it's not there or over there either.

[Guest guest]

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.

[Guest guest]

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-

 

 

 

judging by that lengthy and too detailed reply..

 

i'd say you care.

 

way to much too.

 

..b b.b.

[Guest guest]

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

 

I agree, BTW... you're nothing but a mental construct, wherever ya are ;-).

Mental constructs do not dissolve mental constructs. They dissolve with 'clear

seeing' or 'direct perception', and that only.

 

But... if this is not 'entertainment', dunno what it is. Mental constructs

cannot be taught anything, nor teach anything, nor learn anything. All this is

'play', afaic, whether negative, positive, helpful or unhelpful.

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> wrote:

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> 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.

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > abundant emptiness?

> > > >

> > > > c'mon with you!

> > > >

> > > > besides..that's just dan b.s.

> > > >

> > > > .b b.b.

> > >

> > > The " dan b.s. " is inside you.

> >

> >

> > i have no inside nor outside.

> >

> > no b.s.

> >

> > .b b.b.

>

> So what's this about Dan's BS, then? Isn't he being taken as 'out there'?

>

> Dan's B.S. is your B.S. If you have no inside or outside, there's no such

thing as B.S. apart from you.

 

 

what is your concern for dan?

 

dan can take care of himself mom.

 

and you miss the gist.

 

that's just the way it is.

 

..b b.b.

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111 wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote:

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@> wrote:

> > >

> > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111@>

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.

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > abundant emptiness?

> > > > >

> > > > > c'mon with you!

> > > > >

> > > > > besides..that's just dan b.s.

> > > > >

> > > > > .b b.b.

> > > >

> > > > The " dan b.s. " is inside you.

> > >

> > >

> > > i have no inside nor outside.

> > >

> > > no b.s.

> > >

> > > .b b.b.

> >

> > So what's this about Dan's BS, then? Isn't he being taken as 'out there'?

> >

> > Dan's B.S. is your B.S. If you have no inside or outside, there's no such

thing as B.S. apart from you.

>

>

> what is your concern for dan?

 

I like his clarity. He has a lot of interesting things to say (map-wise) about

the territory I am.

 

> dan can take care of himself mom.

>

> and you miss the gist.

>

> that's just the way it is.

 

It's not the way it has to be.

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote:

>

> You don't mean to suggest to geo to stop typing messages. You mean to

> suggest that geo should learn to look at the words as they arise as you do

> because you know how to do it and geo dont.

 

That's Geo's perception.

 

> Thanks for the advice.

 

Thank yourself... it's your own advice!

[Guest guest]

-

Tim G.

Nisargadatta

Saturday, June 20, 2009 4:34 PM

Re: it's not there or over there either.

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

I agree, BTW... you're nothing but a mental construct, wherever ya are ;-).

Mental constructs do not dissolve mental constructs. They dissolve with

'clear seeing' or 'direct perception', and that only.

 

But... if this is not 'entertainment', dunno what it is. Mental constructs

cannot be taught anything, nor teach anything, nor learn anything. All this

is 'play', afaic, whether negative, positive, helpful or unhelpful.

-tim-

 

For me, this list, presently is a gift. Maybe its me changed, maybe its the

people gathered here...I just ask my self: among 1300+ members, only 7 ~8

write. Is it fear? Is it something like " oh..I already know all that " - but

then why ? Maybe timidity? For those who think that this exchanges

doesnt reveal anything about the self because its jus the

net.....hmmmmmm....they are wrong. I AM RIGHT.

-geo-

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote:

>

> For me, this list, presently is a gift. Maybe its me changed, maybe its the

> people gathered here...I just ask my self: among 1300+ members, only 7 ~8

> write. Is it fear? Is it something like " oh..I already know all that " - but

> then why ? Maybe timidity?

 

All the are like that... many rs, few posting at any given

time. Dunno why.

 

For one thing, nonduality (the real thing) is not only 'uninteresting' to most,

but it's being actively avoided. 99.9% are into the 'false stuff', and almost

all of the remainder seem to hang around to argue and desire to 'get rid of

themselves' rather than go through themselves, beyond themselves, as

Nisargadatta put it.

[Guest guest]

-

roberibus111

Nisargadatta

Saturday, June 20, 2009 4:33 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-

 

judging by that lengthy and too detailed reply..

 

i'd say you care.

 

way to much too.

 

..b b.b.

 

I did. So what?

