Guest guest Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > dan330033 > > Nisargadatta > > Monday, June 22, 2009 10:25 PM > > Re: it's not there or over there either. > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > dan330033 > > > > > > > Nisargadatta > > > > > > > Monday, June 22, 2009 3:07 PM > > > > > > > Re: it's not there or over there either. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Actualy nothing. The implication is fragmentation, a " as if " . > > > > > > > > > -ego- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If I understand without separation of any entity anywhere, then > > > > > > > > (now) > > > > > > > > there > > > > > > > > is no " as if " - anywhere at any time. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's all or nothing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Or all and nothing, if you prefer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Without fragmentation, without the entity, there is no need to > > > > > > > > state a > > > > > > > > " now " . > > > > > > > > -ego- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Without fragmentation, without the entity, there is no need to > > > > > > > state that > > > > > > > there is no need to state a " now. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - d - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If I understand without separation of any entity anywhere, then > > > > > > > there is > > > > > > > no need to state that there is no " as if " either. > > > > > > > -ego- > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no need, period. > > > > > > > > > > > > What would be needed? > > > > > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > evidently you think you have a need to know what would be needed. > > > > > > > > > > so better take that " period " off the end of sentence #1. > > > > > > > > > > it's bullshit by fact of your query in sentence #2. > > > > > > > > > > any time pal.. > > > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > evidently to the mind of bob, that constructs the meaning of the words > > > > read, forms an image, and provides these responses. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - d - > > > > > > > > > you're slipping kid. > > > > > > whatever little stuff you had you've lost. > > > > > > the post above is incoherent... > > > > > > not that that is way different from your norm. > > > > > > you need some rest danny. > > > > > > it's ok to not get to 100 today. > > > > > > you've already posted decades. > > > > > > for christ sake.. > > > > > > don't you ever get tired of your continuous speciousness? > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > i'm here to entertain. > > > > you read and respond. > > > > i succeed. > > > > -- d -- > > > > Pure, pristine, hipocrisy. > > -ego- > > in what way? > > is being entertained wrong? > > - D - no way. you entertain yourself all the time. but your still a hypocrite. you're just too dense to realize it. thereby through your mind farting the situation entertains you. nothing is right nor wrong. but if you call that success.. well let's just leave that to the imagination. who's imagination right? guess. ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > roberibus111 > > Nisargadatta > > Tuesday, June 23, 2009 5:03 AM > > Re: it's not there or over there either. > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > you're slipping kid. > > > > > > > > whatever little stuff you had you've lost. > > > > > > > > the post above is incoherent... > > > > > > > > not that that is way different from your norm. > > > > > > > > you need some rest danny. > > > > > > > > it's ok to not get to 100 today. > > > > > > > > you've already posted decades. > > > > > > > > for christ sake.. > > > > > > > > don't you ever get tired of your continuous speciousness? > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > The funny thing is, I don't say anything different than Dan, really. But > > > if ya gotta pick a separate 'other' to bolster the separate 'self', I > > > guess the choice has been made ;-). > > > > there is no such thing as free choice. > > > > it is clear that you have the same obsession with " self " as dan. > > > > so what? > > > > thus there are two of " you " > > > > are " you " in love..one with the " other " ? > > > > your futile protection of your little pal is getting wearisome.. > > > > one would think that silliness a bit embarrassing for you too. > > > > choice stuff huh? > > > > .b b.b. > > > > He forgot his gurus advice: I occilate between all and nothing. He is stuck > > playing the game of being always out there. Infantile, artificial, > > ignorantil. > > -geo- > > i've seen so much of this kind of talk on internet lists > > the labeling, condescending remarks about others as persons > > i suppose it's the way that it's not a face to face meeting on the internet > > face to face, a conversation like this would go nowhere > > it seems like a dumping ground for personal frustrations projected onto others > > that's what these kind of words suggest > > although maybe i'm missing something > > (here's a great chance to tell me what I'm missing) > > - d - " ..tell " ME " what " I'M " missing. " well daniel... you're missing the hint. it's NOT all about you danny. for christ sake get a clue! ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 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 , " 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > saying that does. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > > > > > does not. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > d. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that's a second " statement " of incorrectly perceived fact. > > > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > correct according to whom? > > > > > > > > - d - > > > > > > > > > the accordance of the wise. > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > yeah, right. > > > > - d - > > > well of course you wouldn't understand. > > .b b.b. do i look like someone who " has an understanding " ? please don't try to saddle me with that crap. - d - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > > > > > hims is getting a widdle upset. > > > > > > siwwy wabbit! > > > > > > siwwy and dumb ass bunny. > > > > > > heh heh heh heh... > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > hims is laughing when you say something funny, > > > > moving on when you say something stupid. > > > > - d - > > > i betcha! > > how do you move on from yourself though stupid? > > you say stupid things all the time. > > it would be for the best that you move on from your stupid self... > > but you're just to holy to believe it. > > and too stupid to understand it's application in your case. > > LOL! > > .b b.b. i'm a hopeless case. except for you. you haven't given up. thanks for your comments. enjoyed them as usual. - d - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > - > > > dan330033 > > > Nisargadatta > > > Monday, June 22, 2009 10:25 PM > > > Re: it's not there or over there either. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > > dan330033 > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta > > > > > > > > Monday, June 22, 2009 3:07 PM > > > > > > > > Re: it's not there or over there either. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Actualy nothing. The implication is fragmentation, a " as if " . > > > > > > > > > > -ego- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If I understand without separation of any entity anywhere, then > > > > > > > > > (now) > > > > > > > > > there > > > > > > > > > is no " as if " - anywhere at any time. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's all or nothing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Or all and nothing, if you prefer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Without fragmentation, without the entity, there is no need to > > > > > > > > > state a > > > > > > > > > " now " . > > > > > > > > > -ego- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Without fragmentation, without the entity, there is no need to > > > > > > > > state that > > > > > > > > there is no need to state a " now. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - d - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If I understand without separation of any entity anywhere, then > > > > > > > > there is > > > > > > > > no need to state that there is no " as if " either. > > > > > > > > -ego- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no need, period. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What would be needed? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > evidently you think you have a need to know what would be needed. > > > > > > > > > > > > so better take that " period " off the end of sentence #1. > > > > > > > > > > > > it's bullshit by fact of your query in sentence #2. > > > > > > > > > > > > any time pal.. > > > > > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > > > evidently to the mind of bob, that constructs the meaning of the words > > > > > read, forms an image, and provides these responses. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - d - > > > > > > > > > > > > you're slipping kid. > > > > > > > > whatever little stuff you had you've lost. > > > > > > > > the post above is incoherent... > > > > > > > > not that that is way different from your norm. > > > > > > > > you need some rest danny. > > > > > > > > it's ok to not get to 100 today. > > > > > > > > you've already posted decades. > > > > > > > > for christ sake.. > > > > > > > > don't you ever get tired of your continuous speciousness? > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > i'm here to entertain. > > > > > > you read and respond. > > > > > > i succeed. > > > > > > -- d -- > > > > > > Pure, pristine, hipocrisy. > > > -ego- > > > > in what way? > > > > is being entertained wrong? > > > > - D - > > > no way. > > you entertain yourself all the time. > > but your still a hypocrite. > > you're just too dense to realize it. > > thereby through your mind farting the situation entertains you. > > nothing is right nor wrong. > > but if you call that success.. > > well let's just leave that to the imagination. > > who's imagination right? > > guess. > > .b b.b. i don't have to. your advice may apply to you. not here, though. - d - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > - > > > roberibus111 > > > Nisargadatta > > > Tuesday, June 23, 2009 5:03 AM > > > Re: it's not there or over there either. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you're slipping kid. > > > > > > > > > > whatever little stuff you had you've lost. > > > > > > > > > > the post above is incoherent... > > > > > > > > > > not that that is way different from your norm. > > > > > > > > > > you need some rest danny. > > > > > > > > > > it's ok to not get to 100 today. > > > > > > > > > > you've already posted decades. > > > > > > > > > > for christ sake.. > > > > > > > > > > don't you ever get tired of your continuous speciousness? > > > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > The funny thing is, I don't say anything different than Dan, really. But > > > > if ya gotta pick a separate 'other' to bolster the separate 'self', I > > > > guess the choice has been made ;-). > > > > > > there is no such thing as free choice. > > > > > > it is clear that you have the same obsession with " self " as dan. > > > > > > so what? > > > > > > thus there are two of " you " > > > > > > are " you " in love..one with the " other " ? > > > > > > your futile protection of your little pal is getting wearisome.. > > > > > > one would think that silliness a bit embarrassing for you too. > > > > > > choice stuff huh? > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > He forgot his gurus advice: I occilate between all and nothing. He is stuck > > > playing the game of being always out there. Infantile, artificial, > > > ignorantil. > > > -geo- > > > > i've seen so much of this kind of talk on internet lists > > > > the labeling, condescending remarks about others as persons > > > > i suppose it's the way that it's not a face to face meeting on the internet > > > > face to face, a conversation like this would go nowhere > > > > it seems like a dumping ground for personal frustrations projected onto others > > > > that's what these kind of words suggest > > > > although maybe i'm missing something > > > > (here's a great chance to tell me what I'm missing) > > > > - d - > > > > > " ..tell " ME " what " I'M " missing. " > > > well daniel... > > you're missing the hint. > > it's NOT all about you danny. > > for christ sake get a clue! > > .b b.b. you talkin' to me? you talkin' to me? well, who the hell you talkin' to? there's no one else here. you talkin' to me? - d - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6 wrote: > > > > i've seen so much of this kind of talk on internet lists > > > > the labeling, condescending remarks about others as persons > > > > i suppose it's the way that it's not a face to face meeting on the internet > > > > face to face, a conversation like this would go nowhere > > > > it seems like a dumping ground for personal frustrations projected onto others > > > > that's what these kind of words suggest > > > > although maybe i'm missing something > > > > (here's a great chance to tell me what I'm missing) > > > > - d - > > P: Frustrations is not the only explanation. I know > you need explanations. It could be explained under the > label of mean streak, or of being free of the instinctual > constrains of face to face social interactions, or a way > to unmask reactivity. But, of course, persistence, faced > with lack of results points to either stupidity, or sadism. yes, persistence of a pattern that is not situational, and not getting results, points to some kind of gratification in the mode of self-expression. - d - - d - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 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 , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > saying that does. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > does not. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > d. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that's a second " statement " of incorrectly perceived fact. > > > > > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > > > correct according to whom? > > > > > > > > > > - d - > > > > > > > > > > > > the accordance of the wise. > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > yeah, right. > > > > > > - d - > > > > > > well of course you wouldn't understand. > > > > .b b.b. > > do i look like someone who " has an understanding " ? > > please don't try to saddle me with that crap. > > - d - we're not sure what kind of creep you look like. we only know by word the creep that writes your posts. who can saddle whom? are you feeling horsey today? not to worry danny. i don't think you understand as much as a horse. ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > - > > > roberibus111 > > > Nisargadatta > > > Tuesday, June 23, 2009 5:03 AM > > > Re: it's not there or over there either. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you're slipping kid. > > > > > > > > > > whatever little stuff you had you've lost. > > > > > > > > > > the post above is incoherent... > > > > > > > > > > not that that is way different from your norm. > > > > > > > > > > you need some rest danny. > > > > > > > > > > it's ok to not get to 100 today. > > > > > > > > > > you've already posted decades. > > > > > > > > > > for christ sake.. > > > > > > > > > > don't you ever get tired of your continuous speciousness? > > > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > The funny thing is, I don't say anything different than Dan, really. But > > > > if ya gotta pick a separate 'other' to bolster the separate 'self', I > > > > guess the choice has been made ;-). > > > > > > there is no such thing as free choice. > > > > > > it is clear that you have the same obsession with " self " as dan. > > > > > > so what? > > > > > > thus there are two of " you " > > > > > > are " you " in love..one with the " other " ? > > > > > > your futile protection of your little pal is getting wearisome.. > > > > > > one