Guest guest Report post Posted June 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > Tim G. > Nisargadatta > Friday, June 19, 2009 8:55 AM > Re: Asteroids with memory > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > Try looking at it this way, ya may find it interesting -- > > > > One's own body is " you " , and the other is " me " . The speaker is always " I " , > > whatever body is speaking. > > > > Play with this stuff... don't let language trap ya into beliefs in 'self'. > > > > geo> I am having a litlle difficulty with your game. How can I be them if > > I feel my guts in this body and dont feel theirs? > > How did you solve this problem? > > By not taking myself to be a body in the first place. > > I don't mean 'be disembodied'. > > I mean, don't assume that one is a body. The body is perceived (seen, felt, > heard, etc) like other bodies. > > geo> Maybe I was not clear. I feel pain in this body but not in others There is simply " pain appearing. " The addition " pain appearing in my body and not in another body, " is an additional layer of thought construction, added onto the thought/perceptual construction " pain appearing. " - D - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 19, 2009 > > > > It's interesting how asteroids in an asteroid field are seen as > > > > objects in > > > > an objective universe, but people are seen as subjects in an > > > > objective > > > > universe. > > > > > > > > How strange. > > > > > > > > People are " asteroids with memory " . That's how much volition folks > > > > have > > > > over > > > > anything. > > > > > > > > geo> But wait a minute. Stay there. Dont go away. > > > > What do you mean by people are seen? Only EACH ONE person sees > > > > himself > > > > as > > > > subject. He sees other people as objects alright. An asteroid can > > > > not > > > > look > > > > at itself. What are you trying to say?? > > > > > > People cannot look at themselves, either. > > > And that's a fact, Jack. Anything you can look at, isn't you. > > > -tim- > > > > > > Ahh... I see :>). Maybe it is " people see themselves as subjects in an > > > objective universe " , right? That is the whole point...it is the origin > > > of > > > sense of self, I. > > > -geo- > > > > The 'sense of self' is nothing more than a belief, based on false data. > > Primarily, the notion that others see them, and they see others. > > > > Switch this to " Others see themselves when they see me, and I see > > myself when I see them " , and the situation changes. > > Try looking at it this way, ya may find it interesting -- > > One's own body is " you " , and the other is " me " . The speaker is always " I " , > whatever body is speaking. > > Play with this stuff... don't let language trap ya into beliefs in 'self'. > > geo> These are all funny games to play...I will try. Side note: I dont > think > the self is just " language " . As per the thread with dan, there is the fact > that this body feels. The others dont. There is seeing through these eyes > and not through others eyes. Well, that's the belief he's questioning. The seeing is the seeing of all seeing. It isn't a partialized seeing. The belief that this particular body is special and has a seeing that is its own, is a thought construction. Without the thought construction, seeing is just seeing, not partialized. The eyeball isn't seen from behind. The seeing is " all around, " so to speak. It is only when thought and memory get involved that seeing is partialized, and there is a sense that " this particular body has its own seeing and experiencing that belong to it. " I'm not saying that thought construction is wrong or bad or shouldn't happen. Clearly, thought functions happen and are not out of place. What I am saying, and what I think Tim is pointing to, is that seeing doesn't depend on thought constructions. And clarity is what is, when the distortions involved in trying to attach to thought constructions, drop. Dissolve. - D - Seeing/being/doing -geo- avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS): 090526-0, 26/05/2009 Tested on: 19/6/2009 13:54:48 avast! - copyright © 1988-2009 ALWIL Software. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 19, 2009 > > > > It's interesting how asteroids in an asteroid field are seen as > > > > objects in > > > > an objective universe, but people are seen as subjects in an > > > > objective > > > > universe. > > > > > > > > How strange. > > > > > > > > People are " asteroids with memory " . That's how much volition folks > > > > have > > > > over > > > > anything. > > > > > > > > geo> But wait a minute. Stay there. Dont go away. > > > > What do you mean by people are seen? Only EACH ONE person sees > > > > himself > > > > as > > > > subject. He sees other people as objects alright. An asteroid can > > > > not > > > > look > > > > at itself. What are you trying to say?? > > > > > > People cannot look at themselves, either. > > > And that's a fact, Jack. Anything you can look at, isn't you. > > > -tim- > > > > > > Ahh... I see :>). Maybe it is " people see themselves as subjects in an > > > objective universe " , right? That is the whole point...it is the origin > > > of > > > sense of self, I. > > > -geo- > > > > The 'sense of self' is nothing more than a belief, based on false data. > > Primarily, the notion that others see them, and they see others. > > > > Switch this to " Others see themselves when they see me, and I see > > myself when I see them " , and the situation changes. > > Try looking at it this way, ya may find it interesting -- > > One's own body is " you " , and the other is " me " . The speaker is always " I " , > whatever body is speaking. > > Play with this stuff... don't let language trap ya into beliefs in 'self'. > > geo> These are all funny games to play...I will try. Side note: I dont > think > the self is just " language " . As per the thread with dan, there is the fact > that this body feels. The others dont. There is seeing through these eyes > and not through others eyes. > > Of course...we are talking about the origin that caused the illusion. It > is > illusion. The need to preserve the body spilled into the need to preserve > some inner observer. Bodies only survive as long as they survive. There is no need for a construction of a " need to preserve the body. " Whose need? Bodies are designed not to be preserved indefinitely. Bodies include " automatic reactions. " Thought interprets these reactions as " need to preserve the body. " Then thought generates an " I " that " needs to preserve my body. " All of these thought formulations are interconnected. And all drop. Including the construction " there is a body-unit existing. " - D - It is not " someones " need. In the beguining of mankind the primate-man went through hardships to find food, shelter, warmth, clothes. Just imagine those man in antiquity in an artic climate. It was hard job. Many died, and many saw those man dying. They did not get food in supermarkets or mackdonalds.They had to fight beasts, disput food with lions and tigres. Dont be fooled...there was a need to work hard to survive. No rest, always on guard.... It is that mood that spilled into the psiche of modern man as a sense of trying to defend some inner entity. -geo- avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS): 090526-0, 26/05/2009 Tested on: 19/6/2009 13:54:49 avast! - copyright © 1988-2009 ALWIL Software. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > Seeing/being/doing > -geo- > yes, seeing/being/doing, touching/feeling/knowing Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > > > > It's interesting how asteroids in an asteroid field are seen as > > > > > objects in > > > > > an objective universe, but people are seen as subjects in an > > > > > objective > > > > > universe. > > > > > > > > > > How strange. > > > > > > > > > > People are " asteroids with memory " . That's how much volition folks > > > > > have > > > > > over > > > > > anything. > > > > > > > > > > geo> But wait a minute. Stay there. Dont go away. > > > > > What do you mean by people are seen? Only EACH ONE person sees > > > > > himself > > > > > as > > > > > subject. He sees other people as objects alright. An asteroid can > > > > > not > > > > > look > > > > > at itself. What are you trying to say?? > > > > > > > > People cannot look at themselves, either. > > > > And that's a fact, Jack. Anything you can look at, isn't you. > > > > -tim- > > > > > > > > Ahh... I see :>). Maybe it is " people see themselves as subjects in an > > > > objective universe " , right? That is the whole point...it is the origin > > > > of > > > > sense of self, I. > > > > -geo- > > > > > > The 'sense of self' is nothing more than a belief, based on false data. > > > Primarily, the notion that others see them, and they see others. > > > > > > Switch this to " Others see themselves when they see me, and I see > > > myself when I see them " , and the situation changes. > > > > Try looking at it this way, ya may find it interesting -- > > > > One's own body is " you " , and the other is " me " . The speaker is always " I " , > > whatever body is speaking. > > > > Play with this stuff... don't let language trap ya into beliefs in 'self'. > > > > geo> These are all funny games to play...I will try. Side note: I dont > > think > > the self is just " language " . As per the thread with dan, there is the fact > > that this body feels. The others dont. There is seeing through these eyes > > and not through others eyes. > > > > Of course...we are talking about the origin that caused the illusion. It > > is > > illusion. The need to preserve the body spilled into the need to preserve > > some inner observer. > > Bodies only survive as long as they survive. > > There is no need for a construction of a " need to preserve the body. " > > Whose need? > > Bodies are designed not to be preserved indefinitely. > > Bodies include " automatic reactions. " > > Thought interprets these reactions as " need to preserve the body. " > > Then thought generates an " I " that " needs to preserve my body. " > > All of these thought formulations are interconnected. > > And all drop. > > Including the construction " there is a body-unit existing. " > > - D - > > It is not " someones " need. In the beguining of mankind the primate-man went > through hardships to find food, shelter, warmth, clothes. Just imagine those > man in antiquity in an artic climate. It was hard job. Many died, and many > saw those man dying. They did not get food in supermarkets or > mackdonalds.They had to fight beasts, disput food with lions and tigres. > Dont be fooled...there was a need to work hard to survive. No rest, always > on guard.... It is that mood that spilled into the psiche of modern man as a > sense of trying to defend some inner entity. > -geo- And so, the " primate man " of your thought construction, of your imagination, names himself " Ugh. " Now " Ugh " has a name. Others in the tribe also get named. They name things. They communicate. They use communication as part of survival. All based on the assumption of a continuing unit that " needs to survive. " It's all one movement, the picturing of self as a unit that continues and survives, the naming, the communicating, the building of villages, etc. And it's imagined. And the imaginary construction of some primate man in the past is made by a primate man of the present. Just an imaginary projection of a projection. - D - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 19, 2009 - dan330033 Nisargadatta Friday, June 19, 2009 3:00 PM Re: Asteroids with memory Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > > > > It's interesting how asteroids in an asteroid field are seen as > > > > > objects in > > > > > an objective universe, but people are seen as subjects in an > > > > > objective > > > > > universe. > > > > > > > > > > How strange. > > > > > > > > > > People are " asteroids with memory " . That's how much volition folks > > > > > have > > > > > over > > > > > anything. > > > > > > > > > > geo> But wait a minute. Stay there. Dont go away. > > > > > What do you mean by people are seen? Only EACH ONE person sees > > > > > himself > > > > > as > > > > > subject. He sees other people as objects alright. An asteroid can > > > > > not > > > > > look > > > > > at itself. What are you trying to say?? > > > > > > > > People cannot look at themselves, either. > > > > And that's a fact, Jack. Anything you can look at, isn't you. > > > > -tim- > > > > > > > > Ahh... I see :>). Maybe it is " people see themselves as subjects in > > > > an > > > > objective universe " , right? That is the whole point...it is the > > > > origin > > > > of > > > > sense of self, I. > > > > -geo- > > > > > > The 'sense of self' is nothing more than a belief, based on false > > > data. > > > Primarily, the notion that others see them, and they see others. > > > > > > Switch this to " Others see themselves when they see me, and I see > > > myself when I see them " , and the situation changes. > > > > Try looking at it this way, ya may find it interesting -- > > > > One's own body is " you " , and the other is " me " . The speaker is always > > " I " , > > whatever body is speaking. > > > > Play with this stuff... don't let language trap ya into beliefs in > > 'self'. > > > > geo> These are all funny games to play...I will try. Side note: I dont > > think > > the self is just " language " . As per the thread with dan, there is the > > fact > > that this body feels. The others dont. There is seeing through these > > eyes > > and not through others eyes. > > > > Of course...we are talking about the origin that caused the illusion. It > > is > > illusion. The need to preserve the body spilled into the need to > > preserve > > some inner observer. > > Bodies only survive as long as they survive. > > There is no need for a construction of a " need to preserve the body. " > > Whose need? > > Bodies are designed not to be preserved indefinitely. > > Bodies include " automatic reactions. " > > Thought interprets these reactions as " need to preserve the body. " > > Then thought generates an " I " that " needs to preserve my body. " > > All of these thought formulations are interconnected. > > And all drop. > > Including the construction " there is a body-unit existing. " > > - D - > > It is not " someones " need. In the beguining of mankind the primate-man > went > through hardships to find food, shelter, warmth, clothes. Just imagine > those > man in antiquity in an artic climate. It was hard job. Many died, and many > saw those man dying. They did not get food in supermarkets or > mackdonalds.They had to fight beasts, disput food with lions and tigres. > Dont be fooled...there was a need to work hard to survive. No rest, always > on guard.... It is that mood that spilled into the psiche of modern man as > a > sense of trying to defend some inner entity. > -geo- And so, the " primate man " of your thought construction, of your imagination, names himself " Ugh. " Now " Ugh " has a name. Others in the tribe also get named. They name things. They communicate. They use communication as part of survival. All based on the assumption of a continuing unit that " needs to survive. " It's all one movement, the picturing of self as a unit that continues and survives, the naming, the communicating, the building of villages, etc. And it's imagined. And the imaginary construction of some primate man in the past is made by a primate man of the present. Just an imaginary projection of a projection. - D - Exactly. Although it is hard to pinpoint - from here - the exact...err....moment....no....circumstances.....no...primal motive...that first moment when the sense of a separate observer emerged. Whywhen a body suddenly becomes a body plus an entity inside (two)? -geo- avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS): 090526-0, 26/05/2009 Tested on: 19/6/2009 15:05:41 avast! - copyright © 1988-2009 ALWIL Software. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > dan330033 > Nisargadatta > Friday, June 19, 2009 3:00 PM > Re: Asteroids with memory > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > It's interesting how asteroids in an asteroid field are seen as > > > > > > objects in > > > > > > an objective universe, but people are seen as subjects in an > > > > > > objective > > > > > > universe. > > > > > > > > > > > > How strange. > > > > > > > > > > > > People are " asteroids with memory " . That's how much volition folks > > > > > > have > > > > > > over > > > > > > anything. > > > > > > > > > > > > geo> But wait a minute. Stay there. Dont go away. > > > > > > What do you mean by people are seen? Only EACH ONE person sees > > > > > > himself > > > > > > as > > > > > > subject. He sees other people as objects alright. An asteroid can > > > > > > not > > > > > > look > > > > > > at itself. What are you trying to say?? > > > > > > > > > > People cannot look at themselves, either. > > > > > And that's a fact, Jack. Anything you can look at, isn't you. > > > > > -tim- > > > > > > > > > > Ahh... I see :>). Maybe it is " people see themselves as subjects in > > > > > an > > > > > objective universe " , right? That is the whole point...it is the > > > > > origin > > > > > of > > > > > sense of self, I. > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > The 'sense of self' is nothing more than a belief, based on false > > > > data. > > > > Primarily, the notion that others see them, and they see others. > > > > > > > > Switch this to " Others see themselves when they see me, and I see > > > > myself when I see them " , and the situation changes. > > > > > > Try looking at it this way, ya may find it interesting -- > > > > > > One's own body is " you " , and the other is " me " . The speaker is always > > > " I " , > > > whatever body is speaking. > > > > > > Play with this stuff... don't let language trap ya into beliefs in > > > 'self'. > > > > > > geo> These are all funny games to play...I will try. Side note: I dont > > > think > > > the self is just " language " . As per the thread with dan, there is the > > > fact > > > that this body feels. The others dont. There is seeing through these > > > eyes > > > and not through others eyes. > > > > > > Of course...we are talking about the origin that caused the illusion. It > > > is > > > illusion. The need to preserve the body spilled into the need to > > > preserve > > > some inner observer. > > > > Bodies only survive as long as they survive. > > > > There is no need for a construction of a " need to preserve the body. " > > > > Whose need? > > > > Bodies are designed not to be preserved indefinitely. > > > > Bodies include " automatic reactions. " > > > > Thought interprets these reactions as " need to preserve the body. " > > > > Then thought generates an " I " that " needs to preserve my body. " > > > > All of these thought formulations are interconnected. > > > > And all drop. > > > > Including the construction " there is a body-unit existing. " > > > > - D - > > > > It is not " someones " need. In the beguining of mankind the primate-man > > went > > through hardships to find food, shelter, warmth, clothes. Just imagine > > those > > man in antiquity in an artic climate. It was hard job. Many died, and many > > saw those man dying. They did not get food in supermarkets or > > mackdonalds.They had to fight beasts, disput food with lions and tigres. > > Dont be fooled...there was a need to work hard to survive. No rest, always > > on guard.... It is that mood that spilled into the psiche of modern man as > > a > > sense of trying to defend some inner entity. > > -geo- > > And so, the " primate man " of your thought construction, of your imagination, > names himself " Ugh. " > > Now " Ugh " has a name. Others in the tribe also get named. They name things. > They communicate. They use communication as part of survival. > > All based on the assumption of a continuing unit that " needs to survive. " > > It's all one movement, the picturing of self as a unit that continues and > survives, the naming, the communicating, the building of villages, etc. > > And it's imagined. > > And the imaginary construction of some primate man in the past is made by a > primate man of the present. Just an imaginary projection of a projection. > > - D - > > Exactly. Although it is hard to pinpoint - from here - the > exact...err....moment....no....circumstances.....no...primal motive...that > first moment when the sense of a separate observer emerged. Whywhen a body > suddenly becomes a body plus an entity inside (two)? > -geo- Now. This apparent division, this apparent " first moment of experience " is occurring now. Here. There is no there or then for it to be occurring (appearing). Once you have something apart from nothing, anything, whether that be an imagined (imaged) body, mind, universal mind, universal body, Self, self, Other, other, pain, pleasure, good, bad -- whatever ... Once you have anything, you now have a million things, a million relationships, a million versions of worlds, beings, times, etc. -- D -- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > dan330033 > > Nisargadatta > > Friday, June 19, 2009 3:00 PM > > Re: Asteroids with memory > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > It's interesting how asteroids in an asteroid field are seen as > > > > > > > objects in > > > > > > > an objective universe, but people are seen as subjects in an > > > > > > > objective > > > > > > > universe. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > How strange. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > People are " asteroids with memory " . That's how much volition folks > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > over > > > > > > > anything. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > geo> But wait a minute. Stay there. Dont go away. > > > > > > > What do you mean by people are seen? Only EACH ONE person sees > > > > > > > himself > > > > > > > as > > > > > > > subject. He sees other people as objects alright. An asteroid can > > > > > > > not > > > > > > > look > > > > > > > at itself. What are you trying to say?? > > > > > > > > > > > > People cannot look at themselves, either. > > > > > > And that's a fact, Jack. Anything you can look at, isn't you. > > > > > > -tim- > > > > > > > > > > > > Ahh... I see :>). Maybe it is " people see themselves as subjects in > > > > > > an > > > > > > objective universe " , right? That is the whole point...it is the > > > > > > origin > > > > > > of > > > > > > sense of self, I. > > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > > > The 'sense of self' is nothing more than a belief, based on false > > > > > data. > > > > > Primarily, the notion that others see them, and they see others. > > > > > > > > > > Switch this to " Others see themselves when they see me, and I see > > > > > myself when I see them " , and the situation changes. > > > > > > > > Try looking at it this way, ya may find it interesting -- > > > > > > > > One's own body is " you " , and the other is " me " . The speaker is always > > > > " I " , > > > > whatever body is speaking. > > > > > > > > Play with this stuff... don't let language trap ya into beliefs in > > > > 'self'. > > > > > > > > geo> These are all funny games to play...I will try. Side note: I dont > > > > think > > > > the self is just " language " . As per the thread with dan, there is the > > > > fact > > > > that this body feels. The others dont. There is seeing through these > > > > eyes > > > > and not through others eyes. > > > > > > > > Of course...we are talking about the origin that caused the illusion. It > > > > is > > > > illusion. The need to preserve the body spilled into the need to > > > > preserve > > > > some inner observer. > > > > > > Bodies only survive as long as they survive. > > > > > > There is no need for a construction of a " need to preserve the body. " > > > > > > Whose need? > > > > > > Bodies are designed not to be preserved indefinitely. > > > > > > Bodies include " automatic reactions. " > > > > > > Thought interprets these reactions as " need to preserve the body. " > > > > > > Then thought generates an " I " that " needs to preserve my body. " > > > > > > All of these thought formulations are interconnected. > > > > > > And all drop. > > > > > > Including the construction " there is a body-unit existing. " > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > It is not " someones " need. In the beguining of mankind the primate-man > > > went > > > through hardships to find food, shelter, warmth, clothes. Just imagine > > > those > > > man in antiquity in an artic climate. It was hard job. Many died, and many > > > saw those man dying. They did not get food in supermarkets or > > > mackdonalds.They had to fight beasts, disput food with lions and tigres. > > > Dont be fooled...there was a need to work hard to survive. No rest, always > > > on