Guest guest Report post Posted June 23, 2009 bbb, are you all or nothing? -geo- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 23, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > bbb, are you all or nothing? > -geo- i am nothing. i am not. both and neither apply and do not. all what? ..b b.b. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 23, 2009 - roberibus111 Nisargadatta Tuesday, June 23, 2009 7:16 AM Re: Question to bbb Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > bbb, are you all or nothing? > -geo- i am nothing. i am not. both and neither apply and do not. all what? ..b b.b. When is " time " to be nothing and the " time " to be all? -geo- avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS): 090526-0, 26/05/2009 Tested on: 23/6/2009 07:22:34 avast! - copyright © 1988-2009 ALWIL Software. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 23, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > roberibus111 > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, June 23, 2009 7:16 AM > Re: Question to bbb > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > bbb, are you all or nothing? > > -geo- > > i am nothing. > > i am not. > > both and neither apply and do not. > > all what? > > .b b.b. > > When is " time " to be nothing and the " time " to be all? > -geo- i don't know what you mean. what is " time " ? if the word " when " is employed.. you are making an unproven assumption about " spacetime co-ordinates. " when " .. " where " .. " why " ... " who " .. " how " .. bullshit all. ..b b.b. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 23, 2009 - roberibus111 Nisargadatta Tuesday, June 23, 2009 7:54 AM Re: Question to bbb Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > roberibus111 > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, June 23, 2009 7:16 AM > Re: Question to bbb > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > bbb, are you all or nothing? > > -geo- > > i am nothing. > > i am not. > > both and neither apply and do not. > > all what? > > .b b.b. > > When is " time " to be nothing and the " time " to be all? > -geo- i don't know what you mean. what is " time " ? if the word " when " is employed.. you are making an unproven assumption about " spacetime co-ordinates. " when " .. " where " .. " why " ... " who " .. " how " .. bullshit all. ..b b.b. It is not easy to refer to what I am trying. There is a natural movement in nature/isness. Time, space does not aply to the rithm. -ego- avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS): 090526-0, 26/05/2009 Tested on: 23/6/2009 08:00:20 avast! - copyright © 1988-2009 ALWIL Software. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 23, 2009 - geo Nisargadatta Tuesday, June 23, 2009 8:11 AM Re: Question to bbb - roberibus111 Nisargadatta Tuesday, June 23, 2009 7:54 AM Re: Question to bbb Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > roberibus111 > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, June 23, 2009 7:16 AM > Re: Question to bbb > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > bbb, are you all or nothing? > > -geo- > > i am nothing. > > i am not. > > both and neither apply and do not. > > all what? > > .b b.b. > > When is " time " to be nothing and the " time " to be all? > -geo- i don't know what you mean. what is " time " ? if the word " when " is employed.. you are making an unproven assumption about " spacetime co-ordinates. " when " .. " where " .. " why " ... " who " .. " how " .. bullshit all. ..b b.b. It is not easy to refer to what I am trying. There is a natural movement in nature/isness. Time, space does not aply to the rithm. Heart beat, breathing in and out, day night, sleep awake, life death. Its rocking....all by itself. If there is no going with it you are left with a....@#$%#@# in your hands...and the owner of the hands as a bonus. -ego- avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS): 090526-0, 26/05/2009 Tested on: 23/6/2009 08:00:20 avast! - copyright © 1988-2009 ALWIL Software. avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS): 090526-0, 26/05/2009 Tested on: 23/6/2009 08:15:34 avast! - copyright © 1988-2009 ALWIL Software. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 23, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > roberibus111 > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, June 23, 2009 7:54 AM > Re: Question to bbb > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > roberibus111 > > Nisargadatta > > Tuesday, June 23, 2009 7:16 AM > > Re: Question to bbb > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > bbb, are you all or nothing? > > > -geo- > > > > i am nothing. > > > > i am not. > > > > both and neither apply and do not. > > > > all what? > > > > .b b.b. > > > > When is " time " to be nothing and the " time " to be all? > > -geo- > > i don't know what you mean. > > what is " time " ? > > if the word " when " is employed.. > > you are making an unproven assumption about " spacetime co-ordinates. > > " when " .. " where " .. " why " ... " who " .. " how " .. > > bullshit all. > > .b b.b. > > It is not easy to refer to what I am trying. There is a natural movement in > nature/isness. Time, space does not aply to the rithm. > -ego- additional bullshit! do you think thanks are in order? think again. ..b b.b. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 23, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > geo > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, June 23, 2009 8:11 AM > Re: Question to bbb - > roberibus111 > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, June 23, 2009 7:54 AM > Re: Question to bbb > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > roberibus111 > > Nisargadatta > > Tuesday, June 23, 2009 7:16 AM > > Re: Question to bbb > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > bbb, are you all or nothing? > > > -geo- > > > > i am nothing. > > > > i am not. > > > > both and neither apply and do not. > > > > all what? > > > > .b b.b. > > > > When is " time " to be nothing and the " time " to be all? > > -geo- > > i don't know what you mean. > > what is " time " ? > > if the word " when " is employed.. > > you are making an unproven assumption about " spacetime co-ordinates. > > " when " .. " where " .. " why " ... " who " .. " how " .. > > bullshit all. > > .b b.b. > > It is not easy to refer to what I am trying. There is a natural movement in > nature/isness. Time, space does not aply to the rithm. > > Heart beat, breathing in and out, day night, sleep awake, life death. Its > rocking....all by itself. If there is no going with it you are left with > a....@#$%#@# in your hands...and the owner of the hands as a bonus. > -ego- here's the bonus: additional additional bullshit. ..b b.b. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 23, 2009 > > > > > > bbb, are you all or nothing? > > > -geo- > > > > i am nothing. > > > > i am not. > > > > both and neither apply and do not. > > > > all what? > > > > .b b.b. > > > > When is " time " to be nothing and the " time " to be all? > > -geo- > > i don't know what you mean. > > what is " time " ? > > if the word " when " is employed.. > > you are making an unproven assumption about " spacetime co-ordinates. > > " when " .. " where " .. " why " ... " who " .. " how " .. > > bullshit all. > > .b b.b. > > It is not easy to refer to what I am trying. There is a natural movement > in > nature/isness. Time, space does not aply to the rithm. > > Heart beat, breathing in and out, day night, sleep awake, life death. Its > rocking....all by itself. If there is no going with it you are left with > a....@#$%#@# in your hands...and the owner of the hands as a bonus. > -ego- here's the bonus: additional additional bullshit. ..b b.b. Exactly. So after all Mike Nelson's concern IS important: b or not to b -ego- avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS): 090526-0, 26/05/2009 Tested on: 23/6/2009 10:25:42 avast! - copyright © 1988-2009 ALWIL Software. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 23, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > > > > > > > > bbb, are you all or nothing? > > > > -geo- > > > > > > i am nothing. > > > > > > i am not. > > > > > > both and neither apply and do not. > > > > > > all what? > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > When is " time " to be nothing and the " time " to be all? > > > -geo- > > > > i don't know what you mean. > > > > what is " time " ? > > > > if the word " when " is employed.. > > > > you are making an unproven assumption about " spacetime co-ordinates. > > > > " when " .. " where " .. " why " ... " who " .. " how " .. > > > > bullshit all. > > > > .b b.b. > > > > It is not easy to refer to what I am trying. There is a natural movement > > in > > nature/isness. Time, space does not aply to the rithm. > > > > Heart beat, breathing in and out, day night, sleep awake, life death. Its > > rocking....all by itself. If there is no going with it you are left with > > a....@#$%#@# in your hands...and the owner of the hands as a bonus. > > -ego- > > here's the bonus: > > additional additional bullshit. > > .b b.b. > > Exactly. So after all Mike Nelson's concern IS important: b or not to b > -ego- oh that makes sense. ..b b.b. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 23, 2009 - roberibus111 Nisargadatta Tuesday, June 23, 2009 11:09 AM Re: Question to bbb Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > > > > > > > > bbb, are you all or nothing? > > > > -geo- > > > > > > i am nothing. > > > > > > i am not. > > > > > > both and neither apply and do not. > > > > > > all what? > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > When is " time " to be nothing and the " time " to be all? > > > -geo- > > > > i don't know what you mean. > > > > what is " time " ? > > > > if the word " when " is employed.. > > > > you are making an unproven assumption about " spacetime co-ordinates. > > > > " when " .. " where " .. " why " ... " who " .. " how " .. > > > > bullshit all. > > > > .b b.b. > > > > It is not easy to refer to what I am trying. There is a natural movement > > in > > nature/isness. Time, space does not aply to the rithm. > > > > Heart beat, breathing in and out, day night, sleep awake, life death. > > Its > > rocking....all by itself. If there is no going with it you are left with > > a....@#$%#@# in your hands...and the owner of the hands as a bonus. > > -ego- > > here's the bonus: > > additional additional bullshit. > > .b b.b. > > Exactly. So after all Mike Nelson's concern IS important: b or not to b > -ego- oh that makes sense. ..b b.b. Not really... The moment its reaches the point of " being all " - its already gone and it must change. The change is towards being nothing. Being nothing is maximum potencial energy and it must act...can not " stay " as nothing. -ego- avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS): 090526-0, 26/05/2009 Tested on: 23/6/2009 11:16:27 avast! - copyright © 1988-2009 ALWIL Software. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 23, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > roberibus111 > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, June 23, 2009 11:09 AM > Re: Question to bbb > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bbb, are you all or nothing? > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > i am nothing. > > > > > > > > i am not. > > > > > > > > both and neither apply and do not. > > > > > > > > all what? > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > When is " time " to be nothing and the " time " to be all? > > > > -geo- > > > > > > i don't know what you mean. > > > > > > what is " time " ? > > > > > > if the word " when " is employed.. > > > > > > you are making an unproven assumption about " spacetime co-ordinates. > > > > > > " when " .. " where " .. " why " ... " who " .. " how " .. > > > > > > bullshit all. > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > It is not easy to refer to what I am trying. There is a natural movement > > > in > > > nature/isness. Time, space does not aply to the rithm. > > > > > > Heart beat, breathing in and out, day night, sleep awake, life death. > > > Its > > > rocking....all by itself. If there is no going with it you are left with > > > a....@#$%#@# in your hands...and the owner of the hands as a bonus. > > > -ego- > > > > here's the bonus: > > > > additional additional bullshit. > > > > .b b.b. > > > > Exactly. So after all Mike Nelson's concern IS important: b or not to b > > -ego- > > oh that makes sense. > > .b b.b. > > Not really... > The moment its reaches the point of " being all " - its already gone and it > must change. The change is towards being nothing. Being nothing is maximum > potencial energy and it must act...can not " stay " as nothing. > -ego- something as simple and clear as nothing.. doesn't need all that horseshit. you're trying to impress yourself. ..b b.b. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 23, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > roberibus111 > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, June 23, 2009 11:09 AM > Re: Question to bbb > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bbb, are you all or nothing? > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > i am nothing. > > > > > > > > i am not. > > > > > > > > both and neither apply and do not. > > > > > > > > all what? > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > When is " time " to be nothing and the " time " to be all? > > > > -geo- > > > > > > i don't know what you mean. > > > > > > what is " time " ? > > > > > > if the word " when " is employed.. > > > > > > you are making an unproven assumption about " spacetime co-ordinates. > > > > > > " when " .. " where " .. " why " ... " who " .. " how " .. > > > > > > bullshit all. > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > It is not easy to refer to what I am trying. There is a natural movement > > > in > > > nature/isness. Time, space does not aply to the rithm. > > > > > > Heart beat, breathing in and out, day night, sleep awake, life death. > > > Its > > > rocking....all by itself. If there is no going with it you are left with > > > a....@#$%#@# in your hands...and the owner of the hands as a bonus. > > > -ego- > > > > here's the bonus: > > > > additional additional bullshit. > > > > .b b.b. > > > > Exactly. So after all Mike Nelson's concern IS important: b or not to b > > -ego- > > oh that makes sense. > > .b b.b. > > Not really... > The moment its reaches the point of " being all " - its already gone and it > must change. The change is towards being nothing. Being nothing is maximum > potencial energy and it must act...can not " stay " as nothing. > -ego- Jeez. You got it all figured out, huh? this big gigantic movement that geo can describe. uh uh. - d - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 23, 2009 - dan330033 Nisargadatta Tuesday, June 23, 2009 2:41 PM Re: Question to bbb Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > roberibus111 > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, June 23, 2009 11:09 AM > Re: Question to bbb > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bbb, are you all or nothing? > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > i am nothing. > > > > > > > > i am not. > > > > > > > > both and neither apply and do not. > > > > > > > > all what? > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > When is " time " to be nothing and the " time " to be all? > > > > -geo- > > > > > > i don't know what you mean. > > > > > > what is " time " ? > > > > > > if the word " when " is employed.. > > > > > > you are making an unproven assumption about " spacetime co-ordinates. > > > > > > " when " .. " where " .. " why " ... " who " .. " how " .. > > > > > > bullshit all. > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > It is not easy to refer to what I am trying. There is a natural > > > movement > > > in > > > nature/isness. Time, space does not aply to the rithm. > > > > > > Heart beat, breathing in and out, day night, sleep awake, life death. > > > Its > > > rocking....all by itself. If there is no going with it you are left > > > with > > > a....@#$%#@# in your hands...and the owner of the hands as a bonus. > > > -ego- > > > > here's the bonus: > > > > additional additional bullshit. > > > > .b b.b. > > > > Exactly. So after all Mike Nelson's concern IS important: b or not to b > > -ego- > > oh that makes sense. > > .b b.b. > > Not really... > The moment its reaches the point of " being all " - its already gone and it > must change. The change is towards being nothing. Being nothing is maximum > potencial energy and it must act...can not " stay " as nothing. > -ego- Jeez. You got it all figured out, huh? this big gigantic movement that geo can describe. uh uh. - d - Pristine hipocrisy. bbb is just like we all except he is a bit less hipocrit. " this big gigantic movement that geo can describe " - tsk tsk tsk. Dan have figured out the nature of it...not you geo. Dan can point to it without words, dan