Guest guest Report post Posted January 8, 2010  I understand that any "how" or "why" question implies time, and that there is no time actually involved. So, I'm also asking: how is there even an appearance or illusion of time in and through a timeless awareness that has no motive or intention to produce illusion. -- geo> To say that awareness has no motive or intention to produce illusion is quite questionable, is teoretical. Illusion or not-illusion....is not some absolute value. Are stars and constalations and a cup of coffe as illusional as the sense of a separate me? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted January 8, 2010 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > > > I understand that any " how " or " why " question implies time, and that there > is no time actually involved. So, I'm also asking: how is there even an > appearance or illusion of time in and through a timeless awareness that has > no motive or intention to produce illusion. > -- > geo> To say that awareness has no motive or intention to produce illusion is > quite questionable, is theoretical. Illusion or not-illusion....is not some > absolute value. > Are stars and constellations and a cup of coffee as illusional as the sense > of a separate me? > > I did not express myself well. What I mean is motives or intention of the > absolute are unknowable to us - human beings. In the other hand obviously > there is a certain - what some have tentatively call " law " - that permeates > the universe otherwise we would not be here :>))). After all our human > world has trees and water falls and animals and lakes and not just > volcanoes, lava, fetid suphurous air etc.... > > ...ahhh...this is not easy to ponder upon.... > > -geo- Confused? I am. I have written some peculiar stuff today. In one message I wrote that when the observer is absent there is the observed only and that appears as perfectly absurd. In another message (to Werner) I wrote that one (the observed) is always flawless. So unless " perfectly absurd " and " always flawless " is the same - I have screwed it all up and contradicted myself, heh Never mind. Like Bob said it there is no mind to never anyway. -Lene Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted January 8, 2010 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > I understand that any " how " or " why " question implies time, and that there is no time actually involved. So, I'm also asking: how is there even an appearance or illusion of time in and through a timeless awareness that has no motive or intention to produce illusion. > -- > geo> To say that awareness has no motive or intention to produce illusion is quite questionable, is teoretical. Illusion or not-illusion....is not some absolute value. > Are stars and constalations and a cup of coffe as illusional as the sense of a separate me? to whom? ..b b.b. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted January 8, 2010 I understand that any " how " or " why " question implies time, and that there is no time actually involved. So, I'm also asking: how is there even an appearance or illusion of time in and through a timeless awareness that has no motive or intention to produce illusion. -- geo> To say that awareness has no motive or intention to produce illusion is quite questionable, is theoretical. Illusion or not-illusion....is not some absolute value. Are stars and constellations and a cup of coffee as illusional as the sense of a separate me? I did not express myself well. What I mean is motives or intention of the absolute are unknowable to us - human beings. In the other hand obviously there is a certain - what some have tentatively call " law " - that permeates the universe otherwise we would not be here :>))). After all our human world has trees and water falls and animals and lakes and not just volcanoes, lava, fetid suphurous air etc.... ....ahhh...this is not easy to ponder upon.... -geo- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted January 9, 2010 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > I understand that any " how " or " why " question implies time, and that there is no time actually involved. So, I'm also asking: how is there even an appearance or illusion of time in and through a timeless awareness that has no motive or intention to produce illusion. > -- > geo> To say that awareness has no motive or intention to produce illusion is quite questionable, is teoretical. Illusion or not-illusion....is not some absolute value. > Are stars and constalations and a cup of coffe as illusional as the sense of a separate me? You have talked about an absolute, Geo. About a " ground. " Who are you? Are you outside of this ground, something else? If you are not outside nor inside, and are this ground, then what are you the ground of? Is there now any ground? So ... is it not clear that there is nothing else? That taking there to be anything else, is illusion? - Dan - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted January 9, 2010 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > > > I understand that any " how " or " why " question implies time, and that there > is no time actually involved. So, I'm also asking: how is there even an > appearance or illusion of time in and through a timeless awareness that has > no motive or intention to produce illusion. > -- > geo> To say that awareness has no motive or intention to produce illusion is > quite questionable, is theoretical. Illusion or not-illusion....is not some > absolute value. > Are stars and constellations and a cup of coffee as illusional as the sense > of a separate me? > > I did not express myself well. What I mean is motives or intention of the > absolute are unknowable to us - human beings. If you are not this absolute ... how can you know anything? How can you claim to know you are a human being? In the other hand obviously > there is a certain - what some have tentatively call " law " - that permeates > the universe otherwise we would not be here :>))). Again, unless you are this absolute - how can you determine whether there is a here or not - and whether or not anyone is here? > After all our human > world has trees and water falls and animals and lakes and not just > volcanoes, lava, fetid suphurous air etc.... > > ...ahhh...this is not easy to ponder upon.... You postulate an absolute. But unless you are this absolute - how can you know anything is absolute? And if you are it ... to whom are you talking about it? Someone else? Something else? - Dan - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted January 9, 2010 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > dan330033 > Nisargadatta > Friday, January 08, 2010 8:49 PM > Re: ^^^^~~~~^^^^ > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I understand that any " how " or " why " question implies time, and that there > > is no time actually involved. So, I'm also asking: how is there even an > > appearance or illusion of time in and through a timeless awareness that > > has > > no motive or intention to produce illusion. > > -- > > geo> To say that awareness has no motive or intention to produce illusion > > is > > quite questionable, is theoretical. Illusion or not-illusion....is not > > some > > absolute value. > > Are stars and constellations and a cup of coffee as illusional as the > > sense > > of a separate me? > > > > I did not express myself well. What I mean is motives or intention of the > > absolute are unknowable to us - human beings. > > If you are not this absolute ... how can you know anything? > > How can you claim to know you are a human being? > > In the other hand obviously > > there is a certain - what some have tentatively call " law " - that > > permeates > > the universe otherwise we would not be here :>))). > > Again, unless you are this absolute - how can you determine whether there is > a here or not - and whether or not anyone is here? > > > After all our human > > world has trees and water falls and animals and lakes and not just > > volcanoes, lava, fetid suphurous air etc.... > > > > ...ahhh...this is not easy to ponder upon.... > > You postulate an absolute. > > But unless you are this absolute - how can you know anything is absolute? > > And if you are it ... to whom are you talking about it? > > Someone else? > > Something else? > > - Dan - > > None else. That is not what I mean (actualy I am having a hard time trying > to express this). What I mean is that there is a certain intention emanating > from the absolute that knowledge can not touch in any way. The intention of > manifesting. > -geo- there is no such intention. ..b b.b. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted January 9, 2010 - dan330033 Nisargadatta Friday, January 08, 2010 8:42 PM Re: ^^^^~~~~^^^^ Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > I understand that any " how " or " why " question implies time, and that there > is no time actually involved. So, I'm also asking: how is there even an > appearance or illusion of time in and through a timeless awareness that > has no motive or intention to produce illusion. > -- > geo> To say that awareness has no motive or intention to produce illusion > is quite questionable, is teoretical. Illusion or not-illusion....is not > some absolute value. > Are stars and constalations and a cup of coffe as illusional as the sense > of a separate me? You have talked about an absolute, Geo. About a " ground. " Who are you? Are you outside of this ground, something else? If you are not outside nor inside, and are this ground, then what are you the ground of? Is there now any ground? So ... is it not clear that there is nothing else? That taking there to be anything else, is illusion? - Dan - Else in the sense other than IT, yes. -geo- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted January 9, 2010 - dan330033 Nisargadatta Friday, January 08, 2010 8:49 PM Re: ^^^^~~~~^^^^ Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > > > I understand that any " how " or " why " question implies time, and that there > is no time actually involved. So, I'm also asking: how is there even an > appearance or illusion of time in and through a timeless awareness that > has > no motive or intention to produce illusion. > -- > geo> To say that awareness has no motive or intention to produce illusion > is > quite questionable, is theoretical. Illusion or not-illusion....is not > some > absolute value. > Are stars and constellations and a cup of coffee as illusional as the > sense > of a separate me? > > I did not express myself well. What I mean is motives or intention of the > absolute are unknowable to us - human beings. If you are not this absolute ... how can you know anything? How can you claim to know you are a human being? In the other hand obviously > there is a certain - what some have tentatively call " law " - that > permeates > the universe otherwise we would not be here :>))). Again, unless you are this absolute - how can you determine whether there is a here or not - and whether or not anyone is here? > After all our human > world has trees and water falls and animals and lakes and not just > volcanoes, lava, fetid suphurous air etc.... > > ...ahhh...this is not easy to ponder upon.... You postulate an absolute. But unless you are this absolute - how can you know anything is absolute? And if you are it ... to whom are you talking about it? Someone else? Something else? - Dan - None else. That is not what I mean (actualy I am having a hard time trying to express this). What I mean is that there is a certain intention emanating from the absolute that knowledge can not touch in any way. The intention of manifesting. -geo- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted January 12, 2010 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > dan330033 > Nisargadatta > Friday, January 08, 2010 8:49 PM > Re: ^^^^~~~~^^^^ > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I understand that any " how " or " why " question implies time, and that there > > is no time actually involved. So, I'm also asking: how is there even an > > appearance or illusion of time in and through a timeless awareness that > > has > > no motive or intention to produce illusion. > > -- > > geo> To say that awareness has no motive or intention to produce illusion > > is > > quite questionable, is theoretical. Illusion or not-illusion....is not > > some > > absolute value. > > Are stars and constellations and a cup of coffee as illusional as the > > sense > > of a separate me? > > > > I did not express myself well. What I mean is motives or intention of the > > absolute are unknowable to us - human beings. > > If you are not this absolute ... how can you know anything? > > How can you claim to know you are a human being? > > In the other hand obviously > > there is a certain - what some have tentatively call " law " - that > > permeates > > the universe otherwise we would not be here :>))). > > Again, unless you are this absolute - how can you determine whether there is > a here or not - and whether or not anyone is here? > > > After all our human > > world has trees and water falls and animals and lakes and not just > > volcanoes, lava, fetid suphurous air etc.... > > > > ...ahhh...this is not easy to ponder upon.... > > You postulate an absolute. > > But unless you are this absolute - how can