Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org
Sign in to follow this  
Guest guest

it's not there or over there either.

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote:

>

>

> -

> Tim G.

> Nisargadatta

> Sunday, June 07, 2009 9:45 AM

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

>

>

>

>

>

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

> >

> >

> > Before the very first thought is already awareness

>

> Before the first thought, before the first sight, sound, smell, taste or

> touch;

>

> In the beginning was the word.

>

> Prior to the beginning, no word ever was.

>

> geo>Prior to the beguining?

 

before the beginning of after the ending of outside the inside

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111 wrote:

>

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

> >

> >

> > -

> > roberibus111

> > Nisargadatta

> > Saturday, June 06, 2009 9:22 PM

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

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > awareness is not found on the " other side " ..

> >

> > through any process or meditation.

> >

> > the very first thought..

> >

> > happens already in awareness.

> >

> > any journey from that thought foreward..

> >

> > can only happen in awareness.

> >

> > it cannot be taking " you " towards awareness.

> >

> > .b b.b.

> >

> > Before the very first thought is already awareness

>

>

> why the need to repeat what was said in the post you reply to?

>

> refresher?

>

> .b b.b.

 

it's not in the words

 

or the thought

 

you can repeat the words ad infinitum

 

an endless echo

 

echo

 

into stillness

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111 wrote:

>

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

> >

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

> > >

> > >

> > > Before the very first thought is already awareness

> >

> > Before the first thought, before the first sight, sound, smell, taste or

touch;

> >

> > In the beginning was the word.

> >

> > Prior to the beginning, no word ever was.

>

>

> there was no beginning.

>

> the notion " prior " is error.

>

> .b b.b.

 

there was no error

 

the notion " error " is absurd

 

there was no absurdity

 

the notion " absurd " is a mind fart

 

there is no mind fart

 

there is no mind

 

there is only jello

 

the raspberry flavor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote:

>

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

> >

> >

> > -

> > Tim G.

> > Nisargadatta

> > Sunday, June 07, 2009 9:45 AM

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

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

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

> > >

> > >

> > > Before the very first thought is already awareness

> >

> > Before the first thought, before the first sight, sound, smell, taste or

> > touch;

> >

> > In the beginning was the word.

> >

> > Prior to the beginning, no word ever was.

> >

> > geo>Prior to the beguining?

>

> before the beginning of after the ending of outside the inside

 

Prior to the beguining, begins the beguine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote:

>

>

>

> > geo> I understand, but then your statement " .... everything's an

> > interpretation. " is not a fact....or is it?

> > I dont know

>

> Even to say " everything's an interpretation " is an interpretation.

>

> Dan will talk about 'what was never interpreted' and such.

>

> There may be such a 'thing' (that isn't a 'thing'), but it isn't subject to

> interpretation. It's just absence of all interpretation.

>

> geo> The only way you can get away with this is if you say that

> interpretation is the same as consciousness or the same as the world.

> Any implication of something being interpreted to a subject receiver of some

> interpretation is conceptual.

>

> I think what is is absense of any interpretation. There is living as

> orgnism/consciousness.

 

none so blind ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote:

>

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

> >

> >

> >

> > > geo> I understand, but then your statement " .... everything's an

> > > interpretation. " is not a fact....or is it?

> > > I dont know

> >

> > Even to say " everything's an interpretation " is an interpretation.

> >

> > Dan will talk about 'what was never interpreted' and such.

> >

> > There may be such a 'thing' (that isn't a 'thing'), but it isn't subject to

> > interpretation. It's just absence of all interpretation.

> >

> > geo> The only way you can get away with this is if you say that

> > interpretation is the same as consciousness or the same as the world.

> > Any implication of something being interpreted to a subject receiver of some

> > interpretation is conceptual.

> >

> > I think what is is absense of any interpretation. There is living as

> > orgnism/consciousness.

>

> none so blind ...

 

" I think " indeed so :-p.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote:

>

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

> >

> >

> > -

> > Tim G.

