it's not there or over there either.

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote:

>

>

> -

> Tim G.

> Nisargadatta

> Sunday, June 21, 2009 4:27 PM

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

>

>

>

>

>

> 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.

> -tim-

>

> Be back soon. Second time Brazil x Italy soccer in South Africa

 

More avoidance. Enjoy.

[Guest guest]

-

Tim G.

Nisargadatta

Sunday, June 21, 2009 4:32 PM

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

 

 

 

 

 

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?

 

Yes. There is forgetting everything here

-geo-

[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-

>

> 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.

 

geo> That is why I told you: I forgot to remember.

[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-

>

> 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.

 

geo>...but, who are you adressing exactly?

[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 , " 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.

 

Oh, yes, and I like Bob's unclarity. He has a lot of interesting things to say

(map-wise) about the map I am not.

 

So it goes :-).

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote:

>

> 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.

 

 

it so happens that nothing ever happens around here....or there.

 

..b b.b.

[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.

>

> To 'see' you aren't happening,

>

> See that you're all that's happening.

>

> geo> See THE all that you are not => you are.

 

One has to stop objectifying " it " . " It " isn't an " it " , or a " the " .

 

Isn't away from you.

 

As long as taken as if it is, merely a mind-object for entertainment.

 

What is the observer of all these mind objects?

 

This cannot be skipped, or objectified, made to be something " out there " to be

reached.

[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.

>

> To 'see' you aren't happening,

>

> See that you're all that's happening.

>

> geo> See THE all that you are not => you are.

 

One has to stop objectifying " it " . " It " isn't an " it " , or a " the " .

 

Isn't away from you.

 

As long as taken as if it is, merely a mind-object for entertainment.

 

What is the observer of all these mind objects?

 

This cannot be skipped, or objectified, made to be something " out there " to

be reached.

 

geo> Prefer the darkness to light.

[Guest guest]

-

roberibus111

Nisargadatta

Sunday, June 21, 2009 4:59 PM

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

 

 

 

 

 

Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote:

>

> 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.

 

it so happens that nothing ever happens around here....or there.

 

..b b.b.

 

Everythig happens around here - not here.

-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.

> >

> > To 'see' you aren't happening,

> >

> > See that you're all that's happening.

> >

> > geo> See THE all that you are not => you are.

>

> One has to stop objectifying " it " . " It " isn't an " it " , or a " the " .

>

> Isn't away from you.

>

> As long as taken as if it is, merely a mind-object for entertainment.

>

> What is the observer of all these mind objects?

>

> This cannot be skipped, or objectified, made to be something " out there " to

> be reached.

>

> geo> Prefer the darkness to light.

 

An interesting thought above, although I don't see how it relates to the subject

matter. Can ya tell me?

[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.

> >

> > To 'see' you aren't happening,

> >

> > See that you're all that's happening.

> >

> > geo> See THE all that you are not => you are.

>

> One has to stop objectifying " it " . " It " isn't an " it " , or a " the " .

>

> Isn't away from you.

>

> As long as taken as if it is, merely a mind-object for entertainment.

>

> What is the observer of all these mind objects?

>

> This cannot be skipped, or objectified, made to be something " out there "

> to

> be reached.

>

> geo> Prefer the darkness to light.

 

An interesting thought above, although I don't see how it relates to the

subject matter. Can ya tell me?

-tim-

 

Not really. The source of light is darkness.

-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.

> > >

> > > To 'see' you aren't happening,

> > >

> > > See that you're all that's happening.

> > >

> > > geo> See THE all that you are not => you are.

> >

> > One has to stop objectifying " it " . " It " isn't an " it " , or a " the " .

> >

> > Isn't away from you.

> >

> > As long as taken as if it is, merely a mind-object for entertainment.

> >

> > What is the observer of all these mind objects?

> >

> > This cannot be skipped, or objectified, made to be something " out there "

> > to

> > be reached.

> >

> > geo> Prefer the darkness to light.

>

> An interesting thought above, although I don't see how it relates to the

> subject matter. Can ya tell me?

> -tim-

>

> Not really. The source of light is darkness.

> -geo-

 

And, surely, the source of darkness is light.

[Guest guest]

-

Tim G.

Nisargadatta

Sunday, June 21, 2009 5:54 PM

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

 

 

 

 

 

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.

> > >

> > > geo> See THE all that you are not => you are.

> >

> > One has to stop objectifying " it " . " It " isn't an " it " , or a " the " .

> >

> > Isn't away from you.

> >

> > As long as taken as if it is, merely a mind-object for entertainment.

