Does neo-advaita work like a disease?

January 22, 2010

Nisargadatta , " wwoehr " <wwoehr wrote:

>

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

> >

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

> > >

> > > Nisargadatta , Marc <dennis_travis33@> wrote:

> > > >

> > > > look like this neo-advaita work like a disease, indeed...

> > > >

> > > > all this freaks who think they are enlightened....since all times....and

therefore declare that there is nothing to know....and nothing to reach....and

nobody to be.....that there is no ego....etc...

> > > >

> > > > creating blogs, groups, sites, programms, conferences....to talk and

share this their new fantastic knowledge....

> > > >

> > > > ....

> > > >

> > > > fools....

> > > >

> > > > nothing else

> > > >

> > > > ...

> > > >

> > > > but this all this their imaginary world Is about...

> > > >

> > > > ...

> > > >

> > > > since endless times...

> > > >

> > > > ...

> > > >

> > >

> > > Well, Mark it's kinda like this, in this world that we imagine,

> > > there are 24 hours to a day, 7 days to a week, and 364/5 days to a

year.... and we've go to do something, going to sleep is easy.

> > >

> > > Waking up is hard to do.

> > >

> > > Love,

> > > Anna

> >

> > well Anna..

> >

> > counting sheep helps going to sleep " they " say.

> >

> > perhaps counting hours..days..weeks to the year..

> >

> > helps wakey wakey wondering.

> >

> > discounting any method helps me remain above it all.

> >

> > no sleep..no wake..

> >

> > No No Nanette.

> >

> > :-)

> >

> > .b b.b.

> >

>

> Wow !

>

> Look how nicely Riot-Bob can behave ... purr, purr, purr ...

>

> No pissing, no shitting, no farting as usual - great !

>

> And now, Anna and Bob, hand in hand, can count sheep together without any

disturbance of Bob's usual fecal sounds - there is just the purring of Bob ...

>

> ROFLMAO !

>

> Werner

the thingy with your funny remarks werner is that they are

not funny whereas bobs funny remarks are actually funny so

why don't you just stick to presenting us with facts thank

you - your being a pragmatic guy an all

tell us the facts - not about us - but about you thank you

i make the mistake often, to state facts about others when

all i can state facts about is me, and not even that can i

so please dont make the same mistake as me thank you

and dont take my advice thank you

yee haaa

giddy up

chopchop

woodie

-lene

January 22, 2010

Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote:

>

> You can play with the " there is " - " there is not " poles endlessly. If you

consider the waves as the ocean itself you will say all is the same. If you

consider that each wave is unique in shape, color, power.. you will say they are

different.... ad ininitum, ad nauseum, like a pendulum. And when this game is

played unconsciously, unknowingly, it is just plane ignorance.

>

> -egg-

what you wrote upstairs

was totally nonsensical

coming on a jet plane &

simple

-hen

January 22, 2010

> peace is always, here and now present

>

> ...

>

> and has nothing to do with any " enlightenment, non-dual, neo advaitin business

etc "

>

> Marc

I would like to understand where you come from Marc

Are you saying - that peace is the being which is you?

And that outside of that being - that peace - which is

you - there is nothing?

And is this equivalent to Niz's I AM ... ? I AM is all

I know ... ?

Your statement: peace is always, here and now present -

is however false - in my perception, that is of course.

There can not be peace and talking of peace at once

To " see " the moon and talk of " seeing " the moon - when

the latter - there is no " seeing " the moon.

Niz repeated the mantra I AM - until he stopped being,

and instead of " his being " , there was peace & silence.

Seems Niz & K was on the same boat. On which boat you

are - I know not

-Lene

January 22, 2010

There can not be peace and talking of peace at once -lene-

So talking is outside the field of the ONE? Where is that....in some other?

-geo-

January 22, 2010

peace is always, here and now present

>

> ...

>

> and has nothing to do with any " enlightenment, non-dual, neo advaitin business

etc "

>

> Marc

I would like to understand where you come from Marc

Are you saying - that peace is the being which is you?

And that outside of that being - that peace - which is

you - there is nothing?

And is this equivalent to Niz's I AM ... ? I AM is all

I know ... ?

