use the intellect for practical purposes regarding time,

> such as planning e t c, but our own sense of self is no longer

dragged

> along into an imagined future that previously only gave us waiting

> and/or stress.

>

> That will create a fearless natural flow in the now, and hopefully

> also a natural high, so that one feels gooooood in body and mind all

> the time. :-)

>

> al.

>

 

i like it al,

it's been an analytical processing for you to put it on paper but in

theory it works.

 

i'm glad to see it, gives me food for thought about you.

 

First off it tells me you are realizing functions and seperation in

the sprirt which is almost essential to come to at some point

especially for the analytical mind and the one who wants answers to

understand why we fall into emotional tailspins sometimes and are

taken so far that the intellect can not escape.

This can be a negative as well as an illusory tailspin of God or not

god, and the intellect will feed the emotion. increasing it either

way.

 

The soul is the seat of emotion and the 'spirit' is intellect and

mind. two eternal parts of one___________ like a golf ball outside

cover and the rubber inside.

 

You see you are 1st driven by love, the love to be at peace joy

happiness, harmony and the line up is not that place, at least that's

what the intellect has said. " i hate waiting, you see you are driven

by the emotion of hate. Lets say you love waiting, now consider the

difference, line ups are now cool.

You can make life a game, that you win or loose depends on how you

make the rules.

 

Here is where the child like life is the perfect eg, go to a mall

stand in line whatch the child is still happy it finds love in doing

nothing. lol

 

Yesterday i went to a local watering hole and a guy walked in and sat

down beside me ordered his beer.

immediately i thought, this guys got problems and i'm feeling his

spirit.

Well, about 3 minites later after intro's he said something that

tipped off he was suffering, his girfriend of 2 years just told him

he's out and that she had hooked up with her old boy friend.

 

this guys mind, intellect, was wrappped up in that line up you were

talking about and then some.

any i gave the ole i,2, 3, what to do in 5 minutes.

 

point is, his emotion of love was shattered, and his intellect was

dwelling on the pain, and his intelligence was scrambled, becoming

subordinate to that pain that just happened. Some girl had just put a

knife in his heart and it was bleeding steadily.

 

so only when you line up the soul with the SOUL, can you free flow

love out from the heart and the intelligence becomes an active tool

to speak, write and thus breath love out.

 

That is why the Holy Spirit says " purge, cleanse your heart, from all

SIN DESIRES " well that's the Holy Spirit speaking through the medium

of this heart.

 

All Prophets are 'one with God' in Love, and librated in the Spirit.

 

peace

 

nice post ,

 

i'll give it another look.

 

whitehorse rides

[Guest guest]

Hi Al

There are some interesting thoughts here. The idea of separating thought

from feeling (emotion from intellect) isn't going to work from my perspective

simply because thought creates feeling. Thought, itself, or at least the

'thought trains' that spiral us into struggle, need to cease.

We know that time is an illusion, a perception of mind, literally a creation

of the memory function of mind. If there is no memory, there is no linear

collection of experiences that yield the perception of linear time. Memory is

required in order for thinking to take place. (This compared to the memory of

that, now compared to then) In this sense, we could say that all time is

psychological time.

 

The experience of waiting in line can lead to frustration because one wishes

to be home doing their meditation. The first is seen as a waste of time and

so it creates tension, while the second is seen as something that produces a

state of peace, and yet the two both involve the essential component of doing

nothing. In the first case, the thought arises that you have better things to

do, that the cashier is slow, that the old lady ahead of you is searching in

the bottom of her purse for that quarter she knows is there, and following

all these trains of thought results in tension and the desire to be someplace

that you are not, and this causes psychological time to drag.

 

In that same situation, if you were to remain in the moment, as you

suggested at the end, and not follow any of these thoughts down the rabbit hole,

the

feelings of tension would never arise. It's possible to simply allow all

things to be what they are. This is being in the moment and is perhaps the

single

most powerful thing we can 'do'. It's also the goal of meditation, which

really needs to be a way of life rather than a practice.

 

All that is required is to stop the thoughts. This is what allows us to

notice the Truth of our being. The difficulty is that ego fears that, if the

thoughts cease, so will the ego, and it will lose control of it's illusory, self

created experience. This is, in fact, true. The fear is justified. The

question is, are we willing to face that fear?

 

Phil

 

 

In a message dated 12/11/2005 11:18:06 AM Pacific Standard Time,

Nisargadatta writes:

 

" anders_lindman " <anders_lindman

Ending psychological time

 

I have been thinking that there are mainly three forms of time:

physical time, calendar time and psychological time. Physical time is

for example earth's orbit around the sun (one year) and earth's

rotation around its own axis (one day and night). Calendar time is for

example time according to the Gregorian calendar, which most of the

world's countries are using. Psychological time is how we experience

time subjectively.

 

Physical time flows steadily in the now. Calendar time proceeds with

exact discrete steps, and psychological time varies depending on the

situation: for example, when we are waiting in a queue in the

supermarket time feels much slower than when we are involved in some

activity we find interesting.

 

My idea is that maybe it is possible to separate emotions from the

intellect, and thereby make psychological time entering the flow in

the now. The intellect is basically blind to the present moment and

can only see its self-constructed mental images about time which is

only past or future. Therefore, in relation to time, the intellect can

only create two types of emotions: waiting or stress. Waiting is

created by the intellect when there is something more important in the

future it wants to do or experience so the present moment becomes a

blockage, an obstacle. Stress is created when the intellect creates

mental images about outward pressures on itself.

 

Therefore, the intellect is always in conflict with physical time and

calendar time and that conflict is felt in the body as stress and/or

waiting.

 

When we separate emotions from the intellect in all aspects relating

to time, then inner conflict ceases and energy is released so that the

negative emotions are melted into peace in the present moment. We can

then still use the intellect for practical purposes regarding time,

such as planning e t c, but our own sense of self is no longer dragged

along into an imagined future that previously only gave us waiting

and/or stress.

 

That will create a fearless natural flow in the now, and hopefully

also a natural high, so that one feels gooooood in body and mind all

the time. :-)

 

al.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

hi al., can you please tell what you mean by intellect in this

context?

 

 

Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

<anders_lindman> wrote:

>

> I have been thinking that there are mainly three forms of time:

> physical time, calendar time and psychological time. Physical time

is

> for example earth's orbit around the sun (one year) and earth's

> rotation around its own axis (one day and night). Calendar time is

for

> example time according to the Gregorian calendar, which most of the

> world's countries are using. Psychological time is how we experience

> time subjectively.

>

> Physical time flows steadily in the now. Calendar time proceeds with

> exact discrete steps, and psychological time varies depending on the

> situation: for example, when we are waiting in a queue in the

> supermarket time feels much slower than when we are involved in some

> activity we find interesting.

>

> My idea is that maybe it is possible to separate emotions from the

> intellect, and thereby make psychological time entering the flow in

> the now. The intellect is basically blind to the present moment and

> can only see its self-constructed mental images about time which is

> only past or future. Therefore, in relation to time, the intellect

can

> only create two types of emotions: waiting or stress. Waiting is

> created by the intellect when there is something more important in

the

> future it wants to do or experience so the present moment becomes a

> blockage, an obstacle. Stress is created when the intellect creates

> mental images about outward pressures on itself.

