Guest guest Report post Posted November 11, 2008 Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , souldreamone@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > > In a message dated 11/11/2008 2:56:55 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, > > dennis_travis33@ writes: > > > > Nisargadatta , souldreamone@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In a message dated 11/11/2008 1:46:51 A.M. Pacific Standard > Time, > > > dennis_travis33@ writes: > > > > > > continious harmony between such entity, constantly in move (ego- > > > system)...and the essense of being.....is like death of ego > > > > > > death of ego means, no more attachment to any worldly things.... > > > > > > because of unity, peace and love > > > > > > because of non-duality > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > ****What entity? You mean ego? Ego is not an entity. > > > > > > so what else is ego in your opinion? > > > > are you one of this believers who stay hard for " there is no > > ego! " ....? > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > ***Ego is a collection of thoughts referring to an imaginary > person. A > > misconception. A false assumption. > > > > > > would say that the collection of thoughts, and the related imaginary > person are such entity > > doesn't matter if one see it as misconception or assumption.....it's > something working/happening through the limitations of time and space. > > > Marc Ps: the one (ego) who is killing some appearent terrorists will have to take responsibility for such non-sense by him/herself there is nobody/nothing existing beside any ego who could take any responsibility for anything done whatever appearently happen in the eyes of an ego, happen for one reason.....the reason of ignorance about Self. nothing ever happen for real Marc > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 11, 2008 In a message dated 11/11/2008 3:13:38 AM Pacific Standard Time, dennis_travis33 writes: Nisargadatta , souldreamone wrote:>> > > > In a message dated 11/11/2008 2:56:55 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, > dennis_travis33 writes:> > Nisargadatta , souldreamone@ wrote:> >> > > > > > > > In a message dated 11/11/2008 1:46:51 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, > > dennis_travis33@ writes:> > > > continious harmony between such entity, constantly in move (ego-> > system)...and the essense of being.....is like death of ego> > > > death of ego means, no more attachment to any worldly things....> > > > because of unity, peace and love> > > > because of non-duality> > > > > > Marc> > > > > > ****What entity? You mean ego? Ego is not an entity. > > > so what else is ego in your opinion?> > are you one of this believers who stay hard for "there is no > ego!"....?> > > > Marc> > > > ***Ego is a collection of thoughts referring to an imaginary person. A > misconception. A false assumption.> > would say that the collection of thoughts, and the related imaginary person are such entitydoesn't matter if one see it as misconception or assumption.....it's something working/happening through the limitations of time and space.Marc en⋅ti⋅ty  –noun, plural -ties. 1. something that has a real existence; thing: corporeal entities. 2. being or existence, esp. when considered as distinct, independent, or self-contained: He conceived of society as composed of particular entities requiring special treatment. 3. essential nature: The entity of justice is universality. The irony of calling ego an entity is that it takes something imaginary, and makes it real. Then we can imagine it needs to be killed. Obviously, it matters very much if one sees it as something real, or as a misconception or assumption. AOL Search: Your one stop for directions, recipes and all other Holiday needs. Search Now. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 11, 2008 In a message dated 11/11/2008 3:39:29 AM Pacific Standard Time, dennis_travis33 writes: Nisargadatta , "dennis_travis33" <dennis_travis33 wrote:>> Nisargadatta , souldreamone@ wrote:> >> > > > > > > > In a message dated 11/11/2008 2:56:55 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, > > dennis_travis33@ writes:> > > > Nisargadatta , souldreamone@ wrote:> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > In a message dated 11/11/2008 1:46:51 A.M. Pacific Standard > Time, > > > dennis_travis33@ writes:> > > > > > continious harmony between such entity, constantly in move (ego-> > > system)...and the essense of being.....is like death of ego> > > > > > death of ego means, no more attachment to any worldly things....> > > > > > because of unity, peace and love> > > > > > because of non-duality> > > > > > > > > Marc> > > > > > > > > ****What entity? You mean ego? Ego is not an entity. > > > > > > so what else is ego in your opinion?> > > > are you one of this believers who stay hard for "there is no > > ego!"....?> > > > > > > > Marc> > > > > > > > ***Ego is a collection of thoughts referring to an imaginary > person. A > > misconception. A false assumption.> > > > > > would say that the collection of thoughts, and the related imaginary > person are such entity> > doesn't matter if one see it as misconception or assumption.....it's > something working/happening through the limitations of time and space.