would think that silliness a bit embarrassing for you too. > > > > > > choice stuff huh? > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > He forgot his gurus advice: I occilate between all and nothing. He is stuck > > > playing the game of being always out there. Infantile, artificial, > > > ignorantil. > > > -geo- > > > > i've seen so much of this kind of talk on internet lists > > > > the labeling, condescending remarks about others as persons > > > > i suppose it's the way that it's not a face to face meeting on the internet > > > > face to face, a conversation like this would go nowhere > > > > it seems like a dumping ground for personal frustrations projected onto others > > > > that's what these kind of words suggest > > > > although maybe i'm missing something > > > > (here's a great chance to tell me what I'm missing) > > > > - d - > > P: Frustrations is not the only explanation. I know > you need explanations. It could be explained under the > label of mean streak, or of being free of the instinctual > constrains of face to face social interactions, or a way > to unmask reactivity. But, of course, persistence, faced > with lack of results points to either stupidity, or sadism. you seem to persist in this folly. ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > hims is getting a widdle upset. > > > > > > > > siwwy wabbit! > > > > > > > > siwwy and dumb ass bunny. > > > > > > > > heh heh heh heh... > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > hims is laughing when you say something funny, > > > > > > moving on when you say something stupid. > > > > > > - d - > > > > > > i betcha! > > > > how do you move on from yourself though stupid? > > > > you say stupid things all the time. > > > > it would be for the best that you move on from your stupid self... > > > > but you're just to holy to believe it. > > > > and too stupid to understand it's application in your case. > > > > LOL! > > > > .b b.b. > > i'm a hopeless case. > > except for you. > > you haven't given up. > > thanks for your comments. > > enjoyed them as usual. > > - d - actually what you enjoy is writing replies. you love yourself. be honest at least. ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 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 , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > > > > dan330033 > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta > > > > > > > > > > Monday, June 22, 2009 3:07 PM > > > > > > > > > > Re: it's not there or over there either. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Actualy nothing. The implication is fragmentation, a " as if " . > > > > > > > > > > > > -ego- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If I understand without separation of any entity anywhere, then (now) > > > > > > > > > > > there > > > > > > > > > > > is no " as if " - anywhere at any time. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's all or nothing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Or all and nothing, if you prefer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Without fragmentation, without the entity, there is no need to state a > > > > > > > > > > > " now " . > > > > > > > > > > > -ego- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Without fragmentation, without the entity, there is no need to state that > > > > > > > > > > there is no need to state a " now. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - d - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If I understand without separation of any entity anywhere, then there is > > > > > > > > > > no need to state that there is no " as if " either. > > > > > > > > > > -ego- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no need, period. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What would be needed? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > evidently you think you have a need to know what would be needed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > so better take that " period " off the end of sentence #1. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it's bullshit by fact of your query in sentence #2. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > any time pal.. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > evidently to the mind of bob, that constructs the meaning of the words read, forms an image, and provides these responses. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - d - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you're slipping kid. > > > > > > > > > > > > whatever little stuff you had you've lost. > > > > > > > > > > > > the post above is incoherent... > > > > > > > > > > > > not that that is way different from your norm. > > > > > > > > > > > > you need some rest danny. > > > > > > > > > > > > it's ok to not get to 100 today. > > > > > > > > > > > > you've already posted decades. > > > > > > > > > > > > for christ sake.. > > > > > > > > > > > > don't you ever get tired of your continuous speciousness? > > > > > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > > > i'm here to entertain. > > > > > > > > > > you read and respond. > > > > > > > > > > i succeed. > > > > > > > > > > -- d -- > > > > > > > > > > > > there's that anserine and dimwitted fixation with " self " again. > > > > > > > > and that's what you call " success " . > > > > > > > > you sound like g.w. bush saying " mission accomplished " in 2003 Iraq. > > > > > > > > you're just as deluded as he was then. > > > > > > > > it's a failure of understanding. > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > ah, you're catching on. > > > > > > my work has not been in vain. > > > > > > now, just acknowledge your own failure of understanding, > > > > > > and everything will be ... > > > > > > as is. > > > > > > - d - > > > > > > are you dyslexic as well as stupid? > > > > your " work " ..ROFLMAO! > > > > what an ignorant asshole. > > > > you love yourself way too much ballerina. > > > > :-) > > > > .b b.b. > > yes, i do. > > you are so right. > > - d - we hardly needed confirmation. it's obvious. why did you pick such a lousy lover? LOL! ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > dan330033 > > > > Nisargadatta > > > > Monday, June 22, 2009 10:25 PM > > > > Re: it's not there or over there either. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > > > > dan330033 > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta > > > > > > > > > Monday, June 22, 2009 3:07 PM > > > > > > > > > Re: it's not there or over there either. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Actualy nothing. The implication is fragmentation, a " as if " . > > > > > > > > > > > -ego- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If I understand without separation of any entity anywhere, then > > > > > > > > > > (now) > > > > > > > > > > there > > > > > > > > > > is no " as if " - anywhere at any time. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's all or nothing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Or all and nothing, if you prefer. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Without fragmentation, without the entity, there is no need to > > > > > > > > > > state a > > > > > > > > > > " now " . > > > > > > > > > > -ego- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Without fragmentation, without the entity, there is no need to > > > > > > > > > state that > > > > > > > > > there is no need to state a " now. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - d - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If I understand without separation of any entity anywhere, then > > > > > > > > > there is > > > > > > > > > no need to state that there is no " as if " either. > > > > > > > > > -ego- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no need, period. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What would be needed? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > evidently you think you have a need to know what would be needed. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > so better take that " period " off the end of sentence #1. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it's bullshit by fact of your query in sentence #2. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > any time pal.. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > > > > > evidently to the mind of bob, that constructs the meaning of the words > > > > > > read, forms an image, and provides these responses. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - d - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you're slipping kid. > > > > > > > > > > whatever little stuff you had you've lost. > > > > > > > > > > the post above is incoherent... > > > > > > > > > > not that that is way different from your norm. > > > > > > > > > > you need some rest danny. > > > > > > > > > > it's ok to not get to 100 today. > > > > > > > > > > you've already posted decades. > > > > > > > > > > for christ sake.. > > > > > > > > > > don't you ever get tired of your continuous speciousness? > > > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > i'm here to entertain. > > > > > > > > you read and respond. > > > > > > > > i succeed. > > > > > > > > -- d -- > > > > > > > > Pure, pristine, hipocrisy. > > > > -ego- > > > > > > in what way? > > > > > > is being entertained wrong? > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > no way. > > > > you entertain yourself all the time. > > > > but your still a hypocrite. > > > > you're just too dense to realize it. > > > > thereby through your mind farting the situation entertains you. > > > > nothing is right nor wrong. > > > > but if you call that success.. > > > > well let's just leave that to the imagination. > > > > who's imagination right? > > > > guess. > > > > .b b.b. > > i don't have to. > > your advice may apply to you. > > not here, though. > > - d - bullshit. ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > roberibus111 > > > > Nisargadatta > > > > Tuesday, June 23, 2009 5:03 AM > > > > Re: it's not there or over there either. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you're slipping kid. > > > > > > > > > > > > whatever little stuff you had you've lost. > > > > > > > > > > > > the post above is incoherent... > > > > > > > > > > > > not that that is way different from your norm. > > > > > > > > > > > > you need some rest danny. > > > > > > > > > > > > it's ok to not get to 100 today. > > > > > > > > > > > > you've already posted decades. > > > > > > > > > > > > for christ sake.. > > > > > > > > > > > > don't you ever get tired of your continuous speciousness? > > > > > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > > > The funny thing is, I don't say anything different than Dan, really. But > > > > > if ya gotta pick a separate 'other' to bolster the separate 'self', I > > > > > guess the choice has been made ;-). > > > > > > > > there is no such thing as free choice. > > > > > > > > it is clear that you have the same obsession with " self " as dan. > > > > > > > > so what? > > > > > > > > thus there are two of " you " > > > > > > > > are " you " in love..one with the " other " ? > > > > > > > > your futile protection of your little pal is getting wearisome.. > > > > > > > > one would think that silliness a bit embarrassing for you too. > > > > > > > > choice stuff huh? > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > He forgot his gurus advice: I occilate between all and nothing. He is stuck > > > > playing the game of being always out there. Infantile, artificial, > > > > ignorantil. > > > > -geo- > > > > > > i've seen so much of this kind of talk on internet lists > > > > > > the labeling, condescending remarks about others as persons > > > > > > i suppose it's the way that it's not a face to face meeting on the internet > > > > > > face to face, a conversation like this would go nowhere > > > > > > it seems like a dumping ground for personal frustrations projected onto others > > > > > > that's what these kind of words suggest > > > > > > although maybe i'm missing something > > > > > > (here's a great chance to tell me what I'm missing) > > > > > > - d - > > > > > > > > > > " ..tell " ME " what " I'M " missing. " > > > > > > well daniel... > > > > you're missing the hint. > > > > it's NOT all about you danny. > > > > for christ sake get a clue! > > > > .b b.b. > > > you talkin' to me? > > you talkin' to me? > > well, who the hell you talkin' to? > > there's no one else here. > > you talkin' to me? > > - d - no i'm not talking to you Danny. that's the problem you have. you believe you're important enough to be " personally " addressed. and cut your bullshit about no one being here. you're getting to be a broken record. now that however is talking to " you " Danny Boy. ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6@> wrote: > > > > > > > i've seen so much of this kind of talk on internet lists > > > > > > the labeling, condescending remarks about others as persons > > > > > > i suppose it's the way that it's not a face to face meeting on the internet > > > > > > face to face, a conversation like this would go nowhere > > > > > > it seems like a dumping ground for personal frustrations projected onto others > > > > > > that's what these kind of words suggest > > > > > > although maybe i'm missing something > > > > > > (here's a great chance to tell me what I'm missing) > > > > > > - d - > > > > P: Frustrations is not the only explanation. I know > > you need explanations. It could be explained under the > > label of mean streak, or of being free of the instinctual > > constrains of face to face social interactions, or a way > > to unmask reactivity. But, of course, persistence, faced > > with lack of results points to either stupidity, or sadism. > > yes, persistence of a pattern that is not situational, and not getting results, points to some kind of gratification in the mode of self-expression. > > - d - > > - d - what about those perstistent " d " s? do those gratify you? LOL! ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111 wrote: > > > no i'm not talking to you Danny. > > that's the problem you have. Telling someone that you're not telling them anything is near insanity. More meds, more meds... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > > > no i'm not talking to you Danny. > > > > that's the problem you have. > > Telling someone that you're not telling them anything is near insanity. More meds, more meds... you're act so obsequious toward your little lover. it's funny watching you bootlick him. maybe you're becoming as much of an asshole as he in the process. as for your meds Timothy.. break your Prozacs in half from now on. LOL! ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > no i'm not talking to you Danny. > > > > > > that's the problem you have. > > > > Telling someone that you're not telling them anything is near insanity. More meds, more meds... > > > > > > you're act so obsequious toward your little lover. > > it's funny watching you bootlick him. > > maybe you're becoming as much of an asshole as he in the process. > > as for your meds Timothy.. > > break your Prozacs in half from now on. > > LOL! > > .b b.b. Is that what yer taking? If not, they're supposed to be safe even for kids (hopeful look) ;-). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 23, 2009 Report Share Posted June 23, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > no i'm not talking to you Danny. > > > > > > > > that's the problem you have. > > > > > > Telling someone that you're not telling them anything is near insanity. More meds, more meds... > > > > > > > > > > > > you're act so obsequious toward your little lover. > > > > it's funny watching you bootlick him. > > > > maybe you're becoming as much of an asshole as he in the process. > > > > as for your meds Timothy.. > > > > break your Prozacs in half from now on. > > > > LOL! > > > > .b b.b. > > Is that what yer taking? If not, they're supposed to be safe even for kids (hopeful look) ;-). they are making you dyslexic like dan as well. don't mix up the characters. learn to read properly. i said you should break your Prozacs. not vice versa. keep taking your meds. they take awhile to work obviously. ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.