you know anything is absolute? > > And if you are it ... to whom are you talking about it? > > Someone else? > > Something else? > > - Dan - > > None else. That is not what I mean (actualy I am having a hard time trying > to express this). What I mean is that there is a certain intention emanating > from the absolute that knowledge can not touch in any way. The intention of > manifesting. > -geo- Geo - An intention? No way. There is no place for any manifestation to have occurred, or to intend for one to happen. An intention relates to an outside. There isn't an outside. - Dan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted January 12, 2010 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > dan330033 > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, January 12, 2010 2:11 PM > Re: ^^^^~~~~^^^^ > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > dan330033 > > Nisargadatta > > Friday, January 08, 2010 8:49 PM > > Re: ^^^^~~~~^^^^ > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I understand that any " how " or " why " question implies time, and that > > > there > > > is no time actually involved. So, I'm also asking: how is there even an > > > appearance or illusion of time in and through a timeless awareness that > > > has > > > no motive or intention to produce illusion. > > > -- > > > geo> To say that awareness has no motive or intention to produce > > > illusion > > > is > > > quite questionable, is theoretical. Illusion or not-illusion....is not > > > some > > > absolute value. > > > Are stars and constellations and a cup of coffee as illusional as the > > > sense > > > of a separate me? > > > > > > I did not express myself well. What I mean is motives or intention of > > > the > > > absolute are unknowable to us - human beings. > > > > If you are not this absolute ... how can you know anything? > > > > How can you claim to know you are a human being? > > > > In the other hand obviously > > > there is a certain - what some have tentatively call " law " - that > > > permeates > > > the universe otherwise we would not be here :>))). > > > > Again, unless you are this absolute - how can you determine whether there > > is > > a here or not - and whether or not anyone is here? > > > > > After all our human > > > world has trees and water falls and animals and lakes and not just > > > volcanoes, lava, fetid suphurous air etc.... > > > > > > ...ahhh...this is not easy to ponder upon.... > > > > You postulate an absolute. > > > > But unless you are this absolute - how can you know anything is absolute? > > > > And if you are it ... to whom are you talking about it? > > > > Someone else? > > > > Something else? > > > > - Dan - > > > > None else. That is not what I mean (actualy I am having a hard time trying > > to express this). What I mean is that there is a certain intention > > emanating > > from the absolute that knowledge can not touch in any way. The intention > > of > > manifesting. > > -geo- > > Geo - > > An intention? No way. > > There is no place for any manifestation to have occurred, or to intend for > one to happen. > > An intention relates to an outside. > > There isn't an outside. > > - Dan > > An intention relates to an outside?? No. This depth here is infinite in all > nuances or manners or intents... Nothing a human mind can grasp. > You did not get what I wanted to say...its OK > -geo- I did. You did not get what I said. You want infinite depth that your human mind can say, " I don't grasp. " Your mind wants some kind of infinite depth with an intention that it can't grasp, and wants to be involved with a " manifestation. " This means you want to have manifested. But nope - you haven't. Sorry to break the news to you. What your mind doesn't want is to not be able to be there, and to have no value whatsoever, no infinite depth to ponder, no ponderer of it. - D - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted January 12, 2010 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > dan330033 > > Nisargadatta > > Tuesday, January 12, 2010 2:11 PM > > Re: ^^^^~~~~^^^^ > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > - > > > dan330033 > > > Nisargadatta > > > Friday, January 08, 2010 8:49 PM > > > Re: ^^^^~~~~^^^^ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I understand that any " how " or " why " question implies time, and that > > > > there > > > > is no time actually involved. So, I'm also asking: how is there even an > > > > appearance or illusion of time in and through a timeless awareness that > > > > has > > > > no motive or intention to produce illusion. > > > > -- > > > > geo> To say that awareness has no motive or intention to produce > > > > illusion > > > > is > > > > quite questionable, is theoretical. Illusion or not-illusion....is not > > > > some > > > > absolute value. > > > > Are stars and constellations and a cup of coffee as illusional as the > > > > sense > > > > of a separate me? > > > > > > > > I did not express myself well. What I mean is motives or intention of > > > > the > > > > absolute are unknowable to us - human beings. > > > > > > If you are not this absolute ... how can you know anything? > > > > > > How can you claim to know you are a human being? > > > > > > In the other hand obviously > > > > there is a certain - what some have tentatively call " law " - that > > > > permeates > > > > the universe otherwise we would not be here :>))). > > > > > > Again, unless you are this absolute - how can you determine whether there > > > is > > > a here or not - and whether or not anyone is here? > > > > > > > After all our human > > > > world has trees and water falls and animals and lakes and not just > > > > volcanoes, lava, fetid suphurous air etc.... > > > > > > > > ...ahhh...this is not easy to ponder upon.... > > > > > > You postulate an absolute. > > > > > > But unless you are this absolute - how can you know anything is absolute? > > > > > > And if you are it ... to whom are you talking about it? > > > > > > Someone else? > > > > > > Something else? > > > > > > - Dan - > > > > > > None else. That is not what I mean (actualy I am having a hard time trying > > > to express this). What I mean is that there is a certain intention > > > emanating > > > from the absolute that knowledge can not touch in any way. The intention > > > of > > > manifesting. > > > -geo- > > > > Geo - > > > > An intention? No way. > > > > There is no place for any manifestation to have occurred, or to intend for > > one to happen. > > > > An intention relates to an outside. > > > > There isn't an outside. > > > > - Dan > > > > An intention relates to an outside?? No. This depth here is infinite in all > > nuances or manners or