> >

> > What is the observer of all these mind objects?

> >

> > This cannot be skipped, or objectified, made to be something " out there "

> > to

> > be reached.

> >

> > geo> Prefer the darkness to light.

>

> An interesting thought above, although I don't see how it relates to the

> subject matter. Can ya tell me?

> -tim-

>

> Not really. The source of light is darkness.

> -geo-

 

And, surely, the source of darkness is light.

-tim-

 

In that case prefer the light, but make sure you dont look at it.

-geo-

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote:

>

>

> And, surely, the source of darkness is light.

> -tim-

>

> In that case prefer the light, but make sure you dont look at it.

> -geo-

 

I am darkness and light both, and the source of them.

[Guest guest]

-

Tim G.

Nisargadatta

Sunday, June 21, 2009 7:11 PM

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

 

 

 

 

 

Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote:

>

>

> And, surely, the source of darkness is light.

> -tim-

>

> In that case prefer the light, but make sure you dont look at it.

> -geo-

 

I am darkness and light both, and the source of them.

-tim-

 

Just the source.

-geo-

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote:

>

>

> -

> dan330033

> Nisargadatta

> Saturday, June 20, 2009 3:23 PM

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

>

>

>

>

>

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

> >

> >

> > -

> > dan330033

> > Nisargadatta

> > Saturday, June 20, 2009 2:39 AM

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

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

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

> > >

> > > You believe there is some kind of real manifestation apart from the

> > > unmanifest

> > > -d-

> > >

> > > I dont believe in anything. I see real manifestations indeed - empty -

> > > but

> > > manifest. This is only possible because I am unmanifest.

> > > geo-

> >

> > there is only the unmanifest

> >

> > - d -

> >

> > And its waves

> > -geo-

>

> " and "

>

> ????

> -d-

>

> Bewfore people think we are about to by our weding rings i will correct and

> prove to you that I am righter.

> It is the wavy unmanifest. Is that better?

> -geo-

 

as one has separated from it, it can have any qualities it pulls from " you "

through an experience, as the experiencer is never other than the experience.

 

as one hasn't separated, no qualities, no other, no experience.

 

experience and no-experience are not-two.

 

one now freely experiences whatever arises without choice, without separation

and without having or knowing any qualities.

 

one can say, " this coffee is sweet, there's a lot of sugar in it, " and there are

no qualities, no experience, no separation.

 

this sounds paradoxical when expressed.

 

when not expressed, there's no paradox, because no " other " is being addressed,

encountered or communicated with.

 

indeed, this is so even when one apparently communicates as if to an other.

 

- dan -

[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-

 

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

[Guest guest]

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. -

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote:

>

>

> -

> roberibus111

> Nisargadatta

> Sunday, June 21, 2009 4:59 PM

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

>

>

>

>

>

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

> >

> > 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.

>

> it so happens that nothing ever happens around here....or there.

>

> .b b.b.

>

> Everythig happens around here - not here.

> -geo-

 

 

happening isn't happening.

 

 

..b b.b.

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote:

>

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

> >

> >

> > And, surely, the source of darkness is light.

> > -tim-

> >

> > In that case prefer the light, but make sure you dont look at it.

> > -geo-

>

> I am darkness and light both, and the source of them.

 

 

i am the source of the source.

 

the force of the source is in my hands.

 

Shazam!

 

captain marvel:

 

..b b.b.

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote:

>

>

> -

> Tim G.

> Nisargadatta

> Sunday, June 21, 2009 7:11 PM

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

>

>

>

>

>

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

> >

> >

> > And, surely, the source of darkness is light.

> > -tim-

> >

> > In that case prefer the light, but make sure you dont look at it.

> > -geo-

>

> I am darkness and light both, and the source of them.

> -tim-

>

> Just the source.

> -geo-

 

 

just the source????

 

" you " 're kidding " me " .

 

why that's just nothing!

 

..b b.b.

[Guest guest]

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.

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote:

>

> 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

 

 

you can see descriptions of dogs walking down the street?

 

dropping the descriptions of dog shit on the described sidewalk?

 

you can hear yourself telling yourself about yourself.

 

and you've got to tell everyone else who is you.

 

no distances huh?

 

hmmmmm?????

 

..b b.b.

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote:

>

> 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.

 

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?

 

All the alternatives have choicelessly dried up.

 

And this is clear only when there is no intent to deviate from truth, from what

is, for any sense of psychological gain, security or protection.

 

- D -

[Guest guest]

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'.