can fill up pages and pages of non-descriptive descriptions that point to the very heart of the nature of what is.... C mon tim..your turn. -ego- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 23, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > dan330033 > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, June 23, 2009 2:41 PM > Re: Question to bbb > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > roberibus111 > > Nisargadatta > > Tuesday, June 23, 2009 11:09 AM > > Re: Question to bbb > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bbb, are you all or nothing? > > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > > > i am nothing. > > > > > > > > > > i am not. > > > > > > > > > > both and neither apply and do not. > > > > > > > > > > all what? > > > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > > > When is " time " to be nothing and the " time " to be all? > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > i don't know what you mean. > > > > > > > > what is " time " ? > > > > > > > > if the word " when " is employed.. > > > > > > > > you are making an unproven assumption about " spacetime co-ordinates. > > > > > > > > " when " .. " where " .. " why " ... " who " .. " how " .. > > > > > > > > bullshit all. > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > It is not easy to refer to what I am trying. There is a natural > > > > movement > > > > in > > > > nature/isness. Time, space does not aply to the rithm. > > > > > > > > Heart beat, breathing in and out, day night, sleep awake, life death. > > > > Its > > > > rocking....all by itself. If there is no going with it you are left > > > > with > > > > a....@#$%#@# in your hands...and the owner of the hands as a bonus. > > > > -ego- > > > > > > here's the bonus: > > > > > > additional additional bullshit. > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > Exactly. So after all Mike Nelson's concern IS important: b or not to b > > > -ego- > > > > oh that makes sense. > > > > .b b.b. > > > > Not really... > > The moment its reaches the point of " being all " - its already gone and it > > must change. The change is towards being nothing. Being nothing is maximum > > potencial energy and it must act...can not " stay " as nothing. > > -ego- > > Jeez. > > You got it all figured out, huh? > > this big gigantic movement that geo can describe. > > uh uh. > > - d - > > Pristine hipocrisy. > bbb is just like we all except he is a bit less hipocrit. > " this big gigantic movement that geo can describe " - tsk tsk tsk. Dan have > figured out the nature of it...not you geo. d: no, i haven't. and i can't. and i won't. i'm not attempting to. > Dan can point to it without words, dan can fill up pages and pages of > non-descriptive descriptions that point to the very heart of the nature of > what is.... d: none of those words have pointed to the heart of it, whatever that is. they were thrown out there like all the words thrown out on the internet, from wherever. > C mon tim..your turn. game-playing with fabricated selves imagined behind the words posted? > -ego- > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 23, 2009 > > > > > > bbb, are you all or nothing? > > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > > > i am nothing. > > > > > > > > > > i am not. > > > > > > > > > > both and neither apply and do not. > > > > > > > > > > all what? > > > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > > > When is " time " to be nothing and the " time " to be all? > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > i don't know what you mean. > > > > > > > > what is " time " ? > > > > > > > > if the word " when " is employed.. > > > > > > > > you are making an unproven assumption about " spacetime co-ordinates. > > > > > > > > " when " .. " where " .. " why " ... " who " .. " how " .. > > > > > > > > bullshit all. > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > It is not easy to refer to what I am trying. There is a natural > > > > movement > > > > in > > > > nature/isness. Time, space does not aply to the rithm. > > > > > > > > Heart beat, breathing in and out, day night, sleep awake, life > > > > death. > > > > Its > > > > rocking....all by itself. If there is no going with it you are left > > > > with > > > > a....@#$%#@# in your hands...and the owner of the hands as a bonus. > > > > -ego- > > > > > > here's the bonus: > > > > > > additional additional bullshit. > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > Exactly. So after all Mike Nelson's concern IS important: b or not to > > > b > > > -ego- > > > > oh that makes sense. > > > > .b b.b. > > > > Not really... > > The moment its reaches the point of " being all " - its already gone and > > it > > must change. The change is towards being nothing. Being nothing is > > maximum > > potencial energy and it must act...can not " stay " as nothing. > > -ego- > > Jeez. > > You got it all figured out, huh? > > this big gigantic movement that geo can describe. > > uh uh. > > - d - > > Pristine hipocrisy. > bbb is just like we all except he is a bit less hipocrit. > " this big gigantic movement that geo can describe " - tsk tsk tsk. Dan have > figured out the nature of it...not you geo. d: no, i haven't. and i can't. and i won't. i'm not attempting to. geo> Ok. What makes you say that geo is trying to figure it ALL out? Is it because you are unable to admit the possibility that there might be some anything that you are capturing with a conceptual mind? Maybe there is avoidance? Absolutely sure? > Dan can point to it without words, dan can fill up pages and pages of > non-descriptive descriptions that point to the very heart of the nature of > what is.... d: none