Guest guest Posted March 18, 2002 Report Share Posted March 18, 2002 Hi Andrew, what's "what"? And what's a "person"? What's "reality"? And what's "assuming"? No offense, I hope ("offense" is a mere label, anyway), but any sixth-grader can play this kind of game (a "game", in case you didn't know, is but a dream within a dream). Pray tell me (but don't forget "you" have no "real" existence) the purpose (though there is no "purpose" in pure beingness) of such input. Anyone of us who graces this list will be able to talk about the fact that the world is illusive/delusive/non-existent/mayic etc. We can, all of us, mouth more or less glibly the pertinent truisms. I am sure you meant well, but the next time anyone plays this game again you will see a grown man cry. Take care (but remember there "is" no one to "take care", nor to "be taken care of"), Michael > -----Ursprungliche Nachricht----- > Von: andrew macnab [a.macnab] > Gesendet: Monday, March 18, 2002 00:12 > An: > Betreff: Re: Re: Blaise Pascal's Bet on God > > > What's "a (rational) person"? > And what is "we"? > If the reality of such things is assumed > then the reality of another thing called God > is something that can be debated. > If it isn't assumed, the question doesn't occur. > > andrew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 18, 2002 Report Share Posted March 18, 2002 MikeSuesserott wrote: > > Hi Andrew, > > what's "what"? > And what's a "person"? > What's "reality"? > And what's "assuming"? > > No offense, I hope ("offense" is a mere label, anyway), > but any sixth-grader can play this kind of game > (a "game", in case you didn't know, is but a dream within a dream). > > Pray tell me (but don't forget "you" have no "real" existence) > the purpose (though there is no "purpose" in pure beingness) > of such input. > > Anyone of us who graces this list will be able to talk about the fact that > the world is illusive/delusive/non-existent/mayic etc. We can, all of us, > mouth more or less glibly the pertinent truisms. > > I am sure you meant well, but the next time anyone > plays this game again you will see a grown man cry. > > Take care > (but remember there "is" no one to "take care", > nor to "be taken care of"), > > Michael > God and person are two sides of the same coin. If one exists the other must. If. andrew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 18, 2002 Report Share Posted March 18, 2002 Michael, Who won this debate? You or Andrew? Namaste, Dan > Hi Andrew, > > what's "what"? > And what's a "person"? > What's "reality"? > And what's "assuming"? > > No offense, I hope ("offense" is a mere label, anyway), > but any sixth-grader can play this kind of game > (a "game", in case you didn't know, is but a dream within a dream). > > Pray tell me (but don't forget "you" have no "real" existence) > the purpose (though there is no "purpose" in pure beingness) > of such input. > > Anyone of us who graces this list will be able to talk about the fact that > the world is illusive/delusive/non-existent/mayic etc. We can, all of us, > mouth more or less glibly the pertinent truisms. > > I am sure you meant well, but the next time anyone > plays this game again you will see a grown man cry. > > Take care > (but remember there "is" no one to "take care", > nor to "be taken care of"), > > Michael > > > > -----Ursprungliche Nachricht----- > > Von: andrew macnab [a.macnab@n...] > > Gesendet: Monday, March 18, 2002 00:12 > > An: > > Betreff: Re: Re: Blaise Pascal's Bet on God > > > > > > What's "a (rational) person"? > > And what is "we"? > > If the reality of such things is assumed > > then the reality of another thing called God > > is something that can be debated. > > If it isn't assumed, the question doesn't occur. > > > > andrew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 19, 2002 Report Share Posted March 19, 2002 Dear Michael -- Yes, I see your point. And what it means to me is that regardless of what Andrew may or may not have been saying, his words came across to you as stale and repetitious of things you heard before. You didn't sense life in what was said, just predictable copying of other things that had been said before. Now, I don't know whether or not this is what was really the case. For me, the interesting question that arises here is: what is really not stale, what is truly alive, what doesn't repeat the past? It seems to me we reach a limit with words and thought, because any idea, no matter how innovative, repeats patterns of the past. To be truly free of repetition, staleness, and triteness requires a leap beyond the contents of thought, a leap which thought is unable to take. So, thought dissolves and peace/freedom/energy is. Thought's dissolution doesn't