ONe wORD Game/ on the other hand ---and re Eric, Judi and Pete

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " wry " <wry1111@e...> wrote:

 

 

Hi. I did not write this message to Eric, but to Pete, and did not

even realize that Pete had posted my message that was was written on

another list, until I received your message just now. It is a

coincidence that I joined this list at the same time that he posted

it, and I apologize to you, Eric. It was not written to you, a

person whom I do not even know, and am open to getting to know, but

to Pete, a person whom I do NOT respect, and it was designed

specifically for the people on that particular list, not for the

people on this list. I still am not sure who wrote this. Eric, was

it you? When did you write it? It is good what you said about the

milk burning. That is our condition. I should have realized that

Pete could not write something like this. Pete put this material on

this other list as if it were his own. " Xerox copyromania " was

at the end, but I had no idea what it meant and did not realize it

was a signature of someone else. Moreoever, I referenced the

material that was touched on in your? message into what I already

knew about Pete. Ignorant people, such as Pete, create great

disorder, and I guess you now have an enemy on the internet, Pete.

Her name is Wry. Your behavior is not okay. It is immoral.

Anyway, see below.

 

< snip >

 

p.s. I finished writing most of this several hours ago and left to go

somewhere. When I returned, I saw the message Pete has written about

me as well as several other messages, but just quickly skimmed them.

Something about nipples, Pete? These sexual words do not intimidate

me. Though I am a slim, attractive, heterosexual Grandmother (ha

ha), in the case of this email list, I am the man here and you are

the woman, as you are merely reacting, so whatever I do, which is

much more intentional then your dreamins, will tend to reorganize

you and everything around you, whether you like it or not. But I am

not even on here to reorganize you, in that this is not even about

you. Even though I do not respect you, I am still sorry to be

stirring you up. In ordinary life, I would treat someone like

yourself with courtesy and respect, as I know you are both confused

and suffering. In this format to do so would be harmful to too many

people, as the bulletin board format is one of extraordinary

potential.

 

 

 

 

KKT: So you do NOT respect Pete?

 

You're right, Wry.

Pete is the kill-joy,

the sower of disorder

everywhere :-))

 

My preferable hobby

is to give him a whack :-))

 

So give him a whack, Wry.

 

 

KKT

[Guest guest]

-

 

Hi Baby cakes

 

--> In Nisargadatta , " wry " <wry1111@e...> wrote:

> Hi. I did not write this message to Eric, but to Pete, and did not

even realize that Pete had posted my message that was was written on

another list, until I received your message just now. It is a

coincidence that I joined this list at the same time that he posted

>it, and I apologize to you, Eric.

 

P: Coincidence my foot! Why do you bother to lie? Is that

respectable?

I don't know why it would hurt your ego to admit you took my

invitation to willy? Here is the proof I posted this at JK befored

you joined this list:

 

> " seesaw1us " <seesaw1us>

> Sun Nov 30, 2003 5:28 pm

> Re: One Word Game

 

>Yes, Join us at nisargadatta@ for the ego demolition derby

>with Judy, N0by, Dan, Eric, and of course, your devoted servant.

 

 

 

 

>It was not written to you, a person whom I do not even know, and am

>open to getting to know, but to Pete, a person whom I do NOT

>respect.

 

P:Ouch, ouch! Woe is me! My Goddess does't respect me!

 

 

>Moreoever, I referenced the material that was touched on in your?

message into what I already knew about Pete. Ignorant people, such as

>Pete, create great disorder, and I guess you now have an enemy on

the internet, Pete. Her name is Wry. Your behavior is not okay. It

>is >immoral. Anyway, see below.

 

P: Flattery such as this is music to my ears. She says: I'm chaos,

enthropy, the destroyer of the past. Oh, whisper sweet lies, you

sweet deceiver!

 

And so you believe in enemies? How do you have the gall to pretend to

be wise and still consider a fellow human your enemy?

 

Ah! I'm so glad you're here. We are going to have some good times

together!

 

Oh, by the way, Eric and sk are two different people in case you

don't know that.

 

Oh, another thing, it's custumary for dispensers of wisdom to offer

a short bio to their admirers. You know, a cursory list of your

many accomplishments and realizations.

 

More now that ever, your humble disciple.

 

Ps: that manifesto to sk was too long for me. Could you give me

some highlights, if any.

[Guest guest]

-

phamdluan2000

Nisargadatta

Monday, December 01, 2003 4:06 PM

Re: ONe wORD Game/ on the other hand ---and re Eric,

Judi and Pete

 

 

snip...

 

 

You're right, Wry.