intents... Nothing a human mind can grasp. > > You did not get what I wanted to say...its OK > > -geo- > > I did. > > You did not get what I said. > > You want infinite depth that your human mind can say, " I don't grasp. " > > Your mind wants some kind of infinite depth with an intention that it can't grasp, and wants to be involved with a " manifestation. " > > This means you want to have manifested. > > But nope - you haven't. > > Sorry to break the news to you. > > What your mind doesn't want is to not be able to be there, and to have no value whatsoever, no infinite depth to ponder, no ponderer of it. > > - D - you didn't really intend to say that now did you dabbo? ROFLMAO! ..b b.b. p.s. what is it that you think you've said that shold be pondered? LOL! [.bx3] Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted January 12, 2010 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > dan330033 > > Nisargadatta > > Friday, January 08, 2010 8:49 PM > > Re: ^^^^~~~~^^^^ > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I understand that any " how " or " why " question implies time, and that there > > > is no time actually involved. So, I'm also asking: how is there even an > > > appearance or illusion of time in and through a timeless awareness that > > > has > > > no motive or intention to produce illusion. > > > -- > > > geo> To say that awareness has no motive or intention to produce illusion > > > is > > > quite questionable, is theoretical. Illusion or not-illusion....is not > > > some > > > absolute value. > > > Are stars and constellations and a cup of coffee as illusional as the > > > sense > > > of a separate me? > > > > > > I did not express myself well. What I mean is motives or intention of the > > > absolute are unknowable to us - human beings. > > > > If you are not this absolute ... how can you know anything? > > > > How can you claim to know you are a human being? > > > > In the other hand obviously > > > there is a certain - what some have tentatively call " law " - that > > > permeates > > > the universe otherwise we would not be here :>))). > > > > Again, unless you are this absolute - how can you determine whether there is > > a here or not - and whether or not anyone is here? > > > > > After all our human > > > world has trees and water falls and animals and lakes and not just > > > volcanoes, lava, fetid suphurous air etc.... > > > > > > ...ahhh...this is not easy to ponder upon.... > > > > You postulate an absolute. > > > > But unless you are this absolute - how can you know anything is absolute? > > > > And if you are it ... to whom are you talking about it? > > > > Someone else? > > > > Something else? > > > > - Dan - > > > > None else. That is not what I mean (actualy I am having a hard time trying > > to express this). What I mean is that there is a certain intention emanating > > from the absolute that knowledge can not touch in any way. The intention of > > manifesting. > > -geo- > > > Geo - > > An intention? No way. > > There is no place for any manifestation to have occurred, or to intend for one to happen. > > An intention relates to an outside. > > There isn't an outside. > > - Dan what did you intend to say inside there dabbo? you know..the inside without an outside that you're relating to. :-) ..b b.b. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted January 12, 2010 Nisargadatta , " BobN " <Roberibus111 wrote: > you didn't really intend to say that now did you dabbo? > > ROFLMAO! > > .b b.b. > > p.s. > > what is it that you think you've said that shold be pondered? > > LOL! > > [.bx3] don't ask me, babbo. i'm pondering your ass as it rolls around on the floor, after getting laughed off. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted January 12, 2010 Nisargadatta , " BobN " <Roberibus111 wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > - > > > dan330033 > > > Nisargadatta > > > Friday, January 08, 2010 8:49 PM > > > Re: ^^^^~~~~^^^^ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I understand that any " how " or " why " question implies time, and that there > > > > is no time actually involved. So, I'm also asking: how is there even an > > > > appearance or illusion of time in and through a timeless awareness that > > > > has > > > > no motive or intention to produce illusion. > > > > -- > > > > geo> To say that awareness has no motive or intention to produce illusion > > > > is > > > > quite questionable, is theoretical. Illusion or not-illusion....is not > > > > some > > > > absolute value. > > > > Are stars and constellations and a cup of coffee as illusional as the > > > > sense > > > > of a separate me? > > > > > > > > I did not express myself well. What I mean is motives or intention of the > > > > absolute are unknowable to us - human beings. > > > > > > If you are not this absolute ... how can you know anything? > > > > > > How can you claim to know you are a human being? > > > > > > In the other hand obviously > > > > there is a certain - what some have tentatively call " law " - that > > > > permeates > > > > the universe otherwise we would not be here :>))). > > > > > > Again, unless you are this absolute - how can you determine whether there is > > > a here or not - and whether or not anyone is here? > > > > > > > After all our human > > > > world has trees and water falls and animals and lakes and not just > > > > volcanoes, lava, fetid suphurous air etc.... > > > > > > > > ...ahhh...this is not easy to ponder upon.... > > > > > > You postulate an absolute. > > > > > > But unless you are this absolute - how can you know anything is absolute? > > > > > > And if you are it ... to whom are you talking about it? > > > > > > Someone else? > > > > > > Something else? > > > > > > - Dan - > > > > > > None else. That is not what I mean (actualy I am having a hard time trying > > > to express this). What I mean is that there is a certain intention emanating > > > from the absolute that knowledge can not touch in any way. The intention of > > > manifesting. > > > -geo- > > > > > > Geo - > > > > An intention? No way. > > > > There is no place for any manifestation to have occurred, or to intend for one to happen. > > > > An intention relates to an outside. > > > > There isn't an outside. > > > > - Dan > > > what did you intend to say inside there dabbo? > > you know..the inside without an outside that you're relating to. > > :-) > > .b b.b. not an inside without an outside. you got it wrong. it's a canoe without a paddle. the one you're riding in, babbo. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted January 12, 2010 - dan330033 Nisargadatta Tuesday, January 12, 2010 2:11 PM Re: ^^^^~~~~^^^^ Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > dan330033 > Nisargadatta > Friday, January 08, 2010 8:49 PM > Re: ^^^^~~~~^^^^ > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I understand that any " how " or " why " question implies time, and that > > there > > is no time actually involved. So, I'm also asking: how is there even an > > appearance or illusion of time in and through a timeless awareness that > > has > > no motive or intention to produce illusion. > > -- > > geo> To say that awareness has no motive or intention to produce > > illusion > > is > > quite questionable, is theoretical. Illusion or not-illusion....is not > > some > > absolute value. > > Are stars and constellations and a cup of coffee as illusional as the > > sense > > of a separate me? > > > > I did not express myself well. What I mean is motives or intention of > > the > > absolute are unknowable to us - human beings. > > If you are not this absolute ... how can you know anything? > > How can you claim to know you are a human being? > > In the other hand obviously > > there is a certain - what some have tentatively call " law " - that > > permeates > > the universe otherwise we would not be here :>))). > > Again, unless you are this absolute - how can you determine whether there > is > a here or not - and whether or not anyone is here? > > > After all our human > > world has trees and water falls and animals and lakes and not just > > volcanoes, lava, fetid suphurous air etc.... > > > > ...ahhh...this is not easy to ponder upon.... > > You postulate an absolute. > > But unless you are this absolute - how can you know anything is absolute? > > And if you are it ... to whom are you talking about it? > > Someone else? > > Something else? > > - Dan - > > None else. That is not what I mean (actualy I am having a hard time trying > to express this). What I mean is that there is a certain intention > emanating > from the absolute that knowledge can not touch in any way. The intention > of > manifesting. > -geo- Geo - An intention? No way. There is no place for any manifestation to have occurred, or to intend for one to happen. An intention relates to an outside. There isn't an outside. - Dan An intention relates to an outside?? No. This depth here is infinite in all nuances or manners or intents... Nothing a human mind can grasp. You did not get what I wanted to say...its OK -geo- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted January 12, 2010 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " BobN " <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > dan330033 > > > > Nisargadatta > > > > Friday, January 08, 2010 8:49 PM > > > > Re: ^^^^~~~~^^^^ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I understand that any " how " or " why " question implies time, and that there > > > > > is no time actually involved. So, I'm also asking: how is there even an > > > > > appearance or illusion of time in and through a timeless awareness that > > > > > has > > > > > no motive or intention to produce illusion. > > > > > -- > > > > > geo> To say that awareness has no motive or intention to produce illusion > > > > > is > > > > > quite questionable, is theoretical. Illusion or not-illusion....is not > > > > > some > > > > > absolute value. > > > > > Are stars and constellations and a cup of coffee as illusional as the > > > > > sense > > > > > of a separate me? > > > > > > > > > > I did not express myself well. What I mean is motives or intention of the > > > > > absolute are unknowable to us - human beings. > > > > > > > > If you are not this absolute ... how can you know anything? > > > > > > > > How can you claim to know you are a human being? > > > > > > > > In the other hand obviously > > > > > there is a certain - what some have tentatively call " law " - that > > > > > permeates > > > > > the universe otherwise we would not be here :>))). > > > > > > > > Again, unless you are this absolute - how can you determine whether there is > > > > a here or not - and whether or not anyone is here? > > > > > > > > > After all our human > > > > > world has trees and water falls and animals and lakes and not just > > > > > volcanoes, lava, fetid suphurous air etc.... > > > > > > > > > > ...ahhh...this is not easy to ponder upon.... > > > > > > > > You postulate an absolute. > > > > > > > > But unless you are this absolute - how can you know anything is absolute? > > > > > > > > And if you are it ... to whom are you talking about it? > > > > > > > > Someone else? > > > > > > > > Something else? > > > > > > > > - Dan - > > > > > > > > None else. That is not what I mean (actualy I am having a hard time trying > > > > to express this). What I mean is that there is a certain intention emanating > > > > from the absolute that knowledge can not touch in any way. The intention of > > > > manifesting. > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > > Geo - > > > > > > An intention? No way. > > > > > > There is no place for any manifestation to have occurred, or to intend for one to happen. > > > > > > An intention relates to an outside. > > > > > > There isn't an outside. > > > > > > - Dan > > > > > > what did you intend to say inside there dabbo? > > > > you know..the inside without an outside that you're relating to. > > > > :-) > > > > .b b.b. > > not an inside without an outside. > > you got it wrong. > > it's a canoe without a paddle. > > the one you're riding in, babbo. oh.. here we go again.. the dabbo right and wrong game. and a " you " who's got it one way or the other. that's a tippy canoe you got there dabbo boy. forget the paddle. i wouldn't ride in that piece of shit. it like yourself doesn't know which way it wants to go. ROFLMAO! ..b b.b. p.s. keep tryin' dabbo. it's cute and a whole lot 'o laughs too. now..get off your butt and VOTE! the name on the ballot is BOB. you agree to let him blabber on. do you need someone to check it off for you? i know you'd have a hard time signing a ballot.. or even figuring out how to write an " X " .. but look here son.. just use your little mouse.. hover the cursor over the " let him babble " section.. and " click " . i see now why you're taking time to get to the voting. we will review this as many times as needed. maybe there isn't enough time for you to " get it " . we only have a little more than half a month. if you don't vote because of your being so challenged.. not to worry . baba will forgive you as he has so many times before. [.bx3] Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted January 12, 2010 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " BobN " <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > you didn't really intend to say that now did you dabbo? > > > > ROFLMAO! > > > > .b b.b. > > > > p.s. > > > > what is it that you think you've said that shold be pondered? > > > > LOL! > > > > [.bx3] > > > don't ask me, babbo. > > i'm pondering your ass as it rolls around on the floor, after getting laughed off. that's good dabbo. that was my meditation for you today. sucked you right in too. well that's what you got to do to lazy kids. they never willingly concentrate on anything. keep rolling that vision around in your head son. maybe it might bump up against some gray matter somewhere. but don't count on it brainless baby boy. and ponder the word " shold " too. it's a real corker! it's interesting that dummies always miss commenting on it. you wont have to study hard dabbo. it's just another meditation. which of course is a non-focusing on anything. that should be right up your alley kid. :-) ..b b.b. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted January 12, 2010 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > BobN > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, January 12, 2010 3:14 PM > Re: ^^^^~~~~^^^^ > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > - > > > dan330033 > > > Nisargadatta > > > Friday, January 08, 2010 8:49 PM > > > Re: ^^^^~~~~^^^^ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I understand that any " how " or " why " question implies time, and that > > > > there > > > > is no time actually involved. So, I'm also asking: how is there even > > > > an > > > > appearance or illusion of time in and through a timeless awareness > > > > that > > > > has > > > > no motive or intention to produce illusion. > > > > -- > > > > geo> To say that awareness has no motive or intention to produce > > > > illusion > > > > is > > > > quite questionable, is theoretical. Illusion or not-illusion....is not > > > > some > > > > absolute value. > > > > Are stars and constellations and a cup of coffee as illusional as the > > > > sense > > > > of a separate me? > > > > > > > > I did not express myself well. What I mean is motives or intention of > > > > the > > > > absolute are unknowable to us - human beings. > > > > > > If you are not this absolute ... how can you know anything? > > > > > > How can you claim to know you are a human being? > > > > > > In the other hand obviously > > > > there is a certain - what some have tentatively call " law " - that > > > > permeates > > > > the universe otherwise we would not be here :>))). > > > > > > Again, unless you are this absolute - how can you determine whether > > > there is > > > a here or not - and whether or not anyone is here? > > > > > > > After all our human > > > > world has trees and water falls and animals and lakes and not just > > > > volcanoes, lava, fetid suphurous air etc.... > > > > > > > > ...ahhh...this is not easy to ponder upon.... > > > > > > You postulate an absolute. > > > > > > But unless you are this absolute - how can you know anything is > > > absolute? > > > > > > And if you are it ... to whom are you talking about it? > > > > > > Someone else? > > > > > > Something else? > > > > > > - Dan - > > > > > > None else. That is not what I mean (actualy I am having a hard time > > > trying > > > to express this). What I mean is that there is a certain intention > > > emanating > > > from the absolute that knowledge can not touch in any way. The intention > > > of > > > manifesting. > > > -geo- > > > > > > Geo - > > > > An intention? No way. > > > > There is no place for any manifestation to have occurred, or to intend for > > one to happen. > > > > An intention relates to an outside. > > > > There isn't an outside. > > > > - Dan > > what did you intend to say inside there dabbo? > > you know..the inside without an outside that you're relating to. > > :-) > > .b b.b. > > Well..in a way thats it. If dan or bbb or geo can intent anything within the > limited mind field...obviously .there is the unlimited unknowable intent > (law). > -geo- ^^^^~~~~^^^^ ..b b.b. b.b. bbb.b b Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted January 12, 2010 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > dan330033 > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, January 12, 2010 2:56 PM > Re: ^^^^~~~~^^^^ > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > dan330033 > > Nisargadatta > > Tuesday, January 12, 2010 2:11 PM > > Re: ^^^^~~~~^^^^ > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > - > > > dan330033 > > > Nisargadatta > > > Friday, January 08, 2010 8:49 PM > > > Re: ^^^^~~~~^^^^ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I understand that any " how " or " why " question implies time, and that > > > > there > > > > is no time actually involved. So, I'm also asking: how is there even > > > > an > > > > appearance or illusion of time in and through a timeless awareness > > > > that > > > > has > > > > no motive or intention to produce illusion. > > > > -- > > > > geo> To say that awareness has no motive or intention to produce > > > > illusion > > > > is > > > > quite questionable, is theoretical. Illusion or not-illusion....is not > > > > some > > > > absolute value. > > > > Are stars and constellations and a cup of coffee as illusional as the > > > > sense > > > > of a separate me? > > > > > > > > I did not express myself well. What I mean is motives or intention of > > > > the > > > > absolute are unknowable to us - human beings. > > > > > > If you are not this absolute ... how can you know anything? > > > > > > How can you claim to know you are a human being? > > > > > > In the other hand obviously > > > > there is a certain - what some have tentatively call " law " - that > > > > permeates > > > > the universe otherwise we would not be here :>))). > > > > > > Again, unless you are this absolute - how can you determine whether > > > there > > > is > > > a here or not - and whether or not anyone is here? > > > > > > > After all our human > > > > world has trees and water falls and animals and lakes and not just > > > > volcanoes, lava, fetid suphurous air etc.... > > > > > > > > ...ahhh...this is not easy to ponder upon.... > > > > > > You postulate an absolute. > > > > > > But unless you are this absolute - how can you know anything is > > > absolute? > > > > > > And if you are it ... to whom are you talking about it? > > > > > > Someone else? > > > > > > Something else? > > > > > > - Dan - > > > > > > None else. That is not what I mean (actualy I am having a hard time > > > trying > > > to express this). What I mean is that there is a certain intention > > > emanating > > > from the absolute that knowledge can not touch in any way. The intention > > > of > > > manifesting. > > > -geo- > > > > Geo - > > > > An