Ramakrishna!! -- Thanks Stefan -- here's my reply.

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " Stefan " <s.petersilge@c...>

wrote:

> Hi Donny,

>

> I am not sure if you are talking to me since what you had quoted

above

> was from Alberto.

>

> You are talking about love. I am so full of love you could not

> believe, I am love. This kind of love that you are talking about

has

> been replaced by another love, much more valuable, a long time

ago. It

> is not emptiness which causes my fear. I am as full as one can be.

> Friends... everybody is my friend whom I meet along the way. I dont

> have or need a best friend but God. Myself I have surrendered to a

> master, many years ago. Only one who did this can understand what

this

> means.

>

> Alberto is not what you " think " he is, Devendra is not what you

> " think " he is, you are not what you " think " you are. The

helplessness

> behind my words is, that there are no words to express " this " .

Nobody

> can take somebody on his boat. Because there is no river, there is

no

> boat, nothing to cross. Look after yourself, you are a beautiful

> person. Dont talk to Alberto or Devendra, they are not here. Dont

get

> cought in speculations about others. You have so much more to give.

> And dont expect the mind from others to be consistent... how can

mind

> be consistent? Its very nature is unconsistency.

>

> We would not be here without Nisargadatta. If you want to

understand

> what he meant with " I am " you have to listen to him. " I am that "

was

> just the title of his most famous book. Forget " that " . Forget the

> others. The only, ...only! ... thing that you can call " relatively

> consistent " is that every morning when you wake up there starts a

> sense of " I am " ... " I exist " . Everything else which comes next is

> already pure madness. To stay with this " I am " is the way of master

> Nisargadatta. Stay with " I am " and become open like a house with

open

> windows. Become like a tree, taking everything as it comes: wind,

> heat, rain, snow... and still stay there as a tree, graceful.

Nothing

> more is needed.

>

> Love

> Stefan

>

> " The me and the mine may be small, or may explode and embrace the

> universe, but love remains. "

 

> Nis.

 

-

 

888888888888888888888888888888888888

 

Hi,

 

And if you believe that beautiful speech you just wrote, wherein you

say:

" I dont have or need a best friend but God. "

 

then,,,it would also follow that if everyone is god in a non-dual

perspective, then you do need everyone. As a matter of fact, you

couldn't begin to escape everyone even if you run to sadhana for 15

years.

:-)

 

you say: >Nobody can take somebody on his boat. Because there is no

river, there is no boat, nothing to cross. "

 

Donny: and yet you seem to be floating along quite nicely, and for

quite some time on this make believe river. Why is that, considering

it's not really here at all? Make sure you pack a sunblock -- That

sun can be brutal when it reflects against the river water. You

can't see the other side of the river, because you " " Know " " " there's

nothing on the other side.

Yet, I guess eventually You'll also " " Know " that you " Are "

floating on a make believe river. Why did you go about the

elaborate work of creating a river, or a life that is not real, and

yet somehow if you cut your finger it seems very 'real' indeed.

interesting question... but I forgot, there's no Stefan to ask!

He's 'really' not floating down this river of life because it/

doesn't exist. And yet you pick up that paddle and keep

rowing,,,hmmmmmmm......

 

:-D

 

Stefan: >Dont talk to Alberto or Devendra, they are not here.

 

Donny: Yes, Alberto seemed to be here in the night. I see he

removed his last entry in which he again said goodby to the board,

and expressed that his extreme sadhana state had made it difficult

to stay on the board.

:-(

I should miss him, if he were truly gone. By the very nature of the

doctrine that you speak of, how can he be truly gone?

 

Stefan: >> " Become like a tree, taking everything as it comes: wind,

> heat, rain, snow... and still stay there as a tree, graceful. "

 

Donny: now that's just confusing. To do that, wouldn't I then have

to swing away from the no-thing ness state which teaches the idea

that everything is illusion, and decide to form it in your own idea

of " non-illusionness " as in, a tree, the wind. Now, how do you

suppose I can do both at one time -- reject and embrace. This only

serves to further the split...in which fortifies the I covered this

topic a couple of times in previous posts, so I won't belabor the

topic again.

 

Stefan: " The me and the mine may be small, or may explode and

embrace the universe, but love remains. "

 

Donny: Well, actually at the root of it all a big old nothing

remains, but a minuute partical of energy. Then it formed itself

into the concept of love, but in fact, underneathe the love

reamins,,,you guessed it,,, a big ole' nothing.

When the masters say that at the origin of it all there is

NOthing, they weren't kidding. Nothing isn't even love. But I

already covered that in previous topics when I said that a person

decides how far out from the nothing state they " choose/want " to

swing that pendulum from the nothing state -- either to small

degrees of something, be it love, or anger, or any other billion of

things in which the imagination can dream up and create -- or to

very large degrees of feeling experience or love. It's their

choice, depending on what they " want " <gasp> " desire " to achieve.