of those words have pointed to the heart of it, whatever that is. they were thrown out there like all the words thrown out on the internet, from wherever. > C mon tim..your turn. game-playing with fabricated selves imagined behind the words posted? geo> No just words on the net. > -ego- > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 23, 2009 game-playing with fabricated selves imagined behind the words posted? -dan- Playing with selves behind word-constructions, yes. It is possible to have an aprox. idea wether the constructions are issuing from a conceptual center or not. As the exchange proceeds one is following a line of perception, one is looking at the big picture and is gauging wether there is agreement between the non-conceptual presence here and the words being red here, or not. As this goes on one may have a pretty good idea. It is not much different from dialoguing alive, except that then there are more inputs to check. -geo- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 23, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > > > > > > bbb, are you all or nothing? > > > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > > > > > i am nothing. > > > > > > > > > > > > i am not. > > > > > > > > > > > > both and neither apply and do not. > > > > > > > > > > > > all what? > > > > > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > > > > > When is " time " to be nothing and the " time " to be all? > > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > > > i don't know what you mean. > > > > > > > > > > what is " time " ? > > > > > > > > > > if the word " when " is employed.. > > > > > > > > > > you are making an unproven assumption about " spacetime co-ordinates. > > > > > > > > > > " when " .. " where " .. " why " ... " who " .. " how " .. > > > > > > > > > > bullshit all. > > > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > > > It is not easy to refer to what I am trying. There is a natural > > > > > movement > > > > > in > > > > > nature/isness. Time, space does not aply to the rithm. > > > > > > > > > > Heart beat, breathing in and out, day night, sleep awake, life > > > > > death. > > > > > Its > > > > > rocking....all by itself. If there is no going with it you are left > > > > > with > > > > > a....@#$%#@# in your hands...and the owner of the hands as a bonus. > > > > > -ego- > > > > > > > > here's the bonus: > > > > > > > > additional additional bullshit. > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > Exactly. So after all Mike Nelson's concern IS important: b or not to > > > > b > > > > -ego- > > > > > > oh that makes sense. > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > Not really... > > > The moment its reaches the point of " being all " - its already gone and > > > it > > > must change. The change is towards being nothing. Being nothing is > > > maximum > > > potencial energy and it must act...can not " stay " as nothing. > > > -ego- > > > > Jeez. > > > > You got it all figured out, huh? > > > > this big gigantic movement that geo can describe. > > > > uh uh. > > > > - d - > > > > Pristine hipocrisy. > > bbb is just like we all except he is a bit less hipocrit. > > " this big gigantic movement that geo can describe " - tsk tsk tsk. Dan have > > figured out the nature of it...not you geo. > > d: no, i haven't. and i can't. and i won't. i'm not attempting to. > > geo> Ok. What makes you say that geo is trying to figure it ALL out? d: it's how it sounded to me. if that doesn't fit, just say so. you've been saying there is no actual inner entity, and the inner entity demonstrates itself by feeling slighted, insulted, attacking, or whatever, no? Is it > because you are unable to admit the possibility that there might be some > anything that you are capturing with a conceptual mind? Maybe there is > avoidance? Absolutely sure? what are you asking me? not clear. are you asking me whether conceptuality has any involvement for me? yes, it arises choicelessly, including the sense of involvement. what is the avoidance you sense? i'm not claiming that i have no avoidance and other people do. i'm stating that the personal reality that separates subject from object is avoidance. what is beyond this reality is not mine as opposed to anyone else's. does this mean i am a saint who has no reactivity? no, i'm not claiming that. in terms of being a person, i have faults like any other person. but the person is a label in a world that labels, and the world is formed by labels (concepts) of the person. what is beyond the person/world is, but isn't mine to claim. > > Dan can point to it without words, dan can fill up pages and pages of > > non-descriptive descriptions that point to the very heart of the nature of > > what is.... > > d: none of those words have pointed to the heart of it, whatever that is. > they were thrown out there like all the words thrown out on the internet, > from wherever. > > > C mon tim..your turn. > > game-playing with fabricated selves imagined behind the words posted? > > geo> No just words on the net. d: i agree. that's all it is. and the personality being referred to or labeled, isn't there. so, if that's understood, why put out words that refer to that personality and characterize that person (who supposedly isn't being seen as having a reality)? as you've pointed out, the world shows a great deal of hurt inflicted in the service of what you have been calling " the inner entity " or what I might call something like " the investment in maintaining a separate self-sense. " so, it's surprising to see personalizing words of condescension used on a list devoted to seeing through the imagined (the " inner psychological entity " ). i tend to associate