>

> Therefore, the intellect is always in conflict with physical time

and

> calendar time and that conflict is felt in the body as stress and/or

> waiting.

>

> When we separate emotions from the intellect in all aspects relating

> to time, then inner conflict ceases and energy is released so that

the

> negative emotions are melted into peace in the present moment. We

can

> then still use the intellect for practical purposes regarding time,

> such as planning e t c, but our own sense of self is no longer

dragged

> along into an imagined future that previously only gave us waiting

> and/or stress.

>

> That will create a fearless natural flow in the now, and hopefully

> also a natural high, so that one feels gooooood in body and mind all

> the time. :-)

>

> al.

>

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba> wrote:

>

> hi al., can you please tell what you mean by intellect in this

> context?

>

 

Yes, with the intellect I basically mean our process of thinking.

Psychological time is both thinking and emotions. Say for example that

you are at work and are longing for the weekend, then the intellect is

the thoughts about that; what you plan to do in the weekend and so on,

and the state of waiting is both those thoughts and the sensed

emotions along with those thoughts in the body. Being stuck in a

traffic jam can also be a great source of the feeling of waiting (and

even stress at the same time if you for example have an important

meeting to attend to and you may be late).

 

al.

 

>

> Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> <anders_lindman> wrote:

> >

> > I have been thinking that there are mainly three forms of time:

> > physical time, calendar time and psychological time. Physical time

> is

> > for example earth's orbit around the sun (one year) and earth's

> > rotation around its own axis (one day and night). Calendar time is

> for

> > example time according to the Gregorian calendar, which most of the

> > world's countries are using. Psychological time is how we experience

> > time subjectively.

> >

> > Physical time flows steadily in the now. Calendar time proceeds with

> > exact discrete steps, and psychological time varies depending on the

> > situation: for example, when we are waiting in a queue in the

> > supermarket time feels much slower than when we are involved in some

> > activity we find interesting.

> >

> > My idea is that maybe it is possible to separate emotions from the

> > intellect, and thereby make psychological time entering the flow in

> > the now. The intellect is basically blind to the present moment and

> > can only see its self-constructed mental images about time which is

> > only past or future. Therefore, in relation to time, the intellect

> can

> > only create two types of emotions: waiting or stress. Waiting is

> > created by the intellect when there is something more important in

> the

> > future it wants to do or experience so the present moment becomes a

> > blockage, an obstacle. Stress is created when the intellect creates

> > mental images about outward pressures on itself.

> >

> > Therefore, the intellect is always in conflict with physical time

> and

> > calendar time and that conflict is felt in the body as stress and/or

> > waiting.

> >

> > When we separate emotions from the intellect in all aspects relating

> > to time, then inner conflict ceases and energy is released so that

> the

> > negative emotions are melted into peace in the present moment. We

> can

> > then still use the intellect for practical purposes regarding time,

> > such as planning e t c, but our own sense of self is no longer

> dragged

> > along into an imagined future that previously only gave us waiting

> > and/or stress.

> >

> > That will create a fearless natural flow in the now, and hopefully

> > also a natural high, so that one feels gooooood in body and mind all

> > the time. :-)

> >

> > al.

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

<anders_lindman> wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba>

wrote:

> >

> > hi al., can you please tell what you mean by intellect in this

> > context?

> >

>

> Yes, with the intellect I basically mean our process of thinking.

> Psychological time is both thinking and emotions. Say for example

that

> you are at work and are longing for the weekend, then the intellect

is

> the thoughts about that; what you plan to do in the weekend and so

on,

> and the state of waiting is both those thoughts and the sensed

> emotions along with those thoughts in the body. Being stuck in a

> traffic jam can also be a great source of the feeling of waiting

(and

> even stress at the same time if you for example have an important

> meeting to attend to and you may be late).

>

> al.

>

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > >

> > > I have been thinking that there are mainly three forms of time:

> > > physical time, calendar time and psychological time. Physical

time

> > is

> > > for example earth's orbit around the sun (one year) and earth's

> > > rotation around its own axis (one day and night). Calendar time

is

> > for

> > > example time according to the Gregorian calendar, which most of

the

> > > world's countries are using. Psychological time is how we

experience

> > > time subjectively.

> > >

> > > Physical time flows steadily in the now. Calendar time proceeds

with

> > > exact discrete steps, and psychological time varies depending

on the

> > > situation: for example, when we are waiting in a queue in the

> > > supermarket time feels much slower than when we are involved in

some

> > > activity we find interesting.

> > >

> > > My idea is that maybe it is possible to separate emotions from

the

> > > intellect, and thereby make psychological time entering the

flow in

> > > the now. The intellect is basically blind to the present moment

and

> > > can only see its self-constructed mental images about time

which is

> > > only past or future. Therefore, in relation to time, the

intellect

> > can

> > > only create two types of emotions: waiting or stress. Waiting is

> > > created by the intellect when there is something more important

in

> > the

> > > future it wants to do or experience so the present moment

becomes a

> > > blockage, an obstacle. Stress is created when the intellect

creates

> > > mental images about outward pressures on itself.

> > >

> > > Therefore, the intellect is always in conflict with physical

time

> > and

> > > calendar time and that conflict is felt in the body as stress

and/or

> > > waiting.

> > >

> > > When we separate emotions from the intellect in all aspects

relating

> > > to time, then inner conflict ceases and energy is released so

that

> > the

> > > negative emotions are melted into peace in the present moment.

We

> > can

> > > then still use the intellect for practical purposes regarding

time,

> > > such as planning e t c, but our own sense of self is no longer

> > dragged

> > > along into an imagined future that previously only gave us

waiting

> > > and/or stress.

> > >

> > > That will create a fearless natural flow in the now, and

hopefully

> > > also a natural high, so that one feels gooooood in body and

mind all

> > > the time. :-)

> > >

> > > al.

> > >

> >

>for the self realized soul or one who is in God lives in love of the

intimacy of His muse has no calender of time.

 

he live always fixed in the now, which is without time or in eternal

time.

That is the victory over death as Jesus described. The 'i am' one

with that " I AM " . this state of conscience basically fuses all the

spirit into oneness where in the thought process is one with God's

Will, therefore from the inside ie soul the self flows up and out

of pure love and is consistently flowing. When one is in this state

of pure love there is nothing, but peace.

 

Now for eg though Jesus demonstrated physically by going to the

Temple and overthrowing the tables and scolding the sellers of sheep

for the sacrifice. His actions were still out of love and in him was

still peace. One can demonstrate love through passion or peace but

the objective must be without personal motive.

 

i may be passionate about what i say but that does not imply evil or

motive. This is an interesting but necessary truth to understand.

God is active in a passionate or peaceful way, but both are Him. God

is not passive wherein things don't matter.

 

Jesus showed 'passive resistence' and was fixed and passionate for

God, by going into Temples and preching right under there noses and

giveing them once over. Paul was busy travelling and speaking and

challenging the heads of religions, and all the idolators.

 

God doesn't want just ___sit at home i am om___.lol. He's looking for

active people passionate about love and loving, giving and seeing

love increase.

How do you get rid of cold in your house, by putting heat in it.

