The Absolute

December 2, 2009

Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote:

>

> -

> Lene

> Nisargadatta

> Tuesday, December 01, 2009 6:47 AM

> Re: The Absolute

>

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

> >

> > The funny thing is that the observer always seems to forget his

> > own presence in the general panic of the search for himself. It

> > is pretty amusing, and the muses are having a good time indeed.

> >

> > -Lene

> >

> > The presence of an observer that forgets about itself? Who is looking for

> > himself but thought?

> > -geo-

>

> Earth is calling: not all seem to know that they are the world.

>

> Is it not peculiar that many people look outside themselves to

> find out what is going on?

>

> Is it not peculiar that many people dissect other peoples mind

> /brain to detect how they function instead of looking at their

> own mind/brain?

>

> Is it not peculiar, that the climate changes has nothing to do

> with me, only with the others? " They " are to blame - not me.

>

> Is it not amusing - and worth a thought or two?

>

> I must always begin with myself was/is the general point.

>

> -Lene

>

> Looking at others minds is not other then my mind.

> -geo-

Agreed.

-Lene

December 2, 2009

Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote:

> >

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

> > >

> > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote:

> > > >

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

> > > > >

> > > > > The funny thing is that the observer always seems to forget his

> > > > > own presence in the general panic of the search for himself. It

> > > > > is pretty amusing, and the muses are having a good time indeed.

> > > > >

> > > > > -Lene

> > > > >

> > > > > The presence of an observer that forgets about itself? Who is looking

for himself but thought?

> > > > > -geo-

> > > >

> > > > Earth is calling: not all seem to know that they are the world.

> > > >

> > > > Is it not peculiar that many people look outside themselves to

> > > > find out what is going on?

> > >

> > > It's not peculiar.

> > >

> > > Nor is it peculiar when the 'path of return' is discovered, and one stops

looking outside oneself to find out what is going on.

> >

> > I have heard of a path called the path of NO return

> >

> > What is the 'path of return'?

> >

> > -Lene

>

> It's Nisargadatta's terminology. The 'outgoing path' is toward the world, the

'path of return' back to the Self.

Thanks for the explanation.

But what is going out, resp in?

There is always this unknown factor which, since it's

not factual - visible - tangible - cannot be a factor.

Because it is not a factor, it can not be explained.

And it's that non being which this being is trying to

track down.

It is a mission impossible because one cannot know or

tell what none is - except it must be nothing but how

can something know and speak of nothing?

I can but talk of something, me, consciousness, being.

Its annoying for one to know that whenever one is none

there's no game. I would like to experience the end of

the game, and then come back and tell you all about it.

Lol ...

-Lene

December 2, 2009

In a moment of clarity

One and none is the same

On and off is the same

In and out is the same

-Lene

Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe wrote:

>

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

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote:

> > >

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

> > > >

> > > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote:

> > > > >

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

> > > > > >

> > > > > > The funny thing is that the observer always seems to forget his

> > > > > > own presence in the general panic of the search for himself. It

> > > > > > is pretty amusing, and the muses are having a good time indeed.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > -Lene

> > > > > >

> > > > > > The presence of an observer that forgets about itself? Who is

looking for himself but thought?

> > > > > > -geo-

> > > > >

> > > > > Earth is calling: not all seem to know that they are the world.

> > > > >

> > > > > Is it not peculiar that many people look outside themselves to

> > > > > find out what is going on?

> > > >

> > > > It's not peculiar.

> > > >

> > > > Nor is it peculiar when the 'path of return' is discovered, and one

stops looking outside oneself to find out what is going on.

> > >

> > > I have heard of a path called the path of NO return

> > >

> > > What is the 'path of return'?

> > >

> > > -Lene

> >

> > It's Nisargadatta's terminology. The 'outgoing path' is toward the world,

the 'path of return' back to the Self.

>

> Thanks for the explanation.

>

> But what is going out, resp in?

>

> There is always this unknown factor which, since it's

> not factual - visible - tangible - cannot be a factor.

>

> Because it is not a factor, it can not be explained.

>

> And it's that non being which this being is trying to

> track down.

>

> It is a mission impossible because one cannot know or

> tell what none is - except it must be nothing but how

> can something know and speak of nothing?

>

> I can but talk of something, me, consciousness, being.

>

> Its annoying for one to know that whenever one is none

> there's no game. I would like to experience the end of

> the game, and then come back and tell you all about it.

>

> Lol ...

>

> -Lene

>

December 2, 2009

The One moment of clarity

is the ongoing moment of

conscious life lived in

compassionate awareness.

~A

Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe wrote:

>

> In a moment of clarity

>

> One and none is the same

>

> On and off is the same

>

> In and out is the same

>

> -Lene

>

> Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote:

> >

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

> > >

> > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote:

> > > >

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

> > > > >

> > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote:

> > > > > >

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

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > The funny thing is that the observer always seems to forget his

> > > > > > > own presence in the general panic of the search for himself. It

> > > > > > > is pretty amusing, and the muses are having a good time indeed.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > -Lene

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > The presence of an observer that forgets about itself? Who is

looking for himself but thought?

> > > > > > > -geo-

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Earth is calling: not all seem to know that they are the world.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Is it not peculiar that many people look outside themselves to

> > > > > > find out what is going on?

> > > > >

> > > > > It's not peculiar.

> > > > >

> > > > > Nor is it peculiar when the 'path of return' is discovered, and one

stops looking outside oneself to find out what is going on.

> > > >

> > > > I have heard of a path called the path of NO return

> > > >

> > > > What is the 'path of return'?

> > > >

> > > > -Lene

> > >

> > > It's Nisargadatta's terminology. The 'outgoing path' is toward the world,

the 'path of return' back to the Self.

> >

> > Thanks for the explanation.

> >

> > But what is going out, resp in?

> >

> > There is always this unknown factor which, since it's

> > not factual - visible - tangible - cannot be a factor.

> >

> > Because it is not a factor, it can not be explained.

> >

> > And it's that non being which this being is trying to

> > track down.

> >

> > It is a mission impossible because one cannot know or

> > tell what none is - except it must be nothing but how

> > can something know and speak of nothing?

> >

> > I can but talk of something, me, consciousness, being.

> >

> > Its annoying for one to know that whenever one is none

> > there's no game. I would like to experience the end of

> > the game, and then come back and tell you all about it.

> >

> > Lol ...

> >

> > -Lene

> >

>

December 2, 2009

Nisargadatta , " anna " <kailashana wrote:

>

> The One moment of clarity

> is the ongoing moment of

> conscious life lived in

> compassionate awareness.

>

> ~A

>

> Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote:

> >

> > In a moment of clarity

> >

> > One and none is the same

> >

> > On and off is the same

> >

> > In and out is the same

> >

> > -Lene

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote:

> > >

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

> > > >

> > > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote:

> > > > >

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

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote:

> > > > > > >

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

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > The funny thing is that the observer always seems to forget his

> > > > > > > > own presence in the general panic of the search for himself. It

> > > > > > > > is pretty amusing, and the muses are having a good time indeed.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > -Lene

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > The presence of an observer that forgets about itself? Who is

looking for himself but thought?

> > > > > > > > -geo-

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Earth is calling: not all seem to know that they are the world.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Is it not peculiar that many people look outside themselves to

> > > > > > > find out what is going on?

> > > > > >

> > > > > > It's not peculiar.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Nor is it peculiar when the 'path of return' is discovered, and one

stops looking outside oneself to find out what is going on.

> > > > >

> > > > > I have heard of a path called the path of NO return

> > > > >

> > > > > What is the 'path of return'?

> > > > >

> > > > > -Lene

> > > >

> > > > It's Nisargadatta's terminology. The 'outgoing path' is toward the

world, the 'path of return' back to the Self.

