Guest guest Report post Posted May 26, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > A: That tends to happen when one has " other " in mind when posting... to try > and show somebody something, teach somebody something, etc., > -tim- > > > B:... and the best teachers consistently point out the need to turn to one's > own resources, turn the student to themselves. > -tim- > > > C: So the best teachers do have things to tell to others? > -geo- Sure... " Turn to yourself, rely on your own resources... now go away " ;-) (j/k). Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 26, 2009 In a message dated 5/26/2009 8:45:21 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, lastrain writes: > In a message dated 5/25/2009 11:56:44 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > lastrain writes:> > Phil......It's time to give up all that crap about little self-Big Self.> > That old idea that we aren't really a bunch of little selves but our > ultimate reality is actually one great Big Self......is just an infantile > elaboration of the same old religiosity that has surfaced since the mind of man > first imagined that it was separated from its source.> > Everything they told you is wrong.> > You have to start thinking through this stuff without referring to those > old maps.> > > > toombaru> > > > ***You don't even know what I mean by Self. You heard it once, forgot the > rest of the sentence and started salivating like Pavlov's doggie. Now > you've written a story around what you think I mean and how i became so > seriously deluded, and have concluded that everything I was told about it is wrong. > Can you also go back to some past lives and tell me what I did wrong that > led to such a predicament?> > > That's because you don't know what you mean by Self.And that's because there is no such thing.Perhaps you could take through the step by step process that led you to believe such a story.Bring out a Big Self so we can take a good look at it.If you can't do that......then stop blathering on about it.*****If you can't see it with your eyes, you're not interested. That seems pretty narrow minded for somebody on a spiritual forum. Who told you if you can't see it it doesn't exist, and what made you believe it without questioning it?toombaru We found the real 'Hotel California' and the 'Seinfeld' diner. What will you find? Explore WhereItsAt.com. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 26, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , souldreamone@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In a message dated 5/25/2009 10:18:31 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > > > fewtch@ writes: > > > > > > Hi Phil (welcome back to the list, BTW) -- > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Phil " <souldreamone@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Something is experiencing and responding, and as such, offering > > > > advice to the thing experiencing and responding doesn't seem to me to > > > > be a totally insane thing to do. > > > > > > I'm experiencing your experiencing, and responding to your responding. > > > > > > I'm aware of that. > > > > > > What I'm not aware of is anything apart -- like, " someone else " > > > experiencing and responding. > > > > > > All advice offered is to myself ;-). > > > > > > > > > > > > ***Hi Tim. Yeah, i'm back to remind myself why I left. I'm sure it will > > > come to me. Hehe. > > > > > > Yes, advice offered to mySelf, but not to the ego self. No ego is > > > listening. > > > > > > > > > > > > \ > > > > > > > > > > > > Your Big Self is listening? > > > > Does it have Big Ears? > > > > :-0 > > > > > > > > toombaru > > Some people post on mailing lists for only one reason. > > Conflict. > > It's immediately identifiable by how often the word " you " is used. > > Such folks are ignored by the wise. > > timbaru well you obviously haven't ignored such folk. hmmmmmmm.... ok.. i'l take your word for those who don't so ignore such folk. you'd know then right? ..b b.b. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 26, 2009 In a message dated 5/26/2009 11:03:08 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, dan330033 writes: Nisargadatta , "toombaru2006" <lastrain wrote:> > Can anything be for real?> > > > toombaruAny thing cannot be real.Nor is it unreal, as there is no real thing to compare it with.Thus, to dismiss a thing as unreal gives it an unreality that is as useless as regarding it as real.-- Dan Hi Dan That's been my 'issue' with real/unreal too; it only applies within the illusion where nothing is real and there's no-thing 'outside' of the illusion on which to base the notion of real/unreal. It's just the mind that wants to separate real from unreal, which is, itself, 'unreal'. How does a dream character look around at a dreamscape and separate the real from the unreal? It's meaningless. We found the real 'Hotel California' and the 'Seinfeld' diner. What will you find? Explore WhereItsAt.com. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 26, 2009 Nisargadatta , souldreamone wrote: > > > > > In a message dated 5/25/2009 10:36:18 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > lastrain writes: > > > ****Hard to know who/what Dan thought he was talking to but what's > important is what is hearing. Is an imaginary self or attachment hearing > anything? Seems purdy durn unlikely that thoughts can hear stuff, so what's > listening; what's aware off those thoughts? > > > > > > Just to be clear, imaginary people don't think, don't type, don't do > anything. Ego's also don't do anything like get all egoic. People, ego, self > are no more than thoughts. The question is, who's thoughts? > > > > Once that's seriously overconceptualized too, you might settle on > something like Awareness or Consciousness or Self or some such, but whatever it > is seems to be intelligent enough to respond, like what's happening here on > the forum. > > > > Something is experiencing and responding, and as such, offering advice > to the thing experiencing and responding doesn't seem to me to be a totally > insane thing to do. > > > > > Advise presupposes volition. > > Advise to other egos concerning ways to fix their consition and is about > as close to insane as it gets. > > > toombaru > > > > ***No, advice doesn't presuppose volition, it presupposes the presence of > an intelligence which will spontaneously respond to it's experience. > > > Reread what I wrote because you obviously missed the point that it is not > an ego being spoken to. It is also not an ego speaking, since thoughts > don't speak any better than they can hear. you're full of shit. ..b b.b. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 26, 2009 Nisargadatta , souldreamone wrote: > > > > > In a message dated 5/25/2009 10:44:09 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > lastrain writes: > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > Advise presupposes volition. > > > > Only if it were volitionally offered, which it isn't ;-). > > > > > Advise to other egos concerning ways to fix their condition is > > > about as close to insane as it gets. > > > > Funny... I thought advice given to military recruits to kill folks was a > bit closer to insane. > > > > > That's just the gene's desire to survive. > > Nothing insane about that. > > toombaru > > > > Uh, oh, now genes have desires. > :::::Eyeing my genes suspiciously:::: uh oh! you think you can see your genes???? i'd be eyeing my " i " very suspiciously if i was you. and i'd have my eyes looked at by a professional. LOL! ..b b.b. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 26, 2009 Nisargadatta , souldreamone wrote: > > > > > In a message dated 5/25/2009 10:48:46 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > fewtch writes: > > > Hi Phil (welcome back to the list, BTW) -- > > > > --- In Nisargadatta , " Phil " <souldreamone@> wrote: > > > > > > Something is experiencing and responding, and as such, offering > > > advice to the thing experiencing and responding doesn't seem to me to > > > > be a totally insane thing to do. > > > > I'm experiencing your experiencing, and responding to your responding. > > > > I'm aware of that. > > > > What I'm not aware of is anything apart -- like, " someone else " > > experiencing and responding. > > > > All advice offered is to myself ;-). > > > > > > > > ***Hi Tim. Yeah, i'm back to remind myself why I left. I'm sure it will > > come to me. Hehe. > > > > Yes, advice offered to mySelf, but not to the ego self. No ego is > > listening. > > From here, ego is the belief in ego... like the the annoying Toombaru case > :-/. > > > > > ****Right, and beyond a belief it has no reality. To me, Toom is annoying > because he is obtuse, possibly purposely so. The point is consistently > missed and a 90 deg turn is taken, which serves the purpose of avoiding the > issue and also making the other wrong. you're hung up on right and wrong? that's annoying. ..b b.b. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 26, 2009 Nisargadatta , souldreamone wrote: > > > > > In a message dated 5/25/2009 10:50:42 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > lastrain writes: > > > Your Big Self is listening? > > Does it have Big Ears? > > :-0 > > > > toombaru > > > > ***It's not a Self that belongs to me, it's me. (It's also you) yeah but does it have big ears? ..b b.b. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 26, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , souldreamone@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > > In a message dated 5/25/2009 10:48:46 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > > fewtch@ writes: > > > > > Hi Phil (welcome back to the list, BTW) -- > > > > > > --- In Nisargadatta , " Phil " <souldreamone@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Something is experiencing and responding, and as such, offering > > > > advice to the thing experiencing and responding doesn't seem to me to > > > > > > be a totally insane thing to do. > > > > > > I'm experiencing your experiencing, and responding to your responding. > > > > > > I'm aware of that. > > > > > > What I'm not aware of is anything apart -- like, " someone else " > > > experiencing and responding. > > > > > > All advice offered is to myself ;-). > > > > > > > > > > > > ***Hi Tim. Yeah, i'm back to remind myself why I left. I'm sure it will > > > come to me. Hehe. > > > > > > Yes, advice offered to mySelf, but not to the ego self. No ego is > > > listening. > > > > From here, ego is the belief in ego... like the the annoying Toombaru case > > :-/. > > > > > > > > > > ****Right, and beyond a belief it has no reality. To me, Toom is annoying > > because he is obtuse, possibly purposely so. The point is consistently > > missed and a 90 deg turn is taken, which serves the purpose of avoiding the > > issue and also making the other wrong. > > That tends to happen when one has " other " in mind when posting... to try and show somebody something, teach somebody something, etc., often for purposes of glorifying one's sense of self. From here, the only 'value' in talking about this stuff is in seeing if it applies to oneself. > > There is no such thing as instructing others )through one's superiority). Advaita is a self-navigated course, or not at all, and the best teachers consistently point out the need to turn to one's own resources, turn the student to themselves. The unwise, egoic teachers want to create dependency. the wise ones don't teach. waste of time. ..b b.b. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 26, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > > For it......beyond that arena.........nothing is. > > > > > > I looked around, but I don't see " nothing " anywhere ;-). > > > > > > " Nothing " , isn't. > > > > > > There is no nothing. > > > > > > > > > Precisely. > > > > > > toombaru > > But you said " nothing is " . I said " nothing isn't " . welllll.. nothing is isn'ting. but it isn't ising. is that better? if it's not fuck it. ..b b.b. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 26, 2009 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > toombaru2006 > > Nisargadatta > > Monday, May 25, 2009 3:39 PM > > Re: no pattern P.S. P.S2 > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > - > > > toombaru2006 > > > Nisargadatta > > > Monday, May 25, 2009 3:13 PM > > > Re: no pattern P.S. P.S2 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Is there not such qualitiless IT that exists without a brain? > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > " A brain " is a thought in the mind. The brain is irrelevant to everyday > > > > life, unless perhaps getting brain surgery ;-). > > > > > > Try living without your brain. > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > In deep sleep the universe is gone? How then can it reapear? > > > -geo- > > > > > > > It reappears within the conceptual-mnemonic machinery. > > > > ...all of which occurs within the mass of jelly in your head that you call > > " my brain " . > > > > toombaru > > > > That is why it is differentiated by its name consciousness. It is > > consciouness that reapears when you wake up. It is consciousness that is > > born as a man. It is consciousness that dies as a man. IT is beyond > > consciousness. This must be meditated. It is beyond the brains grasp... > > You know what? You are fucking putting me on....having a fucking good > > laugh... > > -geo- > > > > > > I am deadly serious. > > > > toombaru " me " .. " i'm " just plain dead. that's not serious though. ..b b.b. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 26, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > toombaru2006 > Nisargadatta > Monday, May 25, 2009 4:15 PM > Re: no pattern P.S. P.S2 > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Is there not such qualitiless IT that exists without a brain? > > > > -geo- > > > > > > The brain is a construct. > > > > > > It can be used as a metaphor. > > > > > > People here write using " brain " as a metaphor for something that > > > anchors awareness. > > > > Folks are looking for 'external' anchors. Family, God, nation, brain, it's > > all the same thing. All in support of a construct ('me') so fragile that > > it requires constant maintenance. The energy expended in support of this > > 'central' construct is astounding! > > > > > Truth is not anchored in something, anything. > > > > One could say 'Truth' is itself the anchor for everything else. Everything > > rests in awareness. Beyond words is the anchor everyone is looking for, > > but first all anchors have to be thrown overboard. > > > > An anchorless vessel is still a vessel. > > toombaru > > Fucking bastard!!! I knew it. Laughing your bottom off , right? > I dont mind...it is a nice game...beautifull joke. > The next time I will prove to you that YOU are god indeed.. > =geo-- a vesseless anchor is useless. (o_0) ..b b.b. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 26, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > There is within consciousness-awareness a predisposition the create a creator. > > > > Your concept of an all encompassing-pre-existing Awareness is merely and extension of that primal religiosity. > > " your concept of " ...? > > > Conceptual mind imagines that since it exists that it must have a source. > > conceptual mind imagines..? > > there is no conceptual mind that imagines, outside of the imagining that a construct has an existence > > the concept of a conceptual mind that imagines is merely an extension of primal religiosity, which is a concept that is an extension of " my ability to label something and dismiss it " ... > > > > It can enter a phase where its primary identification shifts to this imaginary source and instead of the i am it becomes the I am. > > It can enter a phase? > > There is no " it " that enters phases. > > The concept of an it that is capable of entering and leaving phases, is merely an extension of a primal religious investment in duality. > > > All of this occurs within the arena of the mnemonic-self. > > > > For it......beyond that arena.........nothing is. > > Conceptuality has no place to anchor anything. > > > -- Dan WHAT???? give me a fucking break einstein. conceptuality IS the anchor. what a twit! ..b b.b. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 26, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > If you identify with everything.....there is still and > > > > entity.....identifying. > > > > > > > > But now it is a really really big entity....... > > > > > > > > Even if its center is everywhere....you still have an entity on > > > > your really really big hands. > > > > > > You seek the mental concept of " nothingness " . > > > > > > You believe that if you can just get this understanding, you'll get your concept of enlightenment. > > > > > > Here's a clue: You already have it. Every time you think about it. > > > > > > Mental nothingness is yours for the thinking. > > > > > > Reality is always behind and supporting your over-active imagination. > > > > > > > > > Reality supports unreality. > > > > > > > > > > Nice.....comforting......... > > > > > > > > > > Meaningless. > > Yes... reality is meaningless to unreality. Meaningless to Toomie. meaningless to the meaningless? white on white kiddo. ..b b.b. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 26, 2009 Nisargadatta , souldreamone wrote: > > > > > In a message dated 5/25/2009 11:56:44 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, > lastrain writes: > > Phil......It's time to give up all that crap about little self-Big Self. > > That old idea that we aren't really a bunch of little selves but our > ultimate reality is actually one great Big Self......is just an infantile > elaboration of the same old religiosity that has surfaced since the mind of man > first imagined that it was separated from its source. > > Everything they told you is wrong. > > You have to start thinking through this stuff without referring to those > old maps. > > > > toombaru > > > > ***You don't even know what I mean by Self. You heard it once, forgot the > rest of the sentence and started salivating like Pavlov's doggie. Now > you've written a story around what you think I mean and how i became so > seriously deluded, and have concluded that everything I was told about it is wrong. > Can you also go back to some past lives and tell me what I did wrong that > led to such a predicament? > > > That's because you don't know what you mean by Self. And that's because there is no such thing. Perhaps you could take through the step by step process that led you to believe such a story. Bring out a Big Self so we can take a good look at it. If you can't do that......then stop blathering on about it. toombaru Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 26, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hey......that sounds like a good movie. > > > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why can't you just be happy with what you already have? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > We don't know, Toomie. Why cantcha? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Because.......I came to capture your immortal soul. > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > One learns that one is alone. > > Totally alone. > > Tim's soul is Toomie's soul. the timtoombaration of the bells. ..b b.b. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 26, 2009 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > toombaru2006 > > Nisargadatta > > Monday, May 25, 2009 4:41 PM > > Re: no pattern P.S. P.S2 > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > - > > > toombaru2006 > > > Nisargadatta > > > Monday, May 25, 2009 4:11 PM > > > Re: no pattern P.S. P.S2 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Is there not such qualitiless IT that exists without a brain? > > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > > Dear forum members...you may write...but not loudly please..our friend > > > > > toomba needs some sleep. ...ssssssssshhh. > > > > > Just because you dont know what you where before being born means > > > > > nothing > > > > > as > > > > > a ground was? > > > > > Is that which you where before being born gone now?? > > > > > ssssssshhh... > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > > > > > > Where did you get the idea that you were something before you were born? > > > > > > > > Do you imagine that it came from the same place that the idea that you > > > > will > > > > live after you die? > > > > > > > > I have some news: > > > > > > > > The you that you think you are......never was born.......but it will > > > > die. > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > Not ME. Not YOU. IT. The unamed, qualitiless, existence-per-se....there > > > > is > > > > no name for it. > > > > Look toomba. > > > > > > > > The centered entity is gone, right? Its just conditioning... > > > > Now what is there? There is this organism which is no more then its > > > > senses. > > > > The only way i can talk of an organism is because of the senses. I am > > > > looking at the senses. All movements receive by the senses is also the > > > > organism. They are not separte. The dances of colors in the retina IS > > > > the > > > > organism. So I can say that all perceivable world IS what i am. All > > > > manifestation is what i am. Now i ask again: what am I? Here is the > > > > quantum > > > > leap: a voice in the shadow is saying...any voice...is saying: > > > > investigate > > > > further, you are not this world you perceive...you are beyond. That > > > > beyond > > > > hs no name no quality no nothing..nonetheless is real. It is the > > > > foundation > > > > of existence per se. > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > > > If you identify with everything.....there is still and > > > entity.....identifying. > > > > > > But now it is a really really big entity....... > > > > > > Even if its center is everywhere....you still have an entity on your > > > really > > > really big hands. > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > Yes, yes, yes!! Once you are looking hermeticaly to the senses ONLY, you > > > are > > > aware of only ONE thing which is the totality of the sense inputs. Stay > > > there for a while. Investigate it. Stabilize in it. There is this huge ME > > > that is the totality of the human