> > > MarcPs: the one (ego) who is killing some appearent terrorists will have to take responsibility for such non-sense by him/herselfthere is nobody/nothing existing beside any ego who could take any responsibility for anything donewhatever appearently happen in the eyes of an ego, happen for one reason.....the reason of ignorance about Self.nothing ever happen for realMarc ***We desperately want to place responsibility so that we can identify the reason for an occurrance and assign blame, punish, and prevent the reoccurrance. This is all ego driven judgment and fantasy. No person is to blame because there is no person, just the unfolding of consciousness. Yes, all of it comes from ignorance, so rather than blaming a nonentity, it's more helpful to challenge such ignorance.AOL Search: Your one stop for directions, recipes and all other Holiday needs. Search Now. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 12, 2008 In a message dated 11/11/2008 11:46:51 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, dennis_travis33 writes: Nisargadatta , souldreamone wrote:>> > In a message dated 11/11/2008 3:13:38 AM Pacific Standard Time, > dennis_travis33 writes:> > Nisargadatta , souldreamone@ wrote:> >> > > > > > > > In a message dated 11/11/2008 2:56:55 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, > > dennis_travis33@ writes:> > > > --- In Nisargadatta , souldreamone@ wrote:> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > In a message dated 11/11/2008 1:46:51 A.M. Pacific Standard > Time, > > > dennis_travis33@ writes:> > > > > > continious harmony between such entity, constantly in move (ego-> > > system)...and the essense of being.....is like death of ego> > > > > > death of ego means, no more attachment to any worldly things....> > > > > > because of unity, peace and love> > > > > > because of non-duality> > > > > > > > > Marc> > > > > > > > > ****What entity? You mean ego? Ego is not an entity. > > > > > > so what else is ego in your opinion?> > > > are you one of this believers who stay hard for "there is no > > ego!"....?> > > > > > > > Marc> > > > > > > > ***Ego is a collection of thoughts referring to an imaginary > person. A > > misconception. A false assumption.> > > > > > would say that the collection of thoughts, and the related imaginary > person are such entity> > doesn't matter if one see it as misconception or assumption.....it's > something working/happening through the limitations of time and space.> > > Marc> > > > enâ‹…tiâ‹…ty  (http://dictionary.reference.com/help/luna/IPA_pron_key.html) > â€"noun, plural -ties. 1. something that has a real existence; thing: > corporeal entities. 2. being or existence, esp. when considered as distinct, > independent, or self-contained: He conceived of society as composed of > particular entities requiring special treatment. 3. essential nature: The entity > of justice is universality. > > > The irony of calling ego an entity is that it takes something imaginary, and > makes it real. Then we can imagine it needs to be killed.> > Obviously, it matters very much if one sees it as something real, or as a > misconception or assumption.> > > ...why carry about how to name and describe "ego".....?....ok, if you don't like to see it as an entity....then don't see it as an entity.....and if you can't imagine that such "ego" need to get liberation....or however you could call it......doesn't matter the names......then forget about any further "ego" discussion....no problem...i'm sure that there are some people who react in less "allergic" way when it come to "ego"......."whoever" then is trapped by any "misconception or assumption"....need to live with it.......nobody realy care about....Marc ***Naming and describing ego is, of course, not the goal, but understanding it is extremely useful. If one believes there is an entity that needs to be killed, and there isn't, a lot of time and effort is wasted due to ignorance. Ego certainly does not need to be liberated because it's just a false notion to begin with. How do you set an imaginary person free? Liberation is freedom FROM the delusion of personhood. If this isn't understood, than much more "ego discussion" is in order, and not less. AOL Search: Your one stop for directions, recipes and all other Holiday needs. Search Now. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 12, 2008 In a message dated 11/11/2008 11:52:37 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, dennis_travis33 writes: Nisargadatta , souldreamone wrote:>> > In a message dated 11/11/2008 3:39:29 AM Pacific Standard Time, > dennis_travis33 writes:> > Nisargadatta , "dennis_travis33" > <dennis_travis33@> wrote:> >> > Nisargadatta , souldreamone@ wrote:> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > In a message dated 11/11/2008 2:56:55 A.M. Pacific Standard > Time, > > > dennis_travis33@ writes:> > > > > > Nisargadatta , souldreamone@ wrote:> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In a message dated 11/11/2008 1:46:51 A.M. Pacific Standard > > Time, > > > > dennis_travis33@ writes:> > > > > > > > continious harmony between such entity, constantly in move > (ego-> > > > system)...and the essense of being.....is like death of ego> > > > > > > > death of ego means, no more attachment to any worldly > things....> > > > > > > > because of unity, peace and love> > > > > > > > because of non-duality> > > > > > > > > > > > Marc> > > > > > > > > > > > ****What entity? You mean ego? Ego is not an entity. > > > > > > > > > so what else is ego in your opinion?> > > > > > are you one of this believers who stay hard for "there is no > > > ego!"....?