it's not there or over there either.

June 23, 2009

Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote:

>

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

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote:

> > >

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

> > > >

> > > > -

> > > > " geo " <inandor@>

> > > > <Nisargadatta >

> > > > Monday, June 22, 2009 3:25 PM

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

> > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > -

> > > > > 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.

> > > >

> > > > You know what? Stating or not stating has nothing to do with needing or

not. Who is there to need, and who will provide the needed?

> > > > > -ego-

> > >

> > > Yes.

> > >

> > > Who is there to give a statement?

> > >

> > > Has there ever been a statement?

> > >

> > > - D -

> >

> > [Yes.]...is a statement.

> >

> > you said it.

> >

> > you typed it.

> >

> > go figure huh?

> >

> > .b b.b.

>

> very concrete response.

>

> clunker.

>

> - d -

can't argue with what is concretely the truth.

you say dumb ass stuff.

..b b.b.

June 23, 2009

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 ;-).

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 , " roberibus111 "

<Roberibus111@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@>

wrote:

> > > > > > > > > >

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

wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > >

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

wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Aren't 'you' the issue that must unravel?

> > > > > > > > > > > > -tim-

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Why dont you ask dan the same question? He thinks there

is some

> > > > > > > > > > > > universal

> > > > > > > > > > > > mind outside of here/there.

> > > > > > > > > > > > -geo-

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Dan doesn't think there's anything inside or outside

anything else, and he's made this abundantly clear.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > yes

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > but nothing i say will help

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > it just becomes fodder for meaningless repartee, back and

forth

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > and that which is

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > has no involvement in back and forth

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > one who knows without knowing, simply is

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > doesn't require anything from words

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > one who is moving toward knowing, and engaged in experiences

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > can also engage in endless repartee

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > believing that there is meaningful contact being made

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > or imagining there is entertainment through the contact

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > - d -

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > " it just becomes fodder for meaningless repartee, back and

forth " ..

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > daaaaaaaaaaany!

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > you're looking for " meaning " ?

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > " meaning for what and for whom.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > " contact " ???

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > with whom by what?

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > all is one for true and for fun.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > silly guy!

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > .b b.b.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > yes.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > the moon is round.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > - d. -

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > ten lashes of the whip!

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > wake up!

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > .b b.b.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > first put on your captain marvel boots.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > - d -

> > > > >

> > > > > help can only come from within.

> > > > >

> > > > > though you marvel at my boots..

> > > > >

> > > > > they're not miraculous..

> > > > >

> > > > > they are merely Gucci.

> > > > >

> > > > > .b b.b.

> > > >

> > > > within what?

> > >

> > > it's not a within a what wuss.

> > >

> > > .b b.b.

> >

> > ho hum.

> >

> > - d -

>

> how droll.

>

> you don't hum very well ho.

>

> y'all ain't never gonna make no bread with that shit girl.

>

> .b b.b.

within what?

you can't say.

all your words are empty.

- d -

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 , " roberibus111 "

<Roberibus111@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@>

wrote:

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 "

<Roberibus111@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 "

<dan330033@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > >

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

wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

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

wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Aren't 'you' the issue that must unravel?

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > -tim-

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why dont you ask dan the same question? He thinks

there is some

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > universal

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > mind outside of here/there.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > -geo-

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Dan doesn't think there's anything inside or outside

anything else, and he's made this abundantly clear.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > yes

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > but nothing i say will help

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > it just becomes fodder for meaningless repartee, back

and forth

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > and that which is

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > has no involvement in back and forth

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > one who knows without knowing, simply is

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > doesn't require anything from words

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > one who is moving toward knowing, and engaged in

experiences

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > can also engage in endless repartee

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > believing that there is meaningful contact being made

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > or imagining there is entertainment through the contact

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > - d -

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > " it just becomes fodder for meaningless repartee, back and

forth " ..

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > daaaaaaaaaaany!

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > you're looking for " meaning " ?

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > " meaning for what and for whom.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > " contact " ???

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > with whom by what?

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > all is one for true and for fun.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > silly guy!

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > .b b.b.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > yes.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > the moon is round.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > - d. -

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > ten lashes of the whip!

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > wake up!

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > .b b.b.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > first put on your captain marvel boots.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > - d -

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > help can only come from within.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > though you marvel at my boots..

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > they're not miraculous..

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > they are merely Gucci.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > .b b.b.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > within what?