world. Now a voice says what you said > > > above: If you identify with everything.....there is still and > > > entity.....identifying.But now it is a really really big entity.......Even > > > if its center is everywhere....you still have an entity on your really > > > really big hands. > > > > > > Yes true! But the voice goes further.It is aking tou to consider the > > > possibility, no.....hte absolute nescessity...of.... > > > You are not that huge world. You are beyond. It is always receeding....but > > > is real. > > > -geo- > > > > > > > Hey......that sounds like a good movie. > > > > :-) > > > > Why can't you just be happy with what you already have? > > > > toombaru > > > > Because in these few days I am in this cool list I learned to admire you. I > > consider you as a friend. Besides I am very selfish, egoist..I mean it!!! I > > alway want more and more...I am not satisfied untill I get thyyyy most!!! > > And I want you to get this thing. > > - :>)) - > > > > > It's a thing now is it? > > > > :-) > > > > toombaru it never was anything else. ..b b.b. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 26, 2009 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When will I learn to let go? > > > > > > > > > > > > > When you realize that you are using your own dream boot straps in > > > your struggle to lift your self out of its own dream. > > > > When will I stop struggling? > > > > Stop fighting? > > > > When will I stop pushing myself away? > > > > > > > When you see what you are doing. > > > > > toombaru maybe when what's doing is seen.. but he isn't doing anything. ..b b.b. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 26, 2009 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > It anchors its imaginary anchors in its imaginary dream. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > Not now. > > > > I need to stop rejecting myself and remain in the Now. > > > > I keep projecting everything onto " you " . > > > > Why do I keep doing that? > > > > Am I seeking to get rid of myself? > > > > But, that's as bad as clinging. Worse, even, because I lose touch with any subjectivity I may have remaining. > > > > I need to accept myself and then let go of it. > > > > I, the reader of this message. > > > > > > > There occurs.....or not....a breakdown. > > The ground has been planted.......the seed are alive....... > > ...the farmer waits for rain........ > > > > > toombaru the farmer who waits is a fool. the harvest is already here. ..b b.b. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 26, 2009 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > There occurs.....or not....a breakdown. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The ground has been planted.......the seed are alive....... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ...the farmer waits for rain........ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > > > > don't attach to a dream, and it is of no concern. > > > > > > > > > > > > the only breakdown is of the attaching attempt. > > > > > > > > > > > > don't attach and you don't need to wait. > > > > > > > > > > > > now. > > > > > > > > > > > > is. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ahhhh......if were only that simple. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > You are not telling the truth. > > > > > > > > You *want* it all to be complicated. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dan offers the bromide: " Do not attach " . > > > > > > Do you think that the self can extricate itself from its conundrum so easily? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > So, now you're concerned about extricating a self that doesn't exist? > > > > And you think bromides are being offered to it? > > > > Sheesh, and double sheesh. > > > > Nyah, nyah, nyah, ad infinitum. > > > > > > -- D. > > > > > And yet you advise not to attach? > > > > > toombaru " I advise .. " ??? Are you for real? -- Dan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 26, 2009 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There occurs.....or not....a breakdown. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The ground has been planted.......the seed are alive....... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ...the farmer waits for rain........ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > don't attach to a dream, and it is of no concern. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the only breakdown is of the attaching attempt. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > don't attach and you don't need to wait. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > now. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ahhhh......if were only that simple. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > > > > You are not telling the truth. > > > > > > > > > > > > You *want* it all to be complicated. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dan offers the bromide: " Do not attach " . > > > > > > > > > > Do you think that the self can extricate itself from its conundrum so easily? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > So, now you're concerned about extricating a self that doesn't exist? > > > > > > > > And you think bromides are being offered to it? > > > > > > > > Sheesh, and double sheesh. > > > > > > > > Nyah, nyah, nyah, ad infinitum. > > > > > > > > > > > > -- D. > > > > > > > > > > > > > And yet you advise not to attach? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > Attachment does not require a self to attach. Attachment *is* the self. > > > So he's advising attachment not to attach? > > > > > toombaru You're a cover-up. What are you covering up? See this, and you'll stop fretting about imaginary " advice. " LOL, -- Dan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 26, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > So he's advising attachment not to attach? > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > Heheh... I dunno... don't remember what he said. Did it appear to you to be advice? Exactly. Consider noticing the reactions that occurred ... nah, that would be too simple. ;-) -- Dan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 26, 2009 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > So he's advising attachment not to attach? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > Heheh... I dunno... don't remember what he said. Did it appear to you to be advice? > > > > > Dan: > > > " don't attach to a dream, and it is of no concern. > > the only breakdown is of the attaching attempt. > > don't attach and you don't need to wait. > > now. " > > > > > toombaru You missed the key word in this statement you're citing, Toom. Now. If you understood that as you read it, you wouldn't be going back to retrieve words to try to prove a point. Sheesh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 26, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Phil " <souldreamone wrote: > > ****Hard to know who/what Dan thought he was talking to but what's important is what is hearing. Is an imaginary self or attachment hearing anything? Seems purdy durn unlikely that thoughts can hear stuff, so what's listening; what's aware off those thoughts? > > > Just to be clear, imaginary people don't think, don't type, don't do anything. Ego's also don't do anything like get all egoic. People, ego, self are no more than thoughts. The question is, who's thoughts? > > Once that's seriously overconceptualized too, you might settle on something like Awareness or Consciousness or Self or some such, but whatever it is seems to be intelligent enough to respond, like what's happening here on the forum. > > Something is experiencing and responding, and as such, offering advice to the thing experiencing and responding doesn't seem to me to be a totally insane thing to do. Phil -- Your comment is on-target to the statement offered. " If one has ears to hear, " etc., and so on, and so forth ... -- Dan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted May 26, 2009 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >D: Here is where it gets interesting. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > One looks into this 'me' and understands it for what it is, an > > > > > > > activity, > > > > > > > an attempt to hold on, and therefore understands what it is not. It > > > > > > > is not > > > > > > > an actually existing thing, being, or center. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Through this very clarity, the 'me' no longer is able to function > > > > > > > here as > > > > > > > a center. This has nothing to do with proving anything to anyone > > > > > > > " else. " > > > > > > > It has nothing to do with proving I'm unselfish, not greedy, will > > > > > > > give > > > > > > > away all my possessions, etc. There is nothing to prove. It is not > > > > > > > about > > > > > > > how the world (other people) judge whether or not there is a self to > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > person. It is a matter of vision, of awareness. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And there is no 'me' anywhere in the universe. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Not here, now, so not there, then. Now/then is undivided, in > > > > > > > here/out > > > > > > > there undivided. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Although one notices activities happening, as if there were an > > > > > > > attempt to > > > > > > > hold, as if there could be a 'me' somewhere. These activities are > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > unfolding of the human being as the human being manifests as lives > > > > > > > through > > > > > > > time. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > One understands that all activities of holding unwind, it's just a > > > > > > > matter > > > > > > > of time. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And one's time is timeless, one's life is being lived through and > > > > > > > there is > > > > > > > no 'me' center found anywhere. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Not inside or outside. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And therefore, the awareness inside and the awareness outside has no > > > > > > > division. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- Dan > > > > > > > > > > > > P: That is very good, Dan! I would only change > > > > > > the last sentence to read: And therefore, awareness > > > > > > is the same in all brains. Your sentence could be > > > > > > understood as if asserting a universal awareness. > > > > > > > > > > > > geo>P, waht do you mean by universal awareness? > > > > > > > > > > P: That awareness could exist without brains. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > neither no nor not no, no? > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > Is there not such qualitiless IT that exists without a brain? > > > -geo- > > > > > > brains are not required. > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > Is that what you brain tells you? > > > > > toombsru well toombsru.. i think you just proved my point. LOL! ..b b.b. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
