Guest guest Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 - roberibus111 Nisargadatta Sunday, June 21, 2009 9:23 PM Re: it's not there or over there either. Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Aren't 'you' the issue that must unravel? > > > > > > > -tim- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why dont you ask dan the same question? He thinks there is > > > > > > > some > > > > > > > universal > > > > > > > mind outside of here/there. > > > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > > > > > Dan doesn't think there's anything inside or outside anything > > > > > > else, and he's made this abundantly clear. > > > > > > > > > > yes > > > > > > > > > > but nothing i say will help > > > > > > > > > > it just becomes fodder for meaningless repartee, back and forth > > > > > > > > > > and that which is > > > > > > > > > > has no involvement in back and forth > > > > > > > > > > one who knows without knowing, simply is > > > > > > > > > > doesn't require anything from words > > > > > > > > > > one who is moving toward knowing, and engaged in experiences > > > > > > > > > > can also engage in endless repartee > > > > > > > > > > believing that there is meaningful contact being made > > > > > > > > > > or imagining there is entertainment through the contact > > > > > > > > > > - d - > > > > > > > > > > > > " it just becomes fodder for meaningless repartee, back and forth " .. > > > > > > > > daaaaaaaaaaany! > > > > > > > > you're looking for " meaning " ? > > > > > > > > " meaning for what and for whom. > > > > > > > > " contact " ??? > > > > > > > > with whom by what? > > > > > > > > all is one for true and for fun. > > > > > > > > silly guy! > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > yes. > > > > > > the moon is round. > > > > > > - d. - > > > > > > ten lashes of the whip! > > > > wake up! > > > > .b b.b. > > first put on your captain marvel boots. > > - d - help can only come from within. though you marvel at my boots.. they're not miraculous.. they are merely Gucci. ..b b.b. That IS a miracle in these times of crisis!! -geo- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > The fact is that there is only one fact and it is being.... a seen-fact. > > -geo- > > What??? > > Being is being. One cannot 'see' oneself being. That's the illusion! the illusion is believing there exits illusion's opposite. the error is to mistake being for truth or vice versa. the true is not the opposite nor the other side of the false. these pertain to divisions and segments in relation. no relational truism pertains to the Undivided. the Mystery is why it's a mystery. it's the most obvious of obvious. ..b.b b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Exactly. And in my case, it was a case of 'crisis', just as you've talked > > > > about before. Right in the midst of 'suicidal' substance use. Acknowledging, > > > > of course, that this is a story, and 'now never happened'. > > > > > > > > geo> I like to hear stories. Mind telling it? Not important though... > > > > > > Yes, I don't want to tell it on a public mailing list. If you like, you can Email me. > > > > > > in public???? > > > > LOL! > > > > .b b.b. > > OK, then, " in pubic " . I don't want pee-pull to see it ;-). it's not likely anyone would see " it " even if you did Tim. ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > The fact is that there is only one fact and it is being.... a seen-fact. > > > -geo- > > > > What??? > > > > Being is being. One cannot 'see' oneself being. That's the illusion! > > > > > > the illusion is believing there exits illusion's opposite. > > the error is to mistake being for truth or vice versa. > > the true is not the opposite nor the other side of the false. Then kindly stop talking about 'illusion' and 'error', which cannot be if the true is not the opposite of the false. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > roberibus111 > Nisargadatta > Sunday, June 21, 2009 9:20 PM > Re: it's not there or over there either. > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Exactly. And in my case, it was a case of 'crisis', just as you've > > > talked > > > about before. Right in the midst of 'suicidal' substance use. > > > Acknowledging, > > > of course, that this is a story, and 'now never happened'. > > > > > > geo> I like to hear stories. Mind telling it? Not important though... > > > > Yes, I don't want to tell it on a public mailing list. If you like, you > > can Email me. > > in public???? > > LOL! > > .b b.b. > > Well...in fact there might be members that know tim in person. Why not. So > it is his right... > -geo- i think we are talking about two different things. that's as dual as it gets. i'm not good at duality. i'm hardly ever there. ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > roberibus111 > Nisargadatta > Sunday, June 21, 2009 9:23 PM > Re: it's not there or over there either. > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Aren't 'you' the issue that must unravel? > > > > > > > > -tim- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why dont you ask dan the same question? He thinks there is > > > > > > > > some > > > > > > > > universal > > > > > > > > mind outside of here/there. > > > > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dan doesn't think there's anything inside or outside anything > > > > > > > else, and he's made this abundantly clear. > > > > > > > > > > > > yes > > > > > > > > > > > > but nothing i say will help > > > > > > > > > > > > it just becomes fodder for meaningless repartee, back and forth > > > > > > > > > > > > and that which is > > > > > > > > > > > > has