> > >

> > > Thanks for the explanation.

> > >

> > > But what is going out, resp in?

> > >

> > > There is always this unknown factor which, since it's

> > > not factual - visible - tangible - cannot be a factor.

> > >

> > > Because it is not a factor, it can not be explained.

> > >

> > > And it's that non being which this being is trying to

> > > track down.

> > >

> > > It is a mission impossible because one cannot know or

> > > tell what none is - except it must be nothing but how

> > > can something know and speak of nothing?

> > >

> > > I can but talk of something, me, consciousness, being.

> > >

> > > Its annoying for one to know that whenever one is none

> > > there's no game. I would like to experience the end of

> > > the game, and then come back and tell you all about it.

> > >

> > > Lol ...

> > >

> > > -Lene

> > >

> >

>

Anna,

Awareness in no way is compassionate. But when compassion arises it can become a

content of awareness.

Werner

December 2, 2009

Nisargadatta , " BobN " <Roberibus111 wrote:

>

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

> >

> > >

> > > (.b b.b.):

> > >

> > > tell me..what IS without reference?

> > >

> >

> > A village idiot!

> >

> > Although it is an important job...

> >

> > (To make people laugh)

> >

> > I am not sure they come with references.

> >

> > -m

>

> i'm sure you would know all about this type of chap meth.

>

> right pal?

>

> sure makes me laugh.

>

> specially that you aren't sure about yourself and the reference deal.

You seem to judge too quickly. Have you considered the possibility that you

don't write clearly or sensibly? What is the " reference deal " ?

-m

December 2, 2009

Nisargadatta , " methusalum " <methusalum wrote:

>

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

> >

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

> > >

> > > >

> > > > (.b b.b.):

> > > >

> > > > tell me..what IS without reference?

> > > >

> > >

> > > A village idiot!

> > >

> > > Although it is an important job...

> > >

> > > (To make people laugh)

> > >

> > > I am not sure they come with references.

> > >

> > > -m

> >

> > i'm sure you would know all about this type of chap meth.

> >

> > right pal?

> >

> > sure makes me laugh.

> >

> > specially that you aren't sure about yourself and the reference deal.

>

> You seem to judge too quickly. Have you considered the possibility that you

don't write clearly or sensibly? What is the " reference deal " ?

>

> -m

LOL!

i judge not at all lest i be judged meth.

the " reference " deal is re the fact that..

there is absolutely nothing thought about..

nor talked about..

nor written about..

that is without reference.

if you believe otherwise..

giver'er your best shot sport.

write about something that has no reference whatsoever.

have you considered the obvious fact that you don't have a clue?

indeed most of what has occurred during this dialogue..

has clearly occurred too quickly for you to get a handle on..

ergo the silly question regarding referencing.

listen meth...

i'd try to get control of that..

" seeming " stuff of yours if i were you..

though thankfully i'm not.

it consistently runs you into trouble.

actually pal..

that " seeming " of yours which falsely regards me as judging anything..

and how quickly said judging is supposed in your seeming to occur..

is nothing but YOUR judgment.

again may i suggest that you relax..go with the flow.

i hope this has been clear enough for you little friend.

as for it being sensible..

well guy..it can only be sensible for the sensible.

at this juncture i don't hold up much hope of that in your case.

but i am joyed that we can still be fast friends.

although perhaps not fast on the uptake on your side.

but be that as it may..

i'm sure eventually you'll get the picture.

i look forward to our continued friendship and conversation.

..b b.b.

December 2, 2009

Nisargadatta , " wwoehr " <wwoehr wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " anna " <kailashana@> wrote:

> >

> > The One moment of clarity

> > is the ongoing moment of

> > conscious life lived in

> > compassionate awareness.

> >

> > ~A

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote:

> > >

> > > In a moment of clarity

> > >

> > > One and none is the same

> > >

> > > On and off is the same

> > >

> > > In and out is the same

> > >

> > > -Lene

> > >

> > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote:

> > > >

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

> > > > >

> > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote:

> > > > > >

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

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote:

> > > > > > > >

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

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > The funny thing is that the observer always seems to forget

his

> > > > > > > > > own presence in the general panic of the search for himself.

It

> > > > > > > > > is pretty amusing, and the muses are having a good time

indeed.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > -Lene

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > The presence of an observer that forgets about itself? Who is

looking for himself but thought?

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

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Earth is calling: not all seem to know that they are the world.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Is it not peculiar that many people look outside themselves to

> > > > > > > > find out what is going on?

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > It's not peculiar.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Nor is it peculiar when the 'path of return' is discovered, and

one stops looking outside oneself to find out what is going on.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I have heard of a path called the path of NO return

> > > > > >

> > > > > > What is the 'path of return'?

> > > > > >

> > > > > > -Lene

> > > > >

> > > > > It's Nisargadatta's terminology. The 'outgoing path' is toward the

world, the 'path of return' back to the Self.

> > > >

> > > > Thanks for the explanation.

> > > >

> > > > But what is going out, resp in?

> > > >

> > > > There is always this unknown factor which, since it's

> > > > not factual - visible - tangible - cannot be a factor.

> > > >

> > > > Because it is not a factor, it can not be explained.

> > > >

> > > > And it's that non being which this being is trying to

> > > > track down.

> > > >

> > > > It is a mission impossible because one cannot know or

> > > > tell what none is - except it must be nothing but how

> > > > can something know and speak of nothing?

> > > >

> > > > I can but talk of something, me, consciousness, being.

> > > >

> > > > Its annoying for one to know that whenever one is none

> > > > there's no game. I would like to experience the end of

> > > > the game, and then come back and tell you all about it.

> > > >

> > > > Lol ...

> > > >

> > > > -Lene

> > > >

> > >

> >

>

> Anna,

>

> Awareness in no way is compassionate. But when compassion arises it can become

a content of awareness.

>

> Werner

>

Isn't awareness all about with what we identify?

~A

December 2, 2009

Nisargadatta , " wwoehr " <wwoehr wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " anna " <kailashana@> wrote:

> >

> > The One moment of clarity

> > is the ongoing moment of

> > conscious life lived in

> > compassionate awareness.

> >

> > ~A

> >

>

> Anna,

>

> Awareness in no way is compassionate. But when compassion arises it can become

a content of awareness.

>

> Werner

Werner -

Yes.

Therefore, awareness has no quality.

Therefore, awareness cannot be known.

Therefore, whatever is said about awareness cannot be construed as something

known about awareness.

Anything " known " is what you are calling " contents " , aka, " constructed. "

- D -

December 2, 2009

Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote:

>

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

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " anna " <kailashana@> wrote:

> > >

> > > The One moment of clarity

> > > is the ongoing moment of

> > > conscious life lived in

> > > compassionate awareness.

> > >

> > > ~A

> > >

> >

> > Anna,

> >

> > Awareness in no way is compassionate. But when compassion arises it can

become a content of awareness.

> >

> > Werner

>

> Werner -

>

> Yes.

>

> Therefore, awareness has no quality.

>

> Therefore, awareness cannot be known.

>

> Therefore, whatever is said about awareness cannot be construed as something

known about awareness.

>

> Anything " known " is what you are calling " contents " , aka, " constructed. "

>

> - D -

and just how are you aware of all that?

..b b.b.

December 2, 2009

Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote:

>

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

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " anna " <kailashana@> wrote:

> > >

> > > The One moment of clarity

> > > is the ongoing moment of

> > > conscious life lived in

> > > compassionate awareness.

> > >

> > > ~A

> > >

> >

> > Anna,

> >

> > Awareness in no way is compassionate. But when compassion arises it can

become a content of awareness.

> >

> > Werner

>

> Werner -

>

> Yes.

>

> Therefore, awareness has no quality.

>

> Therefore, awareness cannot be known.