-geo-

[Guest guest]

-

Tim G.

Nisargadatta

Saturday, June 20, 2009 4:50 PM

Re: it's not there or over there either.

 

 

 

 

 

Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote:

>

> You don't mean to suggest to geo to stop typing messages. You mean to

> suggest that geo should learn to look at the words as they arise as you do

> because you know how to do it and geo dont.

 

That's Geo's perception.

-tim-

 

> Thanks for the advice.

 

Thank yourself... it's your own advice!

-tim-

 

Is it?

-geo-

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote:

>

>

> -

> Tim G.

> Nisargadatta

> Saturday, June 20, 2009 4:50 PM

> Re: it's not there or over there either.

>

>

>

>

>

> Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote:

> >

> > You don't mean to suggest to geo to stop typing messages. You mean to

> > suggest that geo should learn to look at the words as they arise as you do

> > because you know how to do it and geo dont.

>

> That's Geo's perception.

> -tim-

>

> > Thanks for the advice.

>

> Thank yourself... it's your own advice!

> -tim-

>

> Is it?

> -geo-

 

Absolutely. Why not ask what I meant, instead of immediately assuming " me/you "

motivations? Because 'ego' sees 'ego', immediately and without fail. It

inserts motives for 'others' and then complains about its own creations. It's

all in service of continuing the separate self, and all that ever 'works' is to

lose interest in such servitude.

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote:

> >

> >

> > -

> > Tim G.

> > Nisargadatta

> > Saturday, June 20, 2009 4:50 PM

> > Re: it's not there or over there either.

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote:

> > >

> > > You don't mean to suggest to geo to stop typing messages. You mean to

> > > suggest that geo should learn to look at the words as they arise as you do

> > > because you know how to do it and geo dont.

> >

> > That's Geo's perception.

> > -tim-

> >

> > > Thanks for the advice.

> >

> > Thank yourself... it's your own advice!

> > -tim-

> >

> > Is it?

> > -geo-

>

> Absolutely. Why not ask what I meant, instead of immediately assuming

" me/you " motivations? Because 'ego' sees 'ego', immediately and without fail.

It inserts motives for 'others' and then complains about its own creations.

It's all in service of continuing the separate self, and all that ever 'works'

is to lose interest in such servitude.

>

 

Turn to yourself. Yes, if you like, I have and you haven't. Now do it, so that

isn't the case anymore.

[Guest guest]

> >

> > You don't mean to suggest to geo to stop typing messages. You mean to

> > suggest that geo should learn to look at the words as they arise as you

> > do

> > because you know how to do it and geo dont.

>

> That's Geo's perception.

> -tim-

>

> > Thanks for the advice.

>

> Thank yourself... it's your own advice!

> -tim-

>

> Is it?

> -geo-

 

Absolutely. Why not ask what I meant, instead of immediately assuming

" me/you " motivations? Because 'ego' sees 'ego', immediately and without

fail. It inserts motives for 'others' and then complains about its own

creations. It's all in service of continuing the separate self, and all that

ever 'works' is to lose interest in such servitude.

-tim-

 

This is generalization, is it not? All sort of things may happen with word

exchanges. Ego, actual diversity of meaning of words, of sentences,

gramatical construction issues...several things alone or in combination. And

then we have all the different colors and nuances the ego invents to feign

things and images and characters and personalities...And there are

situations when there is genuin interest in understanding what is being

said. Entretainment is part of course...

-geo-

[Guest guest]

-

Tim G.

Nisargadatta

Saturday, June 20, 2009 5:23 PM

Re: it's not there or over there either.

 

 

 

 

 

Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote:

> >

> >

> > -

> > Tim G.

> > Nisargadatta

> > Saturday, June 20, 2009 4:50 PM

> > Re: it's not there or over there either.

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote:

> > >

> > > You don't mean to suggest to geo to stop typing messages. You mean to

> > > suggest that geo should learn to look at the words as they arise as

> > > you do

> > > because you know how to do it and geo dont.

> >

> > That's Geo's perception.

> > -tim-

> >

> > > Thanks for the advice.

> >

> > Thank yourself... it's your own advice!

> > -tim-

> >

> > Is it?

> > -geo-

>

> Absolutely. Why not ask what I meant, instead of immediately assuming

> " me/you " motivations? Because 'ego' sees 'ego', immediately and without

> fail. It inserts motives for 'others' and then complains about its own

> creations. It's all in service of continuing the separate self, and all

> that ever 'works' is to lose interest in such servitude.

