Guest guest Report post Posted May 14, 2006 B: In comments such as this your words come across as a " correction " of the other. As if to have the last word or something. Dan said something. But I see no sign of you hearing what he had to say... no co-participation in it. Rather it seems like little games with words you are playing here. P: Psst! Haven't it down on you yet? Toomb is a troll! His aim is to disrupt, and stop any intelligent discussion, not to participate in one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 14, 2006 Nisargadatta , " Bill Rishel " <illusyn wrote: > > On 5/13/06, toombaru2006 <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , OConnor Patricia <gdtige@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > --- dan330033 <dan330033@> a écrit : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , OConnor Patricia > > > > <gdtige@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > --- dan330033 <dan330033@> a écrit : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " > > > > > <illusyn@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > thought is an impedance, not a means > > > > > > > > > > Thought doesn't interfere with anything. > > > > > > > > > > There is no interference - because nothing has its > > > > own > > > > > separable > > > > > existence as an " interferer " - unless you believe > > > > that > > > > > your thinking has > > > > > made it so ;-) > > > > > > > > > > -- D. > > > > > > > > > > Maybe not an interference, but a phenomenon with a > > > > big > > > > > appetite, sucking and transforming what could be > > > > > otherwise. > > > > > > > > Nothing could be otherwise. > > > > > > > > Nor is it. > > > > > > > > -- D. > > > > > > > > And you are Book Dan, > > > > Another great fidele of Absolute Truth. > > > > And since I`ve fallen in the gutter, > > > > I am looking at some intersting alchemy: > > > > A word of self-deception, > > > > Self-created, > > > > And yet its mud hasn`t reach our sleeves : not yours > > > > at least. > > > > Puritain of Absolute, > > > > Your comments are of great value, > > > > But your reaching too shallow. > > > > > > > > Patricia > > > > > > For one who dies, there is no other to evaluate. > > > > > > -- D. > > > > > > > Bodies are born....bodies die. > > > > No one was born......no one dies. > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > In comments such as this > your words come across as a " correction " of the other. > As if to have the last word or something. > > Dan said something. > But I see no sign of you hearing what he had to say... > no co-participation in it. > > Rather it seems like little games with words > you are playing here. I am not here to change Dan's mind. I do not care what he believes. If the words that flow through him stimulate something in me to swim deeper into the edgelessness...I use them. If not...I ignore them. I have nothing to offer him.......I do not care if he likes me. toombaru > > Everything you write is not like that... don't get me wrong! > > What you say there does not *counter* Dan at all. > What you have said is simply something different. > > When's the last time you have died? > > Was it more than a second ago? > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 14, 2006 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Only the shallow can be reached. > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > Deep....very Deep. > > > > .....bob > > Here, try these hip boots. > > > -- D. > Salt dolls can only dive so deep. toomaru Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 14, 2006 On 5/13/06, toombaru2006 <lastrain wrote: > Nisargadatta , " Bill Rishel " <illusyn wrote: > > > > On 5/13/06, toombaru2006 <lastrain wrote: > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , OConnor Patricia <gdtige@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > --- dan330033 <dan330033@> a écrit : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , OConnor Patricia > > > > > <gdtige@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- dan330033 <dan330033@> a écrit : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " > > > > > > <illusyn@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > thought is an impedance, not a means > > > > > > > > > > > > Thought doesn't interfere with anything. > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no interference - because nothing has its > > > > > own > > > > > > separable > > > > > > existence as an " interferer " - unless you believe > > > > > that > > > > > > your thinking has > > > > > > made it so ;-) > > > > > > > > > > > > -- D. > > > > > > > > > > > > Maybe not an interference, but a phenomenon with a > > > > > big > > > > > > appetite, sucking and transforming what could be > > > > > > otherwise. > > > > > > > > > > Nothing could be otherwise. > > > > > > > > > > Nor is it. > > > > > > > > > > -- D. > > > > > > > > > > And you are Book Dan, > > > > > Another great fidele of Absolute Truth. > > > > > And since I`ve fallen in the gutter, > > > > > I am looking at some intersting alchemy: > > > > > A word of self-deception, > > > > > Self-created, > > > > > And yet its mud hasn`t reach our sleeves : not yours > > > > > at least. > > > > > Puritain of Absolute, > > > > > Your comments are of great value, > > > > > But your reaching too shallow. > > > > > > > > > > Patricia > > > > > > > > For one who dies, there is no other to evaluate. > > > > > > > > -- D. > > > > > > > > > > Bodies are born....bodies die. > > > > > > No one was born......no one dies. > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > In comments such as this > > your words come across as a " correction " of the other. > > As if to have the last word or something. > > > > Dan said something. > > But I see no sign of you hearing what he had to say... > > no co-participation in it. > > > > Rather it seems