Guest guest Report post Posted May 14, 2006 Nisargadatta , " Bill Rishel " <illusyn wrote: > > > Concepts, being transcended from before the beginning, > absolutely > > concepts are insignificant > thought is insignificant The shrines built to thought are sand castles. As are the shrines built to feelings. But the ones built to feelings seem to have less resistance to the tide coming in. > > 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 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! > ** Right to the point, Bill. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 14, 2006 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr wrote: > > 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 Yes, the claiming of them, and fighting for them can become a bloody mess. Just look around the world. But without the claiming, identifying, and fighting - thoughts are just what the human brain does ... just following its design - not a problem. - 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: > > > > > 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. ** Ah...another 'chestnut' of pyscho-spiritu-babble dispensed with! Bring on the next...lol. > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 14, 2006 Nisargadatta , " kenj02001 " <kenj02001 wrote: > > 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. fair enough > > ]] > > > > > 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.' ;-) LOL You've got to be kidding! *me*??? > > 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. can you do both at the same time? > > 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. I expect it would be a real treat. Bill > > > > > > > > > > > Ken > > > > > > non-separately. > > > > > > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 14, 2006 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr wrote: > > 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 How refreshing!!! What you do have is courage here. Bill > 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 On 5/14/06, dan330033 <dan330033 wrote: > Nisargadatta , " Bill Rishel " <illusyn wrote: > > > > > Concepts, being transcended from before the beginning, > > absolutely > > > > concepts are insignificant > > thought is insignificant > > The shrines built to thought are sand castles. > > As are the shrines built to feelings. > > But the ones built to feelings seem to have less resistance to the tide > coming in. " In watermelon sugar the deeds were done and done again as my life is done in watermelon sugar. " -- Richard Brautigan " Once a salt doll went to measure the depth of the ocean. It wanted to tell others how deep the water was. But this it could never do, for no sooner did it get into the water than it dissolved. Now, who was there to report the ocean's depth? " -- Ramakrisha Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 14, 2006 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> > wrote: > > > > 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 > > Yes, the claiming of them, and fighting for them can become a bloody > mess. Just look around the world. > > But without the claiming, identifying, and fighting - thoughts are > just what the human brain does ... just following its design - not a > problem. > > - D. > Concepts and the sense of 'me' are the same phenomena. Concepts need a gravitational center around which to swirl. The center needs something to swirl around it. toombaru toombaru Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 14, 2006 Nisargadatta , " kenj02001 " <kenj02001 wrote: > > 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. > 'Truth' needs a home. toombaru Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 14, 2006 > > Concepts and the sense of 'me' are the same phenomena. No. But I understand how it can seem that way. When I am doing artwork I can be employing a concept, which is a condensed representation of a discovery. That concept can be very useful. But I don't need a sense of " me " at all to employ that. > Concepts need a gravitational center around which to swirl. Again no. You seem to be thinking of concepts in a special sense, as in the context of " self-consciousness " (which *is* a sense of " me " ). But I can use the concept of figure-ground in my artwork, for example, without attaching that to any personal accumulation point of who-I-am- existentially. > The center needs something to swirl around it. If by " center " you mean a sense of " me " , the notion of " needs " does not apply. I suggest thinking of it more as as strange attractor. It is indifferent. It is just a " hook " to hang stuff on. 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 5/14/06, dan330033 <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Bill Rishel " <illusyn@> wrote: > > > > > > > Concepts, being transcended from before the beginning, > > > absolutely > > > > > > concepts are insignificant > > > thought is insignificant > > > > The shrines built to thought are sand castles. > > > > As are the shrines built to feelings. > > > > But the ones built to feelings seem to have less resistance to the tide > > coming in. > > " In watermelon sugar the deeds were done and done > again as my life is done in watermelon sugar. " > > -- Richard Brautigan > > " Once a salt doll went to measure the depth of the ocean. > It wanted to tell others how deep the water was. But > this it could never do, for no sooner did it get into > the water than it dissolved. Now, who was there to > report the ocean's depth? " > > -- Ramakrisha > ** Cool. I was just thinking about a 'middle road.' Salty and sweet--just rightly balanced for palette. The edges of the road are unstable territory, for 'drunks' maybe-- the bitter, the sour. ;-) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 14, 2006 Nisargadatta , " kenj02001 " <kenj02001 wrote: > > ** Ah...another 'chestnut' of pyscho-spiritu-babble dispensed > with! > > Bring on the next...lol. > Roasting chestnuts on an open fire ... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 14, 2006 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " kenj02001 " <kenj02001@> wrote: > > > > > ** Ah...another 'chestnut' of pyscho-spiritu-babble dispensed > > with! > > > > Bring on the next...lol. > > > > Roasting chestnuts on an open fire ... Holy Cow!....I've been singing that song for more Christmases than I can remember, and I thought it was about 'chipmunks' roasting on an open fire. I learned the tune from a Bob Rivers album doing it like Alvin and his pals. The little(...) are the chipper monks talking themselves and sometimes Nat King Cole and Dave the man of the chippers himself do some talkin'. Well I'm enlightened and 'beyond' that now. Forthwith is the tune : Chipmunks roasting on an open fire Hot sauce dripping from their toes ( " Oh! That tickles! " ) Yuletide squirrels fresh filleted by the choir They poked hot skewers through their nose ( " Ow! Wrong end, ya cowboy! " ) Everybody knows some pepper and a garlic clove Help to make them seasoned right Tiny rats with a crisp golden coat Will really hit the spot tonight And now when Santa sees his tray ( " Ho ho ho ho ho ho " ) There'll be some homemade chipmunk jerky for his sleigh ( " Mmmm…Hey, look at that! " ) And every hungry child is gonna spy To see if chipmunks really sing when they fry And so I'm brushing on some honey glaze To keep them crisp and juicy too Let's hope they get served many times many ways Tasty Chipmunks; good food " On that, Mr. Cole, " " Yes, sir, Mr. Seville? " " Would you mind handing me the barbeque sauce? I am starved! " " Oh,no problem Dave. Hey listen, you best be havin' two of those drumsticks, because they're oh-so tiny and there ain't much meat upon `em " ( " What about animal rights, Dave? " ) " Put a sock in it Melvin " " You know, for years people said you over-rated hamsters were my meal ticket. Now I guess you could just say you're my meal! " " That's a good one, Dave…I always knew you was the funny one in the group! " " Damn straight! " And so I'm offering some recipes From chipmunk pie to chipmunk stew I'm not really sad that it ended this way Furry chipmunks screw you " Did you hear that Melvin? Melvin? Mellllviiiiin? " " Why, I'm sorry Dave, did you want Melvin? There's plenty of Thagadore left though… " Ahhhhhh. the smells of the Yuletide season. .........bob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 14, 2006 LOL! Alvinnnnnn... Stop roasting Chip! He's done on that side. And let's start grilling his brother Thelonius. -- D. (nnb) Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " kenj02001 " <kenj02001@> wrote: > > > > > > > > ** Ah...another 'chestnut' of pyscho-spiritu-babble dispensed > > > with! > > > > > > Bring on the next...lol. > > > > > > > Roasting chestnuts on an open fire ... > > > Holy Cow!....I've been singing that song for more Christmases than I > can remember, and I thought it was about 'chipmunks' roasting on an > open fire. I learned the tune from a Bob Rivers album doing it like > Alvin and his pals. The little(...) are the chipper monks talking > themselves and sometimes Nat King Cole and Dave the man of the > chippers himself do some talkin'. Well I'm enlightened and 'beyond' > that now. Forthwith is the tune : > > Chipmunks roasting on an open fire > Hot sauce dripping from their toes > ( " Oh! That tickles! " ) > Yuletide squirrels fresh filleted by the choir > They poked hot skewers through their nose > ( " Ow! Wrong end, ya cowboy! " ) > Everybody knows some pepper and a garlic clove > Help to make them seasoned right > Tiny rats with a crisp golden coat > Will really hit the spot tonight > > And now when Santa sees his tray > ( " Ho ho ho ho ho ho " ) > There'll be some homemade chipmunk jerky for his sleigh > ( " Mmmm…Hey, look at that! " ) > And every hungry child is gonna spy > To see if chipmunks really sing when they fry > And so I'm brushing on some honey glaze > To keep them crisp and juicy too > Let's hope they get served many times many ways > Tasty Chipmunks; good food > > " On that, Mr. Cole, " > " Yes, sir, Mr. Seville? " > " Would you mind handing me the barbeque sauce? I am starved! " > " Oh,no problem Dave. Hey listen, you best be havin' two of those > drumsticks, because they're oh-so tiny and there ain't much meat > upon `em " > ( " What about animal rights, Dave? " ) > " Put a sock in it Melvin " > " You know, for years people said you over-rated hamsters were my meal > ticket. Now I guess you could just say you're my meal! " > " That's a good one, Dave…I always knew you was the funny one in the > group! " > " Damn straight! " > > And so I'm offering some recipes > From chipmunk pie to chipmunk stew > I'm not really sad that it ended this way > Furry chipmunks screw you > > " Did you hear that Melvin? Melvin? Mellllviiiiin? " > " Why, I'm sorry Dave, did you want Melvin? There's plenty of > Thagadore left though… " > > Ahhhhhh. the smells of the Yuletide season. > > .........bob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 15, 2006 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " kenj02001 " <kenj02001@> wrote: > > > > 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. > 'Truth' needs a home. ??? not true, AT ALL " Truth needs X " not true AT ALL It is like saying, " What Is needs ____ " There is nothing that can go into that ____. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 15, 2006 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > LOL! > > Alvinnnnnn... > > Stop roasting Chip! > > He's done on that side. > > And let's start grilling his brother Thelonius. > > -- D. > > (nnb) OH NO! Thelonious is much too chipper to join the chips on the charcoal! I mean what would Miles or Ornette or Sonny Rollins say? And 'Round Midnight we might hear more than just the crackling fire and sauteing 'munkers....we might hear some inspirational ivories ticking a tune right out of the blue of the blues. ...........bob > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " > <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " kenj02001 " <kenj02001@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > ** Ah...another 'chestnut' of pyscho-spiritu-babble dispensed > > > > with! > > > > > > > > Bring on the next...lol. > > > > > > > > > > Roasting chestnuts on an open fire ... > > > > > > Holy Cow!....I've been singing that song for more Christmases than > I > > can remember, and I thought it was about 'chipmunks' roasting on an > > open fire. I learned the tune from a Bob Rivers album doing it like > > Alvin and his pals. The little(...) are the chipper monks talking > > themselves and sometimes Nat King Cole and Dave the man of the > > chippers himself do some talkin'. Well I'm enlightened and 'beyond' > > that now. Forthwith is the tune : > > > > Chipmunks roasting on an open fire > > Hot sauce dripping from their toes > > ( " Oh! That tickles! " ) > > Yuletide squirrels fresh filleted by the choir > > They poked hot skewers through their nose > > ( " Ow! Wrong end, ya cowboy! " ) > > Everybody knows some pepper and a garlic clove > > Help to make them seasoned right > > Tiny rats with a crisp golden coat > > Will really hit the spot tonight > > > > And now when Santa sees his tray > > ( " Ho ho ho ho ho ho " ) > > There'll be some homemade chipmunk jerky for his sleigh > > ( " Mmmm…Hey, look at that! " ) > > And every hungry child is gonna spy > > To see if chipmunks really sing when they fry > > And so I'm brushing on some honey glaze > > To keep them crisp and juicy too > > Let's hope they get served many times many ways > > Tasty Chipmunks; good food > > > > " On that, Mr. Cole, " > > " Yes, sir, Mr. Seville? " > > " Would you mind handing me the barbeque sauce? I am starved! " > > " Oh,no problem Dave. Hey listen, you best be havin' two of those > > drumsticks, because they're oh-so tiny and there ain't much meat > > upon `em " > > ( " What about animal rights, Dave? " ) > > " Put a sock in it Melvin " > > " You know, for years people said you over-rated hamsters were my > meal > > ticket. Now I guess you could just say you're my meal! " > > " That's a good one, Dave…I always knew you was the funny one in the > > group! " > > " Damn straight! " > > > > And so I'm offering some recipes > > From chipmunk pie to chipmunk stew > > I'm not really sad that it ended this way > > Furry chipmunks screw you > > > > " Did you hear that Melvin? Melvin? Mellllviiiiin? " > > " Why, I'm sorry Dave, did you want Melvin? There's plenty of > > Thagadore left though… " > > > > Ahhhhhh. the smells of the Yuletide season. > > > > .........bob > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 15, 2006 Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <illusyn wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " kenj02001 " <kenj02001@> wrote: > > > > > > 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. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 'Truth' needs a home. > > ??? > > not true, AT ALL > > " Truth needs X " > not true AT ALL > > It is like saying, " What Is needs ____ " > There is nothing that can go into that ____. > 'Truth' does not exist in nature. toombaru Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 15, 2006 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <illusyn@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " kenj02001 " <kenj02001@> wrote: > > > > > > > > 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. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 'Truth' needs a home. > > > > ??? > > > > not true, AT ALL > > > > " Truth needs X " > > not true AT ALL > > > > It is like saying, " What Is needs ____ " > > There is nothing that can go into that ____. > > > > > > > 'Truth' does not exist in nature. > > > > > toombaru that's the 'truth'? ......bob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 15, 2006 Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <illusyn@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " kenj02001 " <kenj02001@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > 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. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 'Truth' needs a home. > > > > > > ??? > > > > > > not true, AT ALL > > > > > > " Truth needs X " > > > not true AT ALL > > > > > > It is like saying, " What Is needs ____ " > > > There is nothing that can go into that ____. > > > > > > > > > > > > > 'Truth' does not exist in nature. > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > that's the 'truth'? > > ......bob ..and nature does not exist in the 'Truth " ......bob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 16, 2006 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr wrote: > > 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 If you don´t take concepts for truth or factually representing reality, they don´t arise. Len Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 16, 2006 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <illusyn@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " kenj02001 " <kenj02001@> wrote: > > > > > > > > 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. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 'Truth' needs a home. > > > > ??? > > > > not true, AT ALL > > > > " Truth needs X " > > not true AT ALL > > > > It is like saying, " What Is needs ____ " > > There is nothing that can go into that ____. > > > > > > > 'Truth' does not exist in nature. > > > > > toombaru > ** Well if it's 'only' a word...then it does...hahaha. (I'm feeling kind of sad actually; I was brought up to believe in the Truth Fairy) ;-( Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 16, 2006 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <illusyn@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " kenj02001 " <kenj02001@> wrote: > > > > > > > > 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. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 'Truth' needs a home. > > > > ??? > > > > not true, AT ALL > > > > " Truth needs X " > > not true AT ALL > > > > It is like saying, " What Is needs ____ " > > There is nothing that can go into that ____. > > > > > > > 'Truth' does not exist in nature. You did not write: 'Truth' does not exist. You wrote: 'Truth' does not exist in nature. Very different statements. But it is not whether Truth exists or not. Existence as attribute does not apply to Truth. So we cannot meaningfully discuss here existence of Truth. But there can be no doubt: Truth is the case. Bill Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 16, 2006 Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <illusyn wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <illusyn@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " kenj02001 " <kenj02001@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > 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. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 'Truth' needs a home. > > > > > > ??? > > > > > > not true, AT ALL > > > > > > " Truth needs X " > > > not true AT ALL > > > > > > It is like saying, " What Is needs ____ " > > > There is nothing that can go into that ____. > > > > > > > > > > > > > 'Truth' does not exist in nature. > > You did not write: 'Truth' does not exist. > You wrote: 'Truth' does not exist in nature. > > Very different statements. > > But it is not whether Truth exists or not. > Existence as attribute does not apply to Truth. > > So we cannot meaningfully discuss here existence of Truth. > > But there can be no doubt: > Truth is the case. > > > Bill > What is truth? toombaru Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 16, 2006 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <illusyn@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <illusyn@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " kenj02001 " <kenj02001@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > 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. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 'Truth' needs a home. > > > > > > > > ??? > > > > > > > > not true, AT ALL > > > > > > > > " Truth needs X " > > > > not true AT ALL > > > > > > > > It is like saying, " What Is needs ____ " > > > > There is nothing that can go into that ____. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 'Truth' does not exist in nature. > > > > You did not write: 'Truth' does not exist. > > You wrote: 'Truth' does not exist in nature. > > > > Very different statements. > > > > But it is not whether Truth exists or not. > > Existence as attribute does not apply to Truth. > > > > So we cannot meaningfully discuss here existence of Truth. > > > > But there can be no doubt: > > Truth is the case. > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > What is truth? > > > toombaru > you expect me to *say*? hasn't it been clear from this discussion that such could never be *said*? Nevertheless, Truth is the case. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 16, 2006 Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <illusyn wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <illusyn@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <illusyn@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " kenj02001 " <kenj02001@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 'Truth' needs a home. > > > > > > > > > > ??? > > > > > > > > > > not true, AT ALL > > > > > > > > > > " Truth needs X " > > > > > not true AT ALL > > > > > > > > > > It is like saying, " What Is needs ____ " > > > > > There is nothing that can go into that ____. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 'Truth' does not exist in nature. > > > > > > You did not write: 'Truth' does not exist. > > > You wrote: 'Truth' does not exist in nature. > > > > > > Very different statements. > > > > > > But it is not whether Truth exists or not. > > > Existence as attribute does not apply to Truth. > > > > > > So we cannot meaningfully discuss here existence of Truth. > > > > > > But there can be no doubt: > > > Truth is the case. > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > What is truth? > > > > > > toombaru > > > > you expect me to *say*? > > hasn't it been clear from this discussion > that such could never be *said*? > > Nevertheless, Truth is the case. If it is the case.........what is it? toombaru Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
