Guest guest Report post Posted February 16, 2009 the sky is not affected by the sun, moon, earth, other planets, comets, stars, clouds, lightening, wind, fire, black hole etc. everything exists within it & its presence is in everything. within it everything that exists is in action, it is in state of inaction. it is unaware of the great sun, beautiful moon, miraculous planet earth. it holds everything togather with intense love. everything that exists is born in its formless attire, grows in its, disintegrates in it. To become one with it & remain forever. - mahesh dennis_travis33 <dennis_travis33Nisargadatta Sent: Monday, February 16, 2009 4:17:56 PM Re: Belief & Faith Nisargadatta, Mahesh Kamat <mv.kamat@.. .> wrote:>> he further says " A man travelling in a train may cover a considerable distance, yet he himself does not walk that distance himself. The train goes the distance, yet the man claims that he has covered it. In the same fashion, the individual consciousness without doing a single thing, says that it has done everything".> -mahesh> > nobody ever has done anythingnothing has ever been done for real....except within the little thinking ego-mind.... .lost in illusionsMarcPs: there is no "doer" at allthere is only infinite, formless and changless Silence & peace. ..nothing else for real Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted February 16, 2009 Nisargadatta , Mahesh Kamat <mv.kamat wrote: > > the sky is not affected by the sun, moon, earth, other planets, comets, stars, clouds, lightening, wind, fire, black hole etc. everything exists within it & its presence is in everything. within it everything that exists is in action, it is in state of inaction. it is unaware of the great sun, beautiful moon, miraculous planet earth. it holds everything togather with intense love. everything that exists is born in its formless attire, grows in its, disintegrates in it. To become one with it & remain forever. > - mahesh when the wild blue yonder is no longer yonder... " everything " you talk about above.. all of the " forever " 'stuff'.. all the sky and planets and moons and space 'stuff'.. all the action and inaction 'stuff'.. even your inanities.. all the 'you's' and 'me's'.. are realized as sleep disorders and distractions. this is dis-ease. nothing from the first which never was... to the last which never will be. ..b b.b. ________________________________ > > dennis_travis33 <dennis_travis33 > Nisargadatta > Monday, February 16, 2009 4:17:56 PM > Re: Belief & Faith > > Nisargadatta, Mahesh Kamat <mv.kamat@ .> > wrote: > > > > he further says " A man travelling in a train may cover a > considerable distance, yet he himself does not walk that distance > himself. The train goes the distance, yet the man claims that he has > covered it. In the same fashion, the individual consciousness without > doing a single thing, says that it has done everything " . > > -mahesh > > > > > nobody ever has done anything > > nothing has ever been done for real > > .... > > except within the little thinking ego-mind.... .lost in illusions > > Marc > > Ps: there is no " doer " at all > > there is only infinite, formless and changless > Silence & peace. ..nothing else for real > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted February 16, 2009 Nisargadatta , Mahesh Kamat <mv.kamat wrote: > > the sky is not affected by the sun, moon, earth, other planets, comets, stars, clouds, lightening, wind, fire, black hole etc. everything exists within it & its presence is in everything. within it everything that exists is in action, it is in state of inaction. it is unaware of the great sun, beautiful moon, miraculous planet earth. it holds everything togather with intense love. everything that exists is born in its formless attire, grows in its, disintegrates in it. To become one with it & remain forever. > - mahesh > > to get one with oneself is of no choice, anyway. get Real, mahesh! then there is no more " sky " and " sun " or " earth " or " clouds " or " miracles " or " love " or whatever (emotional) mind fictions. Marc Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted February 27, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , Mahesh Kamat <mv.kamat@> wrote: > > > > the sky is not affected by the sun, moon, earth, other planets, > comets, stars, clouds, lightening, wind, fire, black hole etc. > everything exists within it & its presence is in everything. within it > everything that exists is in action, it is in state of inaction. it is > unaware of the great sun, beautiful moon, miraculous planet earth. it > holds everything togather with intense love. everything that exists is > born in its formless attire, grows in its, disintegrates in it. To > become one with it & remain forever. > > - mahesh > > > > > > to get one with oneself is of no choice, anyway. > > get Real, mahesh! > Wow. Wow. Wow. I mean, wow. I just read this entire thread and...wow. A real arena of mud slinging. (And please somebody do not tell me there is no mud and no slinging, or that I am the mud and the slinging, or any more thoroughly tired and recycled advaita garbage. Is there any simple human affection on this site? Any?) By the way, I was raised Catholic. I've never read Lacan. I thought the original message, though a bit lecturesome, raised some interesting issues: namely, the cliquishness and egotism and exclusive jargon of most groups, be they Catholic or Hindu or even if they (quite aggressively) profess to be beyond it all. > then there is no more " sky " and " sun " or " earth " or " clouds " > or " miracles " or " love " or whatever (emotional) mind fictions. > > > Marc > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted February 27, 2009 Nisargadatta , " charlieaugust10 " <charlieaugust10 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , Mahesh Kamat <mv.kamat@> wrote: > > > > > > the sky is not affected by the sun, moon, earth, other planets, > > comets, stars, clouds, lightening, wind, fire, black hole etc. > > everything exists within it & its presence is in everything. within it > > everything that exists is in action, it is in state of inaction. it is > > unaware of the great sun, beautiful moon, miraculous planet earth. it > > holds everything togather with intense love. everything that exists is > > born in its formless attire, grows in its, disintegrates in it. To > > become one with it & remain forever. > > > - mahesh > > > > > > > > > > to get one with oneself is of no choice, anyway. > > > > get Real, mahesh! > Wow. Wow. Wow. > I mean, wow. I just read this entire thread and...wow. > A real arena of mud slinging. > (And please somebody do not tell me there is no mud and no slinging, or that I am the > mud and the slinging, or any more thoroughly tired and recycled advaita garbage. > Is there any simple human affection on this site? Any?) > By the way, I was raised Catholic. > I've never read Lacan. > I thought the original message, though a bit lecturesome, raised some interesting issues: > namely, the cliquishness and egotism and exclusive jargon of most groups, be they > Catholic or Hindu or even if they (quite aggressively) profess to be beyond it all. this is a site and forum about non-duality....and also reality.... it's not about and for Catholic Freaks.... have nice prays.... > > > > then there is no more " sky " and " sun " or " earth " or " clouds " > > or " miracles " or " love " or whatever (emotional) mind fictions. > > > > > > Marc > > > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted February 27, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " charlieaugust10 " > <charlieaugust10@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Mahesh Kamat <mv.kamat@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > the sky is not affected by the sun, moon, earth, other planets, > > > comets, stars, clouds, lightening, wind, fire, black hole etc. > > > everything exists within it & its presence is in > everything. within it > > > everything that exists is in action, it is in state of inaction. > it is > > > unaware of the great sun, beautiful moon, miraculous planet > earth. it > > > holds everything togather with intense love. everything that > exists is > > > born in its formless attire, grows in its, disintegrates in > it. To > > > become one with it & remain forever. > > > > - mahesh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to get one with oneself is of no choice, anyway. > > > > > > get Real, mahesh! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wow. Wow. Wow. > > I mean, wow. I just read this entire thread and...wow. > > A real arena of mud slinging. > > (And please somebody do not tell me there is no mud and no > slinging, or that I am the > > mud and the slinging, or any more thoroughly tired and recycled > advaita garbage. > > Is there any simple human affection on this site? Any?) > > By the way, I was raised Catholic. > > I've never read Lacan. > > I thought the original message, though a bit lecturesome, raised > some interesting issues: > > namely, the cliquishness and egotism and exclusive jargon of most > groups, be they > > Catholic or Hindu or even if they (quite aggressively) profess to > be beyond it all. Hi, Lacan was catholic. Didn't practice the religion, as far as I know. I recommend the reading of Zizek instead of Lacan's original opus, for those interested in Lacan. It can take several years to find out what Lacan is talking about and there's much unnecessary blah, blah, blah without importance. Lacan appears to have been a big a..hole! Nonduality is a great tool....but just a tool. When used, take care of it as if it was your own tool. Keep it clean. Give it to another, who needs it. Ricardo Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted February 27, 2009 Nisargadatta , " loewe2009 " <loewe2009 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " charlieaugust10 " > > <charlieaugust10@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Mahesh Kamat <mv.kamat@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > the sky is not affected by the sun, moon, earth, other planets, > > > > comets, stars, clouds, lightening, wind, fire, black hole etc. > > > > everything exists within it & its presence is in > > everything. within it > > > > everything that exists is in action, it is in state of inaction. > > it is > > > > unaware of the great sun, beautiful moon, miraculous planet > > earth. it > > > > holds everything togather with intense love. everything that > > exists is > > > > born in its formless attire, grows in its, disintegrates in > > it. To > > > > become one with it & remain forever. > > > > > - mahesh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to get one with oneself is of no choice, anyway. > > > > > > > > get Real, mahesh! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wow. Wow. Wow. > > > I mean, wow. I just read this entire thread and...wow. > > > A real arena of mud slinging. > > > (And please somebody do not tell me there is no mud and no > > slinging, or that I am the > > > mud and the slinging, or any more thoroughly tired and recycled > > advaita garbage. > > > Is there any simple human affection on this site? Any?) > > > By the way, I was raised Catholic. > > > I've never read Lacan. > > > I thought the original message, though a bit lecturesome, raised > > some interesting issues: > > > namely, the cliquishness and egotism and exclusive jargon of most > > groups, be they > > > Catholic or Hindu or even if they (quite aggressively) profess to > > be beyond it all. > > > Hi, > > Lacan was catholic. Didn't practice the religion, as far as I know. I recommend the reading > of Zizek instead of Lacan's original opus, for those interested in Lacan. It can take several > years to find out what Lacan is talking about and there's much unnecessary blah, blah, > blah without importance. Lacan appears to have been a big a..hole! > > Nonduality is a great tool....but just a tool. When used, take care of it as if it was your own > tool. Keep it clean. Give it to another, who needs it. > > Ricardo " No-body can be beyond all.....! " BTW, what's 'all'?.....might be very easy to say it is 'one " . Maybe too easy. But, why should 'all' be 'one'? Does it matter? Who cares? Ricardo Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted February 27, 2009 Nisargadatta , " loewe2009 " <loewe2009 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " loewe2009@ " <loewe2009@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " charlieaugust10 " > > > <charlieaugust10@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Mahesh Kamat <mv.kamat@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > the sky is not affected by the sun, moon, earth, other planets, > > > > > comets, stars, clouds, lightening, wind, fire, black hole etc. > > > > > everything exists within it & its presence is in > > > everything. within it > > > > > everything that exists is in action, it is in state of inaction. > > > it is > > > > > unaware of the great sun, beautiful moon, miraculous planet > > > earth. it > > > > > holds everything togather with intense love. everything that > > > exists is > > > > > born in its formless attire, grows in its, disintegrates in > > > it. To > > > > > become one with it & remain forever. > > > > > > - mahesh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to get one with oneself is of no choice, anyway. > > > > > > > > > > get Real, mahesh! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wow. Wow. Wow. > > > > I mean, wow. I just read this entire thread and...wow. > > > > A real arena of mud slinging. > > > > (And please somebody do not tell me there is no mud and no > > > slinging, or that I am the > > > > mud and the slinging, or any more thoroughly tired and recycled > > > advaita garbage. > > > > Is there any simple human affection on this site? Any?) > > > > By the way, I was raised Catholic. > > > > I've never read Lacan. > > > > I thought the original message, though a bit lecturesome, raised > > > some interesting issues: > > > > namely, the cliquishness and egotism and exclusive jargon of most > > > groups, be they > > > > Catholic or Hindu or even if they (quite aggressively) profess to > > > be beyond it all. > > > > > > Hi, > > > > Lacan was catholic. Didn't practice the religion, as far as I know. I recommend the > reading > > of Zizek instead of Lacan's original opus, for those interested in Lacan. It can take > several > > years to find out what Lacan is talking about and there's much unnecessary blah, blah, > > blah without importance. Lacan appears to have been a big a..hole! > > > > Nonduality is a great tool....but just a tool. When used, take care of it as if it was your > own > > tool. Keep it clean. Give it to another, who needs it. > > > > Ricardo > > > " No-body can be beyond all.....! " > > BTW, what's 'all'?.....might be very easy to say it is 'one " . Maybe too easy. But, why should > 'all' be 'one'? Does it matter? > > Who cares? > > Ricardo > ego is " all " of " one " imaginary " one " it doesn't matter about the size of ego....about the size of an imaginary world.... what is the size of a thought then?... ..... nobody cares ..... Nobody & Nothing can be behond " all " this " one " fiction of ego.... there can't be anything behond any fictions.... Marc Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted February 27, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " loewe2009@ " <loewe2009@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " loewe2009@ " <loewe2009@> > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " charlieaugust10 " > > > > <charlieaugust10@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Mahesh Kamat > <mv.kamat@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the sky is not affected by the sun, moon, earth, other > planets, > > > > > > comets, stars, clouds, lightening, wind, fire, black > hole etc. > > > > > > everything exists within it & its presence is in > > > > everything. within it > > > > > > everything that exists is in action, it is in state of > inaction. > > > > it is > > > > > > unaware of the great sun, beautiful moon, miraculous planet > > > > earth. it > > > > > > holds everything togather with intense love. everything > that > > > > exists is > > > > > > born in its formless attire, grows in its, disintegrates in > > > > it. To > > > > > > become one with it & remain forever. > > > > > > > - mahesh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to get one with oneself is of no choice, anyway. > > > > > > > > > > > > get Real, mahesh! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wow. Wow. Wow. > > > > > I mean, wow. I just read this entire thread and...wow. > > > > > A real arena of mud slinging. > > > > > (And please somebody do not tell me there is no mud and no > > > > slinging, or that I am the > > > > > mud and the slinging, or any more thoroughly tired and > recycled > > > > advaita garbage. > > > > > Is there any simple human affection on this site? Any?) > > > > > By the way, I was raised Catholic. > > > > > I've never read Lacan. > > > > > I thought the original message, though a bit lecturesome, > raised > > > > some interesting issues: > > > > > namely, the cliquishness and egotism and exclusive jargon of > most > > > > groups, be they > > > > > Catholic or Hindu or even if they (quite aggressively) > profess to > > > > be beyond it all. > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > Lacan was catholic. Didn't practice the religion, as far as I > know. I recommend the > > reading > > > of Zizek instead of Lacan's original opus, for those interested > in Lacan. It can take > > several > > > years to find out what Lacan is talking about and there's much > unnecessary blah, blah, > > > blah without importance. Lacan appears to have been a big > a..hole! > > > > > > Nonduality is a great tool....but just a tool. When used, take > care of it as if it was your > > own > > > tool. Keep it clean. Give it to another, who needs it. > > > > > > Ricardo > > > > > > " No-body can be beyond all.....! " > > > > BTW, what's 'all'?.....might be very easy to say it is 'one " . Maybe > too easy. But, why should > > 'all' be 'one'? Does it matter? > > > > Who cares? > > > > Ricardo > > > > > ego is " all " of " one " imaginary " one " > > it doesn't matter about the size of ego....about the size of an > imaginary world.... > > what is the size of a thought then?... > > .... > > nobody cares > > .... > > Nobody & Nothing can be behond " all " this " one " fiction of ego.... > > there can't be anything behond any fictions.... > > > Marc is that a belief that you don't have faith... or a lack of belief that you do have faith? do you have faith that you don't believe.. or do you not have faith that you do believe? are you faithful to any or all of that? do you believe that you are not faithful to all or any of that? do you have faith that you can have faith in belief..or not.. or not not neither nor? is there a you that can " do " all or none of the above? is the above the below?. mainly and namely: ..b b.b. p.s. don't whatever the hell you do believe me. got nothing to believe in. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted February 27, 2009 Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " loewe2009@ " <loewe2009@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " loewe2009@ " <loewe2009@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " charlieaugust10 " > > > > > <charlieaugust10@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Mahesh Kamat > > <mv.kamat@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the sky is not affected by the sun, moon, earth, other > > planets, > > > > > > > comets, stars, clouds, lightening, wind, fire, black > > hole etc. > > > > > > > everything exists within it & its presence is in > > > > > everything. within it > > > > > > > everything that exists is in action, it is in state of > > inaction. > > > > > it is > > > > > > > unaware of the great sun, beautiful moon, miraculous planet > > > > > earth. it > > > > > > > holds everything togather with intense love. everything > > that > > > > > exists is > > > > > > > born in its formless attire, grows in its, disintegrates in > > > > > it. To > > > > > > > become one with it & remain forever. > > > > > > > > - mahesh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to get one with oneself is of no choice, anyway. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > get Real, mahesh! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wow. Wow. Wow. > > > > > > I mean, wow. I just read this entire thread and...wow. > > > > > > A real arena of mud slinging. > > > > > > (And please somebody do not tell me there is no mud and no > > > > > slinging, or that I am the > > > > > > mud and the slinging, or any more thoroughly tired and > > recycled > > > > > advaita garbage. > > > > > > Is there any simple human affection on this site? Any?) > > > > > > By the way, I was raised Catholic. > > > > > > I've never read Lacan. > > > > > > I thought the original message, though a bit lecturesome, > > raised > > > > > some interesting issues: > > > > > > namely, the cliquishness and egotism and exclusive jargon of > > most > > > > > groups, be they > > > > > > Catholic or Hindu or even if they (quite aggressively) > > profess to > > > > > be beyond it all. > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > Lacan was catholic. Didn't practice the religion, as far as I > > know. I recommend the > > > reading > > > > of Zizek instead of Lacan's original opus, for those interested > > in Lacan. It can take > > > several > > > > years to find out what Lacan is talking about and there's much > > unnecessary blah, blah, > > > > blah without importance. Lacan appears to have been a big > > a..hole! > > > > > > > > Nonduality is a great tool....but just a tool. When used, take > > care of it as if it was your > > > own > > > > tool. Keep it clean. Give it to another, who needs it. > > > > > > > > Ricardo > > > > > > > > > " No-body can be beyond all.....! " > > > > > > BTW, what's 'all'?.....might be very easy to say it is 'one " . Maybe > > too easy. But, why should > > > 'all' be 'one'? Does it matter? > > > > > > Who cares? > > > > > > Ricardo > > > > > > > > > ego is " all " of " one " imaginary " one " > > > > it doesn't matter about the size of ego....about the size of an > > imaginary world.... > > > > what is the size of a thought then?... > > > > .... > > > > nobody cares > > > > .... > > > > Nobody & Nothing can be behond " all " this " one " fiction of ego.... > > > > there can't be anything behond any fictions.... > > > > > > Marc > > > is that a belief that you don't have faith... > > or a lack of belief that you do have faith? faith is for this religious people.... faith and religion go together.... i'm not a religious person.... faith is of no meaning for me... this has also nothing to do with any beliefs > > do you have faith that you don't believe.. > > or do you not have faith that you do believe? > > are you faithful to any or all of that? > > do you believe that you are not faithful to all or any of that? faithfulness go together with this little imaginary ego-minded fictions..... it's of importance for such fictions it's meaningless for the real > > do you have faith that you can have faith in belief..or not.. > > or not not neither nor? > > is there a you that can " do " all or none of the above? > > is the above the below?. > > mainly and namely: > > .b b.b. > > > p.s. > > don't whatever the hell you do believe me. > > got nothing to believe in. > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted February 27, 2009 Nisargadatta , Mahesh Kamat <mv.kamat wrote: > > i am unable to see the glory of existence it is shrouded by my pride, i am always right, i am smarter than others, i know everything, i am enlighetened, making me blind forever. > -mahesh > > pride to see the glory of existence.....means, pride of this little fiction called ego?..... trying to share such pride with other fictions.....means, with nobody realy, beside this little imaginary proud fiction called " mahesh " ?.... nobody ever was, is...and will get blind of anything.....beside this little imaginary existence of " mahesh " .... Marc Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted February 27, 2009 >(Mark) > > > Nobody & Nothing can be behond " all " this " one " fiction of ego.... > > > > > > there can't be anything behond any fictions.... > > > > > > > > > Marc > > >(.b b.b.) > > is that a belief that you don't have faith... > > > > or a lack of belief that you do have faith? >(Mark) > faith is for this religious people.... > faith and religion go together.... > i'm not a religious person.... > faith is of no meaning for me... > this has also nothing to do with any beliefs (.b b.b.) do you believe that. what makes you believe your belief that you don't have beliefs? do you believe that your not believing is believable? to whom? i doubt that i can express faith in: your believing that you don't have belief. you believe that you don't that's all. what a strange thing huh? but remember: there are no " things " :-) > > do you have faith that you don't believe.. > > > > or do you not have faith that you do believe? > > > > are you faithful to any or all of that? > > > > do you believe that you are not faithful to all or any of that? >(Mark) > faithfulness go together with this little imaginary ego-minded > fictions..... > it's of importance for such fictions > it's meaningless for the real (.b b.b.) does that have some sort of meaning for you? does meaningless mean anything to you is what i mean to ask. i can't believe that. but i have faith that i doubt you have no belief in believing. at bare minimum you must believe that you don't have belief. believe me..or don't. it's meaningless anyway. :-) ..b b.b. *******************************NNB************************************ > > do you have faith that you can have faith in belief..or not.. > > > > or not not neither nor? > > > > is there a you that can " do " all or none of the above? > > > > is the above the below?. > > > > mainly and namely: > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > p.s. > > > > don't whatever the hell you do believe me. > > > > got nothing to believe in. > > > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted February 27, 2009 Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111 wrote: > > >(Mark) > > > > > Nobody & Nothing can be behond " all " this " one " fiction of ego.... > > > > > > > > there can't be anything behond any fictions.... > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > >(.b b.b.) > > > > is that a belief that you don't have faith... > > > > > > or a lack of belief that you do have faith? > > > > >(Mark) > > > faith is for this religious people.... > > faith and religion go together.... > > i'm not a religious person.... > > faith is of no meaning for me... > > this has also nothing to do with any beliefs > > > > > > (.b b.b.) > > do you believe that. > > what makes you believe your belief that you don't have beliefs? > > do you believe that your not believing is believable? > > to whom? > > i doubt that i can express faith in: > > your believing that you don't have belief. > > you believe that you don't that's all. > > what a strange thing huh? > > but remember: there are no " things " > > :-) > > > > > do you have faith that you don't believe.. > > > > > > or do you not have faith that you do believe? > > > > > > are you faithful to any or all of that? > > > > > > do you believe that you are not faithful to all or any of that? > > > > >(Mark) > > faithfulness go together with this little imaginary ego-minded > > fictions..... > > it's of importance for such fictions > > it's meaningless for the real > > > > (.b b.b.) > > does that have some sort of meaning for you? > > does meaningless mean anything to you is what i mean to ask. > > i can't believe that. > > but i have faith that i doubt you have no belief in believing. > > at bare minimum you must believe that you don't have belief. > > believe me..or don't. > > it's meaningless anyway. > > :-) > > .b