How do you get rid of negativism ? by putting in positivism

How do you get rid of hate? by putting in love.

 

difficult??????????????????????????

 

your soul is not a void its originally made in love, but now so much

has taken over, so put love into your heart.

GOD IS LOVE, God is not nothing.

 

These are the words of Holy men. If not, then go hide a shut up.

 

 

almost what the Niz tries to explain but connot, due to his inability

to accept the self as a unique part of the Self.

 

 

whitehorserides

[Guest guest]

When we separate emotions from the intellect in all aspects relating

to time, then inner conflict ceases and energy is released so that the

negative emotions are melted into peace in the present moment. We can

then still use the intellect for practical purposes regarding time,

such as planning e t c, but our own sense of self is no longer dragged

along into an imagined future that previously only gave us waiting

and/or stress.

>>>>>

 

From what you are saying the " sense of self " corresponds

to emotions.

 

It is interesting because I picked that out from the first

sentence above and then read you saying as much in the last

sentence.

 

A way that strikes me to say it (a little different than

yours) is to allow a melting into the flow of feeling.

Doing so might be a whitewater rapid or a lazy river.

But staying with it eventually a lazy river.

 

I guess the point is that feeling is always now, and so

real in a way that thought can never can be.

 

Thought is useful as something that arises in a flash

(as a lightning bolt) and then fades, but as steersman

thought is the worst of the worst.

 

 

Bill

 

Note: Krishnamurti speaks of ending psychological time.

[Guest guest]

Hi Bill,

 

I haven't quite got what you wrote but let me say this:

 

All emotions are physical sensation caused by thought. Which means,

first thought, then this physical sensation called 'emotion' which is

a bodily reaction and was induced by thought. And that needs time -

emotions are slow.

 

The interesting thing now is, can unidentified thought cause any

emotions ? Or has there be a preceding identification zo trigger

emotions. ?

 

Werner

 

 

Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illieusion@h...>

wrote:

>

> When we separate emotions from the intellect in all aspects relating

> to time, then inner conflict ceases and energy is released so that

the

> negative emotions are melted into peace in the present moment. We

can

> then still use the intellect for practical purposes regarding time,

> such as planning e t c, but our own sense of self is no longer

dragged

> along into an imagined future that previously only gave us waiting

> and/or stress.

> >>>>>

>

> From what you are saying the " sense of self " corresponds

> to emotions.

>

> It is interesting because I picked that out from the first

> sentence above and then read you saying as much in the last

> sentence.

>

> A way that strikes me to say it (a little different than

> yours) is to allow a melting into the flow of feeling.

> Doing so might be a whitewater rapid or a lazy river.

> But staying with it eventually a lazy river.

>

> I guess the point is that feeling is always now, and so

> real in a way that thought can never can be.

>

> Thought is useful as something that arises in a flash

> (as a lightning bolt) and then fades, but as steersman

> thought is the worst of the worst.

>

>

> Bill

>

> Note: Krishnamurti speaks of ending psychological time.

>

[Guest guest]

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

wrote:

>

> Hi Bill,

>

> I haven't quite got what you wrote but let me say this:

>

> All emotions are physical sensation caused by thought. Which means,

> first thought, then this physical sensation called 'emotion' which

is

> a bodily reaction and was induced by thought. And that needs time -

> emotions are slow.

>

> The interesting thing now is, can unidentified thought cause any

> emotions ? Or has there be a preceding identification zo trigger

> emotions. ?

>

> Werner

>

>

> Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illieusion@h...>

> wrote:

> >

> > When we separate emotions from the intellect in all aspects

relating

> > to time, then inner conflict ceases and energy is released so

that

> the

> > negative emotions are melted into peace in the present moment. We

> can

> > then still use the intellect for practical purposes regarding

time,

> > such as planning e t c, but our own sense of self is no longer

> dragged

> > along into an imagined future that previously only gave us waiting

> > and/or stress.

> > >>>>>

> >

> > From what you are saying the " sense of self " corresponds

> > to emotions.

> >

> > It is interesting because I picked that out from the first

> > sentence above and then read you saying as much in the last

> > sentence.

> >

> > A way that strikes me to say it (a little different than

> > yours) is to allow a melting into the flow of feeling.

> > Doing so might be a whitewater rapid or a lazy river.

> > But staying with it eventually a lazy river.

> >

> > I guess the point is that feeling is always now, and so

> > real in a way that thought can never can be.

> >

> > Thought is useful as something that arises in a flash

> > (as a lightning bolt) and then fades, but as steersman

> > thought is the worst of the worst.

> >

> >

> > Bill

> >

> > Note: Krishnamurti speaks of ending psychological time.

 

 

good eve

 

notice but bad eve,

 

or should it be just eve,

 

WHO knows????????????????

 

well i bagged early

so it's early for me to get up ____10:40 pm __lol

 

ISN'T LIFE STRANGE.

 

you all talk around me,

sept ana, she just tried.

 

bill

 

you have come closest of any to put the spirit in order. By that i'm

implying the make up, and basis for advancing in Spirit Thought.

nice thinking. (:= __lol. The master of color knows all colours, tune

in and the mix will bring out colours you've never seen.

 

werner

however is trying to put thought first, then emotion after due to

the engagement or the identification, or associate thoughts with.

This is the most logical deductive reasoning but you are more

accurate in the True make up.

you actualully are accurate. Now it requires what you are all

refusing to admit or wanting to submit to.

 

and as ana said the Father, thing sounds childish, i believe this is

her words and the " " " we talk maturely ___us here ____in non duality

circles____ because 'we' are beyond being hand held by papa " " " .

Would that be a correct assessment by you ana?

 

 

 

Bill this is what you wrote

 

>>>From what you are saying the " sense of self " corresponds

> > to emotions.

 

This is the basis for the being in the moment as you let out below.

 

you see in that state of pure emotion, ie pure love ie purely in God.

 

That is the point here where you all need to comprehend, which you

dance around but now we can logically proceed, it's course to the end.

 

If you, me, her, him, can independently get to this place then we

still remain " in love " but our idividualism. HEAR THAT permits

through thought which is the operative action to enjoy or feel the

moment in eternal time thus be free from all duality.

 

now having said that you cannot negate the unique character of the

self being independent, but in relationship to others share in that

pure liberated state, or in perfect love. As i've said before the

soul is the seat of emotions and i't make up is love being from the

Soul.

Thought is coverings that are 'the spirit' and are additions from

birth. ______follow_____

 

Consider the pure born baby and then add to it. Who is adding? God or

man/women and the rest of the socialist blast coming, hence the mind

the other part spirit becomes a reservoir of information acculating

in the mind filling the corners and making up what the child

identifies with

 

hence false ego _______misappropriated self understanding. Thoughts

become the I as opposed to Love being the " I Am " which is the Word

of God' or God or Love ____God is LOve___.

 

THIS IS WHAT 'S MISSING IN ALL YOUR NILHILISTIC TEACHINGS IS THE

UNDERSTANDING OF LOVE.

 

Now ana just tried to say this is, but she is just climbing out of

trapped self within the confused I, but is still waying we are all

the who, so hopefully this will soon adjust that WHO IS and we are

only little who's.