>

> Therefore, whatever is said about awareness cannot be construed as something

known about awareness.

>

> Anything " known " is what you are calling " contents " , aka, " constructed. "

>

> - D -

>

The knower is the knowm is thought.

Thought is a content of awareness.

Werner

December 3, 2009

Yoanna,

I would have accepted ur explanation without the 'compassionate'

Was wondering how to explain awareness, when this one presented

itself:

" Awareness is a silent empty space full of noise " .

Awareness and consciousness is the same. Consciousness is thing

as well as no thing. No?

Love

Nisargadatta , " anna " <kailashana wrote:

>

> The One moment of clarity

> is the ongoing moment of

> conscious life lived in

> compassionate awareness.

>

> ~A

>

> Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote:

> >

> > In a moment of clarity

> >

> > One and none is the same

> >

> > On and off is the same

> >

> > In and out is the same

> >

> > -Lene

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote:

> > >

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

> > > >

> > > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote:

> > > > >

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

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote:

> > > > > > >

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

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > The funny thing is that the observer always seems to forget his

> > > > > > > > own presence in the general panic of the search for himself. It

> > > > > > > > is pretty amusing, and the muses are having a good time indeed.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > -Lene

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > The presence of an observer that forgets about itself? Who is

looking for himself but thought?

> > > > > > > > -geo-

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Earth is calling: not all seem to know that they are the world.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Is it not peculiar that many people look outside themselves to

> > > > > > > find out what is going on?

> > > > > >

> > > > > > It's not peculiar.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Nor is it peculiar when the 'path of return' is discovered, and one

stops looking outside oneself to find out what is going on.

> > > > >

> > > > > I have heard of a path called the path of NO return

> > > > >

> > > > > What is the 'path of return'?

> > > > >

> > > > > -Lene

> > > >

> > > > It's Nisargadatta's terminology. The 'outgoing path' is toward the

world, the 'path of return' back to the Self.

> > >

> > > Thanks for the explanation.

> > >

> > > But what is going out, resp in?

> > >

> > > There is always this unknown factor which, since it's

> > > not factual - visible - tangible - cannot be a factor.

> > >

> > > Because it is not a factor, it can not be explained.

> > >

> > > And it's that non being which this being is trying to

> > > track down.

> > >

> > > It is a mission impossible because one cannot know or

> > > tell what none is - except it must be nothing but how

> > > can something know and speak of nothing?

> > >

> > > I can but talk of something, me, consciousness, being.

> > >

> > > Its annoying for one to know that whenever one is none

> > > there's no game. I would like to experience the end of

> > > the game, and then come back and tell you all about it.

> > >

> > > Lol ...

> > >

> > > -Lene

> > >

> >

>

December 3, 2009

Nisargadatta , " BobN " <Roberibus111 wrote:

>

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

> >

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

> > >

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

> > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > (.b b.b.):

> > > > >

> > > > > tell me..what IS without reference?

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > A village idiot!

> > > >

> > > > Although it is an important job...

> > > >

> > > > (To make people laugh)

> > > >

> > > > I am not sure they come with references.

> > > >

> > > > -m

> > >

> > > i'm sure you would know all about this type of chap meth.

> > >

> > > right pal?

> > >

> > > sure makes me laugh.

> > >

> > > specially that you aren't sure about yourself and the reference deal.

> >

> > You seem to judge too quickly. Have you considered the possibility that you

don't write clearly or sensibly? What is the " reference deal " ?

> >

> > -m

>

> LOL!

>

> i judge not at all lest i be judged meth.

>

> the " reference " deal is re the fact that..

>

> there is absolutely nothing thought about..

>

> nor talked about..

>

> nor written about..

>

> that is without reference.

>

> if you believe otherwise..

>

> giver'er your best shot sport.

>

> write about something that has no reference whatsoever.

>

> have you considered the obvious fact that you don't have a clue?

>

> indeed most of what has occurred during this dialogue..

>

> has clearly occurred too quickly for you to get a handle on..

>

> ergo the silly question regarding referencing.

>

> listen meth...

>

> i'd try to get control of that..

>

> " seeming " stuff of yours if i were you..

>

> though thankfully i'm not.

>

> it consistently runs you into trouble.

>

> actually pal..

>

> that " seeming " of yours which falsely regards me as judging anything..

>

> and how quickly said judging is supposed in your seeming to occur..

>

> is nothing but YOUR judgment.

>

> again may i suggest that you relax..go with the flow.

>

> i hope this has been clear enough for you little friend.

>

> as for it being sensible..

>

> well guy..it can only be sensible for the sensible.

>

> at this juncture i don't hold up much hope of that in your case.

>

> but i am joyed that we can still be fast friends.

>

> although perhaps not fast on the uptake on your side.

>

> but be that as it may..

>

> i'm sure eventually you'll get the picture.

>

> i look forward to our continued friendship and conversation.

>

> .b b.b.

>

I won't bother pointing out the contradictions in your posts, or that you

cleverly excluded two categories from your list which don't have reference.

No doubt you are fully aware of them anyway. So much as your posts are

entertaining and a reminder to us of how twisted understanding can become, I am

sure you have much better things to do with your time. As do I.

December 3, 2009

Nisargadatta , " methusalum " <methusalum wrote:

>

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

> >

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

> > >

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

> > > >

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

> > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > (.b b.b.):

> > > > > >

> > > > > > tell me..what IS without reference?

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > A village idiot!

> > > > >

> > > > > Although it is an important job...

> > > > >

> > > > > (To make people laugh)

> > > > >

> > > > > I am not sure they come with references.

> > > > >

> > > > > -m

> > > >

> > > > i'm sure you would know all about this type of chap meth.

> > > >

> > > > right pal?

> > > >

> > > > sure makes me laugh.

> > > >

> > > > specially that you aren't sure about yourself and the reference deal.

> > >

> > > You seem to judge too quickly. Have you considered the possibility that

you don't write clearly or sensibly? What is the " reference deal " ?

> > >

> > > -m

> >

> > LOL!

> >

> > i judge not at all lest i be judged meth.

> >

> > the " reference " deal is re the fact that..

> >

> > there is absolutely nothing thought about..

> >

> > nor talked about..

> >

> > nor written about..

> >

> > that is without reference.

> >

> > if you believe otherwise..

> >

> > giver'er your best shot sport.

> >

> > write about something that has no reference whatsoever.

> >

> > have you considered the obvious fact that you don't have a clue?

> >

> > indeed most of what has occurred during this dialogue..

> >

> > has clearly occurred too quickly for you to get a handle on..

> >

> > ergo the silly question regarding referencing.

> >

> > listen meth...

> >

> > i'd try to get control of that..

> >

> > " seeming " stuff of yours if i were you..

> >

> > though thankfully i'm not.

> >

> > it consistently runs you into trouble.

> >

> > actually pal..

> >

> > that " seeming " of yours which falsely regards me as judging anything..

> >

> > and how quickly said judging is supposed in your seeming to occur..

> >

> > is nothing but YOUR judgment.

> >

> > again may i suggest that you relax..go with the flow.

> >

> > i hope this has been clear enough for you little friend.

> >

> > as for it being sensible..

> >

> > well guy..it can only be sensible for the sensible.

> >

> > at this juncture i don't hold up much hope of that in your case.

> >

> > but i am joyed that we can still be fast friends.

> >

> > although perhaps not fast on the uptake on your side.

> >

> > but be that as it may..

> >

> > i'm sure eventually you'll get the picture.

> >

> > i look forward to our continued friendship and conversation.

> >

> > .b b.b.

> >

(meth.)

> I won't bother pointing out the contradictions in your posts, or that you

cleverly excluded two categories from your list which don't have reference.

(.b b.b.)

no go ahead and point them out.

this should be funnier than the rest of your post.