Pete is the kill-joy,

the sower of disorder

everywhere :-))

 

My preferable hobby

is to give him a whack :-))

 

So give him a whack, Wry.

------------

Wry: I am not on here to " spank " people or give anyone a whack, or have people

suck wisdom out of my nipples or to read poems here or on the K list such as

Pete wrote about pointing his dick at the moon, or hear stories about women

having multiple orgasms, and now I see that someone who I am sure is well

meaning, has posted an interview with one of my pet peeves, Goswami, out here.

You people seem to be having a good time, but this is not the quality of

experience I am looking for on an email list. I will stick around a few more

days and then I am probably gone, unless the atmosphere changes radically, which

I doubt it will. Maybe I will leave the K list, too, or set my email to no

longer receive messages from people who write such material. I would like to be

on a list with people who have a sense of humor, but who are basically serious.

I do not care for the frivilant tone on this particular list. It is

disappointing to see people manifesting in this manner. Sincerely, Wry p.s I did

not find your message funny or cute. And yes, I do not respect people who post

another's material as if it is their own, deceive others, play intimacy avoiding

games, and engage in self-centered behavior in order to be the center of

attention. He is a pig. Oink. Oink. It is sad. I'm almost out of here. Sorry if

I have offended anyone. This morning,when I started writing the first email and

then had to leave, it all looked hopeful, but when I came back, it had all

deteriotated, through no fault of my own, as far as I can see, and this Goswami

message is almost more than I can handle. He is an ignorant idealist. I do not

respect it. There is no excuse for such nonesense from a scientist.

 

 

KKT

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " wry " <wry1111@e...> wrote:

 

Dear, dear rightful Wry, wrathful Wry,

 

We go to all this trouble to cut to a manageable size your gigantic

ego, and this is the thanks we get?

 

What delusions you have child! Enemies, pet peeves, and all over

words. How are you different from Osama, Sadam and Bush? It's the same

principle at play, don't you see? The world has to comform to your

ideas and anyone that opposses those ideas is an enemy.

 

What would you do to me wrathful Wry? Put me in a concentration camp

to silence me? Kill me, bomb my house and call the others you kill

colateral damage? It is the same principle.

 

And you came here pointing your self-rightous finger at Judy and

boasting you'll make her run, but look who is hightailing out of here

because she can't stand a mirror to her face.

 

I think you should thank NOby, Karta, KKt, Dan, Eric, and someone else

whose name scape me now, for showing you how far away you are, from

that ideal self you imaging yourself to be. And, no, the atmosphere

is not going

to change, this isn't Disneyland, princess. This is a 'in your face

reality show'.

 

Hasta la vista, baby

 

 

 

>I will stick around a few more days and then I am probably gone,

>unless the atmosphere changes radically, which I doubt it will.

>Maybe I will leave the K list, too, or set my email to no longer

receive messages from people who write such material. I would like to

>be on a list with people who have a sense of humor, but who are

>basically serious. I do not care for the frivilant tone on this

>particular list. It is disappointing to see people manifesting in

>this manner. Sincerely, Wry p.s I did not find your message funny or

>cute. And yes, I do not respect people who post another's material

>as if it is their own, deceive others, play intimacy avoiding games,

>and engage in self-centered behavior in order to be the center of

>attention. He is a pig. Oink. Oink. It is sad. I'm almost out of

>here. Sorry if I have offended anyone. This morning,when I started

>writing the first email and then had to leave, it all looked

>hopeful, but when I came back, it had all deteriotated, through no

fault of my own, as far as I can see, and this Goswami message is

almost more than I can handle. He is an ignorant idealist. I do not

respect it. There is no excuse for such nonesense from a scientist.

>

>

> KKT

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " seesaw1us " <seesaw1us>

wrote:

> Nisargadatta , " wry " <wry1111@e...> wrote:

>

> Dear, dear rightful Wry, wrathful Wry,

>

> We go to all this trouble to cut to a manageable size your gigantic

> ego, and this is the thanks we get?

>

> What delusions you have child! Enemies, pet peeves, and all over

> words. How are you different from Osama, Sadam and Bush? It's the

same

> principle at play, don't you see? The world has to comform to your

> ideas and anyone that opposses those ideas is an enemy.

>

> What would you do to me wrathful Wry? Put me in a concentration

camp

> to silence me? Kill me, bomb my house and call the others you kill

> colateral damage? It is the same principle.

>

> And you came here pointing your self-rightous finger at Judy and

> boasting you'll make her run, but look who is hightailing out of

here

> because she can't stand a mirror to her face.