intention? No way. > > > > There is no place for any manifestation to have occurred, or to intend for > > one to happen. > > > > An intention relates to an outside. > > > > There isn't an outside. > > > > - Dan > > > > An intention relates to an outside?? No. This depth here is infinite in > > all > > nuances or manners or intents... Nothing a human mind can grasp. > > You did not get what I wanted to say...its OK > > -geo- > > I did. > > You did not get what I said. > > You want infinite depth that your human mind can say, " I don't grasp. " > -dan- > > Nonsense. Dans intelligence, cleverness, or geos or anyones is just a > limited aspect of unlimited intelligence, cleverness (whatever that is) > -geo- > > Your mind wants some kind of infinite depth with an intention that it can't > grasp, and wants to be involved with a " manifestation. " > > This means you want to have manifested. > > But nope - you haven't. > > Sorry to break the news to you. > > What your mind doesn't want is to not be able to be there, and to have no > value whatsoever, no infinite depth to ponder, no ponderer of it. > > - D - > > That is too complicated... and too much filled with cleverness. > -geo- Geo - There isn't any " depth " to ponder. There isn't any intention to grasp. Simple enough? - Dan - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted January 12, 2010 - dan330033 Nisargadatta Tuesday, January 12, 2010 2:56 PM Re: ^^^^~~~~^^^^ Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > dan330033 > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, January 12, 2010 2:11 PM > Re: ^^^^~~~~^^^^ > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > dan330033 > > Nisargadatta > > Friday, January 08, 2010 8:49 PM > > Re: ^^^^~~~~^^^^ > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I understand that any " how " or " why " question implies time, and that > > > there > > > is no time actually involved. So, I'm also asking: how is there even > > > an > > > appearance or illusion of time in and through a timeless awareness > > > that > > > has > > > no motive or intention to produce illusion. > > > -- > > > geo> To say that awareness has no motive or intention to produce > > > illusion > > > is > > > quite questionable, is theoretical. Illusion or not-illusion....is not > > > some > > > absolute value. > > > Are stars and constellations and a cup of coffee as illusional as the > > > sense > > > of a separate me? > > > > > > I did not express myself well. What I mean is motives or intention of > > > the > > > absolute are unknowable to us - human beings. > > > > If you are not this absolute ... how can you know anything? > > > > How can you claim to know you are a human being? > > > > In the other hand obviously > > > there is a certain - what some have tentatively call " law " - that > > > permeates > > > the universe otherwise we would not be here :>))). > > > > Again, unless you are this absolute - how can you determine whether > > there > > is > > a here or not - and whether or not anyone is here? > > > > > After all our human > > > world has trees and water falls and animals and lakes and not just > > > volcanoes, lava, fetid suphurous air etc.... > > > > > > ...ahhh...this is not easy to ponder upon.... > > > > You postulate an absolute. > > > > But unless you are this absolute - how can you know anything is > > absolute? > > > > And if you are it ... to whom are you talking about it? > > > > Someone else? > > > > Something else? > > > > - Dan - > > > > None else. That is not what I mean (actualy I am having a hard time > > trying > > to express this). What I mean is that there is a certain intention > > emanating > > from the absolute that knowledge can not touch in any way. The intention > > of > > manifesting. > > -geo- > > Geo - > > An intention? No way. > > There is no place for any manifestation to have occurred, or to intend for > one to happen. > > An intention relates to an outside. > > There isn't an outside. > > - Dan > > An intention relates to an outside?? No. This depth here is infinite in > all > nuances or manners or intents... Nothing a human mind can grasp. > You did not get what I wanted to say...its OK > -geo- I did. You did not get what I said. You want infinite depth that your human mind can say, " I don't grasp. " -dan- Nonsense. Dans intelligence, cleverness, or geos or anyones is just a limited aspect of unlimited intelligence, cleverness (whatever that is) -geo- Your mind wants some kind of infinite depth with an intention that it can't grasp, and wants to be involved with a " manifestation. " This means you want to have manifested. But nope - you haven't. Sorry to break the news to you. What your mind doesn't want is to not be able to be there, and to have no value whatsoever, no infinite depth to ponder, no ponderer of it. - D - That is too complicated... and too much filled with cleverness. -geo- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted January 12, 2010 - BobN Nisargadatta Tuesday, January 12, 2010 3:14 PM Re: ^^^^~~~~^^^^ Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > dan330033 > > Nisargadatta > > Friday, January 08, 2010 8:49 PM > > Re: ^^^^~~~~^^^^ > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I understand that any " how " or " why " question implies time, and that > > > there > > > is no time actually involved. So, I'm also asking: how is there even > > > an > > > appearance or illusion of time in and through a timeless awareness > > > that > > > has > > > no motive or intention to produce illusion. > > > -- > > > geo> To say that awareness has no motive or intention to produce > > > illusion > > > is > > > quite questionable, is theoretical. Illusion or not-illusion....is not > > > some > > > absolute value. > > > Are stars and constellations and a cup of coffee as illusional as the > > > sense > > > of a separate me? > > > > > > I did not express myself well. What I mean is motives or intention of > > > the > > > absolute are unknowable to us - human beings. > > > > If you are not this absolute ... how can you know anything? > > > > How can you claim to know you are a human being? > > > > In the other hand obviously > > > there is a certain - what some have tentatively call " law " - that > > > permeates > > > the universe otherwise we would not be here :>))). > > > > Again, unless you are this absolute - how can you determine whether > > there is > > a here or not - and whether or not anyone is here? > > > > > After all our human > > > world has trees and water falls and animals and lakes and not just > > > volcanoes, lava, fetid suphurous air etc.... > > > > > > ...ahhh...this is not easy to ponder upon.... > > > > You postulate an