Guest guest Posted April 12, 2007 Report Share Posted April 12, 2007 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " tigerlily_du_lac " > <tigerlily_du_lac@> wrote: > > > > > The answer is in the first three words. > > > > Sometimes I think u hide behind this funny talk. It sounds very clever > > but may be problem for you also? > > > Where else could I hide? > > > > > > > It is a simple question. > > > > If consciousness is like a drop of water, what is that reflected in > > it? It seems that it musts exist out there, but we can never know it. > > If it out there, then who can advaita be correct? > > > > > > > Ok........here's the low-down: > > > You assume that there is such a thing as 'advaita'. > > There isn't. > > You assume that there is such a thing as " consciousness " .....and then > set out to define it with other concepts that you have accumulated. > > In truth.......there is no such thing as consciousness......and even > if there were.....how could you expect it to be able to dissect and > analyze itself? > > Oh I know......there appears to be this thought stream.....coursing > through what you call your mind......but there is no such 'thing' as > mind or thought. > > > > The more amazing: > > > Even if there were a world 'out there' 'you' could never know it. > > The only way that 'you' can 'experience' anything is as an > electro-chemical response in relationship to the accumulated memories > that compose the sense of separateness. > > Every'thing' exists only in relationship to an imaginary self. There appears to be a psychological-center around which all of that > revolves......but there isn't. > > > > 'You' have been asking questions about things that don't even > exist........and the real kicker........you don't exist either. > > > > At least not in the form which you imagine. > > > > How can this be said in the concepts that are themselves the only > cause of confusion...........It can't. > > > > You will just have to wrestle with this until the futility becomes > apparent.....(or not)....and when the walls come a tumblin > down........you will find yourself empty..........within the > emptiness.......struck dumb and amazed. > > > > > toombaru > That is good answer thank you toombaru. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 12, 2007 Report Share Posted April 12, 2007 Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " mstrdmmlbrn " <mstrdmmlbrn@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " > > <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " tigerlily_du_lac " > > > <tigerlily_du_lac@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > until it's not. > > > > > > > > > but 'you' will never know nor see THAT. > > > > > > > > > it's all there is and doesn't need nor want 'you'. > > > > > > > > Problem for me is that if THAT is, then there is two, not one. > > There > > > > is consciousness, and there is inffer of things oustide > > consciousness. > > > > > > > > > 'you' seem to want to make a big and important 'thing' out of > > > > > > consciousness. 'you'/'consciousness'/ number: (0:01) / 'THAT' /... > > are > > > > > > not different abstractions. all and every of the afore 'somewhats' > > > > > > indicated are and is, only and every bit of itself. complete, > > without > > > > > > character or characteristic, neither inside nor outside but that > > very > > > > > > quality of capacity that allows for both and beyond and before and > > > > > > right now. and because 'it' is all that is the case, it is > > not 'other' > > > > > > nor 'aware' of 'other' and strangely not 'aware' of 'self'. not > > > > > > one..not two...'you' can't color an aroma, and 'you' can't put this > > in > > > > > > words. > > > > > > > > > .b boji baba Dear o dear, even an average chimp playing wit a keyboard would have come up with a more meaningful and creative reply. Keep trying tho......Lttl mn. Once again; Absolute highest form of pretentious BULLSHIT. Be Happy, B. Be Happy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 12, 2007 Report Share Posted April 12, 2007 Nisargadatta , " mstrdmmlbrn " <mstrdmmlbrn wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " > <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " mstrdmmlbrn " <mstrdmmlbrn@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " > > > <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " tigerlily_du_lac " > > > > <tigerlily_du_lac@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > until it's not. > > > > > > > > > > > but 'you' will never know nor see THAT. > > > > > > > > > > > it's all there is and doesn't need nor want 'you'. > > > > > > > > > > Problem for me is that if THAT is, then there is two, not > one. > > > There > > > > > is consciousness, and there is inffer of things oustide > > > consciousness. > > > > > > > > > > > > 'you' seem to want to make a big and important 'thing' out of > > > > > > > > consciousness. 