>

> I think you should thank NOby, Karta, KKt, Dan, Eric, and someone

else

> whose name scape me now, for showing you how far away you are, from

> that ideal self you imaging yourself to be. And, no, the atmosphere

> is not going

> to change, this isn't Disneyland, princess. This is a 'in your face

> reality show'.

>

> Hasta la vista, baby

 

Pete i wouldn't be too keen on the reality of our exchanges here or

in other words on our ability to cut through crap, but if it is

enough to reveal to Wry her massive avoidance strategies, then i

would say we are doing a darn good job.

xerox DC 1G volt

[Guest guest]

Thanx for the respone, Wry!

 

 

sk

 

 

 

 

Nisargadatta , " wry " <wry1111@e...> wrote:

> Hi. I did not write this message to Eric, but to Pete, and did not

even realize that Pete had posted my message that was was written on

another list, until I received your message just now. It is a

coincidence that I joined this list at the same time that he posted

it, and I apologize to you, Eric. It was not written to you, a

person whom I do not even know, and am open to getting to know, but

to Pete, a person whom I do NOT respect, and it was designed

specifically for the people on that particular list, not for the

people on this list. I still am not sure who wrote this. Eric, was

it you? When did you write it? It is good what you said about the

milk burning. That is our condition. I should have realized that

Pete could not write something like this. Pete put this material on

this other list as if it were his own. " Xerox copyromania " was at

the end, but I had no idea what it meant and did not realize it was

a signature of someone else. Moreoever, I referenced the material

that was touched on in your? message into what I already knew about

Pete. Ignorant people, such as Pete, create great disorder, and I

guess you now have an enemy on the internet, Pete. Her name is Wry.

Your behavior is not okay. It is immoral. Anyway, see below.

> -

> sk000005

> Nisargadatta

> Monday, December 01, 2003 12:50 AM

> Re: ONe wORD Game/ on the other hand

>

>

> Hi Wry!

>

> congratulations for the message and greetings!

>

>

> You wrote in part:

>

>

> <<You are looking at it as something thought is trying to

achieve,

> but real awareness is not about that. It is about making a

practice

> of being attentive.<<

>

>

> sk: could you expand on this? and, why should stand this in

> controversy to your interpretation of Eric's message " that one

is

> already attentive " .

> ---------

> Wry: This is not what I expected to be responding to, nor the

subject I have chosen to be responding to on this list, as someone

else, Pete, posted my material out here. He is very coarse, writing

poems about his " dick pointing at the moon. " It is not the sexual

imagery I am speaking of when I say " coarse, " but something else.

The mind is not quick. There is a pretending. I shoould have known

he didn't write that, as the person talking about his situation was

more honest. In any case, one is already NOT attentive. This has

been previously verified. Something needs to be fully attentive to

that condition, and then it is transformed, little by little, over-

a -continuum, for the purpose of speaking about it, but actually the

transformation always occurs at the moment of awareness of what is

happening in present time. There is a reason it is not transformed

all at once, as the person does not have the muscle to focus, as the

way the brain-body has come to function, mechanically, leaks the

very energy that is required to see all of the jucntures, the

connections that are causing the psychological complex. That is

work. If one does not do the work, it is not transformed.

> ----------------

>

>

> >>You are saying that one is already attentive, can be attentive

> without being attentive, that one is not functioning

> in a dull, conditioned state. There is also a hint in all of

this

> that you, yourself, believe " awareness " to exist on its own

side, as

> an entity.<<

>

>

> sk: as what kind of entity you think that Eric believes

> that " awareness " exists?

> -----------

> Wry: I would need to refer to the original message to better

answer this. The subject will come up again in other peoples'

material, and then maybe I will go into it. There is a way to work

with dualism in that one does not grasp at awareness, because when I

am grasping I am obviously using up the energy required to be aware.

We all understand this point, but then it needs to be taken to the

next tier, as awareness does not exist on its own side. When

something is aware of myself trying to be aware, that something is a

facet of the functioning of the human brain and body, not an

awareness from outside, though the perspective may create the

illusion that is is outside of that.

