I was thinking ...

[Guest guest]

Hi,

 

... gee, this one is difficult to put in words ..

 

All this ego-business, that we are so intersted in to enquire into

and tear to pieces..

I wonder now, what is actually the point ?..

 

For example, Gary writes : " So is there anything substantial to base

memory on apart from other memories?

What is memory then but a conceptual picture, an idealized form. "

He questions whether Time is just a concept.

It seems so. But how about, " memory, picture, substantial " , are these

not Also concepts ?

If so, are we not still swimming in the same 'soup' ?

Saying that the soup-structure is not 'real', is part of the soup..

no?

 

But my question is .. what Is wrong with this 'soup' ?

I am identified with the body.. take care of it and if someone

attacks I will probably do what I can to protect it. It might be

Mother Nature's mechanics. What's wrong with that ?

... or with the brain's preference for this or that,.. or even making

a picture of a person who is always agressive, and so being on the

watch. In that might be involved anger even prejudice .. it does not

sound terribly nice .. but these soup-fragments Are there,

functioning for some purpose, to protect the inner universe that

extends to the skin. I do not recall, 'me'/ego putting these there.

And even if it did/does, apart from the ego's becoming a 4-letter

word, .. what's wrong with it ?

But then, there come the spiritual/enlightened ones, who tell

us : " Yes but listen.. living like that (as ego) might be good for the

protection of your personal universe, BUT it separates/isolates you

from THE Universe. So leave your ego, and become a beatiful and

blissful Universal Identity " .

... and being tempted, the circus of 'spiritual' fragments looking at

and battling with and interpretting the 'not so spiritual' ones,

begins.

So now, one is still in the soup, and the difference between a

spiritual-soup and the normal-soup being that the spir.-soup has

incorporated a tribe of anti-normal-soup Anarchists .. which gives

its own extra aches to the head.

And the play goes on.

 

And I wonder, whether the anti-normal-soup 'spiritual' gang, is of

any benefit or brings a mere extra complication to life ?

 

Why let that gang in, to begin with ?!

 

You might say.. " well you have already answered that

yourself.. 'cause that's the way mother nature made you.. so what's

wrong with that .. why make a problem out of it ? "

But the fact is that one does make a 'problem' out of it..

and you might say " so what's wrong with that ?.. it is as it is " .

 

Well maybe that's " the end of the famous rope " ..

or maybe not.. maybe just a big despair-'headache'..

and you might say : " so why do you make a problem out of it ? ..

he he .. "

So I just go home and turn on the TV.

Surrendering to my normal-soup.

But the 'spiritual gang' is watching too.. commenting.

But if I turn on the TV volume high enough,.. I cannot hear its

comments so clearly any longer.

And the neigbour's Mother Nature makes him to come and kick butt ..

Now, That's a problem !

 

So .. what then ?!

 

I can hear you whisper " this chap is certainly Not at the eotr.. " ..

So I say " what's wrong with that ? " .

And you say " your post says after all 'I was Thinking'.. well,

_That's_ your problem ! "

Yes but, I thought you said why make problem out of anything ?!..

" Well, if you do not want to be the Universal Self, that's your

problem.. "

So back to square one.

No ?!

 

That was a monologue..

comments welcome.

 

Regards,

jb.

[Guest guest]

Stand Back and let the responses come in .

 

Personally, I dont think ego has to be destroyed,

thats impossible, I think what needs to be done is

loosen our attachment to it, by affirming our

attachment to the sentience which is 'using' the ego

for 'whatever'.

 

-M

 

 

 

 

 

 

--- JB789 wrote:

> Hi,

>

> .. gee, this one is difficult to put in words ..

>

> All this ego-business, that we are so intersted in

> to enquire into

> and tear to pieces..

> I wonder now, what is actually the point ?..

>

> For example, Gary writes : " So is there anything

> substantial to base

> memory on apart from other memories?

> What is memory then but a conceptual picture, an

> idealized form. "

> He questions whether Time is just a concept.