> > > > > > > > > > > > Marc> > > > > > > > > > > > ***Ego is a collection of thoughts referring to an imaginary > > person. A > > > misconception. A false assumption.> > > > > > > > > > would say that the collection of thoughts, and the related > imaginary > > person are such entity> > > > doesn't matter if one see it as misconception or > assumption.....it's > > something working/happening through the limitations of time and > space.> > > > > > Marc> > > > Ps: the one (ego) who is killing some appearent terrorists will have > to take responsibility for such non-sense by him/herself> > there is nobody/nothing existing beside any ego who could take any > responsibility for anything done> > whatever appearently happen in the eyes of an ego, happen for one > reason.....the reason of ignorance about Self.> > nothing ever happen for real> > > Marc> > > > ***We desperately want to place responsibility so that we can identify the > reason for an occurrance and assign blame, punish, and prevent the > reoccurrance. This is all ego driven judgment and fantasy. No person is to blame because > there is no person, just the unfolding of consciousness. Yes, all of it comes > from ignorance, so rather than blaming a nonentity, it's more helpful to > challenge such ignorance.no no...responsability take place....constantly......doesn't matter if you like it....or not...some call such working responsibility "karma"......did i judge anybody in my words?......i told that whatever is done....by whoever....it's of business of this "whoever".......now you see....it's YOU who judge in this your words: "This is all ego driven judgment and fantasy"....then, may i ask.....taking about your (own) ego?......As far i see....we only have little different view points...that's all...you can have yours...up to you...i don't care about......but then, please leave me "mine"...and let's finish the discussion about "ego"...thanksMarc ***Fine with me. AOL Search: Your one stop for directions, recipes and all other Holiday needs. Search Now. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 12, 2008 In a message dated 11/12/2008 12:42:51 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, dennis_travis33 writes: .. > > > ***Naming and describing ego is, of course, not the goal, but understanding > it is extremely useful. If one believes there is an entity that needs to be > killed, and there isn't, a lot of time and effort is wasted due to ignorance. > > Ego certainly does not need to be liberated because it's just a false notion > to begin with. How do you set an imaginary person free? Liberation is > freedom FROM the delusion of personhood. If this isn't understood, than much more > "ego discussion" is in order, and not less.yes....it's important to understand the functions of "ego"....agree.As far i see....we could conclude that there is nobody indeed who need to be killed.....What is necessary to understand, it's that "ego" is of assumption & misconception only....agree.But then....we should stop our talk instantly....because there is nobody anymore realy "out there" who is concerned....also no "Phil" and no "Marc"....The fact of out talk in here....like all talks .....is that such "assumption/misconception" is working....means, existing....in a certain level.If not....there wouldn't be any exchange and talk.....So, talking about "ego"....is talking about ourself.About our own assumption & misconception!Is there anybody else there concerned?....Again...if you are persuaded that you are kind of "nobody"....irresponsable for anything....etc....Then it must be same for "Marc"...no?....But then, please....just Accept the words and opinions of all others!....Let it be....There is nothing to gain...nor to loose...Everybody is just playing his/her roles....and following some rules.The criminels and the policemen are just doing their job.Some deserve freedom, liberty....some deserve prison.Thats it!Nothing more, nothing less.....No judgments realy necessary, true!....Few words still...:whatever world "you" are percieving.....it's "you" who is percieved.And...Up to "you" to "see" whatever "world".......And...Up to "me"...to see whater "world"...;)Marc ***Sure. No self judgment or judgment of other going on here cause I can't honestly find either self or other. Everybody's doing the best they can by their nature, and not really by their choice to be responsible. As we talked about before, a certain level of ego will continue to operate whether anything believes in it or not, since it's functioning spontaneously as part of the integrated functioning of Consciousness. By itself, it's not a problem for somebody. Talking and even thinking can go on and it makes no difference at all. Here, there's a motivation to see various things more clearly, and so others are used to help focus that 'looking'. Nothing I say really has anything to do with anybody else, it's just my own focus I'm looking at. I really have little interest in what folks believe or don't believe. AOL Search: Your one stop for directions, recipes and all other Holiday needs. Search Now. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 12, 2008 Nisargadatta , souldreamone wrote: > > > In a message dated 11/11/2008 3:13:38 AM Pacific Standard Time, > dennis_travis33 writes: > > Nisargadatta , souldreamone@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > > In a message dated 11/11/2008 2:56:55 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, > > dennis_travis33@ writes: > > > > --- In Nisargadatta , souldreamone@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In a message dated 11/11/2008 1:46:51 A.M. Pacific Standard > Time, > > > dennis_travis33@ writes: > > > > > > continious harmony between such entity, constantly in move (ego- > > > system)...and the essense of being.....is like death of ego > > > > > > death of ego means, no more attachment to any worldly things.... > > > > > > because of unity, peace and love > > > > > > because of non-duality > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > ****What entity? You mean ego? Ego is not an entity. > > > > > > so what else is ego in your opinion? > > > > are you one of this believers who stay hard for " there is no > > ego! " ....? > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > ***Ego is a collection of thoughts referring to an imaginary > person. A > > misconception. A false assumption. > > > > > > would say that the collection of thoughts, and the related imaginary > person are such entity > > doesn't matter if one see it as misconception or assumption.....it's > something working/happening through the limitations of time and space. > > > Marc > > > > en⋅ti⋅ty  (http://dictionary.reference.com/help/luna/IPA_pron_key.html) > †" noun, plural -ties. 1. something that has a real existence; thing: > corporeal entities. 2. being or existence, esp. when considered as distinct, > independent, or self-contained: He conceived of society as composed of > particular entities requiring special treatment. 3. essential nature: The entity > of justice is universality. > > > The irony of calling ego an entity is that it takes something imaginary, and > makes it real. Then we can imagine it needs to be killed. > > Obviously, it matters very much if one sees it as something real, or as a > misconception or assumption. > > > ....why carry about how to name and describe " ego " .....?.... ok, if you don't like to see it as an entity....then don't see it as an entity..... and if you can't imagine that such " ego " need to get liberation....or however you could call it......doesn't matter the names...... then forget about any further " ego " discussion.... no problem... i'm sure that there are some people who react in less " allergic " way when it come to " ego " ... ..... " whoever " then is trapped by any " misconception or assumption " ....need to live with it.... .... nobody realy care about ..... Marc Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 12, 2008 Nisargadatta , souldreamone wrote: > > > In a message dated 11/11/2008 3:39:29 AM Pacific Standard Time, > dennis_travis33 writes: > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , souldreamone@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In a message dated 11/11/2008 2:56:55 A.M. Pacific Standard > Time, > > > dennis_travis33@ writes: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , souldreamone@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In a message dated 11/11/2008 1:46:51 A.M. Pacific Standard > > Time, > > > > dennis_travis33@ writes: > > > > > > > > continious harmony between such entity, constantly in move > (ego- > > > > system)...and the essense of being.....is like death of ego > > > > > > > > death of ego means, no more attachment to any worldly > things.... > > > > > > > > because of unity, peace and love > > > > > > > > because of non-duality > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > ****What entity? You mean ego? Ego is not an entity. > > > > > > > > > so what else is ego in your opinion? > > > > > > are you one of this believers who stay hard for " there is no > > > ego! " ....? > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > ***Ego is a collection of thoughts referring to an imaginary > > person. A > > > misconception. A false assumption. > > > > > > > > > > would say that the collection of thoughts, and the related > imaginary > > person are such entity > > > > doesn't matter if one see it as misconception or > assumption.....it's > > something working/happening through the limitations of time and > space. > > > > > > Marc > > > > Ps: the one (ego) who is killing some appearent terrorists will have > to take responsibility for such non-sense by him/herself > > there is nobody/nothing existing beside any ego who could take any > responsibility for anything done > > whatever appearently happen in the eyes of an ego, happen for one > reason.....the reason of ignorance about Self. > > nothing ever happen for real > > > Marc > > > > ***We desperately want to place responsibility so that we can identify the > reason for an occurrance and assign blame, punish, and prevent the > reoccurrance. This is all ego driven judgment and fantasy. No person is to blame because > there is no person, just the unfolding of consciousness. Yes, all of it comes > from ignorance, so rather than blaming a nonentity, it's more helpful to > challenge such ignorance. no no... responsability take place....constantly......doesn't matter if you like it....or not... some call such working responsibility " karma " . ...... did i judge anybody in my words?... .... i told that whatever is done....by whoever....it's of business of this " whoever " ... ..... now you see....it's YOU who judge in this your words: " This is all ego driven judgment and fantasy " .....then, may i ask.....taking about your (own) ego?... .... As far i see....we only have little different view points... that's all .... you can have yours... up to you... i don't care about... .... but then, please leave me " mine " ... and let's finish the discussion about " ego " ... thanks