no involvement in back and forth > > > > > > > > > > > > one who knows without knowing, simply is > > > > > > > > > > > > doesn't require anything from words > > > > > > > > > > > > one who is moving toward knowing, and engaged in experiences > > > > > > > > > > > > can also engage in endless repartee > > > > > > > > > > > > believing that there is meaningful contact being made > > > > > > > > > > > > or imagining there is entertainment through the contact > > > > > > > > > > > > - d - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " it just becomes fodder for meaningless repartee, back and forth " .. > > > > > > > > > > daaaaaaaaaaany! > > > > > > > > > > you're looking for " meaning " ? > > > > > > > > > > " meaning for what and for whom. > > > > > > > > > > " contact " ??? > > > > > > > > > > with whom by what? > > > > > > > > > > all is one for true and for fun. > > > > > > > > > > silly guy! > > > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > yes. > > > > > > > > the moon is round. > > > > > > > > - d. - > > > > > > > > > ten lashes of the whip! > > > > > > wake up! > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > first put on your captain marvel boots. > > > > - d - > > help can only come from within. > > though you marvel at my boots.. > > they're not miraculous.. > > they are merely Gucci. > > .b b.b. > > That IS a miracle in these times of crisis!! > -geo- that's the how and why of the Gucci boots. Palm Beach pawn shop.. shortly after Bernie Madoff was tagged... deals by the dozen! got a beautiful satin cape for flying at a steal! ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > The fact is that there is only one fact and it is being.... a seen-fact. > > > > -geo- > > > > > > What??? > > > > > > Being is being. One cannot 'see' oneself being. That's the illusion! > > > > > > > > > > > > the illusion is believing there exits illusion's opposite. > > > > the error is to mistake being for truth or vice versa. > > > > the true is not the opposite nor the other side of the false. > > Then kindly stop talking about 'illusion' and 'error', which cannot be if the true is not the opposite of the false. nothing is true. what is truth? what is false? this will be fun! ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > dan330033 > Nisargadatta > Sunday, June 21, 2009 8:39 PM > Re: it's not there or over there either. > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > One understands the instant there is no other. > > > > > > But who wants to give up the self that seemingly exists in relation > > > to an other, and by losing this self gain nothing? > > > > Nobody. That's probably why nobody ever does ;-). > > > > > All the alternatives have choicelessly dried up. > > > > Exactly. And in my case, it was a case of 'crisis', just as you've talked > > about before. Right in the midst of 'suicidal' substance use. > > Acknowledging, of course, that this is a story, and 'now never happened'. > > Yes. > > I constructed the basis for crisis when I decided I had encountered an > other, who decided I had been encountered. > > The crisis can be avoided only imaginarily, and so keeps reappearing in > various ways. Look around. It is not " my " crisis, it is the world, I am the > world, and it is always only " my " crisis. > > Finally, one acknowledges that it can't be avoided, and the entire reality > constructed that way inevitably collapses (now). > > - D - > > Sense of self is the avoidance ot the ongoing crisis. > -geo- Yes, a self going through time and maintaining its selfhood, is the crisis that projects the world, and that is projected from the world. - D - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > dan330033 > Nisargadatta > Sunday, June 21, 2009 8:44 PM > Re: it's not there or over there either. > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > dan330033 > > Nisargadatta > > Sunday, June 21, 2009 8:23 PM > > Re: it's not there or over there either. > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > - > > > dan330033 > > > Nisargadatta > > > Sunday, June 21, 2009 7:34 PM > > > Re: it's not there or over there either. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You don't have any substantiality, nor do I, to try to grasp some > > > > > > " universal mind " or any other b.s. > > > > > > -d- > > > > > > > > > > > > You are being ridiculous dan. > > > > > > Do you really think that by behaving like an angry virgin > > > > > > authoritative > > > > > > nun you will convince yourself or me about the nature of some > > > > > > truth? > > > > > > I dont like quoting. Nis was asked wether he could tell the > > > > > > climate > > > > > > in > > > > > > NY - if he was indeed above god. He said he did not, because he > > > > > > was > > > > > > not > > > > > > trained to do so. " You can do anything if are properly trained " . > > > > > > It > > > > > > is > > > > > > just a matter of interest. You can unravel any issue -> if you > > > > > > really > > > > > > want > > > > > > to. > > > > > > > > > > Aren't 'you' the issue that must unravel? > > > > > -tim- > > > > > > > > > > Why dont you ask dan the same question? He thinks there is some > > > > > universal > > > > > mind outside of here/there. > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > yeah, right > > > > -d- > > > > > > > > Yeah right, ok I will say what is in my mind... > > > > > > > > Nis, in his later talks would not let 3 ~4 days pass without talking > > > > about > > > > the five gunas, the five " forces " of consciousness. At that particular > > > > time > > > > in his life he found it important to look at the play of the gunas so > > > > he > > > > asked