mean thought has no application, and shouldn't arise. It means that thought isn't being taken as something it is not. If anything said here by anyone can be a springboard into and as what is beyond thought, then there is the new, the eternal, the unimaginable. Thanks for your clear explanation, Michael, and blessed be -- Love, Dan > Dan, > > this was not about winning at all, nor was it a debate. More like a > desperate cry from one who is getting tired of being fed the same cliche > phrases again and again. > > Like you say "good morning", and sure as hell someone is going to send a > message to the effect that there is no morning, or how can there be a > morning if no observer exists, or some such pearl of wisdom. > > Remember Eliza, one of the early computer programs that simulated the > behavior of a psychologist? You would input some personal problem, and the > computer would repeat part of it back to you and then say, "tell me more > about it." Just a very few stored-up phrases and simple pre-programmed > behaviors were sufficient to make people believe that they were > communicating with a live psychologist. > > Can you guess how there might be an analogy here? :-) > > Take care, > > Michael > > > > > -----Ursprungliche Nachricht----- > > Von: dan330033 [dan330033] > > Gesendet: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 01:47 > > An: > > Betreff: Re: Sigh... (was:Blaise Pascal's Bet on God) > > > > > > Michael, > > > > Who won this debate? > > > > You or Andrew? > > > > Namaste, > > Dan > > > > > > > > > Hi Andrew, > > > > > > what's "what"? > > > And what's a "person"? > > > What's "reality"? > > > And what's "assuming"? > > > > > > No offense, I hope ("offense" is a mere label, anyway), > > > but any sixth-grader can play this kind of game > > > (a "game", in case you didn't know, is but a dream within a dream). > > > > > > Pray tell me (but don't forget "you" have no "real" existence) > > > the purpose (though there is no "purpose" in pure beingness) > > > of such input. > > > > > > Anyone of us who graces this list will be able to talk about the > > fact that > > > the world is illusive/delusive/non-existent/mayic etc. We can, all > > of us, > > > mouth more or less glibly the pertinent truisms. > > > > > > I am sure you meant well, but the next time anyone > > > plays this game again you will see a grown man cry. > > > > > > Take care > > > (but remember there "is" no one to "take care", > > > nor to "be taken care of"), > > > > > > Michael > > > > > > > > > > -----Ursprungliche Nachricht----- > > > > Von: andrew macnab [a.macnab@n...] > > > > Gesendet: Monday, March 18, 2002 00:12 > > > > An: > > > > Betreff: Re: Re: Blaise Pascal's Bet on God > > > > > > > > > > > > What's "a (rational) person"? > > > > And what is "we"? > > > > If the reality of such things is assumed > > > > then the reality of another thing called God > > > > is something that can be debated. > > > > If it isn't assumed, the question doesn't occur. > > > > > > > > andrew > > > > > > > > /join > > > > > > > > > > > > All paths go somewhere. No path goes nowhere. Paths, places, > > sights, perceptions, and indeed all experiences arise from and > > exist in and subside back into the Space of Awareness. Like waves > > rising are not different than the ocean, all things arising from > > Awareness are of the nature of Awareness. Awareness does not come > > and go but is always Present. It is Home. Home is where the Heart > > Is. Jnanis know the Heart to be the Finality of Eternal Being. A > > true devotee relishes in the Truth of Self-Knowledge, > > spontaneously arising from within into It Self. Welcome all to > > a. > > > > > > > > Your use of is subject to > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 19, 2002 Report Share Posted March 19, 2002 Just to keep things fresh here, I also wish to disavow my tomato diet of 12 years ago popularized in my best seller, "The Mysterious Tomato" The first 500 books of my "Broccoli, True and Total Power" will be autographed personally by me. Thanks for all your support. We are always fresh Love from the Broccoli people Harsha dan330033 [dan330033] Tuesday, March 19, 2002 7:17 PM Re: Sigh... (was:Blaise Pascal's Bet on God) Dear Michael -- Yes, I see your point. And what it means to me is that regardless of what Andrew may or may not have been saying, his words came across to you as stale and repetitious of things you heard before. You didn't sense life in what was said, just predictable copying of other things that had been said before. Now, I don't know whether or not this is what was really the case. For me, the interesting question that arises here is: what is really not stale, what is truly alive, what doesn't repeat