Marc Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 12, 2008 .. > > > ***Naming and describing ego is, of course, not the goal, but understanding > it is extremely useful. If one believes there is an entity that needs to be > killed, and there isn't, a lot of time and effort is wasted due to ignorance. > > Ego certainly does not need to be liberated because it's just a false notion > to begin with. How do you set an imaginary person free? Liberation is > freedom FROM the delusion of personhood. If this isn't understood, than much more > " ego discussion " is in order, and not less. yes....it's important to understand the functions of " ego " ....agree. As far i see....we could conclude that there is nobody indeed who need to be killed..... What is necessary to understand, it's that " ego " is of assumption & misconception only....agree. But then....we should stop our talk instantly....because there is nobody anymore realy " out there " who is concerned....also no " Phil " and no " Marc " . .... The fact of out talk in here....like all talks .....is that such " assumption/misconception " is working....means, existing....in a certain level. If not....there wouldn't be any exchange and talk. ..... So, talking about " ego " ....is talking about ourself. About our own assumption & misconception! Is there anybody else there concerned? ..... Again...if you are persuaded that you are kind of " nobody " ....irresponsable for anything....etc.... Then it must be same for " Marc " ...no? ..... But then, please....just Accept the words and opinions of all others! ..... Let it be ..... There is nothing to gain...nor to loose .... Everybody is just playing his/her roles....and following some rules. The criminels and the policemen are just doing their job. Some deserve freedom, liberty....some deserve prison. Thats it! Nothing more, nothing less. ..... No judgments realy necessary, true! ..... Few words still...: whatever world " you " are percieving.....it's " you " who is percieved. And... Up to " you " to " see " whatever " world " .... .... And... Up to " me " ...to see whater " world " ... Marc **************AOL Search: Your one stop for directions, recipes and all other > Holiday needs. Search Now. > (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100000075x1212792382x1200798498/aol? redir=http://searchblog.aol.com/2008/11/04/happy-holidays-from > -aol-search/?ncid=emlcntussear00000001) > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 12, 2008 Nisargadatta , souldreamone wrote: > > > > > In a message dated 11/12/2008 12:42:51 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, > dennis_travis33 writes: > > . > > > > > > ***Naming and describing ego is, of course, not the goal, but > understanding > > it is extremely useful. If one believes there is an entity that > needs to be > > killed, and there isn't, a lot of time and effort is wasted due to > ignorance. > > > > Ego certainly does not need to be liberated because it's just a > false notion > > to begin with. How do you set an imaginary person free? Liberation > is > > freedom FROM the delusion of personhood. If this isn't understood, > than much more > > " ego discussion " is in order, and not less. > > > yes....it's important to understand the functions of " ego " ....agree. > > As far i see....we could conclude that there is nobody indeed who > need to be killed..... > What is necessary to understand, it's that " ego " is of > assumption & misconception only....agree. > > But then....we should stop our talk instantly....because there is > nobody anymore realy " out there " who is concerned....also no " Phil " > and no " Marc " . > > ... > > The fact of out talk in here....like all talks .....is that > such " assumption/misconception " is working....means, existing....in a > certain level. > If not....there wouldn't be any exchange and talk. > > .... > > So, talking about " ego " ....is talking about ourself. > > About our own assumption & misconception! > > Is there anybody else there concerned? > > .... > > Again...if you are persuaded that you are kind > of " nobody " ....irresponsable for anything....etc.... > > Then it must be same for " Marc " ...no? > > .... > > But then, please....just Accept the words and opinions of all others! > > .... > > Let it be > > .... > > There is nothing to gain...nor to loose > > ... > > Everybody is just playing his/her roles....and following some rules. > > The criminels and the policemen are just doing their job. > > Some deserve freedom, liberty....some deserve prison. > > Thats it! > > Nothing more, nothing less. > > .... > > No judgments realy necessary, true! > > > > .... > > > > Few words still...: > > whatever world " you " are percieving.....it's " you " who is percieved. > > And... > > Up to " you " to " see " whatever " world " .... > > ... > > And... > > Up to " me " ...to see whater " world " ... > > > > > Marc > > > > ***Sure. No self judgment or judgment of other going on here cause I can't > honestly find either self or other. Everybody's doing the best they can by > their nature, and not really by their choice to be responsible. -will try to don't judge this " your " words....... agree that everybody is doing the best he/she can by their nature...no choice about. such " nature " depends on the level of " misconception & assumptions " ....no? So, who is then responsible for any " misconception & assumption " ?... nobody? the " criminal " could say : " Oh, you see, i'm not responsible for what i have done " .... They