for those around him to look at them. Someone might have never > > > > given > > > > too much importance to it, nonetheless it would be incorrect to say > > > > that > > > > the > > > > gunas where only in Nis mind. K though it was important to consider > > > > the > > > > psichological self. Marc did not gave too much thought to it, but that > > > > is > > > > no > > > > reason to say that it was just something K invented in his mind. We > > > > tend > > > > to > > > > think we are totaly unfocused absolutes, but in fact we all have > > > > agendas > > > > and > > > > are focused in one thing or another at different times. > > > > Sometimes I feel it is relevant to consider Univesral MInd, there is > > > > the > > > > seeing of it, so I ask to look at it. You cant see it, not interested, > > > > but > > > > that doesnt mean you can conclude it is just geos invention in his > > > > mind. > > > > It > > > > is ignorance to do that. Such atitude is an " easy " way to call > > > > " another " > > > > stupid contrasting with " my " enormous unquestionable wisdom. > > > > > > > > The world has waves that have their source in different " places " like > > > > the > > > > ocean with its waves originated by the winds and temperature changes, > > > > and > > > > the tides realated to the moon and the sun. No self, no inner entity, > > > > and > > > > the ocean/world is a flat mirror...but.... there are still the the > > > > tides...that have nothing to do with that self... > > > > I had to use lots of words, but the fact is being seen. Anyway...who > > > > cares? > > > > -geo- > > > > > > Who cares? > > > > > > Of what importance is a description? > > > > > > Is there any actual distance between what is described, the description > > > of > > > it, the describer, and someone else to whom the description is > > > communicated? > > > > > > - Dan > > > > > > A fact is confused with its description while the fact is not yet seen. > > > -geo- > > > > you'll never see this. > > > > honest. > > > > - d - > > > > This what? > > -geo- > > this fact, as you put it. > > - d - > > The fact is that there is only one fact and it is being.... a seen-fact. > -geo- The seen-fact isn't seeing itself as a fact. In fact. - D - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Aren't 'you' the issue that must unravel? > > > > > > > > -tim- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why dont you ask dan the same question? He thinks there is some > > > > > > > > universal > > > > > > > > mind outside of here/there. > > > > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dan doesn't think there's anything inside or outside anything else, and he's made this abundantly clear. > > > > > > > > > > > > yes > > > > > > > > > > > > but nothing i say will help > > > > > > > > > > > > it just becomes fodder for meaningless repartee, back and forth > > > > > > > > > > > > and that which is > > > > > > > > > > > > has no involvement in back and forth > > > > > > > > > > > > one who knows without knowing, simply is > > > > > > > > > > > > doesn't require anything from words > > > > > > > > > > > > one who is moving toward knowing, and engaged in experiences > > > > > > > > > > > > can also engage in endless repartee > > > > > > > > > > > > believing that there is meaningful contact being made > > > > > > > > > > > > or imagining there is entertainment through the contact > > > > > > > > > > > > - d - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " it just becomes fodder for meaningless repartee, back and forth " .. > > > > > > > > > > daaaaaaaaaaany! > > > > > > > > > > you're looking for " meaning " ? > > > > > > > > > > " meaning for what and for whom. > > > > > > > > > > " contact " ??? > > > > > > > > > > with whom by what? > > > > > > > > > > all is one for true and for fun. > > > > > > > > > > silly guy! > > > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > yes. > > > > > > > > the moon is round. > > > > > > > > - d. - > > > > > > > > > ten lashes of the whip! > > > > > > wake up! > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > first put on your captain marvel boots. > > > > - d - > > > > > help can only come from within. > > though you marvel at my boots.. > > they're not miraculous.. > > they are merely Gucci. > > .b b.b. within what? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > > > > You don't have any substantiality, nor do I, to try to grasp some > > > > " universal mind " or any other b.s. > > > > -d- > > > > > > > > You are being ridiculous dan. > > > > Do you really think that by behaving like an angry virgin > > > > authoritative > > > > nun you will convince yourself or me about the nature of some truth? > > > > I dont like quoting. Nis was asked wether he could tell the climate in > > > > NY - if he was indeed above god. He said he did not, because he was > > > > not > > > > trained to do so. " You can do anything if are properly trained " . It is > > > > just a matter of interest. You can unravel any issue -> if you really > > > > want > > > > to. > > > > > > Aren't 'you' the issue that must unravel? > > > -tim- > > > > > > Why dont you ask dan the same question? He thinks there is some > > > universal > > > mind outside of here/there. > > > -geo- > > > > yeah, right > > -d- > > > > Yeah right, ok I will say what is in my mind... > > > > Nis, in his later talks would not let 3 ~4 days pass without talking about > > the five gunas, the five " forces " of consciousness. At that particular > > time > > in his life he found it important to look at the play of the gunas so he > > asked for those around him to look at them. Someone might have never