guard.... It is that mood that spilled into the psiche of modern man as > > > a > > > sense of trying to defend some inner entity. > > > -geo- > > > > And so, the " primate man " of your thought construction, of your imagination, > > names himself " Ugh. " > > > > Now " Ugh " has a name. Others in the tribe also get named. They name things. > > They communicate. They use communication as part of survival. > > > > All based on the assumption of a continuing unit that " needs to survive. " > > > > It's all one movement, the picturing of self as a unit that continues and > > survives, the naming, the communicating, the building of villages, etc. > > > > And it's imagined. > > > > And the imaginary construction of some primate man in the past is made by a > > primate man of the present. Just an imaginary projection of a projection. > > > > - D - > > > > Exactly. Although it is hard to pinpoint - from here - the > > exact...err....moment....no....circumstances.....no...primal motive...that > > first moment when the sense of a separate observer emerged. Whywhen a body > > suddenly becomes a body plus an entity inside (two)? > > -geo- > > Now. > > This apparent division, this apparent " first moment of experience " is occurring now. Here. > > There is no there or then for it to be occurring (appearing). > > Once you have something apart from nothing, anything, whether that be an imagined (imaged) body, mind, universal mind, universal body, Self, self, Other, other, pain, pleasure, good, bad -- whatever ... > > Once you have anything, you now have a million things, a million relationships, a million versions of worlds, beings, times, etc. > > -- D -- Nisargadatta: " When I am telling you that I was never born, why go on asking me what were my preparations for the next birth? The moment you allow your imagination to spin, it at once spins out a universe. It is not at all as you imagine and I am not bound by your imaginings. " Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > roberibus111 > Nisargadatta > Friday, June 19, 2009 10:29 AM > Re: Asteroids with memory > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > dennis_travis33 > > Nisargadatta > > Friday, June 19, 2009 9:29 AM > > Re: Asteroids with memory > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > - > > > dennis_travis33 > > > Nisargadatta > > > Friday, June 19, 2009 8:58 AM > > > Re: Asteroids with memory > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > It's interesting how asteroids in an asteroid field are seen as > > > > > > objects in > > > > > > an objective universe, but people are seen as subjects in an > > > > > > objective > > > > > > universe. > > > > > > > > > > > > How strange. > > > > > > > > > > > > People are " asteroids with memory " . That's how much volition folks > > > > > > have > > > > > > over > > > > > > anything. > > > > > > > > > > > > geo> But wait a minute. Stay there. Dont go away. > > > > > > What do you mean by people are seen? Only EACH ONE person sees > > > > > > himself > > > > > > as > > > > > > subject. He sees other people as objects alright. An asteroid can > > > > > > not > > > > > > look > > > > > > at itself. What are you trying to say?? > > > > > > > > > > People cannot look at themselves, either. > > > > > And that's a fact, Jack. Anything you can look at, isn't you. > > > > > -tim- > > > > > > > > > > Ahh... I see :>). Maybe it is " people see themselves as subjects in > > > > > an > > > > > objective universe " , right? That is the whole point...it is the > > > > > origin > > > > > of > > > > > sense of self, I. > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > The 'sense of self' is nothing more than a belief, based on false > > > > data. > > > > Primarily, the notion that others see them, and they see others. > > > > > > > > Switch this to " Others see themselves when they see me, and I see > > > > myself > > > > when I see them " , and the situation changes. > > > > > > > > > > or maybe.... > > > > > > switch to " all is appearent real, means fiction " , included " yourself " . > > > > > > enjoy the fiction, > > > > > > no choice about > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > Yes, make sense. Enjoy materiality, objects, space, time..just the way > > > it > > > is. That is the nature of the dream. Or do you doubt that IT can dream > > > it? > > > The mountain is mountain again. The only thing that is missing now is > > > me. > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > yes, make sense...no doubt > > > > ... > > > > missing you?....i'm here.... > > and there... > > like you too > > like the mountain and the river...and... > > > > Marc > > > > What do you mean by you are there? > > -geo- > > you've got to be there guess. > > anyhow.. > > he means he's not here..he's there. > > hey just call whenever clarification is needed. > > .b b.b. > > Yes, he said here and there. I did not read well. > -geo- you read wll enuff. thit cleers thate up! ..b b.b. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 20, 2009 Whywhen a body suddenly becomes a body plus an entity inside (two)? -geo-Now.This apparent division, this apparent "first moment of experience" is occurring now. Here.There is no there or then for it to be occurring (appearing).Once you have something apart from nothing, anything, whether that be an imagined (imaged) body, mind, universal mind, universal body, Self, self, Other, other, pain, pleasure, good, bad -- whatever ...Once you have anything, you now have a million things, a million relationships, a million versions of worlds, beings, times, etc.-- D -- Either no mirror or lots of them. -geo- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 20, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > Whywhen a body suddenly becomes a body plus an entity inside (two)? > -geo- > > Now. > > This apparent division, this apparent " first moment of experience " is occurring now. Here. > > There is no there or then for it to be occurring (appearing). > > Once you have something apart from nothing, anything, whether that be an imagined (imaged) body, mind, universal mind, universal body, Self, self, Other, other, pain, pleasure, good, bad -- whatever ... > > Once you have anything, you now have a million things, a million relationships, a million versions of worlds, beings, times, etc. > > -- D -- > > Either no mirror or lots of them. > -geo- The mirror(s) are all yourself. No self, no mirror(s). This is why self-inquiry is critical. One must realize " there is only Me " (wordlessly), before " there is no me " makes the slightest bit of sense. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 20, 2009 - Tim G. Nisargadatta Friday, June 19, 2009 10:23 PM Re: Asteroids with memory Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > Whywhen a body suddenly becomes a body plus an entity inside (two)? > -geo- > > Now. > > This apparent division, this apparent " first moment of experience " is > occurring now. Here. > > There is no there or then for it to be occurring (appearing). > > Once you have something apart from nothing, anything, whether that be an > imagined (imaged) body, mind, universal mind, universal body, Self, self, > Other, other, pain, pleasure, good, bad -- whatever ... > > Once you have anything, you now have a million things, a million > relationships, a million versions of worlds, beings, times, etc. > > -- D -- > > Either no mirror or lots of them. > -geo- The mirror(s) are all yourself. No self, no mirror(s). This is why self-inquiry is critical. One must realize " there is only Me " (wordlessly), before " there is no me " makes the slightest bit of sense. geo> Or... nothing is everything. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 20, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > Tim G. > Nisargadatta > Friday, June 19, 2009 10:23 PM > Re: Asteroids with memory > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > Whywhen a body suddenly becomes a body plus an entity inside (two)? > > -geo- > > > > Now. > > > > This apparent division, this apparent " first moment of experience " is > > occurring now. Here. > > > > There is no there or then for it to be occurring (appearing). > > > > Once you have something apart from nothing, anything, whether that be an > > imagined (imaged) body, mind, universal mind, universal body, Self, self, > > Other, other, pain, pleasure, good, bad -- whatever ... > > > > Once you have anything, you now have a million things, a million > > relationships, a million versions of worlds, beings, times, etc. > > > > -- D -- > > > > Either no mirror or lots of them. > > -geo- > > The mirror(s) are all yourself. > > No self, no mirror(s). > > This is why self-inquiry is critical. > > One must realize " there is only Me " (wordlessly), before " there is no me " > makes the slightest bit of sense. > > geo> Or... nothing is everything. Or... " there is only Me " . Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 20, 2009 > > > > Whywhen a body suddenly becomes a body plus an entity inside (two)? > > -geo- > > > > Now. > > > > This apparent division, this apparent " first moment of experience " is > > occurring now. Here. > > > > There is no there or then for it to be occurring (appearing). > > > > Once you have something apart from nothing, anything, whether that be an > > imagined (imaged) body, mind, universal mind, universal body, Self, > > self, > > Other, other, pain, pleasure, good, bad -- whatever ... > > > > Once you have anything, you now have a million things, a million > > relationships, a million versions of worlds, beings, times, etc. > > > > -- D -- > > > > Either no mirror or lots of them. > > -geo- > > The mirror(s) are all yourself. > > No self, no mirror(s). > > This is why self-inquiry is critical. > > One must realize " there is only Me " (wordlessly), before " there is no me " > makes the slightest bit of sense. > > geo> Or... nothing is everything. Or... " there is only Me " . -t- I know....but I would not put it in those terms -geo- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 20, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > > > > > > > Whywhen a body suddenly becomes a body plus an entity inside (two)? > > > -geo- > > > > > > Now. > > > > > > This apparent division, this apparent " first moment of experience " is > > > occurring now. Here. > > > > > > There is no there or then for it to be occurring (appearing). > > > > > > Once you have something apart from nothing, anything, whether that be an > > > imagined (imaged) body, mind, universal mind, universal body, Self, > > > self, > > > Other, other, pain, pleasure, good, bad -- whatever ... > > > > > > Once you have anything, you now have a million things, a million > > > relationships, a million versions of worlds, beings, times, etc. > > > > > > -- D -- > > > > > > Either no mirror or lots of them. > > > -geo- > > > > The mirror(s) are all yourself. > > > > No self, no mirror(s). > > > > This is why self-inquiry is critical. > > > > One must realize " there is only Me " (wordlessly), before " there is no me " > > makes the slightest bit of sense. > > > > geo> Or... nothing is everything. > > Or... " there is only Me " . > -t- > > I know....but I would not put it in those terms > -geo- Why not... does it make you feel alone? Alone = " All one " Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 20, 2009 - Tim G. Nisargadatta Friday, June 19, 2009 11:06 PM Re: Asteroids with memory Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > > > > > > > Whywhen a body suddenly becomes a body plus an entity inside (two)? > > > -geo- > > > > > > Now. > > > > > > This apparent division, this apparent " first moment of experience " is > > > occurring now. Here. > > > > > > There is no there or then for it to be occurring (appearing). > > > > > > Once you have something apart from nothing, anything, whether that be > > > an > > > imagined (imaged) body, mind, universal mind, universal body, Self, > > > self, > > > Other, other, pain, pleasure, good, bad -- whatever ... > > > > > > Once you have anything, you now have a million things, a million > > > relationships, a million versions of worlds, beings, times, etc. > > > > > > -- D -- > > > > > > Either no mirror or lots of them. > > > -geo- > > > > The mirror(s) are all yourself. > > > > No self, no mirror(s). > > > > This is why self-inquiry is critical. > > > > One must realize " there is only Me " (wordlessly), before " there is no > > me " > > makes the slightest bit of sense. > > > > geo> Or... nothing is everything. > > Or... " there is only Me " . > -t- > > I know....but I would not put it in those terms > -geo- Why not... does it make you feel alone? Alone = " All one " -t- Al-one certainly yes. But I dont like the expression Me. I dont like god either...or Self also. But considering our level of intimacy :>)) its OK.. -geo- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 20, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > Tim G. > Nisargadatta > Friday, June 19, 2009 11:06 PM > Re: Asteroids with memory > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Whywhen a body suddenly becomes a body plus an entity inside (two)? > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > Now. > > > > > > > > This apparent division, this apparent " first moment of experience " is > > > > occurring now. Here. > > > > > > > > There is no there or then for it to be occurring (appearing). > > > > > > > > Once you have something apart from nothing, anything, whether that be > > > > an > > > > imagined (imaged) body, mind, universal mind, universal body, Self, > > > > self, > > > > Other, other, pain, pleasure, good, bad -- whatever ... > > > > > > > > Once you have anything, you now have a million things, a million > > > > relationships, a million versions of worlds, beings, times, etc. > > > > > > > > -- D -- > > > > > > > > Either no mirror or lots of them. > > > > -geo- > > > > > > The mirror(s) are all yourself. > > > > > > No self, no mirror(s). > > > > > > This is why self-inquiry is critical. > > > > > > One must realize " there is only Me " (wordlessly), before " there is no > > > me " > > > makes the slightest bit of sense. > > > > > > geo> Or... nothing is everything. > > > > Or... " there is only Me " . > > -t- > > > > I know....but I would not put it in those terms > > -geo- > > Why not... does it make you feel alone? > > Alone = " All one " > -t- > > Al-one certainly yes. But I dont like the expression Me. I dont like god > either...or Self also. But considering our level of intimacy :>)) its OK.. > -geo- " intimacy " is a delusion. it's so divisive. ..b b.b. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 20, 2009 - roberibus111 Nisargadatta Saturday, June 20, 2009 9:19 AM Re: Asteroids with memory Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > Tim G. > Nisargadatta > Friday, June 19, 2009 11:06 PM > Re: Asteroids with memory > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Whywhen a body suddenly becomes a body plus an entity inside (two)? > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > Now. > > > > > > > > This apparent division, this apparent " first moment of experience " > > > > is > > > > occurring now. Here. > > > > > > > > There is no there or then for it to be occurring (appearing). > > > > > > > > Once you have something apart from nothing, anything, whether that > > > > be > > > > an > > > > imagined (imaged) body, mind, universal mind, universal body, Self, > > > > self, > > > > Other, other, pain, pleasure, good, bad -- whatever ... > > > > > > > > Once you have anything, you now have a million things, a million > > > > relationships, a million versions of worlds, beings, times, etc. > > > > > > > > -- D -- > > > > > > > > Either no mirror or lots of them. > > > > -geo- > > > > > > The mirror(s) are all yourself. > > > > > > No self, no mirror(s). > > > > > > This is why self-inquiry is critical. > > > > > > One must realize " there is only Me " (wordlessly), before " there is no > > > me " > > > makes the slightest bit of sense. > > > > > > geo> Or... nothing is everything. > > > > Or... " there is only Me " . > > -t- > > > > I know....but I would not put it in those terms > > -geo- > > Why not... does it make you feel alone? > > Alone = " All one " > -t- > > Al-one certainly yes. But I dont like the expression Me. I dont like god > either...or Self also. But considering our level of intimacy :>)) its OK.. > -geo- " intimacy " is a delusion. it's so divisive. ..b b.b. Peeking eeeh? I didnt know you where with us in that motel room.. LOL LOL LOL -geo- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 20, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > roberibus111 > Nisargadatta > Saturday, June 20, 2009 9:19 AM > Re: Asteroids with memory > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > Tim G. > > Nisargadatta > > Friday, June 19, 2009 11:06 PM > > Re: Asteroids with memory > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Whywhen a body suddenly becomes a body plus an entity inside (two)? > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > > > Now. > > > > > > > > > > This apparent division, this apparent " first moment of experience " > > > > > is > > > > > occurring now. Here. > > > > > > > > > > There is no there or then for it to be occurring (appearing). > > > > > > > > > > Once you have something apart from nothing, anything, whether that > > > > > be > > > > > an > > > > > imagined (imaged) body, mind, universal mind, universal body, Self, > > > > > self, > > > > > Other, other, pain, pleasure, good, bad -- whatever ... > > > > > > > > > > Once you have anything, you now have a million things, a million > > > > > relationships, a million versions of worlds, beings, times, etc. > > > > > > > > > > -- D -- > > > > > > > > > > Either no mirror or lots of them. > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > The mirror(s) are all yourself. > > > > > > > > No self, no mirror(s). > > > > > > > > This is why self-inquiry is critical. > > > > > > > > One must realize " there is only Me " (wordlessly), before " there is no > > > > me " > > > > makes the slightest bit of sense. > > > > > > > > geo> Or... nothing is everything. > > > > > > Or... " there is only Me " . > > > -t- > > > > > > I know....but I would not put it in those terms > > > -geo- > > > > Why not... does it make you feel alone? > > > > Alone = " All one " > > -t- > > > > Al-one certainly yes. But I dont like the expression Me. I dont like god > > either...or Self also. But considering our level of intimacy :>)) its OK.. > > -geo- > > " intimacy " is a delusion. > > it's so divisive. > > .b b.b. > > Peeking eeeh? > I didnt know you where with us in that motel room.. LOL LOL LOL > -geo- oh..i'm sorry. i thought you might have had the capacity to understand. i was wrong. i erred in thinking that you had the capacity not to err. let us remember this lesson. you don't want to understand. this is understandable. for you...you know it all. blessings etc... ..b b.b. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 20, 2009 - roberibus111 Nisargadatta Saturday, June 20, 2009 9:48 AM Re: Asteroids with memory Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > roberibus111 > Nisargadatta > Saturday, June 20, 2009 9:19 AM > Re: Asteroids with memory > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > Tim G. > > Nisargadatta > > Friday, June 19, 2009 11:06 PM > > Re: Asteroids with memory > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Whywhen a body suddenly becomes a body plus an entity inside > > > > > (two)? > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > > > Now. > > > > > > > > > > This apparent division, this apparent " first moment of experience " > > > > > is > > > > > occurring now. Here. > > > > > > > > > > There is no there or then for it to be occurring (appearing). > > > > > > > > > > Once you have something apart from nothing, anything, whether that > > > > > be > > > > > an > > > > > imagined (imaged) body, mind, universal mind, universal body, > > > > > Self, > > > > > self, > > > > > Other, other, pain, pleasure, good, bad -- whatever ... > > > > > > > > > > Once you have anything, you now have a million things, a million > > > > > relationships, a million versions of worlds, beings, times, etc. > > > > > > > > > > -- D -- > > > > > > > > > > Either no mirror or lots of them. > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > The mirror(s) are all yourself. > > > > > > > > No self, no mirror(s). > > > > > > > > This is why self-inquiry is critical. > > > > > > > > One must realize " there is only Me " (wordlessly), before " there is > > > > no > > > > me " > > > > makes the slightest bit of sense. > > > > > > > > geo> Or... nothing is everything. > > > > > > Or... " there is only Me " . > > > -t- > > > > > > I know....but I would not put it in those terms > > > -geo- > > > > Why not... does it make you feel alone? > > > > Alone = " All one " > > -t- > > > > Al-one certainly yes. But I dont like the expression Me. I dont like god > > either...or Self also. But considering our level of intimacy :>)) its > > OK.. > > -geo- > > " intimacy " is a delusion. > > it's so divisive. > > .b b.b. > > Peeking eeeh? > I didnt know you where with us in that motel room.. LOL LOL LOL > -geo- oh..i'm sorry. i thought you might have had the capacity to understand. i was wrong. i erred in thinking that you had the capacity not to err. let us remember this lesson. you don't want to understand. this is understandable. for you...you know it all. blessings etc... ..b b.b. Intimacy...What the f..ck is that? " Someone " you can tell lots of B.S. and he'll keep on saying thankyou...thankyou...thakyou. -geo- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 20, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > roberibus111 > Nisargadatta > Saturday, June 20, 2009 9:48 AM > Re: Asteroids with memory > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > roberibus111 > > Nisargadatta > > Saturday, June 20, 2009 9:19 AM > > Re: Asteroids with memory > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > - > > > Tim G. > > > Nisargadatta > > > Friday, June 19, 2009 11:06 PM > > > Re: Asteroids with memory > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Whywhen a body suddenly becomes a body plus an entity inside > > > > > > (two)? > > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > > > > > Now. > > > > > > > > > > > > This apparent division, this apparent " first moment of experience " > > > > > > is > > > > > > occurring now. Here. > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no there or then for it to be occurring (appearing). > > > > > > > > > > > > Once you have something apart from nothing, anything, whether that > > > > > > be > > > > > > an > > > > > > imagined (imaged) body, mind, universal mind, universal body, > > > > > > Self, > > > > > > self, > > > > > > Other, other, pain, pleasure, good, bad -- whatever ... > > > > > > > > > > > > Once you have anything, you now have a million things, a million > > > > > > relationships, a million versions of worlds, beings, times, etc. > > > > > > > > > > > > -- D -- > > > > > > > > > > > > Either no mirror or lots of them. > > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > > > The mirror(s) are all yourself. > > > > > > > > > > No self, no mirror(s). > > > > > > > > > > This is why self-inquiry is critical. > > > > > > > > > > One must realize " there is only Me " (wordlessly), before " there is > > > > > no > > > > > me " > > > > > makes the slightest bit of sense. > > > > > > > > > > geo> Or... nothing is everything. > > > > > > > > Or... " there is only Me " . > > > > -t- > > > > > > > > I know....but I would not put it in those terms > > > > -geo- > > > > > > Why not... does it make you feel alone? > > > > > > Alone = " All one " > > > -t- > > > > > > Al-one certainly yes. But I dont like the expression Me. I dont like god > > > either...or Self also. But considering our level of intimacy :>)) its > > > OK.. > > > -geo- > > > > " intimacy " is a delusion. > > > > it's so divisive. > > > > .b b.b. > > > > Peeking eeeh? > > I didnt know you where with us in that motel room.. LOL LOL LOL > > -geo- > > oh..i'm sorry. > > i thought you might have had the capacity to understand. > > i was wrong. > > i erred in thinking that you had the capacity not to err. > > let us remember this lesson. > > you don't want to understand. > > this is understandable. > > for you...you know it all. > > blessings etc... > > .b b.b. > > Intimacy...What the f..ck is that? " Someone " you can tell lots of B.S. and > he'll keep on saying thankyou...thankyou...thakyou. > -geo- the whole drift of the thread is just that. intimacy is delusional. there are no " separate parts " to be " intimate " one to the other. evidently you still don't understand. this is getting to be not so understandable. it's getting annoying. but hell..it's all of a piece. ..b b.b. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 20, 2009 - roberibus111 Nisargadatta Saturday, June 20, 2009 10:28 AM Re: Asteroids with memory Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > roberibus111 > Nisargadatta > Saturday, June 20, 2009 9:48 AM > Re: Asteroids with memory > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > roberibus111 > > Nisargadatta > > Saturday, June 20, 2009 9:19 AM > > Re: Asteroids with memory > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > - > > > Tim G. > > > Nisargadatta > > > Friday, June 19, 2009 11:06 PM > > > Re: Asteroids with memory > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Whywhen a body suddenly becomes a body plus an entity inside > > > > > > (two)? > > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > > > > > Now. > > > > > > > > > > > > This apparent division, this apparent " first moment of > > > > > > experience " > > > > > > is > > > > > > occurring now. Here. > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no there or then for it to be occurring (appearing). > > > > > > > > > > > > Once you have something apart from nothing, anything, whether > > > > > > that > > > > > > be > > > > > > an > > > > > > imagined (imaged) body, mind, universal mind, universal body, > > > > > > Self, > > > > > > self, > > > > > > Other, other, pain, pleasure, good, bad -- whatever ... > > > > > > > > > > > > Once you have anything, you now have a million things, a million > > > > > > relationships, a million versions of worlds, beings, times, etc. > > > > > > > > > > > > -- D -- > > > > > > > > > > > > Either no mirror or lots of them. > > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > > > The mirror(s) are all yourself. > > > > > > > > > > No self, no mirror(s). > > > > > > > > > > This is why self-inquiry is critical. > > > > > > > > > > One must realize " there is only Me " (wordlessly), before " there is > > > > > no > > > > > me " > > > > > makes the slightest bit of sense. > > > > > > > > > > geo> Or... nothing is everything. > > > > > > > > Or... " there is only Me " . > > > > -t- > > > > > > > > I know....but I would not put it in those terms > > > > -geo- > > > > > > Why not... does it make you feel alone? > > > > > > Alone = " All one " > > > -t- > > > > > > Al-one certainly yes. But I dont like the expression Me. I dont like > > > god > > > either...or Self also. But considering our level of intimacy :>)) its > > > OK.. > > > -geo- > > > > " intimacy " is a delusion. > > > > it's so divisive. > > > > .b b.b. > > > > Peeking eeeh? > > I didnt know you where with us in that motel room.. LOL LOL LOL > > -geo- > > oh..i'm sorry. > > i thought you might have had the capacity to understand. > > i was wrong. > > i erred in thinking that you had the capacity not to err. > > let us remember this lesson. > > you don't want to understand. > > this is understandable. > > for you...you know it all. > > blessings etc... > > .b b.b. > > Intimacy...What the f..ck is that? " Someone " you can tell lots of B.S. and > he'll keep on saying thankyou...thankyou...thakyou. > -geo- the whole drift of the thread is just that. intimacy is delusional. there are no " separate parts " to be " intimate " one to the other. evidently you still don't understand. this is getting to be not so understandable. it's getting annoying. but hell..it's all of a piece. ..b b.b. All-one... I do understand -geo- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 20, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > roberibus111 > Nisargadatta > Saturday, June 20, 2009 10:28 AM > Re: Asteroids with memory > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > roberibus111 > > Nisargadatta > > Saturday, June 20, 2009 9:48 AM > > Re: Asteroids with memory > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > - > > > roberibus111 > > > Nisargadatta > > > Saturday, June 20, 2009 9:19 AM > > > Re: Asteroids with memory > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > Tim G. > > > > Nisargadatta > > > > Friday, June 19, 2009 11:06 PM > > > > Re: Asteroids with memory > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Whywhen a body suddenly becomes a body plus an entity inside > > > > > > > (two)? > > > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This apparent division, this apparent " first moment of > > > > > > > experience " > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > occurring now. Here. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no there or then for it to be occurring (appearing). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Once you have something apart from nothing, anything, whether > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > an > > > > > > > imagined (imaged) body, mind, universal mind, universal body, > > > > > > > Self, > > > > > > > self, > > > > > > > Other, other, pain, pleasure, good, bad -- whatever ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Once you have anything, you now have a million things, a million > > > > > > > relationships, a million versions of worlds, beings, times, etc. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- D -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Either no mirror or lots of them. > > > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > > > > > The mirror(s) are all yourself. > > > > > > > > > > > > No self, no mirror(s). > > > > > > > > > > > > This is why self-inquiry is critical. > > > > > > > > > > > > One must realize " there is only Me " (wordlessly), before " there is > > > > > > no > > > > > > me " > > > > > > makes the slightest bit of sense. > > > > > > > > > > > > geo> Or... nothing is everything. > > > > > > > > > > Or... " there is only Me " . > > > > > -t- > > > > > > > > > > I know....but I would not put it in those terms > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > Why not... does it make you feel alone? > > > > > > > > Alone = " All one " > > > > -t- > > > > > > > > Al-one certainly yes. But I dont like the expression Me. I dont like > > > > god > > > > either...or Self also. But considering our level of intimacy :>)) its > > > > OK.. > > > > -geo- > > > > > > " intimacy " is a delusion. > > > > > > it's so divisive. > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > Peeking eeeh? > > > I didnt know you where with us in that motel room.. LOL LOL LOL > > > -geo- > > > > oh..i'm sorry. > > > > i thought you might have had the capacity to understand. > > > > i was wrong. > > > > i erred in thinking that you had the capacity not to err. > > > > let us remember this lesson. > > > > you don't want to understand. > > > > this is understandable. > > > > for you...you know it all. > > > > blessings etc... > > > > .b b.b. > > > > Intimacy...What the f..ck is that? " Someone " you can tell lots of B.S. and > > he'll keep on saying thankyou...thankyou...thakyou. > > -geo- > > the whole drift of the thread is just that. > > intimacy is delusional. > > there are no " separate parts " to be " intimate " one to the other. > > evidently you still don't understand. > > this is getting to be not so understandable. > > it's getting annoying. > > but hell..it's all of a piece. > > .b b.b. > > All-one... > I do understand > -geo- " i " understand that " you " don't understand. understand this: there is nothing " i " can " do " for " you " . ..b b.b. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 20, 2009 - roberibus111 Nisargadatta Saturday, June 20, 2009 11:43 AM Re: Asteroids with memory Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > roberibus111 > Nisargadatta > Saturday, June 20, 2009 10:28 AM > Re: Asteroids with memory > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > roberibus111 > > Nisargadatta > > Saturday, June 20, 2009 9:48 AM > > Re: Asteroids with memory > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > - > > > roberibus111 > > > Nisargadatta > > > Saturday, June 20, 2009 9:19 AM > > > Re: Asteroids with memory > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > Tim G. > > > > Nisargadatta > > > > Friday, June 19, 2009 11:06 PM > > > > Re: Asteroids with memory > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Whywhen a body suddenly becomes a body plus an entity inside > > > > > > > (two)? > > > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This apparent division, this apparent " first moment of > > > > > > > experience " > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > occurring now. Here. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no there or then for it to be occurring (appearing). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Once you have something apart from nothing, anything, whether > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > an > > > > > > > imagined (imaged) body, mind, universal mind, universal body, > > > > > > > Self, > > > > > > > self, > > > > > > > Other, other, pain, pleasure, good, bad -- whatever ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Once you have anything, you now have a million things, a > > > > > > > million > > > > > > > relationships, a million versions of worlds, beings, times, > > > > > > > etc. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- D -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Either no mirror or lots of them. > > > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > > > > > The mirror(s) are all yourself. > > > > > > > > > > > > No self, no mirror(s). > > > > > > > > > > > > This is why self-inquiry is critical. > > > > > > > > > > > > One must realize " there is only Me " (wordlessly), before " there > > > > > > is > > > > > > no > > > > > > me " > > > > > > makes the slightest bit of sense. > > > > > > > > > > > > geo> Or... nothing is everything. > > > > > > > > > > Or... " there is only Me " . > > > > > -t- > > > > > > > > > > I know....but I would not put it in those terms > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > Why not... does it make you feel alone? > > > > > > > > Alone = " All one " > > > > -t- > > > > > > > > Al-one certainly yes. But I dont like the expression Me. I dont like > > > > god > > > > either...or Self also. But considering our level of intimacy :>)) > > > > its > > > > OK.. > > > > -geo- > > > > > > " intimacy " is a delusion. > > > > > > it's so divisive. > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > Peeking eeeh? > > > I didnt know you where with us in that motel room.. LOL LOL LOL > > > -geo- > > > > oh..i'm sorry. > > > > i thought you might have had the capacity to understand. > > > > i was wrong. > > > > i erred in thinking that you had the capacity not to err. > > > > let us remember this lesson. > > > > you don't want to understand. > > > > this is understandable. > > > > for you...you know it all. > > > > blessings etc... > > > > .b b.b. > > > > Intimacy...What the f..ck is that? " Someone " you can tell lots of B.S. > > and > > he'll keep on saying thankyou...thankyou...thakyou. > > -geo- > > the whole drift of the thread is just that. > > intimacy is delusional. > > there are no " separate parts " to be " intimate " one to the other. > > evidently you still don't understand. > > this is getting to be not so understandable. > > it's getting annoying. > > but hell..it's all of a piece. > > .b b.b. > > All-one... > I do understand > -geo- " i " understand that " you " don't understand. understand this: there is nothing " i " can " do " for " you " . ..b b.b. It can lead " you " into some tortuous trips though... I wonder if you understand this. -geo- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 20, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > roberibus111 > Nisargadatta > Saturday, June 20, 2009 11:43 AM > Re: Asteroids with memory > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > roberibus111 > > Nisargadatta > > Saturday, June 20, 2009 10:28 AM > > Re: Asteroids with memory > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > - > > > roberibus111 > > > Nisargadatta > > > Saturday, June 20, 2009 9:48 AM > > > Re: Asteroids with memory > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > roberibus111 > > > > Nisargadatta > > > > Saturday, June 20, 2009 9:19 AM > > > > Re: Asteroids with memory > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > Tim G. > > > > > Nisargadatta > > > > > Friday, June 19, 2009 11:06 PM > > > > > Re: Asteroids with memory > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Whywhen a body suddenly becomes a body plus an entity inside > > > > > > > > (two)? > > > > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This apparent division, this apparent " first moment of > > > > > > > > experience " > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > occurring now. Here. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no there or then for it to be occurring (appearing). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Once you have something apart from nothing, anything, whether > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > an > > > > > > > > imagined (imaged) body, mind, universal mind, universal body, > > > > > > > > Self, > > > > > > > > self, > > > > > > > > Other, other, pain, pleasure, good, bad -- whatever ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Once you have anything, you now have a million things, a > > > > > > > > million > > > > > > > > relationships, a million versions of worlds, beings, times, > > > > > > > > etc. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- D -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Either no mirror or lots of them. > > > > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The mirror(s) are all yourself. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No self, no mirror(s). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is why self-inquiry is critical. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > One must realize " there is only Me " (wordlessly), before " there > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > no > > > > > > > me " > > > > > > > makes the slightest bit of sense. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > geo> Or... nothing is everything. > > > > > > > > > > > > Or... " there is only Me " . > > > > > > -t- > > > > > > > > > > > > I know....but I would not put it in those terms > > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > > > Why not... does it make you feel alone? > > > > > > > > > > Alone = " All one " > > > > > -t- > > > > > > > > > > Al-one certainly yes. But I dont like the expression Me. I dont like > > > > > god > > > > > either...or Self also. But considering our level of intimacy :>)) > > > > > its > > > > > OK.. > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > " intimacy " is a delusion. > > > > > > > > it's so divisive. > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > Peeking eeeh? > > > > I didnt know you where with us in that motel room.. LOL LOL LOL > > > > -geo- > > > > > > oh..i'm sorry. > > > > > > i thought you might have had the capacity to understand. > > > > > > i was wrong. > > > > > > i erred in thinking that you had the capacity not to err. > > > > > > let us remember this lesson. > > > > > > you don't want to understand. > > > > > > this is understandable. > > > > > > for you...you know it all. > > > > > > blessings etc... > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > Intimacy...What the f..ck is that? " Someone " you can tell lots of B.S. > > > and > > > he'll keep on saying thankyou...thankyou...thakyou. > > > -geo- > > > > the whole drift of the thread is just that. > > > > intimacy is delusional. > > > > there are no " separate parts " to be " intimate " one to the other. > > > > evidently you still don't understand. > > > > this is getting to be not so understandable. > > > > it's getting annoying. > > > > but hell..it's all of a piece. > > > > .b b.b. > > > > All-one... > > I do understand > > -geo- > > " i " understand that " you " don't understand. > > understand this: > > there is nothing " i " can " do " for " you " . > > .b b.b. > > It can lead " you " into some tortuous trips though... > I wonder if you understand this. > -geo- golly geo.. don't wonder. " trips " are no more wondrous than " those " who believe they take them. little wonder too. i don't understand anything..including my self and no-self. i think those who do are silly and smug. and i think they will successfully get nowhere.. all the time being as proud as a ninny goat thinking he's thinking. that must be like being.. a one armed wallpaper hanger with an itch. LOL! ..b b.b. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