would answer him: " Oh, you see, you can think about in prison " .... When i talk about responsibility, then i mean that whoever/whatever " assumption & misconception " is acting/reacting on whatever.....it's of kind irresponsible when this " ghost " don't " see " this his/her own mess or creation or perception & world. > > As we talked about before, a certain level of ego will continue to operate > whether anything believes in it or not, since it's functioning spontaneously > as part of the integrated functioning of Consciousness. By itself, it's not a > problem for somebody. Talking and even thinking can go on and it makes no > difference at all. - " A certain level of ego will continue " ....ok This would be another talk....other subject....other world... > > Here, there's a motivation to see various things more clearly, and so others > are used to help focus that 'looking'. Nothing I say really has anything to > do with anybody else, it's just my own focus I'm looking at. I really have > little interest in what folks believe or don't believe. yes....there is absolutly no necessity to get attached by whatever other folks are believing etc Marc > > > > > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 12, 2008 In a message dated 12/11/2008 1:29:53 AM Pacific Standard Time, dennis_travis33 writes: > ***Sure. No self judgment or judgment of other going on here cause I can't > honestly find either self or other. Everybody's doing the best they can by > their nature, and not really by their choice to be responsible. -will try to don't judge this "your" words.......agree that everybody is doing the best he/she can by their nature...no choice about.such "nature" depends on the level of "misconception & assumptions"....no?So, who is then responsible for any "misconception & assumption"?...nobody?the "criminal" could say : "Oh, you see, i'm not responsible for what i have done"....They would answer him: "Oh, you see, you can think about in prison"...When i talk about responsibility, then i mean that whoever/whatever "assumption & misconception" is acting/reacting on whatever.....it's of kind irresponsible when this "ghost" don't "see" this his/her own mess or creation or perception & world.> > As we talked about before, a certain level of ego will continue to operate > whether anything believes in it or not, since it's functioning spontaneously > as part of the integrated functioning of Consciousness. By itself, it's not a > problem for somebody. Talking and even thinking can go on and it makes no > difference at all. - "A certain level of ego will continue"....okThis would be another talk....other subject....other world...> > Here, there's a motivation to see various things more clearly, and so others > are used to help focus that 'looking'. Nothing I say really has anything to > do with anybody else, it's just my own focus I'm looking at. I really have > little interest in what folks believe or don't believe.yes....there is absolutly no necessity to get attached by whatever other folks are believing etcMarc ***Yes, the world will hold one responsible, judge and punish him. It's all based on an illusion of volition, but as long as this illusion is believed, the threat of punishment becomes a 'necessary' part of the experience, and so we talk of taking responsibility even in the absence of one who could be responsible. When one plays a game, there are certain rules that apply only to the game. The 'level of ego' I referred to is that of the lower animals who have a sense of self that allows them to function effectively (feed themselves, defend, mate, play) but without the ability to project that self image into the future and past (sometimes called self awareness- psychological context) and derive conclusions about what should not have happened, what should not be, and what must happen in the future. This is suffering.Get the Moviefone Toolbar. Showtimes, theaters, movie news more! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 13, 2008 In a message dated 11/13/2008 12:35:19 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, dennis_travis33 writes: > The 'level of ego' I referred to is that of the lower animals who have a > sense of self that allows them to function effectively (feed themselves, defend, > mate, play) but without the ability to project that self image into the > future and past (sometimes called self awareness- psychological context) and > derive conclusions about what should not have happened, what should not be, and > what must happen in the future. This is suffering.would say that suffering is happening as long there is "assumption & misconception" of an "ego" thinking....acting...reacting.....hope that you don't wish a transformation from human to animal....lolMarc ***Naw, was just suggesting that animals don't suffer because they lack the ability to contemplate their fate. The 'Awakened' ones don't suffer because they've transcended the belief in the individual who suffers. The ego of the 'Awakened' one is very much like the ego of the lower animal. The overlay that involves projecting the identity into past and future is removed. Get the Moviefone Toolbar. Showtimes, theaters, movie news more! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 13, 2008 In a message dated 11/13/2008 1:17:30 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, dennis_travis33 writes: > ***Naw, was just suggesting that animals don't suffer because they lack the > ability to contemplate their fate. The 'Awakened' ones don't suffer because > they've transcended the belief in the individual who suffers. The ego of the > 'Awakened' one is very much like the ego of the lower animal. The overlay that > involves projecting the identity into past and future is removed.