that kind of speech with actions that i have seen occur that result in hurt, such as associated with the maintenance of separate self-sense, or what you have called " ego " or " inner psychological entity " or " disease. " my two cents, dan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 23, 2009 - dan330033 Nisargadatta Tuesday, June 23, 2009 4:56 PM Re: Question to bbb Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > > > > > > bbb, are you all or nothing? > > > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > > > > > i am nothing. > > > > > > > > > > > > i am not. > > > > > > > > > > > > both and neither apply and do not. > > > > > > > > > > > > all what? > > > > > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > > > > > When is " time " to be nothing and the " time " to be all? > > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > > > i don't know what you mean. > > > > > > > > > > what is " time " ? > > > > > > > > > > if the word " when " is employed.. > > > > > > > > > > you are making an unproven assumption about " spacetime > > > > > co-ordinates. > > > > > > > > > > " when " .. " where " .. " why " ... " who " .. " how " .. > > > > > > > > > > bullshit all. > > > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > > > It is not easy to refer to what I am trying. There is a natural > > > > > movement > > > > > in > > > > > nature/isness. Time, space does not aply to the rithm. > > > > > > > > > > Heart beat, breathing in and out, day night, sleep awake, life > > > > > death. > > > > > Its > > > > > rocking....all by itself. If there is no going with it you are > > > > > left > > > > > with > > > > > a....@#$%#@# in your hands...and the owner of the hands as a > > > > > bonus. > > > > > -ego- > > > > > > > > here's the bonus: > > > > > > > > additional additional bullshit. > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > Exactly. So after all Mike Nelson's concern IS important: b or not > > > > to > > > > b > > > > -ego- > > > > > > oh that makes sense. > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > Not really... > > > The moment its reaches the point of " being all " - its already gone and > > > it > > > must change. The change is towards being nothing. Being nothing is > > > maximum > > > potencial energy and it must act...can not " stay " as nothing. > > > -ego- > > > > Jeez. > > > > You got it all figured out, huh? > > > > this big gigantic movement that geo can describe. > > > > uh uh. > > > > - d - > > > > Pristine hipocrisy. > > bbb is just like we all except he is a bit less hipocrit. > > " this big gigantic movement that geo can describe " - tsk tsk tsk. Dan > > have > > figured out the nature of it...not you geo. > > d: no, i haven't. and i can't. and i won't. i'm not attempting to. > > geo> Ok. What makes you say that geo is trying to figure it ALL out? d: it's how it sounded to me. if that doesn't fit, just say so. you've been saying there is no actual inner entity, and the inner entity demonstrates itself by feeling slighted, insulted, attacking, or whatever, no? Is it > because you are unable to admit the possibility that there might be some > anything that you are capturing with a conceptual mind? Maybe there is > avoidance? Absolutely sure? what are you asking me? not clear. are you asking me whether conceptuality has any involvement for me? yes, it arises choicelessly, including the sense of involvement. what is the avoidance you sense? i'm not claiming that i have no avoidance and other people do. i'm stating that the personal reality that separates subject from object is avoidance. what is beyond this reality is not mine as opposed to anyone else's. does this mean i am a saint who has no reactivity? no, i'm not claiming that. in terms of being a person, i have faults like any other person. but the person is a label in a world that labels, and the world is formed by labels (concepts) of the person. what is beyond the person/world is, but isn't mine to claim. > > Dan can point to it without words, dan can fill up pages and pages of > > non-descriptive descriptions that point to the very heart of the nature > > of > > what is.... > > d: none of those words have pointed to the heart of it, whatever that is. > they were thrown out there like all the words thrown out on the internet, > from wherever. > > > C mon tim..your turn. > > game-playing with fabricated selves imagined behind the words posted? > > geo> No just words on the net. d: i agree. that's all it is. and the personality being referred to or labeled, isn't there. so, if that's understood, why put out words that refer to that personality and characterize that person (who supposedly isn't being seen as having a reality)? as you've pointed out, the world shows a great deal of hurt inflicted in the service of what you have been calling " the inner entity " or what I might call something like " the investment in maintaining a separate self-sense. " so, it's surprising to see personalizing words of condescension used on a list devoted to seeing through the imagined (the " inner psychological entity " ). i tend to associate that kind of speech with actions that i have seen occur that result in hurt, such as associated with the maintenance of separate self-sense, or what you have called " ego " or " inner psychological entity " or " disease. " my two cents, dan OK...I wrote a message related to this....no I see no need to repeat here.. -geo- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 23, 2009 ....does this mean i am a saint who has no reactivity? no, i'm not claiming that. in terms of being a person, i have faults like any other person. but the person is a label in a world that labels, and the world is formed by labels (concepts) of the person.