(meth.)

> No doubt you are fully aware of them anyway. So much as your posts are

entertaining and a reminder to us of how twisted understanding can become, I am

sure you have much better things to do with your time. As do I.

nope.

i don't have any time.

though time may have me.

dunno for sure.

but say smarty..

what do you have to do with your time..

and where do you store it..

when you're not doing " better things " with it?

you've got to be kidding right meth?

i mean i'm laughing..

and i do hope it's with you and not at you.

i like how this friendship is developing.

keep in touch pal.

..b b.b.

December 4, 2009

> (meth.)

>

> > I won't bother pointing out the contradictions in your posts, or that you

cleverly excluded two categories from your list which don't have reference.

>

> (.b b.b.)

>

> no go ahead and point them out.

>

> this should be funnier than the rest of your post.

>

Only to be reminded (as you have posted) that you don't exist; and that which

isn't cannot contain contradictions.

Laugh away! Your posts are a great inspiration. I am thinking of basing a

character in a book on you. So if you value this fast friendship try to keep

away from Mad Hatter style quotes. That'll make you more unique.

December 4, 2009

Nisargadatta , " methusalum " <methusalum wrote:

>

> > (meth.)

> >

> > > I won't bother pointing out the contradictions in your posts, or that you

cleverly excluded two categories from your list which don't have reference.

> >

> > (.b b.b.)

> >

> > no go ahead and point them out.

> >

> > this should be funnier than the rest of your post.

> >

>(meth.)

> Only to be reminded (as you have posted) that you don't exist; and that which

isn't cannot contain contradictions.

(.b b.b.)

LOL!

say what????

you aren't very talented in repartee are you?

>(meth)

> Laugh away!

(.b b.b.)

I am.

can't you tell?

oh right..

you aren't that fast on the uptake are you?

>(meth.)

>Your posts are a great inspiration.

(.b b.b.)

this i know.

however only those capable of being inspired can benefit.

thus obviously the posts do you no good.

>(meth)

> I am thinking of basing a character in a book on you.

(.b b.b.)

you think?!

oh pshaw!

a book????

that you are going to write?

righhhhhhhhhhhhhhht!

hahahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaa!

>(meth)

>So if you value this fast friendship try to keep away from Mad Hatter style

quotes. That'll make you more unique.

(.b b.b.)

it should be suggested that you not even try to keep up.

you haven't the stuff kid.

you are anything but unique.

maybe this being total opposites in kind..

is the cause of our getting on so well together

s'matter of fact methy...

you're as common as an earthworm.

and just about as sharp.

so smooth around the corners and lacking in..

well let's leave it there..

in deference to your inability to understand.

LOL!

wonder if there's enough time..

to get little dolls of you're type on the shelves..

of Toys'R Us for Christmas?

you'd make the best toy yet!

i know i for one enjoy playing with you.

now then methusalum jerusalam..

as friends and as those " entities " which are not..

let " us " keep in mind..

nothing is of value.

not even your false pride and evident need for " self " respect.

you're never going to achieve the respect for a self that isn't..

so drop the pride false though it is.

and just be happy.

let us soon continue our fun together as the two we are not.

your buddy in nothing and nothingness:

..b b.b.

December 5, 2009

>

> > Laugh away!

>

> (.b b.b.)

>

> I am.

>

> can't you tell?

>

> oh right..

>

> you aren't that fast on the uptake are you?

>

You obviously cannot allow anyone else to use irony although you use it a

plenty. Like a poker player with a rigged deck.

What are you afraid of? You shift around like a petulant child in your

conversation, first one topic then the next. Then you use ad hominem insults. Do

you really think I care?

Are you afraid of logic? Clearly you are dazed by any new idea and are waiting

for a divine revelation to edify you.

Let me run this one by you. If you exist (and you are not being sarcastic – as

you are such a wit - LOL) will you accept that something else exists – either as

a subcomponent of yourself or on the outside?

December 5, 2009

Nisargadatta , " methusalum " <methusalum wrote:

>

> >

> > > Laugh away!

> >

> > (.b b.b.)

> >

> > I am.

> >

> > can't you tell?

> >

> > oh right..

> >

> > you aren't that fast on the uptake are you?

>(methy):

> You obviously cannot allow anyone else to use irony although you use it a

plenty. Like a poker player with a rigged deck.

(.b b.b.)

ahem.

you seem uptight.

relax.

and what the hell type of simile is that supposed to be?

(this playing poker and rigged decks etc.????)

you need both rest and relaxation.

i do so enjoy our conversations though.

it is my hope that you unwind a wee bit buckaroo.

you take everything..particularly yourself..

far too seriously.

you're not that important chum.

so you're a poker player then?

and from what you say..

i assume you lose at that too.

don't blame the other player methy..

the fault lies with you.

> (methy):

> What are you afraid of? You shift around like a petulant child in your

conversation, first one topic then the next. Then you use ad hominem insults. Do

you really think I care?

(.b b.b.)

it would seem that we have a case here..

of the kettle calling the pot black.

'tis thou who changes subjects and who refuses to delineate.

(re reference et al.)...

whatever the hell it is that..

you are so desperately trying to say.

and as for ad hominem insults..

look at yourself and your posting here!

get a grip chap.

and obviously from this your misplaced display of ire..

you care far too much.

if it means nothing to you..

that you can't seem to " catch up " ..

just leave off.

you're acting like a hussy in a tiff.

it's funny it's true.

but i would feel that this behavior of yours..

would be somewhat embarrassing for you as well..

when exposed as it is here for what it is.

ah well..

to each there own.

and we do seem to mutually enjoy this back and forth enough..

to keep it going.

it's enjoyable for me for sure.

>(methy):

> Are you afraid of logic? Clearly you are dazed by any new idea and are waiting

for a divine revelation to edify you.

(.b b.b.)

i fear very little my little friend.

but as for any new ideas..

or logic of any maturity whatsoever..

surely you don't think that you provide either do you?

hahahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaa!

that's a good one meth.

i think your sense of humor is what captivates me.

it's great albeit..

it lacks any sense of dazzling anything.

it's sort of a dumb slapstick stuff..

and in it's sad-sack way..

provides and provokes great laughter.

you make self-mockery an art form..like chaplin sorta.

your pratfalls are terrific.

love it!

oh and meth..

just for the record..

if that's not too far above your ability to understand..

i don't believe in divinity.

but i do believe in humorous revelations..

just like the ones your silly postings provide.

they don't enlighten but they sure do make me laugh!

thanks.

>(methy):

> Let me run this one by you. If you exist (and you are not being sarcastic – as

you are such a wit - LOL) will you accept that something else exists – either as

a subcomponent of yourself or on the outside?

(.b b.b.)

what is existence anyway?

i forgot or i never knew.

so..sock it to us.

this is going to be GREAT!

thanking you in advance for your " response " ..

and thanks again for another swell giggle..

i remain:

your pal..

..b b.b.

December 6, 2009

Nisargadatta , " BobN " <Roberibus111 wrote:

>

Nisargadatta , " methusalum " <methusalum@> wrote:

> >

> > >

> > > > Laugh away!

> > >

> > > (.b b.b.)

> > >

> > > I am.

> > >

> > > can't you tell?

> > >

> > > oh right..

> > >

> > > you aren't that fast on the uptake are you?

>

> >(methy):

>

> > You obviously cannot allow anyone else to use irony although you use it a

plenty. Like a poker player with a rigged deck.

>

> (.b b.b.)

>

> ahem.

>

> you seem uptight.

>

> relax.

>

> and what the hell type of simile is that supposed to be?

>

> (this playing poker and rigged decks etc.????)

>

> you need both rest and relaxation.

>

> i do so enjoy our conversations though.

>

> it is my hope that you unwind a wee bit buckaroo.