 

Now you might have difficulty here with this coming from me but hur

stepped in also to add some idea that we are all little Jesus's and

i'm just junior over here, prasing you all and maybe i'll recognize

that you are all Jesus's too.

 

Well, i'll i have to say to that is " good " so if you all be Jesus's

then i'm sur we can all perfectly get along together and " live as

One, Imagine there's no heaven " , easy now right.

 

So where'w the gathering of the sages,saints and angels?

 

i can't imagine all saints and angels, ie 'Jesus's happy gang' all in

seperation or just connected by cyberair. The final Promise or end

days which are paralyed into the gathering of angels, called virgins

or those whose hearts are circumcised with love, by love,and for love

____________________WHO IS LOVE, but God._____go figure.

 

and what do you do in love?

 

self implode, keep it , hold on to it?

 

when you have so much love as ana wrote in one of her poems recently

it's overflowing inside.

 

Jesus's cup was filled and he was freely doling it out.

 

Can you imagine a force of lovers, strengh in numbers, the impact it

can have on this world..

 

That's God's promise to bring together from all 4 corners of the

world those who love Him.

 

Now i realize you may be having a problem with this third part idea,

or the God Factor, but in time it will be like bill said the rushing

river flowing into the calm, in one sort of thought.

Where the river meets the sea, but all still independently.

 

This is just a piece of expression.

 

i reserve the right to add or clarify, expand to be more precise on

the full expression,

 

thanks

despite what you think of me, we're discussing the Truth.

 

and that causes me to dance.

 

whitehorserides.

 

 

> >

> > It is interesting because I picked that out from the first

> > sentence above and then read you saying as much in the last

> > sentence.

 

 

 

 

 

A way that strikes me to say it (a little different than

> > yours) is to allow a melting into the flow of feeling.

> > Doing so might be a whitewater rapid or a lazy river.

> > But staying with it eventually a lazy river.

> >

> > I guess the point is that feeling is always now, and so

> > real in a way that thought can never can be.

> >

> > Thought is useful as something that arises in a flash

> > (as a lightning bolt) and then fades, but as steersman

> > thought is the worst of the worst.

> >

[Guest guest]

Hi Werner...

 

You wrote:

> All emotions are physical sensation caused by thought.

 

I'm not ready to accept that statement, actually.

But we don't have definitions before us of the

terms, so is difficult to make a focused comment

on the subject.

 

By thought do you mean only conscious thought, or

do you have a notion of unconscious thought as well?

 

> can unidentified thought cause any emotions ? Or has

> there be a preceding identification to trigger

> emotions. ?

 

Apparently by " unidentified thought " you mean

unconscious thought. There are experiments that

clearly show that people experience emotions,

and even act on them, without any consciousness

that they are having the emotions.

 

That being the case, the answer to your second

question above seems to be, " No. "

 

Getting back to your presupposition:

> All emotions are physical sensation caused by thought.

 

Why do you consider that emotions require thought?

It seems entirely plausible to me that emotions

can be initiated by perception alone. If you look

to your left and abruptly see a tiger leaping toward

you I expect there would be emotions kicking in,

and I don't think there would be a lot of thinking

going on. I think that emotions are more primitive

than thought, which is to say evolutionarily " prior "

to thought. [Antonio Damasio's book *The Feeling of

What Happens* supports that view, if I recall correctly.]

 

For example, it seems that one can identify many

examples in the animal kingdom of emotions whereas

thought in the animal kingdom is generally a dubious

conjecture except perhaps in the higher primates.

So a scwaking mother bird whose nest of eggs is being

threatened by a predator is surely experiencing

emotion, but there is little basis for presuming

thought as being operant in such a case.

 

Bill

 

 

 

 

 

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

wrote:

>

> Hi Bill,

>

> I haven't quite got what you wrote but let me say this:

>

> All emotions are physical sensation caused by thought. Which means,

> first thought, then this physical sensation called 'emotion' which

is

> a bodily reaction and was induced by thought. And that needs time -

> emotions are slow.

>

> The interesting thing now is, can unidentified thought cause any

> emotions ? Or has there be a preceding identification zo trigger

> emotions. ?

>

> Werner

>

>

> Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illieusion@h...>

> wrote:

> >

> > When we separate emotions from the intellect in all aspects

relating

> > to time, then inner conflict ceases and energy is released so

that

> the

> > negative emotions are melted into peace in the present moment. We

> can

> > then still use the intellect for practical purposes regarding

time,

> > such as planning e t c, but our own sense of self is no longer

> dragged

> > along into an imagined future that previously only gave us waiting

> > and/or stress.

> > >>>>>

> >

> > From what you are saying the " sense of self " corresponds

> > to emotions.

> >

> > It is interesting because I picked that out from the first

> > sentence above and then read you saying as much in the last

> > sentence.

> >

> > A way that strikes me to say it (a little different than

> > yours) is to allow a melting into the flow of feeling.

> > Doing so might be a whitewater rapid or a lazy river.

> > But staying with it eventually a lazy river.

> >

> > I guess the point is that feeling is always now, and so

> > real in a way that thought can never can be.

> >

> > Thought is useful as something that arises in a flash

> > (as a lightning bolt) and then fades, but as steersman

> > thought is the worst of the worst.

> >

> >

> > Bill

> >

> > Note: Krishnamurti speaks of ending psychological time.

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Hi Bill,

 

Please see, you only can refer to unconscious or subconscious thought

because you have read about it or someone told you.

 

I am only relating to my own daily observations. Therefore you better

should see me as 'simple minded'. And so 'thought' for me originates

in 'thinking' and not in processes I am unconscious of. I do not deny

those processes and if the subconsious can get consious (not by

verbalization) then it is fine.

 

" In the beginning was the word " . And then came emotions which are

just physical sensations.

 

Werner

 

 

Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illieusion@h...>

wrote:

>

> Hi Werner...

>

> You wrote:

> > All emotions are physical sensation caused by thought.

>

> I'm not ready to accept that statement, actually.

> But we don't have definitions before us of the

> terms, so is difficult to make a focused comment

> on the subject.

>

> By thought do you mean only conscious thought, or

> do you have a notion of unconscious thought as well?

>

> > can unidentified thought cause any emotions ? Or has

> > there be a preceding identification to trigger

> > emotions. ?

>

> Apparently by " unidentified thought " you mean

> unconscious thought. There are experiments that

> clearly show that people experience emotions,

> and even act on them, without any consciousness

> that they are having the emotions.

>

> That being the case, the answer to your second

> question above seems to be, " No. "

>

> Getting back to your presupposition:

> > All emotions are physical sensation caused by thought.

>

> Why do you consider that emotions require thought?

> It seems entirely plausible to me that emotions

> can be initiated by perception alone. If you look

> to your left and abruptly see a tiger leaping toward

> you I expect there would be emotions kicking in,

> and I don't think there would be a lot of thinking

> going on. I think that emotions are more primitive

> than thought, which is to say evolutionarily " prior "

> to thought. [Antonio Damasio's book *The Feeling of

> What Happens* supports that view, if I recall correctly.]

>

> For example, it seems that one can identify many

> examples in the animal kingdom of emotions whereas

> thought in the animal kingdom is generally a dubious

> conjecture except perhaps in the higher primates.