But I notice in the seeker circles, the word desire and choice comes

with quite a resistance and energy charge on it. Like it's a non

existent bad swear word which they must run away from. If what you

create doesn't exist, then why are you continuing to create it?

To learn how to " consciously " create with understanding behind it?

I'm sharing with you how to embrace the " " all " " of you, the illusion

as well, rather then running away from it. As you run from

it/yourself, you finally embrace that ahhh, I can't run from the

illusion because I am that which created it...I am " it " . Therefore

it no longer becomes something to run from. Then you can go about

the business of creating what you want.

 

All I see is people who keep running from " it/the illusion " because

it isn't really " real " , and somehow this very non-real thing seems

to come back and bite them in the bum. Case in point:

Devendra,,,Alberto,,,

 

 

Stefan: " Dont get caught in speculations about others. You have so

much more to give.And dont expect the mind from others to be

consistent... how can mind be consistent? Its very nature is

unconsistency. "

 

Donny: I don't see my ideas as speculation, do you see your ideas

as speculation? I learned a long time ago that conscious awareness

involves,,,well,,,just that,,,conscious understanding. Maybe it's

not so much my understanding of things that caused this comment,

but perhaps the idea that we go about the process of it from a

different place. If I don't understand consciously I would continue

to " unconscious " and led by every emotional merry-go-round without

one single clue as to what's going on... in psychology circles they

call/label that as being a *victim*. I think Devendra nicely

displayed that in many of his posts. I've been there; done that.

Consciousness allows me to learn from my mistakes <gasp> so I might

not repeat them,,,but then again,,,if that took place to a great

degree maybe that wheel of suffering would grind to a halt, or slow

down considerably, and then reincarnation for purpose to play out

karma would also grind to a halt and slow down,,, but then

again,,,that too would reduce the emotion humans experience as

suffering to some greater extent.

 

:-))

 

Stefan: " Look after yourself, you are a beautiful person. "

 

Donny: Now, this is a fine example of what Pete is talking about

when he says, " just say what you mean instead of belying what you

REALLY mean behind some flattery that isn't at all what you want to

say. What you're really saying here, is You don't find my words

very beautiful, they don't fit into place with your beliefs and

ideas and you can't seem to work them into your teachings.

Please, I prefer blunt, straightforward and too the point. You like

things hidden behind flowery words and smiles. That's why the

smiley's and stuff appeal to the love emotion in people, and like

Pete, that's why I don't like to conceal my words behind flowery

stuff and smileys. On a board of non-dualism, why would I want to

conceal my stuff behind an illusion smile and a flower. Isn't that

just feeding into the illusion rather then pulling it back. I

prefer honesty, but it's o.k., people often do it to pull the wool

over one's eyes, and even over their own eyes, but I tend to see

through it anyways.

However, having said that, I have no real sense of physical beauty,

when I look in the mirror I know I'm not ugly. People tell me I'm

beautiful. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

 

sincere regards,

 

~*~ Donny

88888888888888888888888888888888888888888888

[Guest guest]

Donny,

 

you are misinterpreting what I say... no problem... but what is left

from what I have said? Almost nothing. You are talking about your

world by using my words, changing them, putting them into a light that

has not been there when they origined. I just wanted to share my

experience, my view. In the header you are writing " thanks Stefan " ...

at least. Ok, you are welcome. The world that I live in might be a

strange or unknown world for you and you are suspicious if all this is

authentic. No problem... but dont disrespect others because they have

travelled some roads that are unknown to you. Where has your

belly-laugh gone?

 

Love

Stefan

 

 

Nisargadatta , " goldenrainbowrider "

<laughterx8@h...> wrote:

 

> Hi,

>

> And if you believe that beautiful speech you just wrote, wherein

you

> say:

> " I dont have or need a best friend but God. "

>

> then,,,it would also follow that if everyone is god in a non-dual

> perspective, then you do need everyone. As a matter of fact, you

> couldn't begin to escape everyone even if you run to sadhana for 15

> years.

> :-)

>

> you say: >Nobody can take somebody on his boat. Because there is no

> river, there is no boat, nothing to cross. "

>

> Donny: and yet you seem to be floating along quite nicely, and for

> quite some time on this make believe river. Why is that,

considering

> it's not really here at all? Make sure you pack a sunblock -- That

> sun can be brutal when it reflects against the river water. You

> can't see the other side of the river, because you " " Know " " "

there's

> nothing on the other side.

> Yet, I guess eventually You'll also " " Know " that you " Are "

> floating on a make believe river. Why did you go about the

> elaborate work of creating a river, or a life that is not real, and

> yet somehow if you cut your finger it seems very 'real' indeed.

> interesting question... but I forgot, there's no Stefan to ask!

> He's 'really' not floating down this river of life because it/

> doesn't exist. And yet you pick up that paddle and keep

> rowing,,,hmmmmmmm......

>

> :-D

>

> Stefan: >Dont talk to Alberto or Devendra, they are not here.