>

> you take everything..particularly yourself..

>

> far too seriously.

>

> you're not that important chum.

>

> so you're a poker player then?

>

> and from what you say..

>

> i assume you lose at that too.

>

> don't blame the other player methy..

>

> the fault lies with you.

>

> > (methy):

>

> > What are you afraid of? You shift around like a petulant child in your

conversation, first one topic then the next. Then you use ad hominem insults. Do

you really think I care?

>

> (.b b.b.)

>

> it would seem that we have a case here..

>

> of the kettle calling the pot black.

>

> 'tis thou who changes subjects and who refuses to delineate.

>

> (re reference et al.)...

>

> whatever the hell it is that..

>

> you are so desperately trying to say.

>

> and as for ad hominem insults..

>

> look at yourself and your posting here!

>

> get a grip chap.

>

> and obviously from this your misplaced display of ire..

>

> you care far too much.

>

> if it means nothing to you..

>

> that you can't seem to " catch up " ..

>

> just leave off.

>

> you're acting like a hussy in a tiff.

>

> it's funny it's true.

>

> but i would feel that this behavior of yours..

>

> would be somewhat embarrassing for you as well..

>

> when exposed as it is here for what it is.

>

> ah well..

>

> to each there own.

>

> and we do seem to mutually enjoy this back and forth enough..

>

> to keep it going.

>

> it's enjoyable for me for sure.

>

>(methy):

>

> > Are you afraid of logic? Clearly you are dazed by any new idea and are

waiting for a divine revelation to edify you.

>

> (.b b.b.)

>

> i fear very little my little friend.

>

> but as for any new ideas..

>

> or logic of any maturity whatsoever..

>

> surely you don't think that you provide either do you?

>

> hahahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaa!

>

> that's a good one meth.

>

> i think your sense of humor is what captivates me.

>

> it's great albeit..

>

> it lacks any sense of dazzling anything.

>

> it's sort of a dumb slapstick stuff..

>

> and in it's sad-sack way..

>

> provides and provokes great laughter.

>

> you make self-mockery an art form..like chaplin sorta.

>

> your pratfalls are terrific.

>

> love it!

>

> oh and meth..

>

> just for the record..

>

> if that's not too far above your ability to understand..

>

> i don't believe in divinity.

>

> but i do believe in humorous revelations..

>

> just like the ones your silly postings provide.

>

> they don't enlighten but they sure do make me laugh!

>

> thanks.

>

>(methy):

>

> > Let me run this one by you. If you exist (and you are not being sarcastic –

as you are such a wit - LOL) will you accept that something else exists – either

as a subcomponent of yourself or on the outside?

>

> (.b b.b.)

>

> what is existence anyway?

>

> i forgot or i never knew.

>

I would suggest you take some time to reflect upon your rationalisations but I

know it will do no good. Your particular beat style seems deranged to me. Like

that of someone who has used too many recreational or psychiatric drugs.

You have taken issue with my using of the word " seemed " , but you have just used

the same. What was it you said (something along the line of " I would watch that

seeming of yours " ). I also recommend you take a look at some basic epistemology.

If you have any criterion for deciding what is truth you should first test your

own musings.

Your not believing in the absolute in any way shape or form seems inconsistent

with the absolute certainty with which you call others foolish.

As far as trying to explain about what can " be " without references, I have been.

But you have not been listening. Again you can take a look at some ontology - or

even maths, but you probably need to look up what " reference " means in the

dictionary.

Ultimately, it's a shame you don't believe in a creator. At least then you might

have a hope of getting out of this confused mess you are in. Still they do say

that lotuses grow from the muddiest of waters. So I have not given up on you.

December 6, 2009

Nisargadatta , " methusalum " <methusalum wrote:

>

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

> >

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

> > >

> > > >

> > > > > Laugh away!

> > > >

> > > > (.b b.b.)

> > > >

> > > > I am.

> > > >

> > > > can't you tell?

> > > >

> > > > oh right..

> > > >

> > > > you aren't that fast on the uptake are you?

> >

> > >(methy):

> >

> > > You obviously cannot allow anyone else to use irony although you use it a

plenty. Like a poker player with a rigged deck.

> >

> > (.b b.b.)

> >

> > ahem.

> >

> > you seem uptight.

> >

> > relax.

> >

> > and what the hell type of simile is that supposed to be?

> >

> > (this playing poker and rigged decks etc.????)

> >

> > you need both rest and relaxation.

> >

> > i do so enjoy our conversations though.

> >

> > it is my hope that you unwind a wee bit buckaroo.

> >

> > you take everything..particularly yourself..

> >

> > far too seriously.

> >

> > you're not that important chum.

> >

> > so you're a poker player then?

> >

> > and from what you say..

> >

> > i assume you lose at that too.

> >

> > don't blame the other player methy..

> >

> > the fault lies with you.

> >

> > > (methy):

> >

> > > What are you afraid of? You shift around like a petulant child in your

conversation, first one topic then the next. Then you use ad hominem insults. Do

you really think I care?

> >

> > (.b b.b.)

> >

> > it would seem that we have a case here..

> >

> > of the kettle calling the pot black.

> >

> > 'tis thou who changes subjects and who refuses to delineate.

> >

> > (re reference et al.)...

> >

> > whatever the hell it is that..

> >

> > you are so desperately trying to say.

> >

> > and as for ad hominem insults..

> >

> > look at yourself and your posting here!

> >

> > get a grip chap.

> >

> > and obviously from this your misplaced display of ire..

> >

> > you care far too much.

> >

> > if it means nothing to you..

> >

> > that you can't seem to " catch up " ..

> >

> > just leave off.

> >

> > you're acting like a hussy in a tiff.

> >

> > it's funny it's true.

> >

> > but i would feel that this behavior of yours..

> >

> > would be somewhat embarrassing for you as well..

> >

> > when exposed as it is here for what it is.

> >

> > ah well..

> >

> > to each there own.

> >

> > and we do seem to mutually enjoy this back and forth enough..

> >

> > to keep it going.

> >

> > it's enjoyable for me for sure.

> >

> > >(methy):

> >

> > > Are you afraid of logic? Clearly you are dazed by any new idea and are

waiting for a divine revelation to edify you.

> >

> > (.b b.b.)

> >

> > i fear very little my little friend.

> >

> > but as for any new ideas..

> >

> > or logic of any maturity whatsoever..

> >

> > surely you don't think that you provide either do you?

> >

> > hahahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaa!

> >

> > that's a good one meth.

> >

> > i think your sense of humor is what captivates me.

> >

> > it's great albeit..

> >

> > it lacks any sense of dazzling anything.

> >

> > it's sort of a dumb slapstick stuff..

> >

> > and in it's sad-sack way..

> >

> > provides and provokes great laughter.

> >

> > you make self-mockery an art form..like chaplin sorta.

> >

> > your pratfalls are terrific.

> >

> > love it!

> >

> > oh and meth..

> >

> > just for the record..

> >

> > if that's not too far above your ability to understand..

> >

> > i don't believe in divinity.

> >

> > but i do believe in humorous revelations..

> >

> > just like the ones your silly postings provide.

> >

> > they don't enlighten but they sure do make me laugh!

> >

> > thanks.

> >

> > >(methy):

> >

> > > Let me run this one by you. If you exist (and you are not being sarcastic

– as you are such a wit - LOL) will you accept that something else exists –

either as a subcomponent of yourself or on the outside?

> >

> > (.b b.b.)

> >

> > what is existence anyway?

> >

> > i forgot or i never knew.

> >

>(methy):

> I would suggest you take some time to reflect upon your rationalisations but I

know it will do no good.