> So a scwaking mother bird whose nest of eggs is being

> threatened by a predator is surely experiencing

> emotion, but there is little basis for presuming

> thought as being operant in such a case.

>

> Bill

>

>

>

>

>

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

> wrote:

> >

> > Hi Bill,

> >

> > I haven't quite got what you wrote but let me say this:

> >

> > All emotions are physical sensation caused by thought. Which

means,

> > first thought, then this physical sensation called 'emotion'

which

> is

> > a bodily reaction and was induced by thought. And that needs

time -

> > emotions are slow.

> >

> > The interesting thing now is, can unidentified thought cause any

> > emotions ? Or has there be a preceding identification zo trigger

> > emotions. ?

> >

> > Werner

> >

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " billrishel "

<illieusion@h...>

> > wrote:

> > >

> > > When we separate emotions from the intellect in all aspects

> relating

> > > to time, then inner conflict ceases and energy is released so

> that

> > the

> > > negative emotions are melted into peace in the present moment.

We

> > can

> > > then still use the intellect for practical purposes regarding

> time,

> > > such as planning e t c, but our own sense of self is no longer

> > dragged

> > > along into an imagined future that previously only gave us

waiting

> > > and/or stress.

> > > >>>>>

> > >

> > > From what you are saying the " sense of self " corresponds

> > > to emotions.

> > >

> > > It is interesting because I picked that out from the first

> > > sentence above and then read you saying as much in the last

> > > sentence.

> > >

> > > A way that strikes me to say it (a little different than

> > > yours) is to allow a melting into the flow of feeling.

> > > Doing so might be a whitewater rapid or a lazy river.

> > > But staying with it eventually a lazy river.

> > >

> > > I guess the point is that feeling is always now, and so

> > > real in a way that thought can never can be.

> > >

> > > Thought is useful as something that arises in a flash

> > > (as a lightning bolt) and then fades, but as steersman

> > > thought is the worst of the worst.

> > >

> > >

> > > Bill

> > >

> > > Note: Krishnamurti speaks of ending psychological time.

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

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

wrote:

>

> Hi Bill,

>

> Please see, you only can refer to unconscious or subconscious

thought

> because you have read about it or someone told you.

>

> I am only relating to my own daily observations. Therefore you

better

> should see me as 'simple minded'. And so 'thought' for me

originates

> in 'thinking' and not in processes I am unconscious of. I do not

deny

> those processes and if the subconsious can get consious (not by

> verbalization) then it is fine.

>

> " In the beginning was the word " . And then came emotions which are

> just physical sensations.

>

> Werner

 

 

wrong______________________wrong ________________wrong___________

 

 

Purified enmotions is God, you are created little loves ie souls, an

existing entity that is covered by 'spirit' mind and intellect, hence

spiritual-soul.

 

werner and so many of you are blinded by adult thinking processes.

 

you can't seem to hear God, nor believe He is.

 

Denial is your out, or excus to do what you want and justify it as

all is one___________________stop lying to God. and your self.

 

You are afraid to let go of your personal attachments,____i know.

 

And you avoid me just as you avoid God. Like you deny Him you deny me

b/c i speak of love in cooperation and you want to love with your own

ideas. God was not made or born last nite, He sees everything and

gives the eyes to those who love Him, to know everything.

 

i used to drive v-12 jaguars in a medium income neighbourhead.

People would turn their head and avoid looking at the car. Why? b/c

it was something that they could not have at least they felt or

believed it was beyond their means. Therefore they avoided looking,

ignore me.

You are doing the same here, it's quite funny, similar but different.

Envious doesn't need words, so to avoid me has the foundation. Some

day, if you pray to God and ask for forgiveness of your

sins, 'perhaps' you might get to the root of the problem. It's called

humility. But right now you are still trying to intellectualize what

is and what is not. Therefore you cannot collapse your intelligence

being too busy trying to describe everything and not admitting to

your faulty intelligence based in ego.

 

some day you will understand, or die looking down the end of your

nose, thinking you have attained, that is the impersonal poison.

 

peace my friend

 

whitehorserides

 

you can still talk to me, i'm not going to think i won or i'm better.

see the child has a short memory and wants to play. he forgives and

forgets easily petty things, for the more important things

play, love , enjoy , trust , games, life. freedom comfort

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

>

[Guest guest]

What ?

 

Werner

 

 

Nisargadatta , " whitehorserides "

<green1911@v...> wrote:

>

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

> wrote:

> >

> > Hi Bill,

> >

> > Please see, you only can refer to unconscious or subconscious

> thought

> > because you have read about it or someone told you.

> >

> > I am only relating to my own daily observations. Therefore you

> better

> > should see me as 'simple minded'. And so 'thought' for me

> originates

> > in 'thinking' and not in processes I am unconscious of. I do not

> deny

> > those processes and if the subconsious can get consious (not by

> > verbalization) then it is fine.

> >

> > " In the beginning was the word " . And then came emotions which are

> > just physical sensations.

> >

> > Werner

>

>

> wrong______________________wrong ________________wrong___________

>

>

> Purified enmotions is God, you are created little loves ie souls,

an

> existing entity that is covered by 'spirit' mind and intellect,

hence

> spiritual-soul.

>

> werner and so many of you are blinded by adult thinking processes.

>

> you can't seem to hear God, nor believe He is.

>

> Denial is your out, or excus to do what you want and justify it as

> all is one___________________stop lying to God. and your self.

>

> You are afraid to let go of your personal attachments,____i know.

>

> And you avoid me just as you avoid God. Like you deny Him you deny

me

> b/c i speak of love in cooperation and you want to love with your

own

> ideas. God was not made or born last nite, He sees everything and

> gives the eyes to those who love Him, to know everything.

>

> i used to drive v-12 jaguars in a medium income neighbourhead.

> People would turn their head and avoid looking at the car. Why? b/c

> it was something that they could not have at least they felt or

> believed it was beyond their means. Therefore they avoided looking,

> ignore me.

> You are doing the same here, it's quite funny, similar but

different.

> Envious doesn't need words, so to avoid me has the foundation. Some

> day, if you pray to God and ask for forgiveness of your

> sins, 'perhaps' you might get to the root of the problem. It's

called

> humility. But right now you are still trying to intellectualize

what

> is and what is not. Therefore you cannot collapse your intelligence

> being too busy trying to describe everything and not admitting to

> your faulty intelligence based in ego.

>

> some day you will understand, or die looking down the end of your

> nose, thinking you have attained, that is the impersonal poison.

>

> peace my friend

>

> whitehorserides

>

> you can still talk to me, i'm not going to think i won or i'm

better.

> see the child has a short memory and wants to play. he forgives and

> forgets easily petty things, for the more important things

> play, love , enjoy , trust , games, life. freedom comfort

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illieusion@h...> wrote:

>

> When we separate emotions from the intellect in all aspects relating

> to time, then inner conflict ceases and energy is released so that the

> negative emotions are melted into peace in the present moment. We can

> then still use the intellect for practical purposes regarding time,

> such as planning e t c, but our own sense of self is no longer dragged

> along into an imagined future that previously only gave us waiting

> and/or stress.

> >>>>>

>

> From what you are saying the " sense of self " corresponds

> to emotions.