>

> Donny: Yes, Alberto seemed to be here in the night. I see he

> removed his last entry in which he again said goodby to the board,

> and expressed that his extreme sadhana state had made it difficult

> to stay on the board.

> :-(

> I should miss him, if he were truly gone. By the very nature of the

> doctrine that you speak of, how can he be truly gone?

>

> Stefan: >> " Become like a tree, taking everything as it comes: wind,

> > heat, rain, snow... and still stay there as a tree, graceful. "

>

> Donny: now that's just confusing. To do that, wouldn't I then

have

> to swing away from the no-thing ness state which teaches the idea

> that everything is illusion, and decide to form it in your own idea

> of " non-illusionness " as in, a tree, the wind. Now, how do you

> suppose I can do both at one time -- reject and embrace. This only

> serves to further the split...in which fortifies the I covered

this

> topic a couple of times in previous posts, so I won't belabor the

> topic again.

>

> Stefan: " The me and the mine may be small, or may explode and

> embrace the universe, but love remains. "

>

> Donny: Well, actually at the root of it all a big old nothing

> remains, but a minuute partical of energy. Then it formed itself

> into the concept of love, but in fact, underneathe the love

> reamins,,,you guessed it,,, a big ole' nothing.

> When the masters say that at the origin of it all there is

> NOthing, they weren't kidding. Nothing isn't even love. But I

> already covered that in previous topics when I said that a person

> decides how far out from the nothing state they " choose/want " to

> swing that pendulum from the nothing state -- either to small

> degrees of something, be it love, or anger, or any other billion of

> things in which the imagination can dream up and create -- or to

> very large degrees of feeling experience or love. It's their

> choice, depending on what they " want " <gasp> " desire " to achieve.

> But I notice in the seeker circles, the word desire and choice

comes

> with quite a resistance and energy charge on it. Like it's a non

> existent bad swear word which they must run away from. If what you

> create doesn't exist, then why are you continuing to create it?

> To learn how to " consciously " create with understanding behind it?

> I'm sharing with you how to embrace the " " all " " of you, the

illusion

> as well, rather then running away from it. As you run from

> it/yourself, you finally embrace that ahhh, I can't run from the

> illusion because I am that which created it...I am " it " . Therefore

> it no longer becomes something to run from. Then you can go about

> the business of creating what you want.

>

> All I see is people who keep running from " it/the illusion " because

> it isn't really " real " , and somehow this very non-real thing seems

> to come back and bite them in the bum. Case in point:

> Devendra,,,Alberto,,,

>

>

> Stefan: " Dont get caught in speculations about others. You have

so

> much more to give.And dont expect the mind from others to be

> consistent... how can mind be consistent? Its very nature is

> unconsistency. "

>

> Donny: I don't see my ideas as speculation, do you see your ideas

> as speculation? I learned a long time ago that conscious awareness

> involves,,,well,,,just that,,,conscious understanding. Maybe it's

> not so much my understanding of things that caused this comment,

> but perhaps the idea that we go about the process of it from a

> different place. If I don't understand consciously I would

continue

> to " unconscious " and led by every emotional merry-go-round without

> one single clue as to what's going on... in psychology circles they

> call/label that as being a *victim*. I think Devendra nicely

> displayed that in many of his posts. I've been there; done that.

> Consciousness allows me to learn from my mistakes <gasp> so I might

> not repeat them,,,but then again,,,if that took place to a great

> degree maybe that wheel of suffering would grind to a halt, or slow

> down considerably, and then reincarnation for purpose to play out

> karma would also grind to a halt and slow down,,, but then

> again,,,that too would reduce the emotion humans experience as

> suffering to some greater extent.

>

> :-))

>

> Stefan: " Look after yourself, you are a beautiful person. "

>

> Donny: Now, this is a fine example of what Pete is talking about

> when he says, " just say what you mean instead of belying what you

> REALLY mean behind some flattery that isn't at all what you want to

> say. What you're really saying here, is You don't find my words

> very beautiful, they don't fit into place with your beliefs and

> ideas and you can't seem to work them into your teachings.

> Please, I prefer blunt, straightforward and too the point. You

like

> things hidden behind flowery words and smiles. That's why the

> smiley's and stuff appeal to the love emotion in people, and like

> Pete, that's why I don't like to conceal my words behind flowery

> stuff and smileys. On a board of non-dualism, why would I want to

> conceal my stuff behind an illusion smile and a flower. Isn't that

> just feeding into the illusion rather then pulling it back. I

> prefer honesty, but it's o.k., people often do it to pull the wool

> over one's eyes, and even over their own eyes, but I tend to see

> through it anyways.

> However, having said that, I have no real sense of physical beauty,

> when I look in the mirror I know I'm not ugly. People tell me I'm

> beautiful. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

>

> sincere regards,

>

> ~*~ Donny

> 88888888888888888888888888888888888888888888