> > > > >

> > > > > it's not a within a what wuss.

> > > > >

> > > > > .b b.b.

> > > >

> > > > ho hum.

> > > >

> > > > - d -

> > >

> > > how droll.

> > >

> > > you don't hum very well ho.

> > >

> > > y'all ain't never gonna make no bread with that shit girl.

> > >

> > > .b b.b.

> >

> > you're silly.

> >

> > - d -

>

> i am what i am.

>

> you're phony and sanctimonious.

>

> the world balances everything out like that.

>

> .b b.b.

you are commenting about yourself.

- d -

June 23, 2009

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 -

June 23, 2009

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 --

June 23, 2009

Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111 wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote:

> >

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

> > >

> > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote:

> > > >

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

> > > > >

> > > > > -

> > > > > " geo " <inandor@>

> > > > > <Nisargadatta >

> > > > > Monday, June 22, 2009 3:25 PM

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

> > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > -

> > > > > > 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.

> > > > >

> > > > > You know what? Stating or not stating has nothing to do with needing

or not. Who is there to need, and who will provide the needed?

> > > > > > -ego-

> > > >

> > > > Yes.

> > > >

> > > > Who is there to give a statement?

> > > >

> > > > Has there ever been a statement?

> > > >

> > > > - D -

> > >

> > > [Yes.]...is a statement.

> > >

> > > you said it.

> > >

> > > you typed it.

> > >

> > > go figure huh?

> > >

> > > .b b.b.

> >

> > very concrete response.

> >

> > clunker.

> >

> > - d -

>

> can't argue with what is concretely the truth.

>

> you say dumb ass stuff.

>

> .b b.b.

butthead: " you're a stupid dumb ass, beavis. "

June 23, 2009

Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote:

>

> within what?

>

> you can't say.

>

> all your words are empty.

>

> - d -

So are yours... so are mine.

June 23, 2009

Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote:

>

> > i am what i am.

> >

> > you're phony and sanctimonious.

> >

> > the world balances everything out like that.

> >

> > .b b.b.

>

> you are commenting about yourself.

>

> - d -

Use " I-language " , dumb ass ;-) (jes kidding).

June 23, 2009

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.

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 , " roberibus111 "

<Roberibus111@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 "

<dan330033@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > >

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

wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > >

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

wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Aren't 'you' the issue that must unravel?

> > > > > > > > > > > > > -tim-

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Why dont you ask dan the same question? He thinks

there is some

> > > > > > > > > > > > > universal

> > > > > > > > > > > > > mind outside of here/there.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > -geo-

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Dan doesn't think there's anything inside or outside

anything else, and he's made this abundantly clear.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > yes

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > but nothing i say will help

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > it just becomes fodder for meaningless repartee, back and

forth

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > and that which is

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > has no involvement in back and forth

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > one who knows without knowing, simply is

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > doesn't require anything from words

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > one who is moving toward knowing, and engaged in

experiences

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > can also engage in endless repartee

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > believing that there is meaningful contact being made

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > or imagining there is entertainment through the contact

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > - d -

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > " it just becomes fodder for meaningless repartee, back and

forth " ..

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > daaaaaaaaaaany!

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > you're looking for " meaning " ?

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > " meaning for what and for whom.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > " contact " ???

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > with whom by what?

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > all is one for true and for fun.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > silly guy!

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > .b b.b.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > yes.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > the moon is round.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > - d. -

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > ten lashes of the whip!

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > wake up!

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > .b b.b.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > first put on your captain marvel boots.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > - d -

> > > > > >

> > > > > > help can only come from within.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > though you marvel at my boots..

> > > > > >

> > > > > > they're not miraculous..

> > > > > >

> > > > > > they are merely Gucci.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > .b b.b.

> > > > >

> > > > > within what?

> > > >

> > > > it's not a within a what wuss.

> > > >

> > > > .b b.b.

> > >

> > > ho hum.

> > >

> > > - d -

> >

> > how droll.

> >

> > you don't hum very well ho.

> >

> > y'all ain't never gonna make no bread with that shit girl.

> >

> > .b b.b.

>

> within what?

>

> you can't say.

>

> all your words are empty.

>

> - d -

all is empty dickhead.

you've said so yourself numerous times.

how queer of you now to try and negate your own words.

well..not really.

typical actually.

..b b.b.