the past? It seems to me we reach a limit with words and thought, because any idea, no matter how innovative, repeats patterns of the past. To be truly free of repetition, staleness, and triteness requires a leap beyond the contents of thought, a leap which thought is unable to take. So, thought dissolves and peace/freedom/energy is. Thought's dissolution doesn't mean thought has no application, and shouldn't arise. It means that thought isn't being taken as something it is not. If anything said here by anyone can be a springboard into and as what is beyond thought, then there is the new, the eternal, the unimaginable. Thanks for your clear explanation, Michael, and blessed be -- Love, Dan > Dan, > > this was not about winning at all, nor was it a debate. More like a > desperate cry from one who is getting tired of being fed the same cliche > phrases again and again. > > Like you say "good morning", and sure as hell someone is going to send a > message to the effect that there is no morning, or how can there be a > morning if no observer exists, or some such pearl of wisdom. > > Remember Eliza, one of the early computer programs that simulated the > behavior of a psychologist? You would input some personal problem, and the > computer would repeat part of it back to you and then say, "tell me more > about it." Just a very few stored-up phrases and simple pre-programmed > behaviors were sufficient to make people believe that they were > communicating with a live psychologist. > > Can you guess how there might be an analogy here? :-) > > Take care, > > Michael > > > > > -----Ursprungliche Nachricht----- > > Von: dan330033 [dan330033] > > Gesendet: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 01:47 > > An: > > Betreff: Re: Sigh... (was:Blaise Pascal's Bet on God) > > > > > > Michael, > > > > Who won this debate? > > > > You or Andrew? > > > > Namaste, > > Dan > > > > > > > > > Hi Andrew, > > > > > > what's "what"? > > > And what's a "person"? > > > What's "reality"? > > > And what's "assuming"? > > > > > > No offense, I hope ("offense" is a mere label, anyway), > > > but any sixth-grader can play this kind of game > > > (a "game", in case you didn't know, is but a dream within a dream). > > > > > > Pray tell me (but don't forget "you" have no "real" existence) > > > the purpose (though there is no "purpose" in pure beingness) > > > of such input. > > > > > > Anyone of us who graces this list will be able to talk about the > > fact that > > > the world is illusive/delusive/non-existent/mayic etc. We can, all > > of us, > > > mouth more or less glibly the pertinent truisms. > > > > > > I am sure you meant well, but the next time anyone > > > plays this game again you will see a grown man cry. > > > > > > Take care > > > (but remember there "is" no one to "take care", > > > nor to "be taken care of"), > > > > > > Michael > > > > > > > > > > -----Ursprungliche Nachricht----- > > > > Von: andrew macnab [a.macnab@n...] > > > > Gesendet: Monday, March 18, 2002 00:12 > > > > An: > > > > Betreff: Re: Re: Blaise Pascal's Bet on God > > > > > > > > > > > > What's "a (rational) person"? > > > > And what is "we"? > > > > If the reality of such things is assumed > > > > then the reality of another thing called God > > > > is something that can be debated. > > > > If it isn't assumed, the question doesn't occur. > > > > > > > > andrew > > > > > > > > /join > > > > > > > > > > > > All paths go somewhere. No path goes nowhere. Paths, places, > > sights, perceptions, and indeed all experiences arise from and > > exist in and subside back into the Space of Awareness. Like waves > > rising are not different than the ocean, all things arising from > > Awareness are of the nature of Awareness. Awareness does not come > > and go but is always Present. It is Home. Home is where the Heart > > Is. Jnanis know the Heart to be the Finality of Eternal Being. A > > true devotee relishes in the Truth of Self-Knowledge, > > spontaneously arising from within into It Self. Welcome all to > > a. > > > > > > > > Your use of is subject to > > > > /join All paths go somewhere. No path goes nowhere. Paths, places, sights, perceptions, and indeed all experiences arise from and exist in and subside back into the Space of Awareness. Like waves rising are not different than the ocean, all things arising from Awareness are of the nature of Awareness. Awareness does not come and go but is always Present. It is Home. Home is where the Heart Is. Jnanis know the Heart to be the Finality of Eternal Being. A true devotee relishes in the Truth of Self-Knowledge, spontaneously arising from within into It Self. Welcome all to a. Your use of is subject to Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.