> > Nisargadatta

> > Sunday, June 07, 2009 8:35 PM

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

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

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

> > >

> > > geo> I understand, but then your statement " .... everything's an

> > > interpretation. " is not a fact....or is it?

> > > I dont know

> >

> > Even to say " everything's an interpretation " is an interpretation.

> >

> > Dan will talk about 'what was never interpreted' and such.

> >

> > There may be such a 'thing' (that isn't a 'thing'), but it isn't subject to

> > interpretation. It's just absence of all interpretation.

> >

> > geo> The only way you can get away with this is if you say that

> > interpretation is the same as consciousness or the same as the world.

> > Any implication of something being interpreted to a subject receiver of some

> > interpretation is conceptual.

>

> once you understand that the world you experience is a description

>

> a translation

>

> you know

>

> without anything being known

 

It isn't subject ('I') to (interpretation). It's just (very just) absence of

interpretation ;-).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

-

dan330033

Nisargadatta

Monday, June 08, 2009 4:18 PM

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

 

 

 

 

 

Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote:

>

>

>

> > geo> I understand, but then your statement " .... everything's an

> > interpretation. " is not a fact....or is it?

> > I dont know

>

> Even to say " everything's an interpretation " is an interpretation.

>

> Dan will talk about 'what was never interpreted' and such.

>

> There may be such a 'thing' (that isn't a 'thing'), but it isn't subject

> to

> interpretation. It's just absence of all interpretation.

>

> geo> The only way you can get away with this is if you say that

> interpretation is the same as consciousness or the same as the world.

> Any implication of something being interpreted to a subject receiver of

> some

> interpretation is conceptual.

>

> I think what is is absense of any interpretation. There is living as

> orgnism/consciousness.

 

none so blind ...

 

??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

-

dan330033

Nisargadatta

Monday, June 08, 2009 4:22 PM

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

 

 

 

 

 

Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote:

>

>

> -

> Tim G.

> Nisargadatta

> Sunday, June 07, 2009 8:35 PM

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

>

>

>

>

>

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

> >

> > geo> I understand, but then your statement " .... everything's an

> > interpretation. " is not a fact....or is it?

> > I dont know

>

> Even to say " everything's an interpretation " is an interpretation.

>

> Dan will talk about 'what was never interpreted' and such.

>

> There may be such a 'thing' (that isn't a 'thing'), but it isn't subject

> to

> interpretation. It's just absence of all interpretation.

>

> geo> The only way you can get away with this is if you say that

> interpretation is the same as consciousness or the same as the world.

> Any implication of something being interpreted to a subject receiver of

> some

> interpretation is conceptual.

 

once you understand that the world you experience is a description

 

a translation

 

you know

 

without anything being known

 

geo> There is no me experiencing the world. The world is not a description

nor a translation of another world.

The human world IS as it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote:

>

>

> geo> There is no me experiencing the world. The world is not a description

> nor a translation of another world.

> The human world IS as it is.

 

The human world is not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

-

Tim G.

Nisargadatta

Monday, June 08, 2009 4:54 PM

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

 

 

 

 

 

Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote:

>

>

> geo> There is no me experiencing the world. The world is not a description

> nor a translation of another world.

> The human world IS as it is.

 

The human world is not.

 

geo> The color of the sky is a description? The sound of thunder is a

description?

The sense of heat, the teste of sweet...are translations?

 

The human world is where the human organism can live. No human world, no

human organsim, no human consciousness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

-

Tim G.

Nisargadatta

Monday, June 08, 2009 4:54 PM

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

 

 

 

 

 

Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote:

>

>

> geo> There is no me experiencing the world. The world is not a description

> nor a translation of another world.

> The human world IS as it is.

 

The human world is not.

 

geo> The human world is a patterning of the one that is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote:

>

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

> >

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

> > >

> > >

> > > -

> > > roberibus111

> > > Nisargadatta

> > > Saturday, June 06, 2009 9:22 PM

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

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > awareness is not found on the " other side " ..

> > >

> > > through any process or meditation.

> > >

> > > the very first thought..