> > > > do you realy believe that animals don't suffer?....animals are mainly acting/reacting based/by fear.....means, by the instinct to survive........So...if we compare then an "Awakened" one with an animal....Would say that an Awakened lost all fears....and don't need to strive anymore to survive....etc.......But strange this your view on "Awakened", Phil......Be carefull...One will call you Animal Phil...if you continue this your (mis)concepts and assumptions...;)Marc ***Yes, I see how pain is in the body, but suffering is in the mind. The idea that something shouldn't have happened or should be other than it is, or the anticipation of future pain and what should change. All of this contemplation is beyond the more spontaneous responses of the animal. Humans pay the price for their ability to contemplate the self, with their suffering. Pain is not suffering and 'negative' feelings such as fear is not suffering. Suffering is in what we think about the pain and feelings. The 'Awakened' one has not lost all fears or drive to survive any more than the animal has, but fear is not suffering. Suffering comes from identification with the fear as 'my fear', which is then projected .. Get the Moviefone Toolbar. Showtimes, theaters, movie news more! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 13, 2008 Nisargadatta , souldreamone wrote: > > > In a message dated 12/11/2008 1:29:53 AM Pacific Standard Time, > dennis_travis33 writes: > > > ***Sure. No self judgment or judgment of other going on here cause > I can't > > honestly find either self or other. Everybody's doing the best > they can by > > their nature, and not really by their choice to be responsible. > > > -will try to don't judge this " your " words....... > > agree that everybody is doing the best he/she can by their > nature...no choice about. > > such " nature " depends on the level > of " misconception & assumptions " ....no? > > So, who is then responsible for any " misconception & assumption " ?... > > nobody? > > the " criminal " could say : " Oh, you see, i'm not responsible for what > i have done " .... > > They would answer him: " Oh, you see, you can think about in prison " > > ... > > When i talk about responsibility, then i mean that > whoever/whatever " assumption & misconception " is acting/reacting on > whatever.....it's of kind irresponsible when this " ghost " don't " see " > this his/her own mess or creation or perception & world. > > > > > > As we talked about before, a certain level of ego will continue to > operate > > whether anything believes in it or not, since it's functioning > spontaneously > > as part of the integrated functioning of Consciousness. By itself, > it's not a > > problem for somebody. Talking and even thinking can go on and it > makes no > > difference at all. > > > - " A certain level of ego will continue " ....ok > > This would be another talk....other subject....other world... > > > > > > Here, there's a motivation to see various things more clearly, and > so others > > are used to help focus that 'looking'. Nothing I say really has > anything to > > do with anybody else, it's just my own focus I'm looking at. I > really have > > little interest in what folks believe or don't believe. > > > yes....there is absolutly no necessity to get attached by whatever > other folks are believing etc > > > Marc > > > > ***Yes, the world will hold one responsible, judge and punish him. It's all > based on an illusion of volition, but as long as this illusion is believed, > the threat of punishment becomes a 'necessary' part of the experience, and so > we talk of taking responsibility even in the absence of one who could be > responsible. When one plays a game, there are certain rules that apply only to > the game. There is no choice about for how long such " world-ego-illusion " is believed... The one who live " within/from/by " such illusion....is driven by such illusions....has no choice about to play the game or not. There, then...is also no choice about certain responsibilities which has to be taken. An " assumption/misconception " of an " ego " can't just escape the world. ....Except he/she wake up....slowly....and so, get free from many illusions. > > > The 'level of ego' I referred to is that of the lower animals who have a > sense of self that allows them to function effectively (feed themselves, defend, > mate, play) but without the ability to project that self image into the > future and past (sometimes called self awareness- psychological context) and > derive conclusions about what should not have happened, what should not be, and > what must happen in the future. This is suffering. would say that suffering is happening as long there is " assumption & misconception " of an " ego " thinking....acting...reacting..... hope that you don't wish a transformation from human to animal....lol Marc Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 13, 2008 Nisargadatta , souldreamone wrote: > > > > > In a message dated 11/13/2008 12:35:19 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, > dennis_travis33 writes: > > > The 'level of ego' I referred to is that of the lower animals who > have a > > sense of self that allows them to function effectively (feed > themselves, defend, > > mate, play) but