-dan- This is the point I was adressing when you said that I was figgurin it all out (hipocrisy and the rest....). That is the way usually happens with stuff that really should matter with us. We escape. This is not personal. A person is ONLY just a label for onlookers, never for us ourselves. If we react like a person it is because there was some kind of a contraction and the consequent fragmentation. I am looking at myself. I can never react like a person who feels ofended..or anything else, without the imagined dark spot. The dark spot of observation. One CAN NOT see that dark spot - but our reactions betray us. I dont know what you make of this.....so i will stop. -geo- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 23, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > > d: i agree. that's all it is. and the personality being referred to or labeled, isn't there. so, if that's understood, why put out words that refer to that personality and characterize that person (who supposedly isn't being seen as having a reality)? > > as you've pointed out, the world shows a great deal of hurt inflicted in the service of what you have been calling " the inner entity " or what I might call something like " the investment in maintaining a separate self-sense. " so, it's surprising to see personalizing words of condescension used on a list devoted to seeing through the imagined (the " inner psychological entity " ). i tend to associate that kind of speech with actions that i have seen occur that result in hurt, such as associated with the maintenance of separate self-sense, or what you have called " ego " or " inner psychological entity " or " disease. " > Quite a paradox, eh? " There is no I, and *I* know more about it than *you* do! " (chuckling)... " Let's give 'em something to talk about " - Bonnie Raitt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 23, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > bbb, are you all or nothing? > > > > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > i am nothing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > i am not. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > both and neither apply and do not. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > all what? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When is " time " to be nothing and the " time " to be all? > > > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > > > > > i don't know what you mean. > > > > > > > > > > > > what is " time " ? > > > > > > > > > > > > if the word " when " is employed.. > > > > > > > > > > > > you are making an unproven assumption about " spacetime co-ordinates. > > > > > > > > > > > > " when " .. " where " .. " why " ... " who " .. " how " .. > > > > > > > > > > > > bullshit all. > > > > > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > > > > > It is not easy to refer to what I am trying. There is a natural > > > > > > movement > > > > > > in > > > > > > nature/isness. Time, space does not aply to the rithm. > > > > > > > > > > > > Heart beat, breathing in and out, day night, sleep awake, life > > > > > > death. > > > > > > Its > > > > > > rocking....all by itself. If there is no going with it you are left > > > > > > with > > > > > > a....@#$%#@# in your hands...and the owner of the hands as a bonus. > > > > > > -ego- > > > > > > > > > > here's the bonus: > > > > > > > > > > additional additional bullshit. > > > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > > > Exactly. So after all Mike Nelson's concern IS important: b or not to > > > > > b > > > > > -ego- > > > > > > > > oh that makes sense. > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > Not really... > > > > The moment its reaches the point of " being all " - its already gone and > > > > it > > > > must change. The change is towards being nothing. Being nothing is > > > > maximum > > > > potencial energy and it must act...can not " stay " as nothing. > > > > -ego- > > > > > > Jeez. > > > > > > You got it all figured out, huh? > > > > > > this big gigantic movement that geo can describe. > > > > > > uh uh. > > > > > > - d - > > > > > > Pristine hipocrisy. > > > bbb is just like we all except he is a bit less hipocrit. > > > " this big gigantic movement that geo can describe " - tsk tsk tsk. Dan have > > > figured out the nature of it...not you geo. > > > > d: no, i haven't. and i can't. and i won't. i'm not attempting to. > > > > geo> Ok. What makes you say that geo is trying to figure it ALL out? > > d: it's how it sounded to me. if that doesn't fit, just say so. > > you've been saying there is no actual inner entity, and the inner entity demonstrates itself by feeling slighted, insulted, attacking, or whatever, no? > > Is it > > because you are unable to admit the possibility that there might be some > > anything that you are capturing with a conceptual mind? Maybe there is > > avoidance? Absolutely sure? > > what are you asking me? not clear. are you asking me whether conceptuality has any involvement for me? yes, it arises choicelessly, including the sense of involvement. > > what is the avoidance you sense? i'm not claiming that i have no avoidance and other people do. i'm stating that the personal reality that separates subject from object is avoidance. what is beyond this reality is not mine as opposed to anyone else's. > > does this mean i am a saint who has no reactivity? no, i'm not claiming that. in terms of being a person, i have faults like any other person. but the person is a label in a world that labels, and the world is formed by labels (concepts) of the person. > > what is beyond the person/world is, but