> It seems so. But how about, " memory, picture,

> substantial " , are these

> not Also concepts ?

> If so, are we not still swimming in the same 'soup'

> ?

> Saying that the soup-structure is not 'real', is

> part of the soup..

> no?

>

> But my question is .. what Is wrong with this 'soup'

> ?

> I am identified with the body.. take care of it and

> if someone

> attacks I will probably do what I can to protect it.

> It might be

> Mother Nature's mechanics. What's wrong with that ?

> .. or with the brain's preference for this or

> that,.. or even making

> a picture of a person who is always agressive, and

> so being on the

> watch. In that might be involved anger even

> prejudice .. it does not

> sound terribly nice .. but these soup-fragments Are

> there,

> functioning for some purpose, to protect the inner

> universe that

> extends to the skin. I do not recall, 'me'/ego

> putting these there.

> And even if it did/does, apart from the ego's

> becoming a 4-letter

> word, .. what's wrong with it ?

> But then, there come the spiritual/enlightened ones,

> who tell

> us : " Yes but listen.. living like that (as ego)

> might be good for the

> protection of your personal universe, BUT it

> separates/isolates you

> from THE Universe. So leave your ego, and become a

> beatiful and

> blissful Universal Identity " .

> .. and being tempted, the circus of 'spiritual'

> fragments looking at

> and battling with and interpretting the 'not so

> spiritual' ones,

> begins.

> So now, one is still in the soup, and the difference

> between a

> spiritual-soup and the normal-soup being that the

> spir.-soup has

> incorporated a tribe of anti-normal-soup Anarchists

> .. which gives

> its own extra aches to the head.

> And the play goes on.

>

> And I wonder, whether the anti-normal-soup

> 'spiritual' gang, is of

> any benefit or brings a mere extra complication to

> life ?

>

> Why let that gang in, to begin with ?!

>

> You might say.. " well you have already answered that

>

> yourself.. 'cause that's the way mother nature made

> you.. so what's

> wrong with that .. why make a problem out of it ? "

> But the fact is that one does make a 'problem' out

> of it..

> and you might say " so what's wrong with that ?.. it

> is as it is " .

>

> Well maybe that's " the end of the famous rope " ..

> or maybe not.. maybe just a big despair-'headache'..

> and you might say : " so why do you make a problem

> out of it ? ..

> he he .. "

> So I just go home and turn on the TV.

> Surrendering to my normal-soup.

> But the 'spiritual gang' is watching too..

> commenting.

> But if I turn on the TV volume high enough,.. I

> cannot hear its

> comments so clearly any longer.

> And the neigbour's Mother Nature makes him to come

> and kick butt ..

> Now, That's a problem !

>

> So .. what then ?!

>

> I can hear you whisper " this chap is certainly Not

> at the eotr.. " ..

> So I say " what's wrong with that ? " .

> And you say " your post says after all 'I was

> Thinking'.. well,

> _That's_ your problem ! "

> Yes but, I thought you said why make problem out of

> anything ?!..

> " Well, if you do not want to be the Universal Self,

> that's your

> problem.. "

> So back to square one.

> No ?!

>

> That was a monologue..

> comments welcome.

>

> Regards,

> jb.

>

>

 

 

 

 

Make a great connection at Personals.

http://personals.

[Guest guest]

i can only say that the energy behind your words felt

open to me i think the greatest love is to accept

everything about yourself the good the bad the ugly

ariel --- JB789 wrote:

<HR>

<html><body>

<tt>

Hi,<BR>

<BR>

... gee, this one is difficult to put in words ..<BR>

<BR>

All this ego-business, that we are so intersted in to

enquire into <BR>

and tear to pieces..<BR>

I wonder now, what is actually the point ?..<BR>

<BR>

For example, Gary writes : & quot;So is there anything

substantial to base <BR>

memory on apart from other memories?<BR>

What is memory then but a conceptual picture, an

idealized form. & quot;<BR>

He questions whether Time is just a concept.<BR>

It seems so. But how about, & quot;memory, picture,

substantial & quot;, are these <BR>

not Also concepts ?<BR>

If so, are we not still swimming in the same 'soup'

?<BR>

Saying that the soup-structure is not 'real', is part

of the soup.. <BR>

no?<BR>

<BR>

But my question is .. what Is wrong with this 'soup'

?<BR>

I am identified with the body.. take care of it and if

someone <BR>

attacks I will probably do what I can to protect it.