> > >

> > > happens already in awareness.

> > >

> > > any journey from that thought foreward..

> > >

> > > can only happen in awareness.

> > >

> > > it cannot be taking " you " towards awareness.

> > >

> > > .b b.b.

> > >

> > > Before the very first thought is already awareness

> >

> >

> > why the need to repeat what was said in the post you reply to?

> >

> > refresher?

> >

> > .b b.b.

>

> it's not in the words

>

> or the thought

>

> you can repeat the words ad infinitum

>

> an endless echo

>

> echo

>

> into stillness

 

 

oh i see.

 

..b b.b.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote:

>

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

> >

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

> > >

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

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Before the very first thought is already awareness

> > >

> > > Before the first thought, before the first sight, sound, smell, taste or

touch;

> > >

> > > In the beginning was the word.

> > >

> > > Prior to the beginning, no word ever was.

> >

> >

> > there was no beginning.

> >

> > the notion " prior " is error.

> >

> > .b b.b.

>

> there was no error

>

> the notion " error " is absurd

>

> there was no absurdity

>

> the notion " absurd " is a mind fart

>

> there is no mind fart

>

> there is no mind

>

> there is only jello

>

> the raspberry flavor

 

 

 

uh huh.

 

sure.

 

you bet.

 

how 'bout those Red Wings eh?

 

..b b.b.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote:

>

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

> >

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

> > >

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

> > > >

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

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Before the very first thought is already awareness

> > > >

> > > > Before the first thought, before the first sight, sound, smell, taste or

touch;

> > > >

> > > > In the beginning was the word.

> > > >

> > > > Prior to the beginning, no word ever was.

> > >

> > >

> > > there was no beginning.

> > >

> > > the notion " prior " is error.

> > >

> > > .b b.b.

> >

> > I stand corrected.

>

> I sit genuflected.

 

 

you bend your ass?

 

how droll.

 

..b b.b.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote:

>

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

> >

> >

> > -

> > Tim G.

> > Nisargadatta

> > Sunday, June 07, 2009 8:35 PM

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

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

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

> > >

> > > geo> I understand, but then your statement " .... everything's an

> > > interpretation. " is not a fact....or is it?

> > > I dont know

> >

> > Even to say " everything's an interpretation " is an interpretation.

> >

> > Dan will talk about 'what was never interpreted' and such.

> >

> > There may be such a 'thing' (that isn't a 'thing'), but it isn't subject to

> > interpretation. It's just absence of all interpretation.

> >

> > geo> The only way you can get away with this is if you say that

> > interpretation is the same as consciousness or the same as the world.

> > Any implication of something being interpreted to a subject receiver of some

> > interpretation is conceptual.

>

> once you understand that the world you experience is a description

>

> a translation

>

> you know

>

> without anything being known

 

 

and ah..

 

" you " :

 

" know " .. " understand " ..

 

a..ah..a ahhhahaahahahahahhaaaaaaaaaa!

 

ok.

 

LOL!

 

..b b..b

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote:

>

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

> >

> >

> > geo> There is no me experiencing the world. The world is not a description

> > nor a translation of another world.

> > The human world IS as it is.

>

> The human world is not.

 

 

tell that to every serviceman in Iraq and Afghanastan

 

maybe the gents riding with you on the bus believe your bullshit.

 

the real human world thinks..

 

you're a fucking lost wannabe philosophy nerd.

 

but fuck that human world is not.

 

so alone as a nonhuman observer you can feel at ease.

 

how fucking stupid.

 

..b b.b.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote:

>

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

> >

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

> > >

> > >

> > > Before the very first thought is already awareness

> >

> > Before the first thought, before the first sight, sound, smell, taste or

touch;

> >

> > In the beginning was the word.

> >

> > Prior to the beginning, no word ever was.

>

>

> " the b'bird's the word "

>

> Trashmen

 

I swear there's a morning bird around here that goes " you... you... you... ME!

you... you... you... ME! " The bird really is the word ;-).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

-

Tim G.