given > > too much importance to it, nonetheless it would be incorrect to say that > > the > > gunas where only in Nis mind. K though it was important to consider the > > psichological self. Marc did not gave too much thought to it, but that is > > no > > reason to say that it was just something K invented in his mind. We tend > > to > > think we are totaly unfocused absolutes, but in fact we all have agendas > > and > > are focused in one thing or another at different times. > > Sometimes I feel it is relevant to consider Univesral MInd, there is the > > seeing of it, so I ask to look at it. You cant see it, not interested, but > > that doesnt mean you can conclude it is just geos invention in his mind. > > It > > is ignorance to do that. Such atitude is an " easy " way to call " another " > > stupid contrasting with " my " enormous unquestionable wisdom. > > > > The world has waves that have their source in different " places " like the > > ocean with its waves originated by the winds and temperature changes, and > > the tides realated to the moon and the sun. No self, no inner entity, and > > the ocean/world is a flat mirror...but.... there are still the the > > tides...that have nothing to do with that self... > > I had to use lots of words, but the fact is being seen. Anyway...who > > cares? > > -geo- > > Who cares? > > Of what importance is a description? > > Is there any actual distance between what is described, the description of > it, the describer, and someone else to whom the description is communicated? > > - Dan > > Just occoured to me that there is another more common way of referring to > " universal mind " : emptiness. > Emptiness is not the ground, it is not the ultimate, it is not the being. > Emptiness is the non-dimensional " space " that grounds manifestation, the > primal field of all and any " thing " , including consciousness. Call it a > concept in the same measure you call emptiness as conceptual. > -geo- all the questions, answers all the words all the who am I's, who I am, and what this is ... come back to this: to which no one can refer or has ever referred Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > all the questions, answers > > all the words > > all the who am I's, who I am, and what this is ... > > come back to this: > > to which no one can refer > > or has ever referred Every word ever spoken, evaporates, Never having been, never having meant anything, Never having referred to or caused or indicated anything. Words word-ing, in tongues speaking; Two I's seeing themselves, no's smelling itself, Eee-ers to " here " with... No going or coming back. Back where? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > > Two I's seeing themselves, no's smelling itself, > > Eee-ers to " here " with... > > No going or coming back. > > Back where? Enjoy the bacteria... Before, after, they rule all ;-). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Aren't 'you' the issue that must unravel? > > > > > > > > > -tim- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why dont you ask dan the same question? He thinks there is some > > > > > > > > > universal > > > > > > > > > mind outside of here/there. > > > > > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dan doesn't think there's anything inside or outside anything else, and he's made this abundantly clear. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > yes > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but nothing i say will help > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it just becomes fodder for meaningless repartee, back and forth > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and that which is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > has no involvement in back and forth > > > > > > > > > > > > > > one who knows without knowing, simply is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > doesn't require anything from words > > > > > > > > > > > > > > one who is moving toward knowing, and engaged in experiences > > > > > > > > > > > > > > can also engage in endless repartee > > > > > > > > > > > > > > believing that there is meaningful contact being made > > > > > > > > > > > > > > or imagining there is entertainment through the contact > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - d - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " it just becomes fodder for meaningless repartee, back and forth " .. > > > > > > > > > > > > daaaaaaaaaaany! > > > > > > > > > > > > you're looking for " meaning " ? > > > > > > > > > > > > " meaning for what and for whom. > > > > > > > > > > > > " contact " ??? > > > > > > > > > > > > with whom by what? > > > > > > > > > > > > all is one for true and for fun. > > > > > > > > > > > > silly guy! > > > > > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > > > yes. > > > > > > > > > > the moon is round. > > > > > > > > > > - d. - > > > > > > > > > > > > ten lashes of the whip! > > > > > > > > wake up! > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > first put on your captain marvel boots. > > > > > > - d - > > > > > > > > > > help can only come from within. > > > > though you marvel at my boots.. > > > > they're not miraculous.. > > > > they are merely Gucci. > > > > .b b.b. > > within what? it's not a within a what wuss. ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 - dan330033 Nisargadatta Monday, June 22, 2009 12:30 AM Re: it's not there or over there either. Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > > > > You don't have any substantiality, nor do I, to try to grasp some > > > > " universal mind " or any other b.s. > > > > -d- > > > > > > > > You are being ridiculous dan. > > > > Do you really think that by behaving like an angry virgin > > > > authoritative > > > > nun you will convince yourself or me about the nature of some truth? > > > > I dont like quoting. Nis was asked wether he could tell the climate > > > > in > > > > NY - if he was indeed above god. He said he did not, because he was > > > > not > > > > trained to do so. " You can do anything if are properly trained " . It > > > > is > > > > just a matter of interest. You can unravel any issue -> if you > > > > really > > > > want > > > > to. > > > > > > Aren't 'you' the issue that must unravel? > > > -tim- > > > > > > Why dont you ask dan the same question? He thinks there is some > > > universal > > > mind outside of here/there. > > > -geo- > > > > yeah, right > > -d- > > > > Yeah right, ok I will say what is in my mind... > > > > Nis, in his later talks would not let 3 ~4 days pass without talking > > about > > the five gunas, the five " forces " of consciousness. At that particular > > time > > in his life he found it important to look at the play of the gunas so he > > asked for those around him to look at them. Someone might have never > > given > > too much importance to it, nonetheless it would be incorrect to say that > > the > > gunas where only in Nis mind. K though it was important to consider the > > psichological self. Marc did not gave too much thought to it, but that > > is > > no > > reason to say that it was just something K invented in his mind. We tend > > to > > think we are totaly unfocused absolutes, but in fact we all have agendas > > and > > are focused in one thing or another at different times. > > Sometimes I feel it is relevant to consider Univesral MInd, there is the > > seeing of it, so I ask to look at it. You cant see it, not interested, > > but > > that doesnt mean you can conclude it is just geos invention in his mind. > > It > > is ignorance to do that. Such atitude is an " easy " way to call " another " > > stupid contrasting with " my " enormous unquestionable wisdom. > > > > The world has waves that have their source in different " places " like > > the > > ocean with its waves originated by the winds and temperature changes, > > and > > the tides realated to the moon and the sun. No self, no inner entity, > > and > > the ocean/world is a flat mirror...but.... there are still the the > > tides...that have nothing to do with that self... > > I had to use lots of words, but the fact is being seen. Anyway...who > > cares? > > -geo- > > Who cares? > > Of what importance is a description? > > Is there any actual distance between what is described, the description of > it, the describer, and someone else to whom the description is > communicated? > > - Dan > > Just occoured to me that there is another more common way of referring to > " universal mind " : emptiness. > Emptiness is not the ground, it is not the ultimate, it is not the being. > Emptiness is the non-dimensional " space " that grounds manifestation, the > primal field of all and any " thing " , including consciousness. Call it a > concept in the same measure you call emptiness as conceptual. > -geo- all the questions, answers all the words all the who am I's, who I am, and what this is ... come back to this: to which no one can refer or has ever referred Ultimately.... yes. -ego- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 - dan330033 Nisargadatta Monday, June 22, 2009 12:22 AM Re: it's not there or over there either. Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > dan330033 > Nisargadatta > Sunday, June 21, 2009 8:44 PM > Re: it's not there or over there either. > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > dan330033 > > Nisargadatta > > Sunday, June 21, 2009 8:23 PM > > Re: it's not there or over there either. > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > - > > > dan330033 > > > Nisargadatta > > > Sunday, June 21, 2009 7:34 PM > > > Re: it's not there or over there either. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You don't have any substantiality, nor do I, to try to grasp > > > > > > some > > > > > > " universal mind " or any other b.s. > > > > > > -d- > > > > > > > > > > > > You are being ridiculous dan. > > > > > > Do you really think that by behaving like an angry virgin > > > > > > authoritative > > > > > > nun you will convince yourself or me about the nature of some > > > > > > truth? > > > > > > I dont like quoting. Nis was asked wether he could tell the > > > > > > climate > > > > > > in > > > > > > NY - if he was indeed above god. He said he did not, because he > > > > > > was > > > > > > not > > > > > > trained to do so. " You can do anything if are properly trained " . > > > > > > It > > > > > > is > > > > > > just a matter of interest. You can unravel any issue -> if you > > > > > > really > > > > > > want > > > > > > to. > > > > > > > > > > Aren't 'you' the issue that must unravel? > > > > > -tim- > > > > > > > > > > Why dont you ask dan the same question? He thinks there is some > > > > > universal > > > > > mind outside of here/there. > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > yeah, right > > > > -d- > > > > > > > > Yeah right, ok I will say what is in my mind... > > > > > > > > Nis, in his later talks would not let 3 ~4 days pass without talking > > > > about > > > > the five gunas, the five " forces " of consciousness. At that > > > > particular > > > > time > > > > in his life he found it important to look at the play of the gunas > > > > so > > > > he > > > > asked for those around him to look at them. Someone might have never > > > > given > > > > too much importance to