It might be <BR>

Mother Nature's mechanics. What's wrong with that

?<BR>

... or with the brain's preference for this or that,..

or even making <BR>

a picture of a person who is always agressive, and so

being on the <BR>

watch. In that might be involved anger even prejudice

... it does not <BR>

sound terribly nice .. but these soup-fragments Are

there, <BR>

functioning for some purpose, to protect the inner

universe that <BR>

extends to the skin. I do not recall, 'me'/ego putting

these there.<BR>

And even if it did/does, apart from the ego's becoming

a 4-letter <BR>

word, .. what's wrong with it ?<BR>

But then, there come the spiritual/enlightened ones,

who tell <BR>

us : & quot;Yes but listen.. living like that (as ego)

might be good for the <BR>

protection of your personal universe, BUT it

separates/isolates you <BR>

from THE Universe. So leave your ego, and become a

beatiful and <BR>

blissful Universal Identity & quot;.<BR>

... and being tempted, the circus of 'spiritual'

fragments looking at <BR>

and battling with and interpretting the 'not so

spiritual' ones, <BR>

begins.<BR>

So now, one is still in the soup, and the difference

between a <BR>

spiritual-soup and the normal-soup being that the

spir.-soup has <BR>

incorporated a tribe of anti-normal-soup Anarchists ..

which gives <BR>

its own extra aches to the head.<BR>

And the play goes on.<BR>

<BR>

And I wonder, whether the anti-normal-soup 'spiritual'

gang, is of <BR>

any benefit or brings a mere extra complication to

life ?<BR>

<BR>

Why let that gang in, to begin with ?! <BR>

<BR>

You might say.. & quot;well you have already answered

that <BR>

yourself.. 'cause that's the way mother nature made

you.. so what's <BR>

wrong with that .. why make a problem out of it

? & quot;<BR>

But the fact is that one does & nbsp; make a 'problem'

out of it..<BR>

and you might say & quot;so what's wrong with that ?..

it is as it is & quot;.<BR>

<BR>

Well maybe that's & quot;the end of the famous

rope & quot;..<BR>

or maybe not.. maybe just a big

despair-'headache'..<BR>

and you might say : & quot;so why do you make a problem

out of it ? .. <BR>

he he .. & quot; & nbsp; <BR>

So I just go home and turn on the TV.<BR>

Surrendering to my normal-soup.<BR>

But the 'spiritual gang' is watching too..

commenting.<BR>

But if I turn on the TV volume high enough,.. I cannot

hear its <BR>

comments so clearly any longer.<BR>

And the neigbour's Mother Nature makes him to come and

kick butt ..<BR>

Now, That's a problem !<BR>

<BR>

So .. what then ?!<BR>

<BR>

I can hear you whisper & quot;this chap is certainly

Not at the eotr.. & quot; ..<BR>

So I say & quot;what's wrong with that ? & quot;.<BR>

And you say & quot;your post says after all 'I was

Thinking'.. well, <BR>

_That's_ your problem ! & quot;<BR>

Yes but, I thought you said why make problem out of

anything ?!..<BR>

& quot;Well, if you do not want to be the Universal

Self, that's your <BR>

problem.. & quot;<BR>

So back to square one.<BR>

No ?!<BR>

<BR>

That was a monologue.. <BR>

comments welcome.<BR>

<BR>

Regards,<BR>

jb.<BR>

<BR>

</tt>

 

 

<br>

<tt>