like little games with words > > you are playing here. > > > > I am not here to change Dan's mind. > > I do not care what he believes. > > If the words that flow through him stimulate something in me to swim > deeper into the edgelessness...I use them. > > If not...I ignore them. > > > I have nothing to offer him.......I do not care if he likes me. > > > > toombaru > > so you are playing a form of solitare here... Dan introduced a very interesting notion of " co-participation " a little while back. Did you miss it? If the " other " is not separate from you, then no cost in letting your heart bleed all over the stage, is there? When's the last time your heart has been broken? Or are you too strong for that? That's the real edgelessness you know. A broken heart. All its contents spewn like the mitochondrial contents of a cell when the cell membrane has ruptured. Perhaps the boundlessness you speak of is a contained boundlessness really. But to be ravished by life! That is something else! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 14, 2006 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , OConnor Patricia <gdtige@> > > wrote: > > > > > > --- dan330033 <dan330033@> a écrit : > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , OConnor Patricia > > > <gdtige@> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- dan330033 <dan330033@> a écrit : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " > > > > <illusyn@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > thought is an impedance, not a means > > > > > > > > Thought doesn't interfere with anything. > > > > > > > > There is no interference - because nothing has its > > > own > > > > separable > > > > existence as an " interferer " - unless you believe > > > that > > > > your thinking has > > > > made it so ;-) > > > > > > > > -- D. > > > > > > > > Maybe not an interference, but a phenomenon with a > > > big > > > > appetite, sucking and transforming what could be > > > > otherwise. > > > > > > Nothing could be otherwise. > > > > > > Nor is it. > > > > > > -- D. > > > > > > And you are Book Dan, > > > Another great fidele of Absolute Truth. > > > And since I`ve fallen in the gutter, > > > I am looking at some intersting alchemy: > > > A word of self-deception, > > > Self-created, > > > And yet its mud hasn`t reach our sleeves : not yours > > > at least. > > > Puritain of Absolute, > > > Your comments are of great value, > > > But your reaching too shallow. > > > > > > Patricia > > > > For one who dies, there is no other to evaluate. > > > > -- D. > > > > Bodies are born....bodies die. > > No one was born......no one dies. > > > > toombaru You just named one. -- D. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 14, 2006 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , OConnor Patricia <gdtige@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > --- dan330033 <dan330033@> a écrit : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " > > > > > <illusyn@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > thought is an impedance, not a means > > > > > > > > > > Thought doesn't interfere with anything. > > > > > > > > > > There is no interference - because nothing has its own > > > > > separable > > > > > existence as an " interferer " - unless you believe that > > > > > your thinking has > > > > > made it so ;-) > > > > > > > > > > -- D. > > > > > > > > > > Maybe not an interference, but a phenomenon with a big > > > > > appetite, sucking and transforming what could be > > > > > otherwise. > > > > > > > > Nothing could be otherwise. > > > > > > > > Nor is it. > > > > > > > > -- D. > > > > > > > > > > > > Nothing can be as it is. > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > Here you are, typing your words. > > > > - D. > > > > > > " Is' is a moment in time.. > > > .......a conceptual stopping of that which flows. > > > Everything changes moment to moment........Nothing is as it is. > > > There are no separate things to be as they 'are'. toombaru *Is* is not a conceptual stopping whatsoever. Nor can any concept stop what is. -- Dan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 14, 2006 Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <illusyn wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , OConnor Patricia <gdtige@> > > wrote: > > > > > > --- dan330033 <dan330033@> a écrit : > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , OConnor Patricia > > > <gdtige@> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- dan330033 <dan330033@> a écrit : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " > > > > <illusyn@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > thought is an impedance, not a means > > > > > > > > Thought doesn't interfere with anything. > > > > > > > > There is no interference - because nothing has its > > > own > > > > separable > > > > existence as an " interferer " - unless you believe > > > that > > > > your thinking has > > > > made it so ;-) > > > > > > > > -- D. > > > > > > > > Maybe not an interference, but a phenomenon with a > > > big > > > > appetite, sucking and transforming what could be > > > > otherwise. > > > > > > Nothing could be otherwise. > > > > > > Nor is it. > > > > > > -- D. > > > > > > And you are Book Dan, > > > Another great fidele of Absolute Truth. > > > And since I`ve fallen in the gutter, > > > I am looking at some intersting alchemy: > > > A word of self-deception, > > > Self-created, > > > And yet its mud hasn`t reach our sleeves : not yours > > > at least. > > > Puritain of Absolute, > > > Your comments are of great value, > > > But your reaching too shallow. > > > > > > Patricia > > > > For one who dies, there is no other to evaluate. > > > > -- D. > > > > and so you brush aside > a comment that bears a gift Not as " gifted " as you, Bob. -- D. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 14, 2006 Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <illusyn wrote: > > and so you brush aside > a comment that bears a gift Err .. Bill, of the Pliant Heart. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 14, 2006 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > I am not here to change Dan's mind. > > I do not care what he believes. > > If the words that flow through him stimulate something in me to swim > deeper into the edgelessness...I use them. > > If not...I ignore them. > > > I have nothing to offer him.......I do not care if he likes me. > > > > toombaru There's nothing to get, no place to arrive -- just the swimming. Swimming without moving, flowing without time, be bop a loo lop be bop bam boom. -- D. -- D. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 14, 2006 > > > > so you are playing a form of solitare here... Indeed. > > Dan introduced a very interesting notion of > " co-participation " a little while back. > Did you miss it? It does not interest me. > > If the " other " is not separate from you, > then no cost in letting your heart bleed all over > the stage, is there? The belief in another is the only separation. > > When's the last time your heart has been broken? > Or are you too strong for that? I live in a broken heart. > > That's the real edgelessness you know. > A broken heart. > > All its contents spewn like the mitochondrial > contents of a cell when the cell membrane has > ruptured. Yes. > > Perhaps the boundlessness you speak of is > a contained boundlessness really. Any boundlessness spoken of is a contained boundlessness. > > But to be ravished by life! > > That is something else! > Life ravages every one. toombaru Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 14, 2006 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , OConnor Patricia > <gdtige@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- dan330033 <dan330033@> a écrit : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " > > > > > > <illusyn@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > thought is an impedance, not a means > > > > > > > > > > > > Thought doesn't interfere with anything. > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no interference - because nothing has its own > > > > > > separable > > > > > > existence as an " interferer " - unless you believe that > > > > > > your thinking has > > > > > > made it so ;-) > > > > > > > > > > > > -- D. > > > > > > > > > > > > Maybe not an interference, but a phenomenon with a big > > > > > > appetite, sucking and transforming what could be > > > > > > otherwise. > > > > > > > > > > Nothing could be otherwise. > > > > > > > > > > Nor is it. > > > > > > > > > > -- D. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nothing can be as it is. > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > Here you are, typing your words. > > > > > > - D. > > > > > > > > > > > " Is' is a moment in time.. > > > > > > .......a conceptual stopping of that which flows. > > > > > > Everything changes moment to moment........Nothing is as it is. > > > > > > There are no separate things to be as they 'are'. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > *Is* is not a conceptual stopping whatsoever. > > Nor can any concept stop what is. > > > > -- Dan > What is....is a concept. toombaru Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 14, 2006 Nisargadatta , " Bill Rishel " <illusyn wrote: > > On 5/13/06, toombaru2006 <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Bill Rishel " <illusyn@> wrote: > > > > > > On 5/13/06, toombaru2006 <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , OConnor Patricia <gdtige@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- dan330033 <dan330033@> a écrit : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , OConnor Patricia > > > > > > <gdtige@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- dan330033 <dan330033@> a écrit : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " > > > > > > > <illusyn@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > thought is an impedance, not a means > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thought doesn't interfere with anything. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no interference - because nothing has its > > > > > > own > > > > > > > separable > > > > > > > existence as an " interferer " - unless you believe > > > > > > that > > > > > > > your thinking has > > > > > > > made it so ;-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- D. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Maybe not an interference, but a phenomenon with a > > > > > > big > > > > > > > appetite, sucking and transforming what could be > > > > > > > otherwise. > > > > > > > > > > > > Nothing could be otherwise. > > > > > > > > > > > > Nor is it. > > > > > > > > > > > > -- D. > > > > > > > > > > > > And you are Book Dan, > > > > > > Another great fidele of Absolute Truth. > > > > > > And since I`ve fallen in the gutter, > > > > > > I am looking at some intersting alchemy: > > > > > > A word of self-deception, > > > > > > Self-created, > > > > > > And yet its mud hasn`t reach our sleeves : not yours > > > > > > at least. > > > > > > Puritain of Absolute, > > > > > > Your comments are of great value, > > > > > > But your reaching too shallow. > > > > > > > > > > > > Patricia > > > > > > > > > > For one who dies, there is no other to evaluate. > > > > > > > > > > -- D. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bodies are born....bodies die. > > > > > > > > No one was born......no one dies. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > In comments such as this > > > your words come across as a " correction " of the other. > > > As if to have the last word or something. > > > > > > Dan said something. > > > But I see no sign of you hearing what he had to say... > > > no co-participation in it. > > > > > > Rather it seems like little games with words > > > you are playing here. > > > > > > > > I am not here to change Dan's mind. > > > > I do not care what he believes. > > > > If the words that flow through him stimulate something in me to swim > > deeper into the edgelessness...I use them. > > > > If not...I ignore them. > > > > > > I have nothing to offer him.......I do not care if he likes me. > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > so you are playing a form of solitare here... > > Dan introduced a very interesting notion of > " co-participation " a little while back. > Did you miss it? > > If the " other " is not separate from you, > then no cost in letting your heart bleed all over > the stage, is there? > > When's the last time your heart has been broken? > Or are you too strong for that? > > That's the real edgelessness you know. > A broken heart. > > All its contents spewn like the mitochondrial > contents of a cell when the cell membrane has > ruptured. > > Perhaps the boundlessness you speak of is > a contained boundlessness really. > > But to be ravished by life! > > That is something else! There's no choice. There's no way out. There's only the ravishment, the coparticipation. Strategies to have it otherwise, delay the inevitable, that is all. The air ravishes one's lungs through the breathing. - D. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 14, 2006 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , OConnor Patricia > > <gdtige@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- dan330033 <dan330033@> a écrit : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " > > > > > > > <illusyn@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > thought is an impedance, not a means > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thought doesn't interfere with anything. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no interference - because nothing has its own > > > > > > > separable > > > > > > > existence as an " interferer " - unless you believe that > > > > > > > your thinking has > > > > > > > made it so ;-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- D. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Maybe not an interference, but a phenomenon with a big > > > > > > > appetite, sucking and transforming what could be > > > > > > > otherwise. > > > > > > > > > > > > Nothing could be otherwise. > > > > > > > > > > > > Nor is it. > > > > > > > > > > > > -- D. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nothing can be as it is. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > Here you are, typing your words. > > > > > > > > - D. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " Is' is a moment in time.. > > > > > > > > > .......a conceptual stopping of that which flows. > > > > > > > > > Everything changes moment to moment........Nothing is as it is. > > > > > > > > > There are no separate things to be as they 'are'. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > *Is* is not a conceptual stopping whatsoever. > > > > Nor can any concept stop what is. > > > > > > > > -- Dan > > > > > What is....is a concept. > > > > > toombaru Jump in, the water's fine. Really! - D. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 14, 2006 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " > <lastrain@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " > <dan330033@> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , OConnor Patricia > > > <gdtige@> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- dan330033 <dan330033@> a écrit : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " > > > > > > > > <illusyn@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > thought is an impedance, not a means > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thought doesn't interfere with anything. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no interference - because nothing has its own > > > > > > > > separable > > > > > > > > existence as an " interferer " - unless you believe that > > > > > > > > your thinking has > > > > > > > > made it so ;-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- D. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Maybe not an interference, but a phenomenon with a big > > > > > > > > appetite, sucking and transforming what could be > > > > > > > > otherwise. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nothing could be otherwise. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nor is it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- D. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nothing can be as it is. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > > Here you are, typing your words. > > > > > > > > > > - D. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " Is' is a moment in time.. > > > > > > > > > > > > .......a conceptual stopping of that which flows. > > > > > > > > > > > > Everything changes moment to moment........Nothing is as it is. > > > > > > > > > > > > There are no separate things to be as they 'are'. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > *Is* is not a conceptual stopping whatsoever. > > > > > > Nor can any concept stop what is. > > > > > > > > > > > > -- Dan > > > > > > > > > What is....is a concept. > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > Jump in, the water's fine. > > Really! > > - D. > I was never other then water. toombaru Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 14, 2006 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , OConnor Patricia > > <gdtige@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- dan330033 <dan330033@> a écrit : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " > > > > > > > <illusyn@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > thought is an impedance, not a means > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thought doesn't interfere with anything. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no interference - because nothing has its own > > > > > > > separable > > > > > > > existence as an " interferer " - unless you believe that > > > > > > > your thinking has > > > > > > > made it so ;-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- D. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Maybe not an interference, but a phenomenon with a big > > > > > > > appetite, sucking and transforming what could be > > > > > > > otherwise. > > > > > > > > > > > > Nothing could be otherwise. > > > > > > > > > > > > Nor is it. > > > > > > > > > > > > -- D. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nothing can be as it is. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > Here you are, typing your words. > > > > > > > > - D. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " Is' is a moment in time.. > > > > > > > > > .......a conceptual stopping of that which flows. > > > > > > > > > Everything changes moment to moment........Nothing is as it is. > > > > > > > > > There are no separate things to be as they 'are'. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > *Is* is not a conceptual stopping whatsoever. > > > > Nor can any concept stop what is. > > > > > > > > -- Dan > > > > > What is....is a concept. > > > > > toombaru > All concepts are frozen.......dead. Mind takes a teaspoon to the river........ toombaru Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 14, 2006 --- dan330033 <dan330033 a écrit : Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <illusyn wrote: > > and so you brush aside > a comment that bears a gift Err .. Bill, of the Pliant Heart. Nothing ever get brushed aside, You know it only takes one tear warm enough To get that seed to grow. ** If you do not wish to receive individual emails, to change your subscription, sign in with your ID and go to Edit My Groups: /mygroups?edit=1 Under the Message Delivery option, choose " No Email " for the Nisargadatta group and click on Save Changes. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 14, 2006 > > > > > > > > For one who dies, there is no other to evaluate. > > > > > > > > -- D. > > > > > > > > > > Bodies are born....bodies die. > > > > > > No one was born......no one dies. > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > In comments such as this > > your words come across as a " correction " of the other. > > As if to have the last word or something. > > > > Dan said something. > > But I see no sign of you hearing what he had to say... > > no co-participation in it. > > > > Rather it seems like little games with words > > you are playing here. > > > > I am not here to change Dan's mind. > > I do not care what he believes. > > If the words that flow through him stimulate something in me to swim > deeper into the edgelessness...I use them. > > If not...I ignore them. > > > I have nothing to offer him.......I do not care if he likes me. > > > > toombaru > > so you are playing a form of solitare here... Dan introduced a very interesting notion of " co-participation " a little while back. Did you miss it? If the " other " is not separate from you, then no cost in letting your heart bleed all over the stage, is there? When's the last time your heart has been broken? Or are you too strong for that? That's the real edgelessness you know. A broken heart. All its contents spewn like the mitochondrial contents of a cell when the cell membrane has ruptured. Perhaps the boundlessness you speak of is a contained boundlessness really. But to be ravished by life! That is something else! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Be aware of broken hearts! They have no mind to lose. ** If you do not wish to receive individual emails, to change your subscription, sign in with your ID and go to Edit My Groups: /mygroups?edit=1 Under the Message Delivery option, choose " No Email " for the Nisargadatta group and click on Save Changes. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 14, 2006 --- toombaru2006 <lastrain a écrit : Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , OConnor Patricia <gdtige@> > > wrote: > > > > > > --- dan330033 <dan330033@> a écrit : > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , OConnor Patricia > > > <gdtige@> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- dan330033 <dan330033@> a écrit : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " > > > > <illusyn@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > thought is an impedance, not a means > > > > > > > > Thought doesn't interfere with anything. > > > > > > > > There is no interference - because nothing has its > > > own > > > > separable > > > > existence as an " interferer " - unless you believe > > > that > > > > your thinking has > > > > made it so ;-) > > > > > > > > -- D. > > > > > > > > Maybe not an interference, but a phenomenon with a > > > big > > > > appetite, sucking and transforming what could be > > > > otherwise. > > > > > > Nothing could be otherwise. > > > > > > Nor is it. > > > > > > -- D. > > > > > > And you are Book Dan, > > > Another great fidele of Absolute Truth. > > > And since I`ve fallen in the gutter, > > > I am looking at some intersting alchemy: > > > A word of self-deception, > > > Self-created, > > > And yet its mud hasn`t reach our sleeves : not yours > > > at least. > > > Puritain of Absolute, > > > Your comments are of great value, > > > But your reaching too shallow. > > > > > > Patricia > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Only the shallow can be reached. > > > > > > toombaru > > You are reaching. > > -- D. > Only the shallow can be reached. toombaru Bravo, you`ve reached again, The bottom of shallowness. Patricia ** If you do not wish to receive individual emails, to change your subscription, sign in with your ID and go to Edit My Groups: /mygroups?edit=1 Under the Message Delivery option, choose " No Email " for the Nisargadatta group and click on Save Changes. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 14, 2006 Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <illusyn wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " kenj02001 " <kenj02001@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <illusyn@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > bottom line: thought is not important > > > > ** to whom? > > > > > > realizing What Is transcends/goes beyond/is outside of > > > thought > > > > ** What is, is right in the middle of thought. > > > > > > thought is an impedance, not a means > > > > ** Really? Ohm-my-god! > > > > Ken > > > > BTW, Ken. I do hope you are going to be someone > who actually has something to say here, and not > one of those cutsie sophmoric types that makes > coy remarks about the messages of those who are > so bold as to actually say something. > > Have you said anything here yet? > > Of your own? > > Or is it *all* just tailcoating and snippet sniping? ** Sincere questions, obviously. > > Excuse me if I have missed something. ** Well that's a gentlemanly touch, after the browbeating and pigeon-holeing! I haven't noticed at all that you miss much-- you're fairly quick to defend your experience, your interpretations. You've said some good things; then occasionally it's arrogance and pride that comes across, to me. Maybe you've heard the term 'stink of enlightenment'? Ken > > Bill > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 14, 2006 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > All concepts are frozen.......dead. > > Mind takes a teaspoon to the river........ > > > > toombaru Concepts, being transcended from before the beginning, have never had any power to freeze anything, including themselves. D. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 14, 2006 > Concepts, being transcended from before the beginning, absolutely concepts are insignificant thought is insignificant > have never had > any power to freeze anything, including themselves. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 14, 2006 On 5/14/06, dan330033 <dan330033 wrote: > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain > wrote: > > > > > All concepts are frozen.......dead. > > > > Mind takes a teaspoon to the river........ > > > > > > > > toombaru > > Concepts, being transcended from before the beginning, have never had > any power to freeze anything, including themselves. > > D. two statements of the same thing Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 14, 2006 Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <illusyn wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " kenj02001 " <kenj02001@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Bill Rishel " <illusyn@> wrote: > > > > > > On 5/12/06, OConnor Patricia <gdtige@> wrote: > > > > --- Bill Rishel <illusyn@> a écrit: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 5/12/06, toombaru2006 <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " > > > > <illusyn@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , > > > > " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , > > > > " pliantheart " <illusyn@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > One thought flows edgelessly into the next. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no separated...isolated thought. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and the same with any " thought stream " ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " thought stream " does not refer to any > > > > distinct reality > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it is just a reference that implies that what > > > > it > > > > > > > > refers to is " there " ... > > > > > > > > which it isn't > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > thoughts can seem to arise and disappear in > > > > consciousness > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but on investigation there is no distinct > > > > thought anywhere > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and the same with " thought stream " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > both are chimeras > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > neither really exists > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why would you want thinking to " see a > > > > problem " ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Because......that's the only door out. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > oh no! not at all! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it is only clear, unconditional attention, > > > > > > > > which is true *intelligence*, > > > > > > > > that is freeing > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > such unconditional attention is not thought > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > How does thought know that 'clear unconditional > > > > attention' exists > > > > > > > outside of itself?.........And why does it > > > > assume that it can somehow > > > > > > > improve itself by getting some to that stuff? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the questions posed *presume* the significance > > > > > > of thought > > > > > > > > > > > > but what was said (about unconditioned attention > > > > etc.) > > > > > > asserts that thought is *not* significant > > > > > > > > > > > > hence the questions posed are irrelevant > > > > > > > > > > > > if thought is not the real basis > > > > > > then " how thought knows " is not > > > > significant/relevant > > > > > > > > > > > > perhaps thought would like to know (what the > > > > questions > > > > > > ask)... but what is real always skirts thought > > > > > > > > > > > > thought has its own " game " in mind as to what > > > > > > " it is all about " etc. > > > > > > > > > > > > but what thought thinks is significant only from > > > > > > within thought's game. > > > > > > > > > > > > bottom line: thought is not important > > > > > > > > > > > > realizing What Is transcends/goes beyond/is > > > > outside of > > > > > > thought > > > > > > > > > > > > thought is an impedance, not a means > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well that's the basic problem with thought......It > > > > can't think outside > > > > > of itself......and it's the only game in town. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It may think that there is something outside of its > > > > self...but that's > > > > > only another thought. > > > > > > > > > > And there is no way around...through....or beyond > > > > that. > > > > > > > > > > No matter what it thinks. > > > > > > > > > > It and the world arise and subside concurrently. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > They are the same. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Period. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are missing something very important. > > > > > > > > Thought is not always the case. > > > > The mind can go silent. > > > > > > > > What it is " like " when the mind goes silent > > > > can't really be described. > > > > But it *can be* experienced. > > > > [which is not to say it is *an* experience, > > > > which is of memory, and so is of thought.] > > > > > > > > Silent mind is not of thought. > > > > > > > > Perhaps you have not experienced > > > > silent mind. If not then there is no way > > > > for you to know what I mean. > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > everybody has experienced a sikent mind. ... > > > > Is experiencing a silent mind, between two thoughts, > > > > suspended. > > > > Or very early in life, > > > > Or watching some beautiful eyes seeing what isn`t to > > > > be seen ... > > > > Are you aware of those non-moments? > > > > Those non-happenings? > > > > > > > > Patricia > > > > > > > > > > it is true that everyone does experience silent mind, > > > but few experience it *consciously*, and for even > > > fewer a sustained experience of silent mind. > > > > > > In fact, to someone for whom " silent mind " is > > > considered something very important to *achieve* > > > (a misconception) becoming conscious of silent > > > mind is likely to kick in thoughts again (as in, " cool! > > > I'm experiencing silent mind! " (correction, *were* ) > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > ** Everything you two are presenting is an image or concept. > > 'Consciously'....'sustained'...'gaps' ...etc.) > > such is your experience > > why are you sharing this? ** Okay. My experience is that often concepts and images are taken for what's real. > > [[ > BTW: some help with a rewrite: > " when I (Ken) read what you two are presenting > all I get are images or concepts. > 'Consciously'....'sustained'...'gaps' ...etc.) " > > what is left out in that rewrite? > > and what is put in? > ... your owning of it... ** I didn't say 'all I get'-- you did. I did say I was presenting concepts, too. Right below... What I could add is that read a certain energy, too. And not always with precision, as it happens. > > ]] > > > Naturellement! Me too. > > > > No imaging >> no mind --no silent mind, no resting > > mind, either-- the larger phenomenon of brain activity, > > on-going. One could call it 'experiencing,' yes... > > your presumption to instruct is > well... > presumptuous... ** Well, maybe you're being 'assumptuous.' ;-) > > consider saying something that is not reaction > not reflection on the words of another > but which stands on its own ** Do your own deconstructing! I'd be happy to listen to music or paddle my kayak. > > that would be interesting > > and I would be happy to read thereof ** Inevitability can be a drag sometimes. But stay tuned... Like ol' Heraclitus said: only change endures. > > > > > > > Ken > > > > non-separately. > > > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 14, 2006 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> > wrote: > > > > > All concepts are frozen.......dead. > > > > Mind takes a teaspoon to the river........ > > > > > > > > toombaru > > Concepts, being transcended from before the beginning, have never had > any power to freeze anything, including themselves. > > D. > If I would be really clear would I then need or create concepts ? Aren't concepts kind of approximation towards what is not understood ? But I am not clear, I do not understand and so I create concepts. Why not ? As long as I do not take a concept for trúth or factually represanting reality then what is he harm of it ? Maybe because I tend to identify with my concepts and call them mine and fight for their survival as I would fight for my kids ? Werner Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 14, 2006 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " kenj02001 " <kenj02001@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > Self knowledge is all ;-) > > > > > > > > Len > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That might be true........ if there were a self. > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > ** OY!!!! > > > > Same ol', same ol' ;-) > > > > It was never about 'entity' nor entity denied. > > So avoidance can be relinquished...now. > > > > It's about self-activity, energy, intent. > > That, and the awareness-of-that, is inseparably what > > you are. > > > > > > > > > > > That is the hypnotic delusion of I am. > > It will appear real......until it doesn't. > > > > > toombaru > ** self-centering motion/emotion toward an imaginary center of perception, knowing and being never required any I-am state or self. It's real enough, as an action. It's suffering--the first noble truth, the first grace. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