Your statement: peace is always, here and now present -

is however false - in my perception, that is of course.

There can not be peace and talking of peace at once

To " see " the moon and talk of " seeing " the moon - when

the latter - there is no " seeing " the moon.

Niz repeated the mantra I AM - until he stopped being,

and instead of " his being " , there was peace & silence.

Seems Niz & K was on the same boat. On which boat you

are - I know not

-Lene

peace isn't of any imaginary " being " ...and also not of any imaginary " world "

....

there is no inside and outside of peace

....

Marc

January 22, 2010

Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote:

>

> There can not be peace and talking of peace at once

> -lene-

>

> So talking is outside the field of the ONE? Where is that....in some other?

> -geo-

let me field that question.

the answer is an absolute maybe yes maybe no maybe maybe.

and nobody can " say " otherwise.

well they can but would that be " saying " outside the field of the ONE?

well where is that....in some other?

maybe yes maybe no maybe maybe.

so there it is and that is that and this is what it is.

now yoiu can proceed onwards with your day with no more questions.

you're all very welcome.

this is what i'm here for.

wherever here is.

i think.

so just chill and go in peace or in piss off.

it doesn't matter.

..b b.b.

January 22, 2010

Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote:

>

> There can not be peace and talking of peace at once

> -lene-

>

> So talking is outside the field of the ONE? Where is that....in some other?

> -geo-

No. There is only one world, one reality, and it consists

of many fragments.

One fragment is thought. The weird thing about thought is

that not only is it a fragment of life, it is the creator

of fragmentation, of dualism.

Thought is the labelling, description, naming wording and

so on.

Thought is not that which is labelled, only the labelling.

This is also the case when its a thought that is labelled.

Because the something worded is not the something itself,

there's a gap between those: the thing and the word about

the thing.

Where there is a gap-between, there is conflict; there is

two, not one, this side and that side: the thing, and the

thought/word about the thing and voila! There is no peace.

If there is to BE ONE that is to be without fragmentation

- there cannot be words OR the words cannot be about some

thing - only be in their own right (a figure of speech

That's why I like nonsensical babbling - because it is so

full of not pointing to anything -- like a painting which

does not look like - anything - recognizable - Babbling's

poesy.

-Lene

January 22, 2010

Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe wrote:

>

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

> >

> > There can not be peace and talking of peace at once

> > -lene-

> >

> > So talking is outside the field of the ONE? Where is that....in some other?

> > -geo-

>

> No. There is only one world, one reality, and it consists

> of many fragments.

>

> One fragment is thought. The weird thing about thought is

> that not only is it a fragment of life, it is the creator

> of fragmentation, of dualism.

>

> Thought is the labelling, description, naming wording and

> so on.

>

> Thought is not that which is labelled, only the labelling.

> This is also the case when its a thought that is labelled.

>

> Because the something worded is not the something itself,

> there's a gap between those: the thing and the word about

> the thing.

>

> Where there is a gap-between, there is conflict; there is

> two, not one, this side and that side: the thing, and the

> thought/word about the thing and voila! There is no peace.

>

> If there is to BE ONE that is to be without fragmentation

> - there cannot be words OR the words cannot be about some

> thing - only be in their own right (a figure of speech

>

> That's why I like nonsensical babbling - because it is so

> full of not pointing to anything -- like a painting which

> does not look like - anything - recognizable - Babbling's

> poesy.

>

> -Lene

yes.

it's no.

maybe.

..b b.b.

January 22, 2010

Nisargadatta , " BobN " <Roberibus111 wrote:

>

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

> >

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

> > >

> > > There can not be peace and talking of peace at once

> > > -lene-

> > >

> > > So talking is outside the field of the ONE? Where is that....in some

other?

> > > -geo-

> >

> > No. There is only one world, one reality, and it consists

> > of many fragments.

> >

> > One fragment is thought. The weird thing about thought is

> > that not only is it a fragment of life, it is the creator

> > of fragmentation, of dualism.

> >

> > Thought is the labelling, description, naming wording and

> > so on.

> >

> > Thought is not that which is labelled, only the labelling.

> > This is also the case when its a thought that is labelled.

> >

> > Because the something worded is not the something itself,

> > there's a gap between those: the thing and the word about

> > the thing.

