Guest guest Report post Posted August 18, 2009 > > > At what point do you get sick of asserting what you're negating, and negating what you're asserting? > > > - D - P: Probably the same day that you do. Or do you think you are not asserting and negating and repeating with every sentence? > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 18, 2009 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > dan330033 > > > > > Nisargadatta > > > > > Tuesday, August 18, 2009 1:10 PM > > > > > Re: timeless nonexperience > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > > > dan330033 > > > > > > Nisargadatta > > > > > > Monday, August 17, 2009 7:41 PM > > > > > > Re: timeless nonexperience > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think the miracle of making some orderly world out of caos is > > > > > > > not-understandable. In other words, perception is beyond understanding. > > > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > > > > > So much so, that the invention of language is sacrilegious. > > > > > > > > > > > > But, of course, can't be helped. > > > > > > > > > > > > ;-) > > > > > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > > > > > Language? waht is wrong with it? > > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > > > It refers to a past that isn't. > > > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > > > Once that is understood, there is nothing wrong with it. > > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > Once that is understood, it doesn't refer to anything. > > > > > > > > Wrong or right refer to the past. > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The idea that the conceptual mind can morph itself into a non-conceptual mind is the great hope.......of the conceptual mind. > > > > > > It imagines a perfectly peaceful existence......where its dream of separation simply evaporates. > > > > > > It wants its cake and to be it at the same time. > > > > > > > > > It's a tricky little monkey. > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > How can you not get sick of this endless reiteration of talking about what " it " does ... > > > > > > At the same time you say there are no " things " ... > > > > > > At what point do you get sick of asserting what you're negating, and negating what you're asserting? > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > No. > > :-0 > > > > > toombaru Okay, no, then. Or yes. No/yes. - D - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 18, 2009 Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6 wrote: > > > > > > > > At what point do you get sick of asserting what you're negating, and negating what you're asserting? > > > > > > - D - > > P: Probably the same day that you do. Or do you > think you are not asserting and negating > and repeating with every sentence? I haven't said anything. Neither has Toom. Don't you have anything constructive to add? - D - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 18, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > It can observe its own wake. > > > > It IS that observation. > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > It is what it observes. > > For that very reason, it is NOT that wake, and is not an it. > > > - D - > It cannot conceive of anything that is not an it. toombaru Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 18, 2009 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > > It can observe its own wake. > > > > > > It IS that observation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > It is what it observes. > > > > For that very reason, it is NOT that wake, and is not an it. > > > > > > - D - > > > > > It cannot conceive of anything that is not an it. > > > > > > toombaru funny. it doesn't seem to be doing anything at all. and nothing is missing or not happening right on time. imagine that. - D - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 18, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > At what point do you get sick of asserting what you're negating, and negating what you're asserting? > > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > P: Probably the same day that you do. Or do you > > think you are not asserting and negating > > and repeating with every sentence? > > > I haven't said anything. > > Neither has Toom. > > Don't you have anything constructive to add? > > - D - No, construction is what ails you, Danny boy. Why would you post so often if not to construct Dan? Dan x 330033. Haha! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > At what point do you get sick of asserting what you're negating, and negating what you're asserting? > > > > > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > P: Probably the same day that you do. Or do you > > > think you are not asserting and negating > > > and repeating with every sentence? > > > > > > I haven't said anything. > > > > Neither has Toom. > > > > Don't you have anything constructive to add? > > > > - D - > > No, construction is what ails you, Danny boy. > Why would you post so often if not to > construct Dan? Dan x 330033. Haha! Pete's best explanation for the motivations of a you who makes words he reads appear on his screen. Thanks for sharing, Pete. Glad you cleared up that mystery. Good work! - D - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > At what point do you get sick of asserting what you're negating, and negating what you're asserting? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > P: Probably the same day that you do. Or do you > > > > think you are not asserting and negating > > > > and repeating with every sentence? > > > > > > > > > I haven't said anything. > > > > > > Neither has Toom. > > > > > > Don't you have anything constructive to add? > > > > > > - D - > > > > No, construction is what ails you, Danny boy. > > Why would you post so often if not to > > construct Dan? Dan x 330033. Haha! > > Pete's best explanation for the motivations of a you who makes words he reads appear on his screen. > > Thanks for sharing, Pete. > > Glad you cleared up that mystery. > > Good work! > > - D - We're all enlightened now, thanks to Pete's enlightened assumptions. The more awake and enlightened an assumption is, the truer it is. The truest assumption, is an awake assumption. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 19, 2009 > > > > > > No, construction is what ails you, Danny boy. > > > Why would you post so often if not to > > > construct Dan? Dan x 330033. Haha! > > > > Pete's best explanation for the motivations of a you who makes words he reads appear on his screen. > > > > Thanks for sharing, Pete. > > > > Glad you cleared up that mystery. > > > > Good work! > > > > - D - > > We're all enlightened now, thanks to Pete's enlightened assumptions. > > The more awake and enlightened an assumption is, the truer it is. > > The truest assumption, is an awake assumption. P: ) You kiddies in the sandbox building your shaky wooden blocks houses. I like that little yellow truck. What is written in the tiny door? Cosmic Ego Construction Co.? Too cute! > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > At what point do you get sick of asserting what you're negating, and negating what you're asserting? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > > > P: Probably the same day that you do. Or do you > > > > > think you are not asserting and negating > > > > > and repeating with every sentence? > > > > > > > > > > > > I haven't said anything. > > > > > > > > Neither has Toom. > > > > > > > > Don't you have anything constructive to add? > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > No, construction is what ails you, Danny boy. > > > Why would you post so often if not to > > > construct Dan? Dan x 330033. Haha! > > > > Pete's best explanation for the motivations of a you who makes words he reads appear on his screen. > > > > Thanks for sharing, Pete. > > > > Glad you cleared up that mystery. > > > > Good work! > > > > - D - > > We're all enlightened now, thanks to Pete's enlightened assumptions. > > The more awake and enlightened an assumption is, the truer it is. > > The truest assumption, is an awake assumption. > You are both posing as you have arrived at some profound understanding.....and that that understanding has evaporated your sense of separation. I know that you think that you believe what you say. But........what you think.....is only what you think (the answer is in the last sentence) toombaru Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6 wrote: > > > > > > > > > > No, construction is what ails you, Danny boy. > > > > Why would you post so often if not to > > > > construct Dan? Dan x 330033. Haha! > > > > > > Pete's best explanation for the motivations of a you who makes words he reads appear on his screen. > > > > > > Thanks for sharing, Pete. > > > > > > Glad you cleared up that mystery. > > > > > > Good work! > > > > > > - D - > > > > We're all enlightened now, thanks to Pete's enlightened assumptions. > > > > The more awake and enlightened an assumption is, the truer it is. > > > > The truest assumption, is an awake assumption. > > P: ) You kiddies in the sandbox building your > shaky wooden blocks houses. I like that little > yellow truck. What is written in the tiny door? > > Cosmic Ego Construction Co.? Too cute! Do you find your ego, as reflected as 'others', cute? Of course, I can't see your ego, not being there with you. But it's interesting that folks find their own egos cute ;-). Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > You are both posing as you have arrived at some profound > understanding.....and that that understanding has evaporated your > sense of separation. > > I know that you think that you believe what you say. > > But........what you think.....is only what you think > > (the answer is in the last sentence) Uhuh, yes, Toom. You are here with us, to know what we are thinking. Or -- are you there with yourself, knowing only what you're thinking? Doh. Reality is too obvious to be seen by a conceptual being, who imagines to be 'out there' with 'others'. Are these words, here, out there with others? It's just too obvious. Toom won't see it. He isn't capable. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > You are both posing as you have arrived at some profound > > understanding.....and that that understanding has evaporated your > > sense of separation. > > > > I know that you think that you believe what you say. > > > > But........what you think.....is only what you think > > > > (the answer is in the last sentence) > > Uhuh, yes, Toom. > > You are here with us, to know what we are thinking. > > Or -- are you there with yourself, knowing only what you're thinking? > > Doh. > > Reality is too obvious to be seen by a conceptual being, who imagines to be 'out there' with 'others'. > > Are these words, here, out there with others? > > It's just too obvious. > > Toom won't see it. He isn't capable. > Toom knows that it can't be seen. And you think that you have arrived. toombaru Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > You are both posing as you have arrived at some profound > > > understanding.....and that that understanding has evaporated your > > > sense of separation. > > > > > > I know that you think that you believe what you say. > > > > > > But........what you think.....is only what you think > > > > > > (the answer is in the last sentence) > > > > Uhuh, yes, Toom. > > > > You are here with us, to know what we are thinking. > > > > Or -- are you there with yourself, knowing only what you're thinking? > > > > Doh. > > > > Reality is too obvious to be seen by a conceptual being, who imagines to be 'out there' with 'others'. > > > > Are these words, here, out there with others? > > > > It's just too obvious. > > > > Toom won't see it. He isn't capable. > Toom knows that it can't be seen. Toom knows way too much. He wants reality on his own terms. And that will never happen. " When you pass through the gateless gate, you walk the universe alone " . Again -- are these words, here, out there with others? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > > You are both posing as you have arrived at some profound > > > > understanding.....and that that understanding has evaporated your > > > > sense of separation. > > > > > > > > I know that you think that you believe what you say. > > > > > > > > But........what you think.....is only what you think > > > > > > > > (the answer is in the last sentence) > > > > > > Uhuh, yes, Toom. > > > > > > You are here with us, to know what we are thinking. > > > > > > Or -- are you there with yourself, knowing only what you're thinking? > > > > > > Doh. > > > > > > Reality is too obvious to be seen by a conceptual being, who imagines to be 'out there' with 'others'. > > > > > > Are these words, here, out there with others? > > > > > > It's just too obvious. > > > > > > Toom won't see it. He isn't capable. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Toom knows that it can't be seen. > > Toom knows way too much. > > He wants reality on his own terms. > > And that will never happen. > > " When you pass through the gateless gate, you walk the universe alone " . > > Again -- are these words, here, out there with others? > Oh yes the gateless gate. I think I saw that in Barstow. Or..............was the the world's tallest thermometer? I forget. :-0 toombaru toombaru Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > You are both posing as you have arrived at some profound > > > > > understanding.....and that that understanding has evaporated your > > > > > sense of separation. > > > > > > > > > > I know that you think that you believe what you say. > > > > > > > > > > But........what you think.....is only what you think > > > > > > > > > > (the answer is in the last sentence) > > > > > > > > Uhuh, yes, Toom. > > > > > > > > You are here with us, to know what we are thinking. > > > > > > > > Or -- are you there with yourself, knowing only what you're thinking? > > > > > > > > Doh. > > > > > > > > Reality is too obvious to be seen by a conceptual being, who imagines to be 'out there' with 'others'. > > > > > > > > Are these words, here, out there with others? > > > > > > > > It's just too obvious. > > > > > > > > Toom won't see it. He isn't capable. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Toom knows that it can't be seen. > > > > Toom knows way too much. > > > > He wants reality on his own terms. > > > > And that will never happen. > > > > " When you pass through the gateless gate, you walk the universe alone " . > > > > Again -- are these words, here, out there with others? > > > > > > > Oh yes the gateless gate. > > > I think I saw that in Barstow. > > > Or..............was the the world's tallest thermometer? > > > I forget. > > > :-0 > > > > > toombaru > > > toombaru Ahh well, Toom. Another opportunity will arise to look into what's obvious, rather than what's difficult and obtuse. After all, this 'opportunity' is called " every moment of every day of your life " . Peace... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6 wrote: > > > > > > > > > > No, construction is what ails you, Danny boy. > > > > Why would you post so often if not to > > > > construct Dan? Dan x 330033. Haha! > > > > > > Pete's best explanation for the motivations of a you who makes words he reads appear on his screen. > > > > > > Thanks for sharing, Pete. > > > > > > Glad you cleared up that mystery. > > > > > > Good work! > > > > > > - D - > > > > We're all enlightened now, thanks to Pete's enlightened assumptions. > > > > The more awake and enlightened an assumption is, the truer it is. > > > > The truest assumption, is an awake assumption. > > P: ) You kiddies in the sandbox building your > shaky wooden blocks houses. I like that little > yellow truck. What is written in the tiny door? > > Cosmic Ego Construction Co.? Too cute! Wow, it's made of mirrors. How cool is that? - D - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No, construction is what ails you, Danny boy. > > > > > Why would you post so often if not to > > > > > construct Dan? Dan x 330033. Haha! > > > > > > > > Pete's best explanation for the motivations of a you who makes words he reads appear on his screen. > > > > > > > > Thanks for sharing, Pete. > > > > > > > > Glad you cleared up that mystery. > > > > > > > > Good work! > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > We're all enlightened now, thanks to Pete's enlightened assumptions. > > > > > > The more awake and enlightened an assumption is, the truer it is. > > > > > > The truest assumption, is an awake assumption. > > > > P: ) You kiddies in the sandbox building your > > shaky wooden blocks houses. I like that little > > yellow truck. What is written in the tiny door? > > > > Cosmic Ego Construction Co.? Too cute! > > Wow, it's made of mirrors. > > How cool is that? > > - D - Shhhhhh. It. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > At what point do you get sick of asserting what you're negating, and negating what you're asserting? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > > > > > P: Probably the same day that you do. Or do you > > > > > > think you are not asserting and negating > > > > > > and repeating with every sentence? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I haven't said anything. > > > > > > > > > > Neither has Toom. > > > > > > > > > > Don't you have anything constructive to add? > > > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > No, construction is what ails you, Danny boy. > > > > Why would you post so often if not to > > > > construct Dan? Dan x 330033. Haha! > > > > > > Pete's best explanation for the motivations of a you who makes words he reads appear on his screen. > > > > > > Thanks for sharing, Pete. > > > > > > Glad you cleared up that mystery. > > > > > > Good work! > > > > > > - D - > > > > We're all enlightened now, thanks to Pete's enlightened assumptions. > > > > The more awake and enlightened an assumption is, the truer it is. > > > > The truest assumption, is an awake assumption. > > > > > > > You are both posing as you have arrived at some profound understanding.....and that that understanding has evaporated your sense of separation. > > I know that you think that you believe what you say. > > But........what you think.....is only what you think > > (the answer is in the last sentence) > > > > > > toombaru Clearly, that's what you were thinking about at the time you typed it, translated into words, and put up there for you to look at. Wonder if you're learning something from it? Who would be the learner? The one who typed it? But that one already knew what he was thinking at the time he typed it. So, it can only be for enjoyment's sake. Contributing to the display that is all that is anyway. It's the all you station, all the time. - D - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > At what point do you get sick of asserting what you're negating, and negating what you're asserting? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > P: Probably the same day that you do. Or do you > > > > > > > think you are not asserting and negating > > > > > > > and repeating with every sentence? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I haven't said anything. > > > > > > > > > > > > Neither has Toom. > > > > > > > > > > > > Don't you have anything constructive to add? > > > > > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > > > No, construction is what ails you, Danny boy. > > > > > Why would you post so often if not to > > > > > construct Dan? Dan x 330033. Haha! > > > > > > > > Pete's best explanation for the motivations of a you who makes words he reads appear on his screen. > > > > > > > > Thanks for sharing, Pete. > > > > > > > > Glad you cleared up that mystery. > > > > > > > > Good work! > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > We're all enlightened now, thanks to Pete's enlightened assumptions. > > > > > > The more awake and enlightened an assumption is, the truer it is. > > > > > > The truest assumption, is an awake assumption. > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are both posing as you have arrived at some profound understanding.....and that that understanding has evaporated your sense of separation. > > > > I know that you think that you believe what you say. > > > > But........what you think.....is only what you think > > > > (the answer is in the last sentence) > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > Clearly, that's what you were thinking about at the time you typed it, translated into words, and put up there for you to look at. > > Wonder if you're learning something from it? > > Who would be the learner? > > The one who typed it? > > But that one already knew what he was thinking at the time he typed it. > > So, it can only be for enjoyment's sake. > > Contributing to the display that is all that is anyway. > > It's the all you station, all the time. > > - D - Naah... it's gotta be about " someone else " ... After all, Toomie read it, Toomie interpreted it, and Toomie responded to it. There's gotta be an 'other' somewhere in that loop ;-). Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > You are both posing as you have arrived at some profound > > > understanding.....and that that understanding has evaporated your > > > sense of separation. > > > > > > I know that you think that you believe what you say. > > > > > > But........what you think.....is only what you think > > > > > > (the answer is in the last sentence) > > > > Uhuh, yes, Toom. > > > > You are here with us, to know what we are thinking. > > > > Or -- are you there with yourself, knowing only what you're thinking? > > > > Doh. > > > > Reality is too obvious to be seen by a conceptual being, who imagines to be 'out there' with 'others'. > > > > Are these words, here, out there with others? > > > > It's just too obvious. > > > > Toom won't see it. He isn't capable. > Toom knows that it can't be seen. > > And you think that you have arrived. > > toombaru Is that your Ram Tzu imitation? - D - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > At what point do you get sick of asserting what you're negating, and negating what you're asserting? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > P: Probably the same day that you do. Or do you > > > > > > > > think you are not asserting and negating > > > > > > > > and repeating with every sentence? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I haven't said anything. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Neither has Toom. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Don't you have anything constructive to add? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > > > > > No, construction is what ails you, Danny boy. > > > > > > Why would you post so often if not to > > > > > > construct Dan? Dan x 330033. Haha! > > > > > > > > > > Pete's best explanation for the motivations of a you who makes words he reads appear on his screen. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for sharing, Pete. > > > > > > > > > > Glad you cleared up that mystery. > > > > > > > > > > Good work! > > > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > We're all enlightened now, thanks to Pete's enlightened assumptions. > > > > > > > > The more awake and enlightened an assumption is, the truer it is. > > > > > > > > The truest assumption, is an awake assumption. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are both posing as you have arrived at some profound understanding.....and that that understanding has evaporated your sense of separation. > > > > > > I know that you think that you believe what you say. > > > > > > But........what you think.....is only what you think > > > > > > (the answer is in the last sentence) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > Clearly, that's what you were thinking about at the time you typed it, translated into words, and put up there for you to look at. > > > > Wonder if you're learning something from it? > > > > Who would be the learner? > > > > The one who typed it? > > > > But that one already knew what he was thinking at the time he typed it. > > > > So, it can only be for enjoyment's sake. > > > > Contributing to the display that is all that is anyway. > > > > It's the all you station, all the time. > > > > - D - > > Naah... it's gotta be about " someone else " ... > > After all, Toomie read it, Toomie interpreted it, and Toomie responded to it. > > There's gotta be an 'other' somewhere in that loop ;-). > The conceptual negation of the conceptual others turns out to be one of the hardest things that I have ever tried to explain to Muggins. toombaru Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > > You are both posing as you have arrived at some profound > > > > understanding.....and that that understanding has evaporated your > > > > sense of separation. > > > > > > > > I know that you think that you believe what you say. > > > > > > > > But........what you think.....is only what you think > > > > > > > > (the answer is in the last sentence) > > > > > > Uhuh, yes, Toom. > > > > > > You are here with us, to know what we are thinking. > > > > > > Or -- are you there with yourself, knowing only what you're thinking? > > > > > > Doh. > > > > > > Reality is too obvious to be seen by a conceptual being, who imagines to be 'out there' with 'others'. > > > > > > Are these words, here, out there with others? > > > > > > It's just too obvious. > > > > > > Toom won't see it. He isn't capable. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Toom knows that it can't be seen. > > > > And you think that you have arrived. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > Is that your Ram Tzu imitation? > > - D - It's his " I'm addressing a you who's really me " imitation. It's very cheap 'n cheesy, but also very popular. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > > You are both posing as you have arrived at some profound > > > > understanding.....and that that understanding has evaporated your > > > > sense of separation. > > > > > > > > I know that you think that you believe what you say. > > > > > > > > But........what you think.....is only what you think > > > > > > > > (the answer is in the last sentence) > > > > > > Uhuh, yes, Toom. > > > > > > You are here with us, to know what we are thinking. > > > > > > Or -- are you there with yourself, knowing only what you're thinking? > > > > > > Doh. > > > > > > Reality is too obvious to be seen by a conceptual being, who imagines to be 'out there' with 'others'. > > > > > > Are these words, here, out there with others? > > > > > > It's just too obvious. > > > > > > Toom won't see it. He isn't capable. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Toom knows that it can't be seen. > > > > And you think that you have arrived. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > Is that your Ram Tzu imitation? > > - D - > I like Ram Tzu. :-) toombaru Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted August 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > At what point do you get sick of asserting what you're negating, and negating what you're asserting? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > P: Probably the same day that you do. Or do you > > > > > > > > > think you are not asserting and negating > > > > > > > > > and repeating with every sentence? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I haven't said anything. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Neither has Toom. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Don't you have anything constructive to add? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No, construction is what ails you, Danny boy. > > > > > > > Why would you post so often if not to > > > > > > > construct Dan? Dan x 330033. Haha! > > > > > > > > > > > > Pete's best explanation for the motivations of a you who makes words he reads appear on his screen. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for sharing, Pete. > > > > > > > > > > > > Glad you cleared up that mystery. > > > > > > > > > > > > Good work! > > > > > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > > > We're all enlightened now, thanks to Pete's enlightened assumptions. > > > > > > > > > > The more awake and enlightened an assumption is, the truer it is. > > > > > > > > > > The truest assumption, is an awake assumption. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are both posing as you have arrived at some profound understanding.....and that that understanding has evaporated your sense of separation. > > > > > > > > I know that you think that you believe what you say. > > > > > > > > But........what you think.....is only what you think > > > > > > > > (the answer is in the last sentence) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > Clearly, that's what you were thinking about at the time you typed it, translated into words, and put up there for you to look at. > > > > > > Wonder if you're learning something from it? > > > > > > Who would be the learner? > > > > > > The one who typed it? > > > > > > But that one already knew what he was thinking at the time he typed it. > > > > > > So, it can only be for enjoyment's sake. > > > > > > Contributing to the display that is all that is anyway. > > > > > > It's the all you station, all the time. > > > > > > - D - > > > > Naah... it's gotta be about " someone else " ... > > > > After all, Toomie read it, Toomie interpreted it, and Toomie responded to it. > > > > There's gotta be an 'other' somewhere in that loop ;-). > > > > > > The conceptual negation of the conceptual others turns out to be > one of the hardest things that I have ever tried to explain to > Muggins. > > > > > > toombaru Well, thump yourself up side the head then, Muggins. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