it, nonetheless it would be incorrect to say > > > > that > > > > the > > > > gunas where only in Nis mind. K though it was important to consider > > > > the > > > > psichological self. Marc did not gave too much thought to it, but > > > > that > > > > is > > > > no > > > > reason to say that it was just something K invented in his mind. We > > > > tend > > > > to > > > > think we are totaly unfocused absolutes, but in fact we all have > > > > agendas > > > > and > > > > are focused in one thing or another at different times. > > > > Sometimes I feel it is relevant to consider Univesral MInd, there is > > > > the > > > > seeing of it, so I ask to look at it. You cant see it, not > > > > interested, > > > > but > > > > that doesnt mean you can conclude it is just geos invention in his > > > > mind. > > > > It > > > > is ignorance to do that. Such atitude is an " easy " way to call > > > > " another " > > > > stupid contrasting with " my " enormous unquestionable wisdom. > > > > > > > > The world has waves that have their source in different " places " > > > > like > > > > the > > > > ocean with its waves originated by the winds and temperature > > > > changes, > > > > and > > > > the tides realated to the moon and the sun. No self, no inner > > > > entity, > > > > and > > > > the ocean/world is a flat mirror...but.... there are still the the > > > > tides...that have nothing to do with that self... > > > > I had to use lots of words, but the fact is being seen. Anyway...who > > > > cares? > > > > -geo- > > > > > > Who cares? > > > > > > Of what importance is a description? > > > > > > Is there any actual distance between what is described, the > > > description > > > of > > > it, the describer, and someone else to whom the description is > > > communicated? > > > > > > - Dan > > > > > > A fact is confused with its description while the fact is not yet > > > seen. > > > -geo- > > > > you'll never see this. > > > > honest. > > > > - d - > > > > This what? > > -geo- > > this fact, as you put it. > > - d - > > The fact is that there is only one fact and it is being.... a seen-fact. > -geo- The seen-fact isn't seeing itself as a fact. In fact. - D - The seen-fact seeing itself as a fact would imply in a seer looking. -ego- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 > > > > > > geo> " Now " is just a concept of the timebound mind. Chasing the now is > > > more > > > like a joke. > > > > This applies equally to all concepts, not only 'now'. If it seems to > > apply > > especially to 'now', then something is being avoided. > > > > All involuntary concepts, yes. The conception of a new mechanism may not > > be > > avoidance. > > -geo- > > I dunno what you're talking about, and doubt you do either. > > But, enjoy ;-). LOL To imagine the way to the super-market, to design a new car, does not imply in a separate entity. -ego- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 - dan330033 Nisargadatta Monday, June 22, 2009 12:21 AM Re: it's not there or over there either. Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > dan330033 > Nisargadatta > Sunday, June 21, 2009 8:39 PM > Re: it's not there or over there either. > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > One understands the instant there is no other. > > > > > > But who wants to give up the self that seemingly exists in relation > > > to an other, and by losing this self gain nothing? > > > > Nobody. That's probably why nobody ever does ;-). > > > > > All the alternatives have choicelessly dried up. > > > > Exactly. And in my case, it was a case of 'crisis', just as you've > > talked > > about before. Right in the midst of 'suicidal' substance use. > > Acknowledging, of course, that this is a story, and 'now never > > happened'. > > Yes. > > I constructed the basis for crisis when I decided I had encountered an > other, who decided I had been encountered. > > The crisis can be avoided only imaginarily, and so keeps reappearing in > various ways. Look around. It is not " my " crisis, it is the world, I am > the > world, and it is always only " my " crisis. > > Finally, one acknowledges that it can't be avoided, and the entire reality > constructed that way inevitably collapses (now). > > - D - > > Sense of self is the avoidance ot the ongoing crisis. > -geo- Yes, a self going through time and maintaining its selfhood, is the crisis that projects the world, and that is projected from the world. - D - To get rid of the desiese is to know that you are sick. The trouble is that as soon as you get well you are dead. -ego- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 - geo Nisargadatta Monday, June 22, 2009 8:37 AM Re: Re: it's not there or over there either. > > > > > > geo> " Now " is just a concept of the timebound mind. Chasing the now is > > > more > > > like a joke. > > > > This applies equally to all concepts, not only 'now'. If it seems to > > apply > > especially to 'now', then something is being avoided. > > > > All involuntary concepts, yes. The conception of a new mechanism may not > > be > > avoidance. > > -geo- > > I dunno what you're talking about, and doubt you do either. > > But, enjoy ;-). LOL To imagine the way to the super-market, to design a new car, does not imply in a separate entity. Otherewise there would not be even a bed where to deposit my body in coma. -ego- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > > > > > > > > geo> " Now " is just a concept of the timebound mind. Chasing the now is > > > > more > > > > like a joke. > > > > > > This applies equally to all concepts, not only 'now'. If it seems to > > > apply > > > especially to 'now', then something is being