b.b. > > *******************************NNB************************************ > > > > > do you have faith that you can have faith in belief..or not.. > > > > > > or not not neither nor? > > > > > > is there a you that can " do " all or none of the above? > > > > > > is the above the below?. > > > > > > mainly and namely: > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > > p.s. > > > > > > don't whatever the hell you do believe me. > > > > > > got nothing to believe in. > > > > > > your faith in my (non) beliefs are meaningless for me.... why should i try to think about beliefs...and about faith.....?.... no thanks.... Marc Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted February 27, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " > <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > >(Mark) > > > > > > > Nobody & Nothing can be behond " all " this " one " fiction of > ego.... > > > > > > > > > > there can't be anything behond any fictions.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > >(.b b.b.) > > > > > > is that a belief that you don't have faith... > > > > > > > > or a lack of belief that you do have faith? > > > > > > > > >(Mark) > > > > > faith is for this religious people.... > > > faith and religion go together.... > > > i'm not a religious person.... > > > faith is of no meaning for me... > > > this has also nothing to do with any beliefs > > > > > > > > > > > > (.b b.b.) > > > > do you believe that. > > > > what makes you believe your belief that you don't have beliefs? > > > > do you believe that your not believing is believable? > > > > to whom? > > > > i doubt that i can express faith in: > > > > your believing that you don't have belief. > > > > you believe that you don't that's all. > > > > what a strange thing huh? > > > > but remember: there are no " things " > > > > :-) > > > > > > > > do you have faith that you don't believe.. > > > > > > > > or do you not have faith that you do believe? > > > > > > > > are you faithful to any or all of that? > > > > > > > > do you believe that you are not faithful to all or any of that? > > > > > > > > >(Mark) > > > faithfulness go together with this little imaginary ego-minded > > > fictions..... > > > it's of importance for such fictions > > > it's meaningless for the real > > > > > > > > (.b b.b.) > > > > does that have some sort of meaning for you? > > > > does meaningless mean anything to you is what i mean to ask. > > > > i can't believe that. > > > > but i have faith that i doubt you have no belief in believing. > > > > at bare minimum you must believe that you don't have belief. > > > > believe me..or don't. > > > > it's meaningless anyway. > > > > :-) > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > *******************************NNB************************************ > > > > > > > > do you have faith that you can have faith in belief..or not.. > > > > > > > > or not not neither nor? > > > > > > > > is there a you that can " do " all or none of the above? > > > > > > > > is the above the below?. > > > > > > > > mainly and namely: > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > > > > > p.s. > > > > > > > > don't whatever the hell you do believe me. > > > > > > > > got nothing to believe in. > > > > > > > > > > > > your faith in my (non) beliefs are meaningless for me.... > > why should i try to think about beliefs...and about faith.....?.... > > no thanks.... > > Marc > Ps: you want hear something about meaning(lessness)?.... the existence of ego fictions give meanings to fictions.... the meaning of ego is the one of being fiction only .... therefore... nobody ever could give any meaning to anything for real Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted February 27, 2009 fiction & non fiction, belief & non belief, faith & no faith, right & wrong, ego & non ego,.......... picture continues displaying on the screen till the camera is on. picture is real till camera is on, camera shuts picture disappears, screen doesn't carry images or picturization. -mahesh dennis_travis33 <dennis_travis33Nisargadatta Sent: Friday, February 27, 2009 8:23:15 PM Re: Belief & Faith Nisargadatta@ .. com, "dennis_travis33" <dennis_travis33@ ...> wrote:>> Nisargadatta, "roberibus111" > <Roberibus111@ > wrote:> >> > >(Mark)> > > > > > > Nobody & Nothing can be behond "all" this "one" fiction of > ego....> > > > > > > > > > there can't be anything behond any fictions....> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc> > > > > > > > > > >(.b b.b.)> > > > > > is that a belief that you don't have faith...> > > > > > > > or a lack of belief that you do have faith?> > > > > > > > >(Mark) > > > > > faith is for this religious people....> > > faith and religion go together....> > > i'm not a religious person....> > > faith is of no meaning for me...> > > this has also nothing to do with any beliefs> > > > > > > > > > > > (.b b.b.)> > > > do you believe that.> > > > what makes you believe your belief that you don't have beliefs?> > > > do you believe that your not believing is believable?> > > > to whom?> > > > i doubt that i can express faith in:> > > > your believing that you don't have belief.> > > > you believe that you don't that's all.> > > > what a strange thing huh?> > > > but remember: there are no "things"> > > > :-)> > > > > > > > do you have faith that you don't believe..> > > > > > > > or do you not have faith that you do believe?> > > > > > > > are you faithful to any or all of that?> > > > > > > > do you believe that you are not faithful to all or any of that?> > > > > > > > >(Mark)> > > faithfulness go together with this little imaginary ego-minded > > > fictions.... .