'you'/'consciousness'/ number: > (0:01) / 'THAT' /... > > > are > > > > > > > > not different abstractions. all and every of the > afore 'somewhats' > > > > > > > > indicated are and is, only and every bit of itself. complete, > > > without > > > > > > > > character or characteristic, neither inside nor outside but > that > > > very > > > > > > > > quality of capacity that allows for both and beyond and before > and > > > > > > > > right now. and because 'it' is all that is the case, it is > > > not 'other' > > > > > > > > nor 'aware' of 'other' and strangely not 'aware' of 'self'. not > > > > > > > > one..not two...'you' can't color an aroma, and 'you' can't put > this > > > in > > > > > > > > words. > > > > > > > > > > > > .b boji baba > > > Dear o dear, even an average chimp playing wit a keyboard would have > come up with a more meaningful and creative reply. Keep trying > tho......Lttl mn. > > Once again; Absolute highest form of pretentious BULLSHIT. > > Be Happy, B. Be Happy. melllll.........vin! your second comment on the same post. rereading are we spunky? good for you son. maybe it will help. ..b bobji baba Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 13, 2007 Report Share Posted April 13, 2007 Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " mstrdmmlbrn " <mstrdmmlbrn@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " > > <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " mstrdmmlbrn " <mstrdmmlbrn@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " > > > > <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " tigerlily_du_lac " > > > > > <tigerlily_du_lac@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > until it's not. > > > > > > > > > > > > > but 'you' will never know nor see THAT. > > > > > > > > > > > > > it's all there is and doesn't need nor want 'you'. > > > > > > > > > > > > Problem for me is that if THAT is, then there is two, not > > one. > > > > There > > > > > > is consciousness, and there is inffer of things oustide > > > > consciousness. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 'you' seem to want to make a big and important 'thing' out of > > > > > > > > > > consciousness. 'you'/'consciousness'/ number: > > (0:01) / 'THAT' /... > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > not different abstractions. all and every of the > > afore 'somewhats' > > > > > > > > > > indicated are and is, only and every bit of itself. complete, > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > character or characteristic, neither inside nor outside but > > that > > > > very > > > > > > > > > > quality of capacity that allows for both and beyond and before > > and > > > > > > > > > > right now. and because 'it' is all that is the case, it is > > > > not 'other' > > > > > > > > > > nor 'aware' of 'other' and strangely not 'aware' of 'self'. not > > > > > > > > > > one..not two...'you' can't color an aroma, and 'you' can't put > > this > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > words. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > .b boji baba > > > > > > Dear o dear, even an average chimp playing wit a keyboard would have > > come up with a more meaningful and creative reply. Keep trying > > tho......Lttl mn. > > > > Once again; Absolute highest form of pretentious BULLSHIT. > > > > Be Happy, B. Be Happy. > > > > > melllll.........vin! > > your second comment on the same post. > > rereading are we spunky? > > good for you son. > > maybe it will help. > > > .b bobji baba > To be honest with you, I can't get enough of reading this little drama lttl mn. Hang in there B. I trust you're well. Be Happy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 13, 2007 Report Share Posted April 13, 2007 Nisargadatta , " mstrdmmlbrn " <mstrdmmlbrn wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " > <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " mstrdmmlbrn " <mstrdmmlbrn@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " > > > <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " mstrdmmlbrn " > <mstrdmmlbrn@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " > > > > > <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " tigerlily_du_lac " > > > > > > <tigerlily_du_lac@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > until it's not. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but 'you' will never know nor see THAT. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it's all there is and doesn't need nor want 'you'. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Problem for me is that if THAT is, then there is two, not > > > one. > > > > > There > > > > > > > is consciousness, and there is inffer of things oustide > > > > > consciousness. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 'you' seem to want to make a big and important 'thing' out > of > > > > > > > > > > > > consciousness. 