(.b b.b.)

actually i've reflected on my " rationalisations " :

i.e.:

the parameters i employ in mathematics or mathematical form..

considered as the simplification of an expression or equation..

by eliminating radicals without changing the value of the expression..

or the roots of any equation given for consideration...

and i find them quite sound...

as applied to any form of any argumentation applicable.

as for your attempts at ratiocination in trying to defend..

your indefensible positions of judgment..

i would NOT consider them " sound " for a second.

though it's clear that you do..

and thus this expresses..

in acute and accurate mathematical formulation...

your inability to grasp the fundamentals of this ongoing discussion.

as noted in prior responses i find this fun and laughable.

and because of this factor i encourage you to continue..

with your incredibly silly arguments.

they stretch the boundary lines of inanity.

whereas my deductive and inductive reasoning..

as expressed in elegant and compelling fashion and formulation..

is definitely far beyond your ability to grasp even minutely..

it's fun to occasionally " have on " with a child.

thanks ever so much for allowing my indulgence in this..

playful use of your lack of talents.

and it is here again i must ask you:

how is it that " one " could possibly " take " time?

from where and by what imaginary method could time be taken?

now i'd say " save yourself the time " in trying to figure that out..

but that would be as silly as..

your concepts of time waste or the taking of same.

i'm sure that you don't understand.

that's ok muffin.

as for it doing or not doing " me " any " good " ..

try this:

what is the " good " ?

you come back to this time and again.

and considering that both " time " and the " good " ..

are wispy and ludicrous abstractions at best..

your suggestion re same is..

further indication of your lack of undertsanding.

by golly this is fun!

>(methy):

> Your particular beat style seems deranged to me. Like that of someone who has

used too many recreational or psychiatric drugs.

now methy!

tsk tsk tsk!

silly fellow.

here you sink to ridiculous levels of self defense.

because you find yourself wallowing around in muck and mire..

unable to even give sense..

to whatever it is which you wish to convey..

you dare to suggest that psychoactive drugs must be responsible.

and you further go on to suggest such usage of said chemicals..

was something done by the one with whom you cannot win in argument.

are you currently on drugs?

it always seems that those who are so consumed..

are the first to suggest that anything that doesn't cohere..

with their obtuse views of " what's what " ..

must be like themselves skewered in mind and soul..

by the same affliction that besets their own sorry life.

i hope you grow out and away from this evident " lifestyle " .

and i must say that the source of everything..

that you have so poorly written thus far in our dialogue..

now begins to become clear.

that's your mind on drugs young man.

and perhaps you'll find someday..

if you are lucky..

that without those drugs..

you won't be hindered with that fictional mind anyway.

>(methy)

> You have taken issue with my using of the word " seemed " , but you have just

used the same. What was it you said (something along the line of " I would watch

that seeming of yours " ). I also recommend you take a look at some basic

epistemology. If you have any criterion for deciding what is truth you should

first test your own musings.

i don't believe in truth.

all there is...is musings.

and now as for your sentence:

" I also recommend you take a look at some basic epistemology. "

???!!!

OMG!

this sounds like a nitpicking nun.

please tell me that you aren't as nerdy as that sentence would imply.

i mean your lack of understanding and ill-educated approach..

in responses thus far given..

have been amusing and fun.

but this kind of expression will not be tolerated.

it's just so uncool dude.

LOL!

>(methy)

> Your not believing in the absolute in any way shape or form seems inconsistent

with the absolute certainty with which you call others foolish.

(.b b.b.)

i don NOT believe in an Absolute.

and even if i did..

i don't believe in believing AND..

as a nonexistent entity..

of what value would any " absolutism " have?

you make no sense.

everyone (and that includes me bubba)..is foolish.

but..

and here's the fine point..

only some..and a very few it is..are True Fools.

i don't expect you to understand.

as a matter of fact i KNOW you don't.

no matter methy..

you are not a True Fool.

and only a True Fool would know this.

you are however foolish which should lighten your heavy heart.

for indeed it must be a heavy heart you are burdened with.

you take yourself soooooooooooo seriously.

LOL!

i hope someday you understand.

>(methy)

> As far as trying to explain about what can " be " without references, I have

been. But you have not been listening. Again you can take a look at some

ontology - or even maths, but you probably need to look up what " reference "

means in the dictionary.

ok let's give'er a go:

Noun:

1. A remark that calls attention to something or someone.

" the speaker made several references to his wife "

2. A short note recognizing a source of information..

or of a quoted passage.

3.An indicator that orients you generally.

" it is used as a reference for comparing the heating..

and the electrical energy involved "

4. A book to which you can refer for authoritative facts

" he contributed articles to the basic reference work on that topic "

5. A formal recommendation by a former employer..

to a potential future employer..

describing the person's qualifications and dependability.

" requests for character references are all too often..

answered evasively "

6. The most direct or specific meaning of a word or expression; the class of

objects that an expression refers to.

7.The act of referring or consulting.

" reference to an encyclopedia produced the answer "

8.A publication (or a passage from a publication) that is referred to

" he carried an armful of references back to his desk "

7.(computer science) the code that identifies where a piece of information is

stored

8. The relation between a word or phrase and the object or idea it refers to

" he argued that reference is a consequence of conditioned reflexes "

Verb:

1. Refer to.

" he referenced his colleagues' work "

soooo..

what the hell's your point?

>(methy)

> Ultimately, it's a shame you don't believe in a creator. At least then you

might have a hope of getting out of this confused mess you are in. Still they do

say that lotuses grow from the muddiest of waters. So I have not given up on

you.

(.b b.b.)

now your being just plain silly.

and you can put " ultimate " right alongside " absolute " ..

if you know what i mean.

oh wait!

of course you don''t.

your pen pal..

..b b.b.

December 6, 2009

>

> >(methy):

>

> > I would suggest you take some time to reflect upon your rationalisations but

I know it will do no good.

>

> (.b b.b.)

>

> actually i've reflected on my " rationalisations " :

>

> i.e.:

>

> the parameters i employ in mathematics or mathematical form..

>

> considered as the simplification of an expression or equation..

>

> by eliminating radicals without changing the value of the expression..

>

> or the roots of any equation given for consideration...

>

> and i find them quite sound...

>

> as applied to any form of any argumentation applicable.

>

> as for your attempts at ratiocination in trying to defend..

>

> your indefensible positions of judgment..

>

> i would NOT consider them " sound " for a second.

>

> though it's clear that you do..

>

> and thus this expresses..

>

> in acute and accurate mathematical formulation...

>

> your inability to grasp the fundamentals of this ongoing discussion.

>

> as noted in prior responses i find this fun and laughable.

>

> and because of this factor i encourage you to continue..

>

> with your incredibly silly arguments.

>

> they stretch the boundary lines of inanity.

>

> whereas my deductive and inductive reasoning..

>

> as expressed in elegant and compelling fashion and formulation..

>

> is definitely far beyond your ability to grasp even minutely..

>

> it's fun to occasionally " have on " with a child.

>

> thanks ever so much for allowing my indulgence in this..

>

> playful use of your lack of talents.

>

> and it is here again i must ask you:

>

> how is it that " one " could possibly " take " time?

>

> from where and by what imaginary method could time be taken?

>

> now i'd say " save yourself the time " in trying to figure that out..

>

> but that would be as silly as..

>

> your concepts of time waste or the taking of same.

>

> i'm sure that you don't understand.

>

> that's ok muffin.

>

> as for it doing or not doing " me " any " good " ..

>

> try this:

>

> what is the " good " ?

>

> you come back to this time and again.

>

> and considering that both " time " and the " good " ..

>

> are wispy and ludicrous abstractions at best..

>

> your suggestion re same is..

>

> further indication of your lack of undertsanding.

>

> by golly this is fun!

>

>(methy):

>

> > Your particular beat style seems deranged to me. Like that of someone who

has used too many recreational or psychiatric drugs.

>

> now methy!