> > > it's of importance for such fictions> > > it's meaningless for the real> > > > > > > > (.b b.b.)> > > > does that have some sort of meaning for you?> > > > does meaningless mean anything to you is what i mean to ask.> > > > i can't believe that.> > > > but i have faith that i doubt you have no belief in believing.> > > > at bare minimum you must believe that you don't have belief.> > > > believe me..or don't.> > > > it's meaningless anyway.> > > > :-)> > > > .b b.b.> > > > > ************ ********* ********* *NNB***** ********* ********* ********* ****> > > > > > > > do you have faith that you can have faith in belief..or not..> > > > > > > > or not not neither nor?> > > > > > > > is there a you that can "do" all or none of the above?> > > > > > > > is the above the below?.> > > > > > > > mainly and namely:> > > > > > > > .b b.b.> > > > > > > > > > > > p.s.> > > > > > > > don't whatever the hell you do believe me.> > > > > > > > got nothing to believe in.> > > >> > >> >> > > your faith in my (non) beliefs are meaningless for me....> > why should i try to think about beliefs...and about faith.....?. ....> > no thanks....> > Marc>Ps: you want hear something about meaning(lessness) ?....the existence of ego fictions give meanings to fictions....the meaning of ego is the one of being fiction only...therefore...nobody ever could give any meaning to anything for real Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted February 27, 2009 Nisargadatta , Mahesh Kamat <mv.kamat wrote: > > fiction & non fiction, belief & non belief, faith & no faith, right & wrong, ego & non ego,.......... picture continues displaying on the screen till the camera is on. picture is real till camera is on, camera shuts picture disappears, screen doesn't carry images or picturization. > -mahesh > cameraman " mahesh " , this your mentionned " camera " is (restless) mind....taking pictures.... pictures are pictures, only there are no real pictures....means, there isn't any reality within pictures busy mind can never see " something " real busy mind can create & project fictions only.... fictions are unreal therefore there isn't ever any creation for real Marc Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted February 27, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33 wrote: > your faith in my (non) beliefs are meaningless for me.... > > why should i try to think about beliefs...and about faith.....?.... > > no thanks.... > > Marc why did you believe it was necessary to reply or give no thanks? ..b b.b. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted February 27, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33 wrote: > Ps: you want hear something about meaning(lessness)?.... > > the existence of ego fictions give meanings to fictions.... > > the meaning of ego is the one of being fiction only > > ... > > therefore... > > nobody ever could give any meaning to anything for real > that's meaningless. ..b b.b. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted February 27, 2009 Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > your faith in my (non) beliefs are meaningless for me.... > > > > why should i try to think about beliefs...and about faith.....?.... > > > > no thanks.... > > > > Marc > > > why did you believe it was necessary to reply or give no thanks? > > .b b.b. > because i knew that bbb love to play little mind games.... today bbb love the " belief & believe " game?.... .... as i told you before.... there is never any necessity to believe anything or to reply to bbb ..... don't you think so? (you must say Yes...in order to follow this your beloved mind games) Marc Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted February 27, 2009 Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > Ps: you want hear something about meaning(lessness)?.... > > > > the existence of ego fictions give meanings to fictions.... > > > > the meaning of ego is the one of being fiction only > > > > ... > > > > therefore... > > > > nobody ever could give any meaning to anything for real > > > > that's meaningless. > > .b b.b. > no no.... bbb, as somebody who is into beliefs,....must say " bbb believe it's meaningless " lol Marc Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted February 27, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " > <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > your faith in my (non) beliefs are meaningless for me.... > > > > > > why should i try to think about beliefs...and about > faith.....?.... > > > > > > no thanks.... > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > why did you believe it was necessary to reply or give no thanks? > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > because i knew that bbb love to play little mind games.... > > today bbb love the " belief & believe " game?.... > > ... > > as i told you before.... > > there is never any necessity to believe anything or to reply to bbb > > .... > > don't you think so? > > (you must say Yes...in order to follow this your beloved mind games) > > > > > Marc there are no such things as mind games. there are no players nor played upon. the thought is...in answer to your last question....no. and there is no " thinker " to ask " don't you think so " . don't you know? what do you think? answer only if you believe that you have no doubts.. and only if you have faith in that believing. :-) ..b b.b. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted February 27, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " > <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > Ps: you want hear something about meaning(lessness)?.... > > > > > > the existence of ego fictions give meanings to fictions.... > > > > > > the meaning of ego is the one of being fiction only > > > > > > ... > > > > > > therefore... > > > > > > nobody ever could give any meaning to anything for real > > > > > > > that's meaningless. > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > no no.... > > bbb, as somebody who is into beliefs,....must say > > " bbb believe it's meaningless " > > lol > > > Marc ..b b.b. never " must " say or do anything. ..b b.b. never " does " anyhow. why must you you believe so? ..b b.b. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted February 27, 2009 Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " > > <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > your faith in my (non) beliefs are meaningless for me.... > > > > > > > > why should i try to think about beliefs...and about > > faith.....?.... > > > > > > > > no thanks.... > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > why did you believe it was necessary to reply or give no thanks? > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > > because i knew that bbb love to play little mind games.... > > > > today bbb love the " belief & believe " game?.... > > > > ... > > > > as i told you before.... > > > > there is never any necessity to believe anything or to reply to bbb > > > > .... > > > > don't you think so? > > > > (you must say Yes...in order to follow this your beloved mind games) > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > there are no such things as mind games. > > there are no players nor played upon. > > the thought is...in answer to your last question....no. > > and there is no " thinker " to ask " don't you think so " . > > don't you know? > > what do you think? > > answer only if you believe that you have no doubts.. > > and only if you have faith in that believing. > > > :-) > > .b b.b. > lol Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted February 28, 2009 > > > > Wow. Wow. Wow. > > I mean, wow. I just read this entire thread and...wow. > > A real arena of mud slinging. > > (And please somebody do not tell me there is no mud and no > slinging, or that I am the > > mud and the slinging, or any more thoroughly tired and recycled > advaita garbage. > > Is there any simple human affection on this site? Any?) > > By the way, I was raised Catholic. > > I've never read Lacan. > > I thought the original message, though a bit lecturesome, raised > some interesting issues: > > namely, the cliquishness and egotism and exclusive jargon of most > groups, be they > > Catholic or Hindu or even if they (quite aggressively) profess to > be beyond it all. > > > this is a site and forum about non-duality....and also reality.... > > it's not about and for Catholic Freaks.... > > have nice prays.... > Real courage and insight. I'm impressed. Exclusive Nondual Realists. I'm sure even Ramana Maharshi and Vivekananda (who pronounces compassion as well as tolerance for other religions as the only genuine sign of awakening) would be thoroughly impressed with your open-mindedness. " It's not about and for Catholic Freaks. " Sign of maturity, respect, patience, tolerance, understanding, compassion. 'Not Two,' right? Oops, I mean not two except for Catholic Freaks. Actually, no, I mean, not two except for everybody who does not to the laughably limited and suffocating dogma of nonduality. Oh well, with that attitude you will certainly attain a nice isolating and friendless state of Oneness. You will have no one left around with a different perspective to carry on your debate with and the universe will just be filled with your One Nondual Voice echoing into the Emptiness. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted February 28, 2009 > > > Wow. Wow. Wow. > > > I mean, wow. I just read this entire thread and...wow. > > > A real arena of mud slinging. > > > (And please somebody do not tell me there is no mud and no > > slinging, or that I am the > > > mud and the slinging, or any more thoroughly tired and recycled > > advaita garbage. > > > Is there any simple human affection on this site? Any?) > > > By the way, I was raised Catholic. > > > I've never read Lacan. > > > I thought the original message, though a bit lecturesome, raised > > some interesting issues: > > > namely, the cliquishness and egotism and exclusive jargon of most > > groups, be they > > > Catholic or Hindu or even if they (quite aggressively) profess to > > be beyond it all. > > > Hi, > > Lacan was catholic. Didn't practice the religion, as far as I know. I recommend the reading > of Zizek instead of Lacan's original opus, for those interested in Lacan. It can take several > years to find out what Lacan is talking about and there's much unnecessary blah, blah, > blah without importance. Lacan appears to have been a big a..hole! > > Nonduality is a great tool....but just a tool. When used, take care of it as if it was your own > tool. Keep it clean. Give it to another, who needs it. > > Ricardo Hi Ricardo, No interest in reading Lacan. I am enjoying Schopenhauer, Vivekananda, and Balsekar for the moment, but I won't wish them on you, as I know all of our paths are personal and unique. As far as being raised Catholic, I don't much identify with it, it is just a fact like having brown skin. I think the people on this site and other sites who cannot tolerate a little bit of difference are...well...what is the word?? Oh well, I am new to this dialogue forum thing, I guess on a nonduality forum I expected a little more... Anyway, thought you made some good points on original thread. Cheers, C > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