>

 

Turn to yourself. Yes, if you like, I have and you haven't. Now do it, so

that isn't the case anymore.

-tim-

 

YESSS SIR........ SIR!!

-geo-

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote:

>

>

> -

> roberibus111

> Nisargadatta

> Saturday, June 20, 2009 4:33 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-

>

> judging by that lengthy and too detailed reply..

>

> i'd say you care.

>

> way to much too.

>

> .b b.b.

>

> I did. So what?

> -geo-

 

 

that's what.

 

that's all.

 

what it is.. is what i said.. and that is all that there is to it.

 

..b b.b.

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote:

>

>

> Turn to yourself. Yes, if you like, I have and you haven't. Now do it, so

> that isn't the case anymore.

> -tim-

>

> YESSS SIR........ SIR!!

> -geo-

 

Don't forget to click yer heels together (chuckling) ;-).

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote:

>

> This is generalization, is it not? All sort of things may happen

> with word

> exchanges.

 

Just word exchanges ;-).

 

Ego, actual diversity of meaning of words, of sentences,

> gramatical construction issues...several things alone or in combination. And

> then we have all the different colors and nuances the ego invents to feign

> things and images and characters and personalities...

 

None of this 'stuff' is happening. You're happening.

[Guest guest]

-

Tim G.

Nisargadatta

Sunday, June 21, 2009 3:45 PM

Re: it's not there or over there either.

 

 

 

 

 

Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote:

>

>

> Turn to yourself. Yes, if you like, I have and you haven't. Now do it, so

> that isn't the case anymore.

> -tim-

>

> YESSS SIR........ SIR!!

> -geo-

 

Don't forget to click yer heels together (chuckling) ;-).

 

I did

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote:

>

>

> -

> Tim G.

> Nisargadatta

> Sunday, June 21, 2009 3:45 PM

> Re: it's not there or over there either.

>

>

>

>

>

> Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote:

> >

> >

> > Turn to yourself. Yes, if you like, I have and you haven't. Now do it, so

> > that isn't the case anymore.

> > -tim-

> >

> > YESSS SIR........ SIR!!

> > -geo-

>

> Don't forget to click yer heels together (chuckling) ;-).

>

> I did

 

Good, good, good.... all is in order... all is....

 

** INCOMING **

 

AAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

 

*here and now*

[Guest guest]

> This is generalization, is it not? All sort of things may happen

> with word

> exchanges.

 

Just word exchanges ;-).

 

Ego, actual diversity of meaning of words, of sentences,

> gramatical construction issues...several things alone or in combination.

> And

> then we have all the different colors and nuances the ego invents to feign

> things and images and characters and personalities...

 

None of this 'stuff' is happening. You're happening.

-tim-

 

No I am not.

-geo-

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote:

>

> None of this 'stuff' is happening. You're happening.

> -tim-

>

> No I am not.

> -geo-

 

You're all that's happening.

 

Therefore, you aren't happening.

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote:

> >

> > None of this 'stuff' is happening. You're happening.

> > -tim-

> >

> > No I am not.

> > -geo-

>

> You're all that's happening.

>

> Therefore, you aren't happening.

 

To 'see' you aren't happening,

 

See that you're all that's happening.

[Guest guest]

> None of this 'stuff' is happening. You're happening.

> -tim-

>

> No I am not.

> -geo-

 

You're all that's happening.

 

Therefore, you aren't happening.

-tim-

 

Are not you " forgeting " your side?

-geo-

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote:

>

>

> > None of this 'stuff' is happening. You're happening.

> > -tim-

> >

> > No I am not.

> > -geo-

>

> You're all that's happening.

>

> Therefore, you aren't happening.

> -tim-

>

> Are not you " forgeting " your side?

> -geo-

 

No. Are you?

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote:

> >

> >

> > > None of this 'stuff' is happening. You're happening.

> > > -tim-

> > >

> > > No I am not.

> > > -geo-

> >

> > You're all that's happening.

> >

> > Therefore, you aren't happening.

> > -tim-

> >

> > Are not you " forgeting " your side?

> > -geo-

>

> No. Are you?

 

Words go around, and around, and around.

 

The " purpose " of words is to address " the other " .

 

Therefore, words hide the truth.

 

Keep this in mind when looking for truth in words.