>

>

> >> In other words, you are implying you are already aware. To

say

> this is ignorant.<<

>

>

> sk: Where lies the ignorance-relevant difference between

saying " I'm

> already attentive " or saying " making a practice out of being

> attentive, is what awareness is really about. "

> ----------

> Wry: The answer is that there is not really only one moment, in

that we function on a continuum. In the moment I realize I am not

aware, there is awareness. Three hours later there is again

awareness. Now the memory function , not as a reactive complex. but

simply as the tool it was (not very perfectly) designed for or

evolved into, realizes that sometimes there is no awareness for

great amounts of time, and during that span, I did great damage to

the world. Observe this situation a few more times and one can come

to the conclusion that there are only flickers of awareness. Then

one can make a plan to address this situation. It may not be

perfect, but it is better than nothing. Some people understand this

right away and it makes perfect sense. To others, it does not. These

two kinds of people have different kinds of understanding about

their situation and how to address it. To me, the first kind are

lost in la la, and, generally speaking, it is hopeless to work with

them, as there is no grp (grip.

> ----------

>

>

> Of course people invariably think they are already fully

attentive,

> and so, nothing is attentive to what is happening. This is

waking

> sleep.

>

>

> sk: What do you mean with " fully attentive " , Wry? I'm not sure

in

> which sense you use the term " entity " too but, in my opinion,

this

> sounds like you were doing with " what is happening " the same as

you

> opine Eric does, with " awareness " , i.e. putting it on its own

side,

> as en entity.This sounds also, as if you would know

what's " really "

> happening. So then, be so kind and tell me, is this the result

of

> your practice of being attentive? that you now know, that there

are

> people who think, they are fully attentive but are, in effect,

> waking sleep. Are you trying to wake this people up? If yes, why

and

> what can you offer instead of waking sleep? Are you not

positioning

> yourself on the same place you critisized, Pete was postioning

> himself with his Koan regarding consciousness? Your response

> implies, in my opinion, that you are able to discern between

those

> who are waking sleep and those who don't. So, Wry, tell me

please

> what's really happening in the realm of the blinds? Do you know

that?

> ----------

> Wry: In all sincerity, this material was written for another

list, in which much water has gone under the bridge, and we have all

learned and grown together. Even if you were to read all the

material, it would not be the same, as it would not be recorded into

your functioning in a way that is time appropriate. Plus this

message was made for specific people, on this other list, at a

specific time and in a specific way. I am not on here to wake people

up, as I do not believe it is possible on this kind of email list,

if possible at all. Moreover,I am still subject at times to the

afflictive mind.I joined this list for other reasons. I was looking

for another list to hang out on, due to Pete and Will and a couple

of others, one who is on here (but not KKT), ruining the other list,

in my opinion, and I happened to come across this one, which I would

not have joined either, as it seemed similar in tone and quality to

the others list in many way, not enough contrast, people lost in la

la. I only joined because Judi was on here, quite honestly. Some

people here do not know me , but people on the other list know that

I am a board specialist (in my own opinion. Ha ha) in that that my

ongoing passionate study of almost twelve years is the use of the

bulletin board format (such as an email list or a telephone

community) as a learning tool to affect trends and tendencies in

broader humanity and in regards to this, the theory of active

information systems of David Bohm. I have written about this on

other lists. If Judi is kicked off, I will probably leave, too, as

she is the only reason I joined, in that once I saw that Pete is on

here, I would have gone elsewhere. Sincerely, Wry

>

> p.s. I finished writing most of this several hours ago and left

to go somewhere. When I returned, I saw the message Pete has written

about me as well as several other messages, but just quickly skimmed

them. Something about nipples, Pete? These sexual words do not

intimidate me. Though I am a slim, attractive, heterosexual

Grandmother (ha ha), in the case of this email list, I am the man

here and you are the woman, as you are merely reacting, so whatever

I do, which is much more intentional then your dreamins, will tend

to reorganize you and everything around you, whether you like it or

not. But I am not even on here to reorganize you, in that this is

not even about you. Even though I do not respect you, I am still

sorry to be stirring you up. In ordinary life, I would treat someone

like yourself with courtesy and respect, as I know you are both

confused and suffering. In this format to do so would be harmful to

too many people, as the bulletin board format is one of

extraordinary potential.

>

>

> smile

> sk

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " eric " <vertvetiver> wrote:

> Nisargadatta , " seesaw1us " <seesaw1us>

> >

> Pete i wouldn't be too keen on the reality of our exchanges here or

> in other words on our ability to cut through crap, but if it is

> enough to reveal to Wry her massive avoidance strategies, then i

> would say we are doing a darn good job.

> xerox DC 1G volt

 

I know, buddy. I have no illusions we showed her anything. But here

is how it works, someone else might have seen those strategies and

recognize them in him/herself. That poor woman has too much

investment in her self image to admit that anything that was pointed

to her is true. On the other hand, she is right about me, I'm a

disruptive pig, and pigs have no shame. That, doesn't mean, of

course, that pigs are not usefull. I love bacon, don't you?

 

That's all folks,

PPP