Nisargadatta

Tuesday, June 09, 2009 8:51 AM

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

 

 

 

 

 

Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote:

>

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

> >

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

> > >

> > >

> > > Before the very first thought is already awareness

> >

> > Before the first thought, before the first sight, sound, smell, taste or

> > touch;

> >

> > In the beginning was the word.

> >

> > Prior to the beginning, no word ever was.

>

>

> " the b'bird's the word "

>

> Trashmen

 

I swear there's a morning bird around here that goes " you... you... you...

ME! you... you... you... ME! " The bird really is the word ;-).

-tim-

 

There is a funny bird here also, sitting in front of a screen...

-geo-.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote:

>

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

> >

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

> > >

> > >

> > > -

> > > Tim G.

> > > Nisargadatta

> > > Sunday, June 07, 2009 8:35 PM

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

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

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

> > > >

> > > > geo> I understand, but then your statement " .... everything's an

> > > > interpretation. " is not a fact....or is it?

> > > > I dont know

> > >

> > > Even to say " everything's an interpretation " is an interpretation.

> > >

> > > Dan will talk about 'what was never interpreted' and such.

> > >

> > > There may be such a 'thing' (that isn't a 'thing'), but it isn't subject

to

> > > interpretation. It's just absence of all interpretation.

> > >

> > > geo> The only way you can get away with this is if you say that

> > > interpretation is the same as consciousness or the same as the world.

> > > Any implication of something being interpreted to a subject receiver of

some

> > > interpretation is conceptual.

> >

> > once you understand that the world you experience is a description

> >

> > a translation

> >

> > you know

> >

> > without anything being known

>

> It isn't subject ('I') to (interpretation). It's just (very just) absence of

interpretation ;-).

 

Yes, one's interpretive template becomes what is known as reality: me/you

inside/outside yesterday/today/tomorrow

 

We go from the template (thought) to reality (we think), applying our changing

template (which we consider learning, life experience, survival.

 

With no movement to template, and no template to apply, there is no activity of

thought.

 

Often, this is expressed in negative terms: no template, no I or you, no time,

no becoming

 

But it isn't a negation

 

There isn't anything missing or not happening that needs to happen

 

One understands clearly, without anything being known or needing to be known

 

It is resolved, without anything having to be resolved.

 

- d -

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote:

>

>

> -

> dan330033

> Nisargadatta

> Monday, June 08, 2009 4:18 PM

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

>

>

>

>

>

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

> >

> >

> >

> > > geo> I understand, but then your statement " .... everything's an

> > > interpretation. " is not a fact....or is it?

> > > I dont know

> >

> > Even to say " everything's an interpretation " is an interpretation.

> >

> > Dan will talk about 'what was never interpreted' and such.

> >

> > There may be such a 'thing' (that isn't a 'thing'), but it isn't subject

> > to

> > interpretation. It's just absence of all interpretation.

> >

> > geo> The only way you can get away with this is if you say that

> > interpretation is the same as consciousness or the same as the world.

> > Any implication of something being interpreted to a subject receiver of

> > some

> > interpretation is conceptual.

> >

> > I think what is is absense of any interpretation. There is living as

> > orgnism/consciousness.

>

> none so blind ...

>

> ??

 

be those question marks

 

no movement to " something " to " anything " or even to " nothing " ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote:

>

>

> -

> dan330033

> Nisargadatta

> Monday, June 08, 2009 4:22 PM

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

>

>

>

>

>

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

> >

> >

> > -

> > Tim G.

> > Nisargadatta

> > Sunday, June 07, 2009 8:35 PM

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

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

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

> > >

> > > geo> I understand, but then your statement " .... everything's an

> > > interpretation. " is not a fact....or is it?

> > > I dont know

> >

> > Even to say " everything's an interpretation " is an interpretation.

> >

> > Dan will talk about 'what was never interpreted' and such.

> >

> > There may be such a 'thing' (that isn't a 'thing'), but it isn't subject

> > to

> > interpretation. It's just absence of all interpretation.

> >

> > geo> The only way you can get away with this is if you say that

> > interpretation is the same as consciousness or the same as the world.