>

> tsk tsk tsk!

>

> silly fellow.

>

> here you sink to ridiculous levels of self defense.

>

> because you find yourself wallowing around in muck and mire..

>

> unable to even give sense..

>

> to whatever it is which you wish to convey..

>

> you dare to suggest that psychoactive drugs must be responsible.

>

> and you further go on to suggest such usage of said chemicals..

>

> was something done by the one with whom you cannot win in argument.

>

> are you currently on drugs?

>

> it always seems that those who are so consumed..

>

> are the first to suggest that anything that doesn't cohere..

>

> with their obtuse views of " what's what " ..

>

> must be like themselves skewered in mind and soul..

>

> by the same affliction that besets their own sorry life.

>

> i hope you grow out and away from this evident " lifestyle " .

>

> and i must say that the source of everything..

>

> that you have so poorly written thus far in our dialogue..

>

> now begins to become clear.

>

> that's your mind on drugs young man.

>

> and perhaps you'll find someday..

>

> if you are lucky..

>

> that without those drugs..

>

> you won't be hindered with that fictional mind anyway.

>(methy)

>

> > You have taken issue with my using of the word " seemed " , but you have just

used the same. What was it you said (something along the line of " I would watch

that seeming of yours " ). I also recommend you take a look at some basic

epistemology. If you have any criterion for deciding what is truth you should

first test your own musings.

>

> i don't believe in truth.

>

> all there is...is musings.

>

> and now as for your sentence:

>

> " I also recommend you take a look at some basic epistemology. "

>

> ???!!!

>

> OMG!

>

> this sounds like a nitpicking nun.

>

> please tell me that you aren't as nerdy as that sentence would imply.

>

> i mean your lack of understanding and ill-educated approach..

>

> in responses thus far given..

>

> have been amusing and fun.

>

> but this kind of expression will not be tolerated.

>

> it's just so uncool dude.

>

> LOL!

>

> >(methy)

>

> > Your not believing in the absolute in any way shape or form seems

inconsistent with the absolute certainty with which you call others foolish.

>

> (.b b.b.)

>

> i don NOT believe in an Absolute.

>

> and even if i did..

>

> i don't believe in believing AND..

>

> as a nonexistent entity..

>

> of what value would any " absolutism " have?

>

> you make no sense.

>

> everyone (and that includes me bubba)..is foolish.

>

> but..

>

> and here's the fine point..

>

> only some..and a very few it is..are True Fools.

>

> i don't expect you to understand.

>

> as a matter of fact i KNOW you don't.

>

> no matter methy..

>

> you are not a True Fool.

>

> and only a True Fool would know this.

>

> you are however foolish which should lighten your heavy heart.

>

> for indeed it must be a heavy heart you are burdened with.

>

> you take yourself soooooooooooo seriously.

>

> LOL!

>

> i hope someday you understand.

>

> >(methy)

>

> > As far as trying to explain about what can " be " without references, I have

been. But you have not been listening. Again you can take a look at some

ontology - or even maths, but you probably need to look up what " reference "

means in the dictionary.

>

> ok let's give'er a go:

>

> Noun:

>

> 1. A remark that calls attention to something or someone.

>

> " the speaker made several references to his wife "

>

> 2. A short note recognizing a source of information..

>

> or of a quoted passage.

>

> 3.An indicator that orients you generally.

>

> " it is used as a reference for comparing the heating..

>

> and the electrical energy involved "

>

> 4. A book to which you can refer for authoritative facts

>

> " he contributed articles to the basic reference work on that topic "

>

> 5. A formal recommendation by a former employer..

>

> to a potential future employer..

>

> describing the person's qualifications and dependability.

>

> " requests for character references are all too often..

>

> answered evasively "

>

> 6. The most direct or specific meaning of a word or expression; the class of

objects that an expression refers to.

>

> 7.The act of referring or consulting.

>

> " reference to an encyclopedia produced the answer "

>

> 8.A publication (or a passage from a publication) that is referred to

>

> " he carried an armful of references back to his desk "

>

> 7.(computer science) the code that identifies where a piece of information is

stored

>

> 8. The relation between a word or phrase and the object or idea it refers to

>

> " he argued that reference is a consequence of conditioned reflexes "

>

> Verb:

>

> 1. Refer to.

>

> " he referenced his colleagues' work "

>

> soooo..

>

> what the hell's your point?

>

> >(methy)

> > Ultimately, it's a shame you don't believe in a creator. At least then you

might have a hope of getting out of this confused mess you are in. Still they do

say that lotuses grow from the muddiest of waters. So I have not given up on

you.

>

> (.b b.b.)

>

> now your being just plain silly.

>

> and you can put " ultimate " right alongside " absolute " ..

>

> if you know what i mean.

>

> oh wait!

>

> of course you don''t.

>

> your pen pal..

>

> .b b.b.

>

i know you will misinterpret this post in some fashion -- as you have grasped

that all language is but a symbol of what it is intended to represent. and as a

symbol it's impreciseness can be used as a sort of weak argument. but try and

understand the core message of this one.

you have far too much time for this malarkey. every premise i make you respond

with a half baked reply and then add seven more. do you hope to verify your

opinions with sheer number of words? regarding the drugs allusion (implied by

your beat references) i was only pointing that that you appear to lack a certain

amount of focus as evidenced by this verbosity and your inability to grasp what

i am writing. i apologise if this is not the case.

you also seem to think that i am arguing with you. this is not strictly true.

let me put it like this, you are simply thrust into my attention by the odd

things you come out with, and the way you object to all and everyone. to use an

analogy, if one steps on a stationary escalator without realising one becomes

aware of something wrong (what should be moving isn't). that wrongness comes

thrusting it's way into ones consciousness. your writings have a similar effect.

to put it bluntly there is something wrong with them. i am sure you have the

same feeling about mine, but whereas this curiosity of mine only applies to your

writings (and not to you i might add) you respond to all posters with the same

evident resentment. would you like to clarify why that is?

December 6, 2009

Nisargadatta , " methusalum " <methusalum wrote:

>

> >

> > >(methy):

> >

> > > I would suggest you take some time to reflect upon your rationalisations

but I know it will do no good.

> >

> > (.b b.b.)

> >

> > actually i've reflected on my " rationalisations " :

> >

> > i.e.:

> >

> > the parameters i employ in mathematics or mathematical form..

> >

> > considered as the simplification of an expression or equation..

> >

> > by eliminating radicals without changing the value of the expression..

> >

> > or the roots of any equation given for consideration...

> >

> > and i find them quite sound...

> >

> > as applied to any form of any argumentation applicable.

> >

> > as for your attempts at ratiocination in trying to defend..

> >

> > your indefensible positions of judgment..

> >

> > i would NOT consider them " sound " for a second.

> >

> > though it's clear that you do..

> >

> > and thus this expresses..

> >

> > in acute and accurate mathematical formulation...

> >

> > your inability to grasp the fundamentals of this ongoing discussion.

> >

> > as noted in prior responses i find this fun and laughable.

> >

> > and because of this factor i encourage you to continue..

> >

> > with your incredibly silly arguments.

> >

> > they stretch the boundary lines of inanity.

> >

> > whereas my deductive and inductive reasoning..

> >

> > as expressed in elegant and compelling fashion and formulation..

> >

> > is definitely far beyond your ability to grasp even minutely..

> >

> > it's fun to occasionally " have on " with a child.

> >

> > thanks ever so much for allowing my indulgence in this..

> >

> > playful use of your lack of talents.

> >

> > and it is here again i must ask you:

> >

> > how is it that " one " could possibly " take " time?

> >

> > from where and by what imaginary method could time be taken?

> >

> > now i'd say " save yourself the time " in trying to figure that out..

> >

> > but that would be as silly as..