isn't mine to claim. > > > > Dan can point to it without words, dan can fill up pages and pages of > > > non-descriptive descriptions that point to the very heart of the nature of > > > what is.... > > > > d: none of those words have pointed to the heart of it, whatever that is. > > they were thrown out there like all the words thrown out on the internet, > > from wherever. > > > > > C mon tim..your turn. > > > > game-playing with fabricated selves imagined behind the words posted? > > > > geo> No just words on the net. > > d: i agree. that's all it is. and the personality being referred to or labeled, isn't there. so, if that's understood, why put out words that refer to that personality and characterize that person (who supposedly isn't being seen as having a reality)? > > as you've pointed out, the world shows a great deal of hurt inflicted in the service of what you have been calling " the inner entity " or what I might call something like " the investment in maintaining a separate self-sense. " so, it's surprising to see personalizing words of condescension used on a list devoted to seeing through the imagined (the " inner psychological entity " ). i tend to associate that kind of speech with actions that i have seen occur that result in hurt, such as associated with the maintenance of separate self-sense, or what you have called " ego " or " inner psychological entity " or " disease. " > > > my two cents, > > dan bitch bitch bitch... cry and whine and complain. you think the salt needs more salt. you're thirst is unquenchable. the well is full to bursting and yet you thirst. amazing! ..b b.b. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 23, 2009 Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111 wrote: > > bitch bitch bitch... > > cry and whine and complain. Quit bitching about bitching. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 23, 2009 d: i agree. that's all it is. and the personality being referred to or labeled, isn't there. so, if that's understood, why put out words that refer to that personality and characterize that person (who supposedly isn't being seen as having a reality)? geo> First I want to say that I said "just words in the net" as a reaction, a joke, not meaning it in fact. What is there, behind the words? Either no-person, or a person INDEED! The sequence of words shows that there is a person there somewhere! It may be mixed with more or less imagination but there is. Or none - but then there is complete agreement and the two organisms feel that agreement as the isness. Sounds stupid and vain I know. ==as you've pointed out, the world shows a great deal of hurt inflicted in the service of what you have been calling "the inner entity" or what I might call something like "the investment in maintaining a separate self-sense." geo> So it has a certain importance doesn it? I can hardly bear hearing ideas that there is nobady here there and everywhere. There is suffering and hurt in the world, there are persons, and there are persons behind the lines that you read. All ideas in the contrary are...sorry..hipocrisy. == so, it's surprising to see personalizing words of condescension used on a list devoted to seeing through the imagined (the "inner psychological entity"). i tend to associate that kind of speech with actions that i have seen occur that result in hurt, such as associated with the maintenance of separate self-sense, or what you have called "ego" or "inner psychological entity" or "disease." -dan- So we are dealing with persons and not just imagination. I was referring to this problem when talking about rithm. If you dont see it right now doesnt mean I am inventing it. Either we are all and love or we are nothing and are wise. This movement is part of what is. Maybe one can see it maybe not...but that will not change the fact. This movement is interpreted in one way by persons and "felt" in another way by wholeness. Not conceptual.....but maybe just new to some..I dont know. -geo- -geo- geo> Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted June 23, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > ...does this mean i am a saint who has no reactivity? no, i'm not claiming > that. in terms of being a person, i have faults like any other person. but > the person is a label in a world that labels, and the world is formed by > labels (concepts) of the person. > -dan- > > This is the point I was adressing when you said that I was figgurin it all out (hipocrisy and the rest....). That is the way usually happens with stuff that really should matter with us. We escape. This is not personal. A person is ONLY just a label for onlookers, never for us ourselves. If we react like a person it is because there was some kind of a contraction and the consequent fragmentation. I am looking at myself. I can never react like a person who feels ofended..or anything else, without the imagined dark spot. The dark spot of observation. One CAN NOT see that dark spot - but our reactions betray us. I dont know what you make of this.....so i will stop. > -geo- what i make of it is that it's good stuff. also this: i am looking at the contraction, so to speak, at the fragementation. it is not " my " contraction, or someone else's, there is not a possessor of it. the contraction, fragmentation, is the attempt to possess, the attempt to have a location from which to possess. what is looking is not fragmentable. i am not looking from the contraction, or within the contraction. the contraction is the result of memory, of experience, and is memory, is the past. what is looking, is not the past. labels, word meanings, are the past. - d - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