avoided. > > > > > > All involuntary concepts, yes. The conception of a new mechanism may not > > > be > > > avoidance. > > > -geo- > > > > I dunno what you're talking about, and doubt you do either. > > > > But, enjoy ;-). > > LOL > > To imagine the way to the super-market, to design a new car, does not imply > in a separate entity. > -ego- Responding to Dan three-three oh-oh three-three, Gee-double-Oh Seven. Over. Are you there? Over. Out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > dan330033 > Nisargadatta > Monday, June 22, 2009 12:22 AM > Re: it's not there or over there either. > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > dan330033 > > Nisargadatta > > Sunday, June 21, 2009 8:44 PM > > Re: it's not there or over there either. > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > - > > > dan330033 > > > Nisargadatta > > > Sunday, June 21, 2009 8:23 PM > > > Re: it's not there or over there either. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > dan330033 > > > > Nisargadatta > > > > Sunday, June 21, 2009 7:34 PM > > > > Re: it's not there or over there either. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You don't have any substantiality, nor do I, to try to grasp > > > > > > > some > > > > > > > " universal mind " or any other b.s. > > > > > > > -d- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are being ridiculous dan. > > > > > > > Do you really think that by behaving like an angry virgin > > > > > > > authoritative > > > > > > > nun you will convince yourself or me about the nature of some > > > > > > > truth? > > > > > > > I dont like quoting. Nis was asked wether he could tell the > > > > > > > climate > > > > > > > in > > > > > > > NY - if he was indeed above god. He said he did not, because he > > > > > > > was > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > trained to do so. " You can do anything if are properly trained " . > > > > > > > It > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > just a matter of interest. You can unravel any issue -> if you > > > > > > > really > > > > > > > want > > > > > > > to. > > > > > > > > > > > > Aren't 'you' the issue that must unravel? > > > > > > -tim- > > > > > > > > > > > > Why dont you ask dan the same question? He thinks there is some > > > > > > universal > > > > > > mind outside of here/there. > > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > > > yeah, right > > > > > -d- > > > > > > > > > > Yeah right, ok I will say what is in my mind... > > > > > > > > > > Nis, in his later talks would not let 3 ~4 days pass without talking > > > > > about > > > > > the five gunas, the five " forces " of consciousness. At that > > > > > particular > > > > > time > > > > > in his life he found it important to look at the play of the gunas > > > > > so > > > > > he > > > > > asked for those around him to look at them. Someone might have never > > > > > given > > > > > too much importance to it, nonetheless it would be incorrect to say > > > > > that > > > > > the > > > > > gunas where only in Nis mind. K though it was important to consider > > > > > the > > > > > psichological self. Marc did not gave too much thought to it, but > > > > > that > > > > > is > > > > > no > > > > > reason to say that it was just something K invented in his mind. We > > > > > tend > > > > > to > > > > > think we are totaly unfocused absolutes, but in fact we all have > > > > > agendas > > > > > and > > > > > are focused in one thing or another at different times. > > > > > Sometimes I feel it is relevant to consider Univesral MInd, there is > > > > > the > > > > > seeing of it, so I ask to look at it. You cant see it, not > > > > > interested, > > > > > but > > > > > that doesnt mean you can conclude it is just geos invention in his > > > > > mind. > > > > > It > > > > > is ignorance to do that. Such atitude is an " easy " way to call > > > > > " another " > > > > > stupid contrasting with " my " enormous unquestionable wisdom. > > > > > > > > > > The world has waves that have their source in different " places " > > > > > like > > > > > the > > > > > ocean with its waves originated by the winds and temperature > > > > > changes, > > > > > and > > > > > the tides realated to the moon and the sun. No self, no inner > > > > > entity, > > > > > and > > > > > the ocean/world is a flat mirror...but.... there are still the the > > > > > tides...that have nothing to do with that self... > > > > > I had to use lots of words, but the fact is being seen. Anyway...who > > > > > cares? > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > Who cares? > > > > > > > > Of what importance is a description? > > > > > > > > Is there any actual distance between what is described, the > > > > description > > > > of > > > > it, the describer, and someone else to whom the description is > > > > communicated? > > > > > > > > - Dan > > > > > > > > A fact is confused with its description while the fact is not yet > > > > seen. > > > > -geo- > > > > > > you'll never see this. > > > > > > honest. > > > > > > - d - > > > > > > This what? > > > -geo- > > > > this fact, as you put it. > > > > - d - > > > > The fact is that there is only one fact and it is being.... a seen-fact. > > -geo- > > The seen-fact isn't seeing itself as a fact. > > In fact. > > - D - > > The seen-fact seeing itself as a fact would imply in a seer looking. > -ego- Yes and an objective fact of some kind Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > > > The seen-fact seeing itself as a fact would imply in a seer looking. > > -ego- > > Yes > > and an objective fact of some kind The least folks could do would be to acknowledge that 'objectivity' is a subjective concept ;-). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Aren't 'you' the issue that must unravel? > > > > > > > > > > -tim- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why dont you ask dan the same question? He thinks there is some > > > > > > > > > > universal > > > > > > > > > > mind outside of here/there. > > > > > > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dan doesn't think there's anything inside or outside anything else, and he's made this abundantly clear. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > yes > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but nothing i say will help > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it just becomes fodder for meaningless repartee, back and forth > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > and that which is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > has no involvement in back and forth > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > one who knows without knowing, simply is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > doesn't require anything from words > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > one who is moving toward knowing, and engaged in experiences > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > can also engage in endless repartee > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > believing that there is meaningful contact being made > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > or imagining there is entertainment through the contact > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - d - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " it just becomes fodder for meaningless repartee, back and forth " .. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > daaaaaaaaaaany! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you're looking for " meaning " ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " meaning for what and for whom. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " contact " ??? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with whom by what? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > all is one for true and for fun. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > silly guy! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > > > > > yes. > > > > > > > > > > > > the moon is round. > > > > > > > > > > > > - d. - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ten lashes of the whip! > > > > > > > > > > wake up! > > > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > first put on your captain marvel boots. > > > > > > > > - d - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > help can only come from within. > > > > > > though you marvel at my boots.. > > > > > > they're not miraculous.. > > > > > > they are merely Gucci. > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > within what? > > > it's not a within a what wuss. > > .b b.b. ho hum. - d - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > > > > > > > > geo> " Now " is just a concept of the timebound mind. Chasing the now is > > > > more > > > > like a joke. > > > > > > This applies equally to all concepts, not only 'now'. If it seems to > > > apply > > > especially to 'now', then something is being avoided. > > > > > > All involuntary concepts, yes. The conception of a new mechanism may not > > > be > > > avoidance. > > > -geo- > > > > I dunno what you're talking about, and doubt you do either. > > > > But, enjoy ;-). > > LOL > > To imagine the way to the super-market, to design a new car, does not imply > in a separate entity. > -ego- nothing implies a separate entity Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 22, 2009 Report Share Posted June 22, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > dan330033 > Nisargadatta > Monday, June 22, 2009 12:21 AM > Re: it's not there or over there either. > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > dan330033 > > Nisargadatta > > Sunday, June 21, 2009 8:39 PM > > Re: it's not there or over there either. > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > One understands the instant there is no other. > > > > > > > > But who wants to give up the self that seemingly exists in relation > > > > to an other, and by losing this self gain nothing? > > > > > > Nobody. That's probably why nobody ever does ;-). > > > > > > > All the alternatives have choicelessly dried up. > > > > > > Exactly. And in my case, it was a case of 'crisis', just as you've > > > talked > > > about before. Right in the midst of 'suicidal' substance use. > > > Acknowledging, of course, that this is a story, and 'now never > > > happened'. > > > > Yes. > > > > I constructed the basis for crisis when I decided I had encountered an > > other, who decided I had been encountered. > > > > The crisis can be avoided only imaginarily, and so keeps reappearing in > > various ways. Look around. It is not " my " crisis, it is the world, I am > > the > > world, and it is always only " my " crisis. > > > > Finally, one acknowledges that it can't be avoided, and the entire reality > > constructed that way inevitably collapses (now). > > > > - D - > > > > Sense of self is the avoidance ot the ongoing crisis. > > -geo- > > Yes, a self going through time and maintaining its selfhood, is the crisis > that projects the world, and that is projected from the world. > > - D - > > To get rid of the desiese is to know that you are sick. The trouble is that > as soon as you get well you are dead. > -ego- if by dead you mean never having been, yes. but it's no trouble. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.