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 , " roberibus111 "

<Roberibus111@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 "

<dan330033@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 "

<Roberibus111@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 "

<dan330033@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. "

<fewtch@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo "

<inandor@> wrote:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Aren't 'you' the issue that must unravel?

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -tim-

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why dont you ask dan the same question? He thinks

there is some

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > universal

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > mind outside of here/there.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -geo-

> > > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dan doesn't think there's anything inside or outside

anything else, and he's made this abundantly clear.

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > yes

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > but nothing i say will help

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > it just becomes fodder for meaningless repartee, back

and forth

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > and that which is

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > has no involvement in back and forth

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > one who knows without knowing, simply is

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > doesn't require anything from words

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > one who is moving toward knowing, and engaged in

experiences

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > can also engage in endless repartee

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > believing that there is meaningful contact being made

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > or imagining there is entertainment through the

contact

> > > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > > - d -

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > " it just becomes fodder for meaningless repartee, back

and forth " ..

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > daaaaaaaaaaany!

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > you're looking for " meaning " ?

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > " meaning for what and for whom.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > " contact " ???

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > with whom by what?

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > all is one for true and for fun.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > silly guy!

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > .b b.b.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > yes.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > the moon is round.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > - d. -

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > ten lashes of the whip!

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > wake up!

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > .b b.b.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > first put on your captain marvel boots.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > - d -

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > help can only come from within.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > though you marvel at my boots..

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > they're not miraculous..

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > they are merely Gucci.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > .b b.b.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > within what?

> > > > > >

> > > > > > it's not a within a what wuss.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > .b b.b.

> > > > >

> > > > > ho hum.

> > > > >

> > > > > - d -

> > > >

> > > > how droll.

> > > >

> > > > you don't hum very well ho.

> > > >

> > > > y'all ain't never gonna make no bread with that shit girl.

> > > >

> > > > .b b.b.

> > >

> > > you're silly.

> > >

> > > - d -

> >

> > i am what i am.

> >

> > you're phony and sanctimonious.

> >

> > the world balances everything out like that.

> >

> > .b b.b.

>

> you are commenting about yourself.

>

> - d -

no daniel.

there is no self here.

that's your burden though.

and with a dumb ass 'self " like that there..

it's little wonder you try and deny it.

..b b.b.

June 23, 2009

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.

June 23, 2009

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.

June 23, 2009

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 " <inandor@>

> > > > > > <Nisargadatta >

> > > > > > Monday, June 22, 2009 3:25 PM

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

> > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > -

> > > > > > > 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.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > You know what? Stating or not stating has nothing to do with needing

or not. Who is there to need, and who will provide the needed?

> > > > > > > -ego-

> > > > >

> > > > > Yes.

> > > > >

> > > > > Who is there to give a statement?

> > > > >

> > > > > Has there ever been a statement?

> > > > >

> > > > > - D -

> > > >

> > > > [Yes.]...is a statement.

> > > >

> > > > you said it.

> > > >

> > > > you typed it.

> > > >

> > > > go figure huh?

> > > >

> > > > .b b.b.

> > >

> > > very concrete response.

> > >

> > > clunker.

> > >

> > > - d -

> >

> > can't argue with what is concretely the truth.

> >

> > you say dumb ass stuff.

> >

> > .b b.b.

>

> butthead: " you're a stupid dumb ass, beavis. "

hims is getting a widdle upset.

siwwy wabbit!

siwwy and dumb ass bunny.

heh heh heh heh...

..b b.b.

June 23, 2009

-

Tim G.

Nisargadatta

Monday, June 22, 2009 9:48 PM

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

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 ;-).

-tim-

You can be a real idiot when you whant, eh? Its not enough to saythe same

things as one other...you must dance the right tune - ignorant.

-ego-

avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean.

Virus Database (VPS): 090526-0, 26/05/2009

Tested on: 23/6/2009 07:00:16

June 23, 2009

-

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-

avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean.

Virus Database (VPS): 090526-0, 26/05/2009

Tested on: 23/6/2009 07:00:17

June 23, 2009

-

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-

avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean.

Virus Database (VPS): 090526-0, 26/05/2009

Tested on: 23/6/2009 07:00:19

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 , " 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 -

June 23, 2009

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 -

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 , " 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 -

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 , " 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.

June 23, 2009

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.

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 , " 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.

June 23, 2009

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 -

Sign In

it's not there or over there either.

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Guest guest