without the ability to project that self image into > the > > future and past (sometimes called self awareness- psychological > context) and > > derive conclusions about what should not have happened, what should > not be, and > > what must happen in the future. This is suffering. > > > would say that suffering is happening as long there > is " assumption & misconception " of an " ego " > thinking....acting...reacting..... > > hope that you don't wish a transformation from human to animal....lol > > > Marc > > > > ***Naw, was just suggesting that animals don't suffer because they lack the > ability to contemplate their fate. The 'Awakened' ones don't suffer because > they've transcended the belief in the individual who suffers. The ego of the > 'Awakened' one is very much like the ego of the lower animal. The overlay that > involves projecting the identity into past and future is removed. > > > > do you realy believe that animals don't suffer?.... animals are mainly acting/reacting based/by fear.....means, by the instinct to survive.... ..... So...if we compare then an " Awakened " one with an animal.... Would say that an Awakened lost all fears....and don't need to strive anymore to survive....etc... ..... But strange this your view on " Awakened " , Phil... .... Be carefull... One will call you Animal Phil...if you continue this your (mis) concepts and assumptions... Marc Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 13, 2008 Nisargadatta , souldreamone wrote: > > > > > In a message dated 11/13/2008 1:17:30 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, > dennis_travis33 writes: > > > ***Naw, was just suggesting that animals don't suffer because they > lack the > > ability to contemplate their fate. The 'Awakened' ones don't > suffer because > > they've transcended the belief in the individual who suffers. The > ego of the > > 'Awakened' one is very much like the ego of the lower animal. The > overlay that > > involves projecting the identity into past and future is removed. > > > > > > > > > do you realy believe that animals don't suffer?.... > > animals are mainly acting/reacting based/by fear.....means, by the > instinct to survive.... > > .... > > So...if we compare then an " Awakened " one with an animal.... > Would say that an Awakened lost all fears....and don't need to strive > anymore to survive....etc... > > .... > > But strange this your view on " Awakened " , Phil... > > ... > > Be carefull... > > One will call you Animal Phil...if you continue this your (mis) > concepts and assumptions... > > > Marc > > > ***Yes, I see how pain is in the body, but suffering is in the mind. The > idea that something shouldn't have happened or should be other than it is, or > the anticipation of future pain and what should change. All of this > contemplation is beyond the more spontaneous responses of the animal. Humans pay the > price for their ability to contemplate the self, with their suffering. Pain is > not suffering and 'negative' feelings such as fear is not suffering. Suffering > is in what we think about the pain and feelings. > > The 'Awakened' one has not lost all fears or drive to survive any more than > the animal has, but fear is not suffering. Suffering comes from > identification with the fear as 'my fear', which is then projected > . > yes, pain is not suffering only humans so are suffering because of many reasons main reason is ....coming back to the subject....the " assumption & misconception " of an " ego " due to such " ego-dream " or " mind-fiction " .....there are appearent " animals " .... " heaven & hell " .... " trees " .... " flowers " ..... " teac hers " .... " horses " .... " fishes " ......etc appearently seperated and different to the body-mind-intellect percieving it all are forming whole of a world and! whole of this percieved world Is the mentionned ego-dream or ego- fiction no difference! .... it's clear ...such fiction is evoluating....is being transformed.....etc....constantly....never the same ego- fiction.....never the same appearent world....etc ...... what is always the Same....during such appearent transformations....and appearences of whatever " animals & trees " ... is being simply existence itself untouched by/from any world(s) and ego-fictions .... Marc Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted November 13, 2008 In a message dated 11/13/2008 2:00:33 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, dennis_travis33 writes: yes, pain is not sufferingonly humans so are suffering because of many reasonsmain reason is ....coming back to the subject....the "assumption & misconception" of an "ego" due to such "ego-dream" or "mind-fiction".....there are appearent "animals"...."heaven & hell"...."trees"...."flowers"....."teachers"...."horses"...."fishes"......etcappearently seperated and different to the body-mind-intellect percieving itall are forming whole of a worldand!whole of this percieved world Is the mentionned ego-dream or ego-fictionno difference!...it's clear ...such fiction is evoluating....is being transformed.....etc....constantly....never the same ego-fiction.....never the same appearent world....etc.....what is always the Same....during such appearent transformations....and appearences of whatever "animals & trees"...is beingsimply existence itselfuntouched by/from any world(s) and ego-fictions...Marc ***Yeah. Get the Moviefone Toolbar. Showtimes, theaters, movie news more! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