>

> It is interesting because I picked that out from the first

> sentence above and then read you saying as much in the last

> sentence.

>

> A way that strikes me to say it (a little different than

> yours) is to allow a melting into the flow of feeling.

> Doing so might be a whitewater rapid or a lazy river.

> But staying with it eventually a lazy river.

>

> I guess the point is that feeling is always now, and so

> real in a way that thought can never can be.

>

> Thought is useful as something that arises in a flash

> (as a lightning bolt) and then fades, but as steersman

> thought is the worst of the worst.

>

>

> Bill

>

> Note: Krishnamurti speaks of ending psychological time.

>

 

 

Emotions are in the now, while the intellect tries to move into an

imagine future. That creates a tug-of-war between thoughts and

emotions when it comes to psychological time. That strain is felt as

waiting and/or stress. So, yes emotions/feelings are closer to the

flow in the now than the intellect which is basically blind to time

other than as mental images about past and future.

 

al.

[Guest guest]

Find what links together emotions and thoughts.

is it an emotion?

is it a thought?

 

 

Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

<anders_lindman> wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illieusion@h...>

wrote:

> >

> > When we separate emotions from the intellect in all aspects

relating

> > to time, then inner conflict ceases and energy is released so

that the

> > negative emotions are melted into peace in the present moment. We

can

> > then still use the intellect for practical purposes regarding

time,

> > such as planning e t c, but our own sense of self is no longer

dragged

> > along into an imagined future that previously only gave us waiting

> > and/or stress.

> > >>>>>

> >

> > From what you are saying the " sense of self " corresponds

> > to emotions.

> >

> > It is interesting because I picked that out from the first

> > sentence above and then read you saying as much in the last

> > sentence.

> >

> > A way that strikes me to say it (a little different than

> > yours) is to allow a melting into the flow of feeling.

> > Doing so might be a whitewater rapid or a lazy river.

> > But staying with it eventually a lazy river.

> >

> > I guess the point is that feeling is always now, and so

> > real in a way that thought can never can be.

> >

> > Thought is useful as something that arises in a flash

> > (as a lightning bolt) and then fades, but as steersman

> > thought is the worst of the worst.

> >

> >

> > Bill

> >

> > Note: Krishnamurti speaks of ending psychological time.

> >

>

>

> Emotions are in the now, while the intellect tries to move into an

> imagine future. That creates a tug-of-war between thoughts and

> emotions when it comes to psychological time. That strain is felt as

> waiting and/or stress. So, yes emotions/feelings are closer to the

> flow in the now than the intellect which is basically blind to time

> other than as mental images about past and future.

>

> al.

>

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

<anders_lindman> wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illieusion@h...>

wrote:

> >

> > When we separate emotions from the intellect in all aspects

relating

> > to time, then inner conflict ceases and energy is released so

that the

> > negative emotions are melted into peace in the present moment. We

can

> > then still use the intellect for practical purposes regarding

time,

> > such as planning e t c, but our own sense of self is no longer

dragged

> > along into an imagined future that previously only gave us waiting

> > and/or stress.

> > >>>>>

> >

> > From what you are saying the " sense of self " corresponds

> > to emotions.

> >

> > It is interesting because I picked that out from the first

> > sentence above and then read you saying as much in the last

> > sentence.

> >

> > A way that strikes me to say it (a little different than

> > yours) is to allow a melting into the flow of feeling.

> > Doing so might be a whitewater rapid or a lazy river.

> > But staying with it eventually a lazy river.

> >

> > I guess the point is that feeling is always now, and so

> > real in a way that thought can never can be.

> >

> > Thought is useful as something that arises in a flash

> > (as a lightning bolt) and then fades, but as steersman

> > thought is the worst of the worst.

> >

> >

> > Bill

> >

> > Note: Krishnamurti speaks of ending psychological time.

> >

>

>

> Emotions are in the now, while the intellect tries to move into an

> imagine future. That creates a tug-of-war between thoughts and

> emotions when it comes to psychological time. That strain is felt as

> waiting and/or stress. So, yes emotions/feelings are closer to the

> flow in the now than the intellect which is basically blind to time

> other than as mental images about past and future.

>

> al.

>

correct

 

Pure emotion is the soul and is the state of purity. When you remove

all the coverings there remains only Love. correct.

 

Love is the only perfect Truth, that is God. And God is Love.

 

the intellect is sorting al, it's using stored information from the

mind, recalling the experience and can sort to imagine , make or

create or call upon past learned habit to execute on auto pilot.

That's not subconcously or unconscious as some are trying to say here.

 

the sub ie below is in and inactive state, that is the sleeping

state. the mind never sleeps nor does it loose it's retained

experiences.

Howwever, when you go to sleep the intelligence rests, not mind, the

intelligence functioning in the wakened state and is actually

working, and does all the imagining or thinking, conceptualizing.

 

Emotions of love are buried into the soul, they are more than stored

information, b/c they are feelings, they are more than thoughts.

however a thought or visual can trigger and emotion, it's not the

thought that cries or feels pain it's the emotion or soul.

 

That's why the soul is originally pure and is the you, or self, or

pure self, or pure ego. Pure ego, not thought ego, or mind ego or

body ego, but pure Love ego. Love is at the base of all ____that's

God.

 

now you must know what it is that perfectly pleases that soul.

 

is a women, or a car or a boat, ____no these are only partial and

only fill parts and inevitalbly will fade or fail you at some point.

 

But God never fails, therefore love God with all your heart, mind,

and soul. The first commandment,

 

 

it's simple, it doesn't take all this mental word jugglery to figure

God out.

Like these nihilists who want to figure God out of of the picture,

 

like annihilate God , lol

 

you can't kill me, i'm eternal soul. i cannot be killed, nor can you

take my love away, it's in Him it's His.

 

hello

 

whitehorserides

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba> wrote:

>

>

> Find what links together emotions and thoughts.

> is it an emotion?

> is it a thought?

 

 

It is our sense of being aware in the now (for example called the

Witness by Ken Wilber) that is the connection point between thoughts

and emotions. For example when we use our physical senses such as

sight, then when we look at something there is an " image " created in

the " mind " (the information from the left and right eye are turned

upside down and presented as one image in the mind). That direct

perception is not a thought, is not the intellect. When you look at

the computer monitor in front of you, you are aware of the direct

image of the computer monitor as registered by your eyes. That which

is aware of that image is not a thought, it is the " Witness " . When you

think about what you will do the next hour, that is the intellect.

 

al.

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

<anders_lindman> wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba>

wrote:

> >

> >

> > Find what links together emotions and thoughts.

> > is it an emotion?

> > is it a thought?

>

>

> It is our sense of being aware in the now (for example called the

> Witness by Ken Wilber) that is the connection point between thoughts

> and emotions. For example when we use our physical senses such as

> sight, then when we look at something there is an " image " created in

> the " mind " (the information from the left and right eye are turned

> upside down and presented as one image in the mind). That direct

> perception is not a thought, is not the intellect. When you look at

> the computer monitor in front of you, you are aware of the direct

> image of the computer monitor as registered by your eyes. That which

> is aware of that image is not a thought, it is the " Witness " . When

you

> think about what you will do the next hour, that is the intellect.