> >

> > Where there is a gap-between, there is conflict; there is

> > two, not one, this side and that side: the thing, and the

> > thought/word about the thing and voila! There is no peace.

> >

> > If there is to BE ONE that is to be without fragmentation

> > - there cannot be words OR the words cannot be about some

> > thing - only be in their own right (a figure of speech

> >

> > That's why I like nonsensical babbling - because it is so

> > full of not pointing to anything -- like a painting which

> > does not look like - anything - recognizable - Babbling's

> > poesy.

> >

> > -Lene

>

> yes.

>

> it's no.

>

> maybe.

>

> .b b.b.

take a tree and tell me

what it looks like

how to take it

i dont know

-lene

January 22, 2010

No. There is only one world, one reality, and it consists

of many fragments.

One fragment is thought. The weird thing about thought is

that not only is it a fragment of life, it is the creator

of fragmentation, of dualism.

Thought is the labelling, description, naming wording and

so on.

Thought is not that which is labelled, only the labelling.

This is also the case when its a thought that is labelled.

Because the something worded is not the something itself,

there's a gap between those: the thing and the word about

the thing.

Where there is a gap-between, there is conflict; there is

two, not one, this side and that side: the thing, and the

thought/word about the thing and voila! There is no peace.

If there is to BE ONE that is to be without fragmentation

- there cannot be words OR the words cannot be about some

thing - only be in their own right (a figure of speech

That's why I like nonsensical babbling - because it is so

full of not pointing to anything -- like a painting which

does not look like - anything - recognizable - Babbling's

poesy.

-Lene

ahhh....so there is only one world.....

Lene is having a concept about this " one world " ...

and then are following many bubbling words...

....

yes, would be even more funny if you wrote some poems about...

why not

....

Marc

January 22, 2010

Nisargadatta , Marc <dennis_travis33 wrote:

>

> No. There is only one world, one reality, and it consists

> of many fragments.

>

> One fragment is thought. The weird thing about thought is

> that not only is it a fragment of life, it is the creator

> of fragmentation, of dualism.

>

> Thought is the labelling, description, naming wording and

> so on.

>

> Thought is not that which is labelled, only the labelling.

> This is also the case when its a thought that is labelled.

>

> Because the something worded is not the something itself,

> there's a gap between those: the thing and the word about

> the thing.

>

> Where there is a gap-between, there is conflict; there is

> two, not one, this side and that side: the thing, and the

> thought/word about the thing and voila! There is no peace.

>

> If there is to BE ONE that is to be without fragmentation

> - there cannot be words OR the words cannot be about some

> thing - only be in their own right (a figure of speech

>

> That's why I like nonsensical babbling - because it is so

> full of not pointing to anything -- like a painting which

> does not look like - anything - recognizable - Babbling's

> poesy.

>

> -Lene

>

> ahhh....so there is only one world.....

>

> Lene is having a concept about this " one world " ...

Nope. Thought is the concept about one world. There

is no Lene - and so Lene cannot have concepts aboyt

anything, heh heh

What is Lene? The body - the psyche - the me - what

is Lene? Lene is a word, a name - and thought it is

that invented it.

> and then are following many bubbling words...

Yepsy. Many bubbling words coming from this world of

thought and that world of thought, all possible wsot.

Enough.

Now tell me about one being.

No - not the concept - the thing as such - the being

as such. What is being?

Lol

-Lene

January 22, 2010

ahhh....so there is only one world.....

>

> Lene is having a concept about this " one world " ...

Nope. Thought is the concept about one world. There

is no Lene - and so Lene cannot have concepts aboyt

anything, heh heh

What is Lene? The body - the psyche - the me - what

is Lene? Lene is a word, a name - and thought it is

that invented it.

> and then are following many bubbling words...

Yepsy. Many bubbling words coming from this world of

thought and that world of thought, all possible wsot.

Enough.

Now tell me about one being.

No - not the concept - the thing as such - the being

as such. What is being?

Lol

-Lene

i'm not of this your imaginary world....

so i can't help you out...

....

wait....ask one of this your teachers and Gurus...

....

maybe they would have the thoughts you are searching for...