'you'/'consciousness'/ number: > > > (0:01) / 'THAT' /... > > > > > are > > > > > > > > > > > > not different abstractions. all and every of the > > > afore 'somewhats' > > > > > > > > > > > > indicated are and is, only and every bit of itself. > complete, > > > > > without > > > > > > > > > > > > character or characteristic, neither inside nor outside but > > > that > > > > > very > > > > > > > > > > > > quality of capacity that allows for both and beyond and > before > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > right now. and because 'it' is all that is the case, it is > > > > > not 'other' > > > > > > > > > > > > nor 'aware' of 'other' and strangely not 'aware' of 'self'. > not > > > > > > > > > > > > one..not two...'you' can't color an aroma, and 'you' can't > put > > > this > > > > > in > > > > > > > > > > > > words. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > .b boji baba > > > > > > > > > Dear o dear, even an average chimp playing wit a keyboard would > have > > > come up with a more meaningful and creative reply. Keep trying > > > tho......Lttl mn. > > > > > > Once again; Absolute highest form of pretentious BULLSHIT. > > > > > > Be Happy, B. Be Happy. > > > > > > > > > > melllll.........vin! > > > > your second comment on the same post. > > > > rereading are we spunky? > > > > good for you son. > > > > maybe it will help. > > > > > > .b bobji baba > > > > To be honest with you, I can't get enough of reading this little > drama lttl mn. Hang in there B. I trust you're well. > Be Happy. ROFLMAO!!!!!!! sure, sure melvin. i believe you....ahem. you're such a silly melly. ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 16, 2007 Report Share Posted April 16, 2007 Nisargadatta , " tigerlily_du_lac " <tigerlily_du_lac wrote: > > >And sensing will > >always give you a sensory image. What could possibly give you the > >nature of the actual thing you believe to exist out there? > > Ah! This is including image of body too! So Eye, ear, all this is only > sensed. > > But time now to stop with concepts. Enought. Yes. " Now " is always the end of concept. -- D. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 16, 2007 Report Share Posted April 16, 2007 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " tigerlily_du_lac " > <tigerlily_du_lac@> wrote: > > > > >And sensing will > > >always give you a sensory image. What could possibly give you the > > >nature of the actual thing you believe to exist out there? > > > > Ah! This is including image of body too! So Eye, ear, all this is only > > sensed. > > > > But time now to stop with concepts. Enought. > > Yes. > > " Now " is always the end of concept. > > -- D. > " Now " is merely another concept. It is an unsuccessful attempt by mind to freeze the flowing moment. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 16, 2007 Report Share Posted April 16, 2007 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " tigerlily_du_lac " > > <tigerlily_du_lac@> wrote: > > > > > > >And sensing will > > > >always give you a sensory image. What could possibly give you the > > > >nature of the actual thing you believe to exist out there? > > > > > > Ah! This is including image of body too! So Eye, ear, all this is > only > > > sensed. > > > > > > But time now to stop with concepts. Enought. > > > > Yes. > > > > " Now " is always the end of concept. > > > > -- D. > > > > > " Now " is merely another concept. > > It is an unsuccessful attempt by mind to freeze the flowing moment. > > > toombaru Now just indicates " immediate " which is " without mediation. " It's silly to hypothesize a mind that can do something to a moment that can move somewhere. Ah, watch this silliness dissolving of itself ... -- D. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 16, 2007 Report Share Posted April 16, 2007 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " tigerlily_du_lac " > > > <tigerlily_du_lac@> wrote: > > > > > > > > >And sensing will > > > > >always give you a sensory image. What could possibly give you the > > > > >nature of the actual thing you believe to exist out there? > > > > > > > > Ah! This is including image of body too! So Eye, ear, all this is > > only > > > > sensed. > > > > > > > > But time now to stop with concepts. Enought. > > > > > > Yes. > > > > > > " Now " is always the end of concept. > > > > > > -- D. > > > > > > > > > " Now " is merely another concept. > > > > It is an unsuccessful attempt by mind to freeze the flowing moment. > > > > > > toombaru > > Now just indicates " immediate " which is " without mediation. " > > It's silly to hypothesize a mind that can do something to a moment > that can move somewhere. > > Ah, watch this silliness dissolving of itself ... > > -- D. > " Immediate " to whom? You're just not going to catch This in words Dan.....No matter how many words you employ. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 16, 2007 Report Share Posted April 16, 2007 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " tigerlily_du_lac " > > > > <tigerlily_du_lac@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >And sensing will > > > > > >always give you a sensory image. What could possibly give you the > > > > > >nature of the actual thing you believe to exist out there? > > > > > > > > > > Ah! This is including image of body too! So Eye, ear, all this is > > > only > > > > > sensed. > > > > > > > > > > But time now to stop with concepts. Enought. > > > > > > > > Yes. > > > > > > > > " Now " is always the end of concept. > > > > > > > > -- D. > > > > > > > > > > > > > " Now " is merely another concept. > > > > > > It is an unsuccessful attempt by mind to freeze the flowing moment. > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > Now just indicates " immediate " which is " without mediation. " > > > > It's silly to hypothesize a mind that can do something to a moment > > that can move somewhere. > > > > Ah, watch this silliness dissolving of itself ... > > > > -- D. > > > > > " Immediate " to whom? > > You're just not going to catch This in words Dan.....No matter how > many words you employ. > > > toombaru > ....and that's why " I " am not even going to try at least right now....;-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 16, 2007 Report Share Posted April 16, 2007 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " tigerlily_du_lac " > > <tigerlily_du_lac@> wrote: > > > > > > >And sensing will > > > >always give you a sensory image. What could possibly give you the > > > >nature of the actual thing you believe to exist out there? > > > > > > Ah! This is including image of body too! So Eye, ear, all this is > only > > > sensed. > > > > > > But time now to stop with concepts. Enought. > > > > Yes. > > > > " Now " is always the end of concept. > > > > -- D. > > > > > " Now " is merely another concept. > > It is an unsuccessful attempt by mind to freeze the flowing moment. > > > toombaru this is merely your concept of what a concept is or is not, and what you believe the concept's capability is limited to....capable of or incapable of. and 'you' are not capable of saying it. mind does not 'attempt' anything. mind is period. whatever a moment is...it does not 'flow'. this, the above, was your unsuccessful attempt at wisdom. it is wrong. ..b b. b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 16, 2007 Report Share Posted April 16, 2007 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " tigerlily_du_lac " > > > > <tigerlily_du_lac@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >And sensing will > > > > > >always give you a sensory image. What could possibly give you the > > > > > >nature of the actual thing you believe to exist out there? > > > > > > > > > > Ah! This is including image of body too! So Eye, ear, all this is > > > only > > > > > sensed. > > > > > > > > > > But time now to stop with concepts. Enought. > > > > > > > > Yes. > > > > > > > > " Now " is always the end of concept. > > > > > > > > -- D. > > > > > > > > > > > > > " Now " is merely another concept. > > > > > > It is an unsuccessful attempt by mind to freeze the flowing moment. > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > Now just indicates " immediate " which is " without mediation. " > > > > It's silly to hypothesize a mind that can do something to a moment > > that can move somewhere. > > > > Ah, watch this silliness dissolving of itself ... > > > > -- D. > > > > > " Immediate " to whom? Any whom would involve a mediator. > You're just not going to catch This in words Dan..... There is no " this " which one could fail to catch, Toom, regardless of whether one capitalizes it ... > No matter how > many words you employ. Maybe you'll get lucky when you hit 223,548,769,330,229. Never say never, old chap. -- D. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 16, 2007 Report Share Posted April 16, 2007 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " tigerlily_du_lac " > > > > > <tigerlily_du_lac@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > >And sensing will > > > > > > >always give you a sensory image. What could possibly give > you the > > > > > > >nature of the actual thing you believe to exist out there? > > > > > > > > > > > > Ah! This is including image of body too! So Eye, ear, all > this is > > > > only > > > > > > sensed. > > > > > > > > > > > > But time now to stop with concepts. Enought. > > > > > > > > > > Yes. > > > > > > > > > > " Now " is always the end of concept. > > > > > > > > > > -- D. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " Now " is merely another concept. > > > > > > > > It is an unsuccessful attempt by mind to freeze the flowing moment. > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > Now just indicates " immediate " which is " without mediation. " > > > > > > It's silly to hypothesize a mind that can do something to a moment > > > that can move somewhere. > > > > > > Ah, watch this silliness dissolving of itself ... > > > > > > -- D. > > > > > > > > > " Immediate " to whom? > > Any whom would involve a mediator. > > > You're just not going to catch This in words Dan..... > > There is no " this " which one could fail to catch, Toom, regardless of > whether one capitalizes it ... > > > No matter how > > many words you employ. > > Maybe you'll get lucky when you hit 223,548,769,330,229. > > Never say never, old chap. > > -- D. the 'Great No This' is really a Stupid. oh to be Stupid! no words needed... to capitalize. big dividends for small letters. i'll take the letter 'Q' Vana. let's spin the wheel! nobody wins! ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.