> >

> > your concepts of time waste or the taking of same.

> >

> > i'm sure that you don't understand.

> >

> > that's ok muffin.

> >

> > as for it doing or not doing " me " any " good " ..

> >

> > try this:

> >

> > what is the " good " ?

> >

> > you come back to this time and again.

> >

> > and considering that both " time " and the " good " ..

> >

> > are wispy and ludicrous abstractions at best..

> >

> > your suggestion re same is..

> >

> > further indication of your lack of undertsanding.

> >

> > by golly this is fun!

> >

> > >(methy):

> >

> > > Your particular beat style seems deranged to me. Like that of someone who

has used too many recreational or psychiatric drugs.

> >

> > now methy!

> >

> > tsk tsk tsk!

> >

> > silly fellow.

> >

> > here you sink to ridiculous levels of self defense.

> >

> > because you find yourself wallowing around in muck and mire..

> >

> > unable to even give sense..

> >

> > to whatever it is which you wish to convey..

> >

> > you dare to suggest that psychoactive drugs must be responsible.

> >

> > and you further go on to suggest such usage of said chemicals..

> >

> > was something done by the one with whom you cannot win in argument.

> >

> > are you currently on drugs?

> >

> > it always seems that those who are so consumed..

> >

> > are the first to suggest that anything that doesn't cohere..

> >

> > with their obtuse views of " what's what " ..

> >

> > must be like themselves skewered in mind and soul..

> >

> > by the same affliction that besets their own sorry life.

> >

> > i hope you grow out and away from this evident " lifestyle " .

> >

> > and i must say that the source of everything..

> >

> > that you have so poorly written thus far in our dialogue..

> >

> > now begins to become clear.

> >

> > that's your mind on drugs young man.

> >

> > and perhaps you'll find someday..

> >

> > if you are lucky..

> >

> > that without those drugs..

> >

> > you won't be hindered with that fictional mind anyway.

> >

> > >(methy)

> >

> > > You have taken issue with my using of the word " seemed " , but you have just

used the same. What was it you said (something along the line of " I would watch

that seeming of yours " ). I also recommend you take a look at some basic

epistemology. If you have any criterion for deciding what is truth you should

first test your own musings.

> >

> > i don't believe in truth.

> >

> > all there is...is musings.

> >

> > and now as for your sentence:

> >

> > " I also recommend you take a look at some basic epistemology. "

> >

> > ???!!!

> >

> > OMG!

> >

> > this sounds like a nitpicking nun.

> >

> > please tell me that you aren't as nerdy as that sentence would imply.

> >

> > i mean your lack of understanding and ill-educated approach..

> >

> > in responses thus far given..

> >

> > have been amusing and fun.

> >

> > but this kind of expression will not be tolerated.

> >

> > it's just so uncool dude.

> >

> > LOL!

> >

> > >(methy)

> >

> > > Your not believing in the absolute in any way shape or form seems

inconsistent with the absolute certainty with which you call others foolish.

> >

> > (.b b.b.)

> >

> > i don NOT believe in an Absolute.

> >

> > and even if i did..

> >

> > i don't believe in believing AND..

> >

> > as a nonexistent entity..

> >

> > of what value would any " absolutism " have?

> >

> > you make no sense.

> >

> > everyone (and that includes me bubba)..is foolish.

> >

> > but..

> >

> > and here's the fine point..

> >

> > only some..and a very few it is..are True Fools.

> >

> > i don't expect you to understand.

> >

> > as a matter of fact i KNOW you don't.

> >

> > no matter methy..

> >

> > you are not a True Fool.

> >

> > and only a True Fool would know this.

> >

> > you are however foolish which should lighten your heavy heart.

> >

> > for indeed it must be a heavy heart you are burdened with.

> >

> > you take yourself soooooooooooo seriously.

> >

> > LOL!

> >

> > i hope someday you understand.

> >

> > >(methy)

> >

> > > As far as trying to explain about what can " be " without references, I have

been. But you have not been listening. Again you can take a look at some

ontology - or even maths, but you probably need to look up what " reference "

means in the dictionary.

> >

> > ok let's give'er a go:

> >

> > Noun:

> >

> > 1. A remark that calls attention to something or someone.

> >

> > " the speaker made several references to his wife "

> >

> > 2. A short note recognizing a source of information..

> >

> > or of a quoted passage.

> >

> > 3.An indicator that orients you generally.

> >

> > " it is used as a reference for comparing the heating..

> >

> > and the electrical energy involved "

> >

> > 4. A book to which you can refer for authoritative facts

> >

> > " he contributed articles to the basic reference work on that topic "

> >

> > 5. A formal recommendation by a former employer..

> >

> > to a potential future employer..

> >

> > describing the person's qualifications and dependability.

> >

> > " requests for character references are all too often..

> >

> > answered evasively "

> >

> > 6. The most direct or specific meaning of a word or expression; the class of

objects that an expression refers to.

> >

> > 7.The act of referring or consulting.

> >

> > " reference to an encyclopedia produced the answer "

> >

> > 8.A publication (or a passage from a publication) that is referred to

> >

> > " he carried an armful of references back to his desk "

> >

> > 7.(computer science) the code that identifies where a piece of information

is stored

> >

> > 8. The relation between a word or phrase and the object or idea it refers to

> >

> > " he argued that reference is a consequence of conditioned reflexes "

> >

> > Verb:

> >

> > 1. Refer to.

> >

> > " he referenced his colleagues' work "

> >

> > soooo..

> >

> > what the hell's your point?

> >

> > >(methy)

> > > Ultimately, it's a shame you don't believe in a creator. At least then you

might have a hope of getting out of this confused mess you are in. Still they do

say that lotuses grow from the muddiest of waters. So I have not given up on

you.

> >

> > (.b b.b.)

> >

> > now your being just plain silly.

> >

> > and you can put " ultimate " right alongside " absolute " ..

> >

> > if you know what i mean.

> >

> > oh wait!

> >

> > of course you don''t.

> >

> > your pen pal..

> >

> > .b b.b.

>(methy)

> i know you will misinterpret this post in some fashion -- as you have grasped

that all language is but a symbol of what it is intended to represent. and as a

symbol it's impreciseness can be used as a sort of weak argument. but try and

understand the core message of this one.

(.b.b b.)

i never have the least bit of trouble understanding what you say.

it's the weakness of it's layout..

and the insignificance of what it intends to impart..

that causes me to giggle.

" core " message.

oh for christmas' sake son.

get a grip!

>(methy)

> you have far too much time for this malarkey.

(.b b.b.)

sorry fella.

again i will state that i have no time whatsoever.

you wish to treat time as a commodity.

and you cheapen it as well as yourself by so doing.

i'll not let you perpetrate this folly without reprimand.

talk about malarkey!

> (methy)

> every premise i make you respond with a half baked reply and then add seven

more. do you hope to verify your opinions with sheer number of words?

(.b b.b.)

i need not verify anything chum.

you however seem hell bent on trying to though.

you lose consistently with this poor endeavor.

and..you know what you can do with " hope " .

it goes in the same pile as belief and time and absolutes.

and that's a black hole of a round bin methy.

it neither signifies nor lands anywhere.

are you intending to be dense?

>(methy)

> regarding the drugs allusion (implied by your beat references) i was only

pointing that that you appear to lack a certain amount of focus as evidenced by

this verbosity and your inability to grasp what i am writing. i apologise if

this is not the case.

(.b b.b.)

and i'm to take it that you believe " apologise " is a word?

i don't need you to apologize for anything.

i could care less what you think..or feel.

i thought i had made this clear.

however i should see by now that nothing is clear to you.

i'd apologize but you know where i stand on that.

what is is.

i live with it and so should you.

try and stay focused methy.

>(methy)

> you also seem to think that i am arguing with you. this is not strictly true.