> > Any implication of something being interpreted to a subject receiver of

> > some

> > interpretation is conceptual.

>

> once you understand that the world you experience is a description

>

> a translation

>

> you know

>

> without anything being known

>

> geo> There is no me experiencing the world. The world is not a description

> nor a translation of another world.

> The human world IS as it is.

 

it's nice for you to know that so definitely

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote:

>

>

> -

> Tim G.

> Nisargadatta

> Monday, June 08, 2009 4:54 PM

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

>

>

>

>

>

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

> >

> >

> > geo> There is no me experiencing the world. The world is not a description

> > nor a translation of another world.

> > The human world IS as it is.

>

> The human world is not.

>

> geo> The human world is a patterning of the one that is.

 

you and your patternings ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote:

>

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

> >

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

> > >

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

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > -

> > > > Tim G.

> > > > Nisargadatta

> > > > Sunday, June 07, 2009 8:35 PM

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

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

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

> > > > >

> > > > > geo> I understand, but then your statement " .... everything's an

> > > > > interpretation. " is not a fact....or is it?

> > > > > I dont know

> > > >

> > > > Even to say " everything's an interpretation " is an interpretation.

> > > >

> > > > Dan will talk about 'what was never interpreted' and such.

> > > >

> > > > There may be such a 'thing' (that isn't a 'thing'), but it isn't subject

to

> > > > interpretation. It's just absence of all interpretation.

> > > >

> > > > geo> The only way you can get away with this is if you say that

> > > > interpretation is the same as consciousness or the same as the world.

> > > > Any implication of something being interpreted to a subject receiver of

some

> > > > interpretation is conceptual.

> > >

> > > once you understand that the world you experience is a description

> > >

> > > a translation

> > >

> > > you know

> > >

> > > without anything being known

> >

> > It isn't subject ('I') to (interpretation). It's just (very just) absence

of interpretation ;-).

>

> Yes, one's interpretive template becomes what is known as reality: me/you

inside/outside yesterday/today/tomorrow

>

> We go from the template (thought) to reality (we think), applying our changing

template (which we consider learning, life experience, survival.

>

> With no movement to template, and no template to apply, there is no activity

of thought.

>

> Often, this is expressed in negative terms: no template, no I or you, no

time, no becoming

>

> But it isn't a negation

 

Indeed so. " Absence " isn't a quality, isn't the presence of absence.

 

> There isn't anything missing or not happening that needs to happen

>

> One understands clearly, without anything being known or needing to be known

>

> It is resolved, without anything having to be resolved.

>

> - d -

 

Yup yup, sez the muppet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guest

-

dan330033

Nisargadatta

Tuesday, June 09, 2009 12:43 PM

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

 

 

 

 

 

Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote:

>

>

> -

> dan330033

> Nisargadatta

> Monday, June 08, 2009 4:22 PM

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

>

>

>

>

>

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

> >

> >

> > -

> > Tim G.

> > Nisargadatta

> > Sunday, June 07, 2009 8:35 PM

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

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

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

> > >

> > > geo> I understand, but then your statement " .... everything's an

> > > interpretation. " is not a fact....or is it?

> > > I dont know

> >

> > Even to say " everything's an interpretation " is an interpretation.

> >

> > Dan will talk about 'what was never interpreted' and such.

> >

> > There may be such a 'thing' (that isn't a 'thing'), but it isn't subject

> > to

> > interpretation. It's just absence of all interpretation.

> >

> > geo> The only way you can get away with this is if you say that

> > interpretation is the same as consciousness or the same as the world.

> > Any implication of something being interpreted to a subject receiver of

> > some

> > interpretation is conceptual.

>

> once you understand that the world you experience is a description

>

> a translation

>

> you know

>

> without anything being known

>

> geo> There is no me experiencing the world. The world is not a description

> nor a translation of another world.

> The human world IS as it is.

 

it's nice for you to know that so definitely

 

geo> I dont understand what you mean...or maybe there is nothing to

understand anyway...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...