>

> al.

 

and when this " witness " become " aware " of being " witness " .....?...

 

then the computer monitor still is being used by the intellect

writing nice theories?

 

Marc

 

 

 

>

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " whitehorserides "

<green1911@v...> wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> <anders_lindman> wrote:

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illieusion@h...>

> wrote:

> > >

> > > When we separate emotions from the intellect in all aspects

> relating

> > > to time, then inner conflict ceases and energy is released so

> that the

> > > negative emotions are melted into peace in the present moment. We

> can

> > > then still use the intellect for practical purposes regarding

> time,

> > > such as planning e t c, but our own sense of self is no longer

> dragged

> > > along into an imagined future that previously only gave us waiting

> > > and/or stress.

> > > >>>>>

> > >

> > > From what you are saying the " sense of self " corresponds

> > > to emotions.

> > >

> > > It is interesting because I picked that out from the first

> > > sentence above and then read you saying as much in the last

> > > sentence.

> > >

> > > A way that strikes me to say it (a little different than

> > > yours) is to allow a melting into the flow of feeling.

> > > Doing so might be a whitewater rapid or a lazy river.

> > > But staying with it eventually a lazy river.

> > >

> > > I guess the point is that feeling is always now, and so

> > > real in a way that thought can never can be.

> > >

> > > Thought is useful as something that arises in a flash

> > > (as a lightning bolt) and then fades, but as steersman

> > > thought is the worst of the worst.

> > >

> > >

> > > Bill

> > >

> > > Note: Krishnamurti speaks of ending psychological time.

> > >

> >

> >

> > Emotions are in the now, while the intellect tries to move into an

> > imagine future. That creates a tug-of-war between thoughts and

> > emotions when it comes to psychological time. That strain is felt as

> > waiting and/or stress. So, yes emotions/feelings are closer to the

> > flow in the now than the intellect which is basically blind to time

> > other than as mental images about past and future.

> >

> > al.

> >

> correct

>

> Pure emotion is the soul and is the state of purity. When you remove

> all the coverings there remains only Love. correct.

>

> Love is the only perfect Truth, that is God. And God is Love.

>

> the intellect is sorting al, it's using stored information from the

> mind, recalling the experience and can sort to imagine , make or

> create or call upon past learned habit to execute on auto pilot.

> That's not subconcously or unconscious as some are trying to say here.

>

> the sub ie below is in and inactive state, that is the sleeping

> state. the mind never sleeps nor does it loose it's retained

> experiences.

> Howwever, when you go to sleep the intelligence rests, not mind, the

> intelligence functioning in the wakened state and is actually

> working, and does all the imagining or thinking, conceptualizing.

>

> Emotions of love are buried into the soul, they are more than stored

> information, b/c they are feelings, they are more than thoughts.

> however a thought or visual can trigger and emotion, it's not the

> thought that cries or feels pain it's the emotion or soul.

>

> That's why the soul is originally pure and is the you, or self, or

> pure self, or pure ego. Pure ego, not thought ego, or mind ego or

> body ego, but pure Love ego. Love is at the base of all ____that's

> God.

>

> now you must know what it is that perfectly pleases that soul.

>

> is a women, or a car or a boat, ____no these are only partial and

> only fill parts and inevitalbly will fade or fail you at some point.

>

> But God never fails, therefore love God with all your heart, mind,

> and soul. The first commandment,

>

>

> it's simple, it doesn't take all this mental word jugglery to figure

> God out.

> Like these nihilists who want to figure God out of of the picture,

>

> like annihilate God , lol

>

> you can't kill me, i'm eternal soul. i cannot be killed, nor can you

> take my love away, it's in Him it's His.

>

> hello

>

> whitehorserides

>

 

 

I guess you mean that God is the full conflictless experience in the

moment. I am currently working with some ideas, like that of

psychological time and so on, and by placing each " part " of me in the

right place, then I will perhaps come closer to God. Everything must

somehow be holographically interconnected because everything connects

with everything else, yet it is possible to identify separate aspect

of oneself, for example my leg is not the same " thing " as my arm, and

my thoughts are not the same thing as my emotions. To say " my "

consciousness becomes trickier. The " me " is my body, thoughts and

emotions, but the " Witness " is more like some connector of everything

holding it together.

 

al.

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 "

<dennis_travis33> wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> <anders_lindman> wrote:

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba>

> wrote:

> > >

> > >

> > > Find what links together emotions and thoughts.

> > > is it an emotion?

> > > is it a thought?

> >

> >

ok waaba , answer your question?

 

_

______________________

_.

 

or is it nothing.___________________________

 

what did your guru tell you?

 

go________________________________.

 

aal said his share and marc chirped now you.

 

 

 

 

> > It is our sense of being aware in the now (for example called the

> > Witness by Ken Wilber) that is the connection point between

thoughts

> > and emotions. For example when we use our physical senses such as

> > sight, then when we look at something there is an " image " created

in

> > the " mind " (the information from the left and right eye are turned

> > upside down and presented as one image in the mind). That direct

> > perception is not a thought, is not the intellect. When you look

at

> > the computer monitor in front of you, you are aware of the direct

> > image of the computer monitor as registered by your eyes. That

which

> > is aware of that image is not a thought, it is the " Witness " .

When

> you

> > think about what you will do the next hour, that is the intellect.

> >

> > al.

>

> and when this " witness " become " aware " of being " witness " .....?...

>

> then the computer monitor still is being used by the intellect

> writing nice theories?

>

> Marc

>

>

>

> >

>

[Guest guest]

no,no,no

 

that's not the way!

wait...

 

Nisargadatta , " whitehorserides "

<green1911@v...> wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 "

> <dennis_travis33> wrote:

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > >

> > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba>

> > wrote:

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Find what links together emotions and thoughts.

> > > > is it an emotion?

> > > > is it a thought?

> > >

> > >

> ok waaba , answer your question?

>

> _

> ______________________

> _.

>

> or is it nothing.___________________________

>

> what did your guru tell you?

>

> go________________________________.

>

> aal said his share and marc chirped now you.

>

>

>

>

> > > It is our sense of being aware in the now (for example called

the

> > > Witness by Ken Wilber) that is the connection point between

> thoughts

> > > and emotions. For example when we use our physical senses such

as

> > > sight, then when we look at something there is an " image "

created

> in

> > > the " mind " (the information from the left and right eye are

turned

> > > upside down and presented as one image in the mind). That direct

> > > perception is not a thought, is not the intellect. When you

look

> at

> > > the computer monitor in front of you, you are aware of the

direct

> > > image of the computer monitor as registered by your eyes. That

> which

> > > is aware of that image is not a thought, it is the " Witness " .

> When

> > you

> > > think about what you will do the next hour, that is the

intellect.

> > >

> > > al.

> >

> > and when this " witness " become " aware " of being " witness " .....?...

> >

> > then the computer monitor still is being used by the intellect

> > writing nice theories?

> >

> > Marc

> >

> >

> >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba> wrote:

>

> no,no,no

>

> that's not the way!

> wait...

 

 

big goof not big waaba

 

you can't make up your mind cause you don't have one____ remember,

 

you can't even remember b/c you stopped that too,

 

 

you're nothing, be quiet, listen to you gurur

this is your answer.