....

who knows

....

Marc

January 22, 2010

Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , Marc <dennis_travis33@> wrote:

> >

> > No. There is only one world, one reality, and it consists

> > of many fragments.

> >

> > One fragment is thought. The weird thing about thought is

> > that not only is it a fragment of life, it is the creator

> > of fragmentation, of dualism.

> >

> > Thought is the labelling, description, naming wording and

> > so on.

> >

> > Thought is not that which is labelled, only the labelling.

> > This is also the case when its a thought that is labelled.

> >

> > Because the something worded is not the something itself,

> > there's a gap between those: the thing and the word about

> > the thing.

> >

> > Where there is a gap-between, there is conflict; there is

> > two, not one, this side and that side: the thing, and the

> > thought/word about the thing and voila! There is no peace.

> >

> > If there is to BE ONE that is to be without fragmentation

> > - there cannot be words OR the words cannot be about some

> > thing - only be in their own right (a figure of speech

> >

> > That's why I like nonsensical babbling - because it is so

> > full of not pointing to anything -- like a painting which

> > does not look like - anything - recognizable - Babbling's

> > poesy.

> >

> > -Lene

> >

> > ahhh....so there is only one world.....

> >

> > Lene is having a concept about this " one world " ...

>

> Nope. Thought is the concept about one world. There

> is no Lene - and so Lene cannot have concepts aboyt

> anything, heh heh

>

> What is Lene? The body - the psyche - the me - what

> is Lene? Lene is a word, a name - and thought it is

> that invented it.

>

Haha !

What a nonsense.

But there is Lene, that immature silly goose who loves Bob making fun on behalf

of others.

Werner

>

> > and then are following many bubbling words...

>

> Yepsy. Many bubbling words coming from this world of

> thought and that world of thought, all possible wsot.

>

> Enough.

>

> Now tell me about one being.

>

> No - not the concept - the thing as such - the being

> as such. What is being?

>

> Lol

>

> -Lene

>

January 22, 2010

> There can not be peace and talking of peace at once

> -lene-

>

> So talking is outside the field of the ONE? Where is that....in some

> other?

> -geo-

No. There is only one world, one reality, and it consists

of many fragments.

-lene-

To think the that universe is a sum of fragments is not correct. That is not

the case at all. Each and any fragment is an empty shell by itself -as a

fragment. Each fragment is just a pattern of the one.

-egg-

- One fragment is thought. The weird thing about thought is

that not only is it a fragment of life, it is the creator

of fragmentation, of dualism.

-lene-

A thought is just another empty fragment of the only one that is.

-geo-

Thought is the labelling, description, naming wording and

so on.

Thought is not that which is labelled, only the labelling.

This is also the case when its a thought that is labelled.

-lene-

And as such it is also a pattern of the one/here. Could not be somewhere

else.

-ego-

Because the something worded is not the something itself,

there's a gap between those: the thing and the word about

the thing.

Where there is a gap-between, there is conflict; there is

two, not one, this side and that side: the thing, and the

thought/word about the thing and voila! There is no peace.

-lene-

Not necessarily at all. See thoughts as a pointer. So there is seeing of the

fact that there is a pointer and a pointed, just as there is man/women,

dogs/rocks. that is not duality just diversity. And for some there is that

which can not be named at all....so what? Obviously the pointer can not be

pointed.

-geo-

If there is to BE ONE that is to be without fragmentation

- there cannot be words OR the words cannot be about some

thing - only be in their own right (a figure of speech

-lene-

The ONE patterns into worlds, into things, into words also. No part is taken

away or added. The empty substratum is unmoved, unchanged, unborn.

-ggo-

That's why I like nonsensical babbling - because it is so

full of not pointing to anything -- like a painting which

does not look like - anything - recognizable - Babbling's

poesy.

-lene-

No. Words, thinking, can be used as very precise chirurgical tools, they are

amazing at that. Babbling is adding more confusion, is in fact laziness of a

disordered mind. It is boring. Why would anybody need to listen to words

that reflect the confusion that already is all around? Why would anyone need

to observe random paintings that reflect ones conditioning - that is all

around any way. Just look around, its all there.

-ego-

-Lene

January 22, 2010