absolute. > > > > But unless you are this absolute - how can you know anything is > > absolute? > > > > And if you are it ... to whom are you talking about it? > > > > Someone else? > > > > Something else? > > > > - Dan - > > > > None else. That is not what I mean (actualy I am having a hard time > > trying > > to express this). What I mean is that there is a certain intention > > emanating > > from the absolute that knowledge can not touch in any way. The intention > > of > > manifesting. > > -geo- > > > Geo - > > An intention? No way. > > There is no place for any manifestation to have occurred, or to intend for > one to happen. > > An intention relates to an outside. > > There isn't an outside. > > - Dan what did you intend to say inside there dabbo? you know..the inside without an outside that you're relating to. :-) ..b b.b. Well..in a way thats it. If dan or bbb or geo can intent anything within the limited mind field...obviously .there is the unlimited unknowable intent (law). -geo- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted January 12, 2010 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > Nonsense. Dans intelligence, cleverness, or geos or anyones is just a > limited aspect of unlimited intelligence, cleverness (whatever that is) > -geo- Geo - There are no separable " aspects " to be had by anyone. Dan's intelligence, Geo's intelligence, or anyone's - considered as " theirs " - is fragmentation. - D - Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted January 12, 2010 - dan330033 Nisargadatta Tuesday, January 12, 2010 5:45 PM Re: ^^^^~~~~^^^^ Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > dan330033 > Nisargadatta > Tuesday, January 12, 2010 2:56 PM > Re: ^^^^~~~~^^^^ > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > dan330033 > > Nisargadatta > > Tuesday, January 12, 2010 2:11 PM > > Re: ^^^^~~~~^^^^ > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > - > > > dan330033 > > > Nisargadatta > > > Friday, January 08, 2010 8:49 PM > > > Re: ^^^^~~~~^^^^ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I understand that any " how " or " why " question implies time, and that > > > > there > > > > is no time actually involved. So, I'm also asking: how is there even > > > > an > > > > appearance or illusion of time in and through a timeless awareness > > > > that > > > > has > > > > no motive or intention to produce illusion. > > > > -- > > > > geo> To say that awareness has no motive or intention to produce > > > > illusion > > > > is > > > > quite questionable, is theoretical. Illusion or not-illusion....is > > > > not > > > > some > > > > absolute value. > > > > Are stars and constellations and a cup of coffee as illusional as > > > > the > > > > sense > > > > of a separate me? > > > > > > > > I did not express myself well. What I mean is motives or intention > > > > of > > > > the > > > > absolute are unknowable to us - human beings. > > > > > > If you are not this absolute ... how can you know anything? > > > > > > How can you claim to know you are a human being? > > > > > > In the other hand obviously > > > > there is a certain - what some have tentatively call " law " - that > > > > permeates > > > > the universe otherwise we would not be here :>))). > > > > > > Again, unless you are this absolute - how can you determine whether > > > there > > > is > > > a here or not - and whether or not anyone is here? > > > > > > > After all our human > > > > world has trees and water falls and animals and lakes and not just > > > > volcanoes, lava, fetid suphurous air etc.... > > > > > > > > ...ahhh...this is not easy to ponder upon.... > > > > > > You postulate an absolute. > > > > > > But unless you are this absolute - how can you know anything is > > > absolute? > > > > > > And if you are it ... to whom are you talking about it? > > > > > > Someone else? > > > > > > Something else? > > > > > > - Dan - > > > > > > None else. That is not what I mean (actualy I am having a hard time > > > trying > > > to express this). What I mean is that there is a certain intention > > > emanating > > > from the absolute that knowledge can not touch in any way. The > > > intention > > > of > > > manifesting. > > > -geo- > > > > Geo - > > > > An intention? No way. > > > > There is no place for any manifestation to have occurred, or to intend > > for > > one to happen. > > > > An intention relates to an outside. > > > > There isn't an outside. > > > > - Dan > > > > An intention relates to an outside?? No. This depth here is infinite in > > all > > nuances or manners or intents... Nothing a human mind can grasp. > > You did not get what I wanted to say...its OK > > -geo- > > I did. > > You did not get what I said. > > You want infinite depth that your human mind can say, " I don't grasp. " > -dan- > > Nonsense. Dans intelligence, cleverness, or geos or anyones is just a > limited aspect of unlimited intelligence, cleverness (whatever that is) > -geo- > > Your mind wants some kind of infinite depth with an intention that it > can't > grasp, and wants to be involved with a " manifestation. " > > This means you want to have manifested. > > But nope - you haven't. > > Sorry to break the news to you. > > What your mind doesn't want is to not be able to be there, and to have no > value whatsoever, no infinite depth to ponder, no ponderer of it. > > - D - > > That is too complicated... and too much filled with cleverness. > -geo- Geo - There isn't any " depth " to ponder. There isn't any intention to grasp. Simple enough? - Dan - Yes. That is simple. I desagree. Specially to the absurdity " there isn't any " depth " to ponder " . You are very simply and clearly blind-pissed off. :>) -geo- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted January 12, 2010 > > > > Yes. That is simple. I desagree. Specially to the absurdity " there isn't any > > " depth " to ponder " . > > You are very simply and clearly blind-pissed off. :>) > > -geo- > > No, Geo. > > You're missing the message. > > Look: > > The individual being, with its perspective, history, and mind is a portion, a fragment, if you will. > > Agree? > > That individual wants to ponder the depths, gaze into the infinite ... whatever. > > That individual's pondering is fragmented, its gazing into the depths is fragmented. > > It can only be fragmented, because it is a fragmentation, is a fragmenting. > > Anything it says, thinks, feels, about the absolute, the infinite, the depths .... is irrelevant. > > Is fragmented. > > Understand? > > - Dan - P: And that includes Dan. Not that I'm saying that what he wrote is wrong, it just needs to be verify by me to be credible. ) > Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