 

go away waaba , don't come back don't be a hypocrite.

you're nothing , be quiet.

look at the lines

change your name to _________________

 

_____________________________

_________

_________________________________.

 

 

 

 

 

 

>

> Nisargadatta , " whitehorserides "

> <green1911@v...> wrote:

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 "

> > <dennis_travis33> wrote:

> > >

> > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba "

<bigwaaba>

> > > wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Find what links together emotions and thoughts.

> > > > > is it an emotion?

> > > > > is it a thought?

> > > >

> > > >

> > ok waaba , answer your question?

> >

> > _

> > ______________________

> > _.

> >

> > or is it nothing.___________________________

> >

> > what did your guru tell you?

> >

> > go________________________________.

> >

> > aal said his share and marc chirped now you.

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > > > It is our sense of being aware in the now (for example called

> the

> > > > Witness by Ken Wilber) that is the connection point between

> > thoughts

> > > > and emotions. For example when we use our physical senses

such

> as

> > > > sight, then when we look at something there is an " image "

> created

> > in

> > > > the " mind " (the information from the left and right eye are

> turned

> > > > upside down and presented as one image in the mind). That

direct

> > > > perception is not a thought, is not the intellect. When you

> look

> > at

> > > > the computer monitor in front of you, you are aware of the

> direct

> > > > image of the computer monitor as registered by your eyes.

That

> > which

> > > > is aware of that image is not a thought, it is the " Witness " .

> > When

> > > you

> > > > think about what you will do the next hour, that is the

> intellect.

> > > >

> > > > al.

> > >

> > > and when this " witness " become " aware " of

being " witness " .....?...

> > >

> > > then the computer monitor still is being used by the intellect

> > > writing nice theories?

> > >

> > > Marc

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

LOL LOL LOL

where should nothingness go?

 

not enough, still not enough

 

 

Nisargadatta , " whitehorserides "

<green1911@v...> wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba>

wrote:

> >

> > no,no,no

> >

> > that's not the way!

> > wait...

>

>

> big goof not big waaba

>

> you can't make up your mind cause you don't have one____ remember,

>

> you can't even remember b/c you stopped that too,

>

>

> you're nothing, be quiet, listen to you gurur

> this is your answer.

>

> go away waaba , don't come back don't be a hypocrite.

> you're nothing , be quiet.

> look at the lines

> change your name to _________________

>

> _____________________________

> _________

> _________________________________.

>

> > Nisargadatta , " whitehorserides "

> > <green1911@v...> wrote:

> > >

> > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 "

> > > <dennis_travis33> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > > > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba "

> <bigwaaba>

> > > > wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Find what links together emotions and thoughts.

> > > > > > is it an emotion?

> > > > > > is it a thought?

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > ok waaba , answer your question?

> > >

> > > _

> > > ______________________

> > > _.

> > >

> > > or is it nothing.___________________________

> > >

> > > what did your guru tell you?

> > >

> > > go________________________________.

> > >

> > > aal said his share and marc chirped now you.

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > > > It is our sense of being aware in the now (for example

called

> > the

> > > > > Witness by Ken Wilber) that is the connection point between

> > > thoughts

> > > > > and emotions. For example when we use our physical senses

> such

> > as

> > > > > sight, then when we look at something there is an " image "

> > created

> > > in

> > > > > the " mind " (the information from the left and right eye are

> > turned

> > > > > upside down and presented as one image in the mind). That

> direct

> > > > > perception is not a thought, is not the intellect. When you

> > look

> > > at

> > > > > the computer monitor in front of you, you are aware of the

> > direct

> > > > > image of the computer monitor as registered by your eyes.

> That

> > > which

> > > > > is aware of that image is not a thought, it is

the " Witness " .

> > > When

> > > > you

> > > > > think about what you will do the next hour, that is the

> > intellect.

> > > > >

> > > > > al.

> > > >

> > > > and when this " witness " become " aware " of

> being " witness " .....?...

> > > >

> > > > then the computer monitor still is being used by the

intellect

> > > > writing nice theories?

> > > >

> > > > Marc

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba> wrote:

>

> LOL LOL LOL

> where should nothingness go?

>

> not enough, still not enough

 

 

 

you are mental, go away

 

empty your mind and change your name__________________that's enough

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

>

>

> Nisargadatta , " whitehorserides "

> <green1911@v...> wrote:

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba>

> wrote:

> > >

> > > no,no,no

> > >

> > > that's not the way!

> > > wait...

> >

> >

> > big goof not big waaba

> >

> > you can't make up your mind cause you don't have one____

remember,

> >

> > you can't even remember b/c you stopped that too,

> >

> >

> > you're nothing, be quiet, listen to you gurur

> > this is your answer.

> >

> > go away waaba , don't come back don't be a hypocrite.

> > you're nothing , be quiet.

> > look at the lines

> > change your name to _________________

> >

> > _____________________________

> > _________

> > _________________________________.

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > >

> > > Nisargadatta , " whitehorserides "

> > > <green1911@v...> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 "

> > > > <dennis_travis33> wrote:

> > > > >

> > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman "

> > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba "

> > <bigwaaba>

> > > > > wrote:

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Find what links together emotions and thoughts.

> > > > > > > is it an emotion?

> > > > > > > is it a thought?

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > ok waaba , answer your question?

> > > >

> > > > _

> > > > ______________________

> > > > _.

> > > >

> > > > or is it nothing.___________________________

> > > >

> > > > what did your guru tell you?

> > > >

> > > > go________________________________.

> > > >

> > > > aal said his share and marc chirped now you.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > > > It is our sense of being aware in the now (for example

> called

> > > the

> > > > > > Witness by Ken Wilber) that is the connection point

between

> > > > thoughts

> > > > > > and emotions. For example when we use our physical senses

> > such

> > > as

> > > > > > sight, then when we look at something there is an " image "

> > > created

> > > > in

> > > > > > the " mind " (the information from the left and right eye

are

> > > turned

> > > > > > upside down and presented as one image in the mind). That

> > direct

> > > > > > perception is not a thought, is not the intellect. When

you

> > > look

> > > > at

> > > > > > the computer monitor in front of you, you are aware of

the

> > > direct

> > > > > > image of the computer monitor as registered by your eyes.

> > That

> > > > which

> > > > > > is aware of that image is not a thought, it is

> the " Witness " .

> > > > When

> > > > > you

> > > > > > think about what you will do the next hour, that is the

> > > intellect.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > al.

> > > > >

> > > > > and when this " witness " become " aware " of

> > being " witness " .....?...

> > > > >

> > > > > then the computer monitor still is being used by the

> intellect

> > > > > writing nice theories?

> > > > >

> > > > > Marc

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " whitehorserides "

<green1911@v...> wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba>

wrote:

> >

> > LOL LOL LOL

> > where should nothingness go?

> >

> > not enough, still not enough

>

>

>

> you are mental, go away

>

> empty your mind and change your name__________________that's enough

>

>

>

> ....maybe " God " could create another " world " for you.....just for

you ....for the child " who " don't respect any play-rules......and

don't like any real " others " , except the unreal " ones " he is dreaming

about....

 

let's pray to " God " .....