Guest guest Posted February 6, 2005 Report Share Posted February 6, 2005 Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " > > <dan330033> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Adithya K > > > > > > <adithya_comming> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > # > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin is an avoidable ...act, thought or emotion that > > causes > > > > > > > ...Suffering ! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin is a suffering-causing act, thought or emotion that > > can > > > > have > > > > > > be > > > > > > > avoided ...if, there is enough Consciousness PRESENT to > > See, > > > > know > > > > > > and > > > > > > > understand what, why, how is going on. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin is any suffering-causing act that can be avoided, > > > > changed or > > > > > > > transformed, if there is PRESENCE to See, examine and if > > > > necessary > > > > > > > ...dissolve its roots and to watch and learn from its > > > > reflection, > > > > > > > impact and after-effect! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ..... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Suffering is its fruit, and unconsciousness is its > > roots. > > > > And, > > > > > > > whether one that suffers is ...body, minds, me, him, > > > > her, ...or > > > > > > them, > > > > > > > ...doesn't matter that much ! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My idea is...........that ALL suffering..........can be > > > > > > > avoided.............by......intense..........awareness.... > > > > > > > > > > > > Divisionless awareness avoids nothing. > > > > > > > > > > > > All-inclusive, holographic. > > > > > > > > > > Divisionless awareness is a regression into oblivion. True > > > > awareness > > > > > is so much smarter than that! > > > > > > > > Divisionless oblivion is a regression into awareness. > > > > > > > > True oblivion is so much less than you. > > > > > > I don't understand what you mean here. Can you explain it in > > another way? > > > > No. > > > > (You thrive way too much on explanations.) > > > > :-) > > > > Remember the most important word: > > > > No. > > A swami once said in a satsang: " Remove the No and only Yes remains " That most definitely is not how it works. Yes is meaningless without no. Just goes to show, swamis are just as likely to lead you down the garden path as any used car salesman. I have a feeling the one you just quoted, lives in the mind of Anders only. But regardless of that -- if you meet a swami on the road, kill him. :-) -- Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 6, 2005 Report Share Posted February 6, 2005 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " > <dan330033> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " > > > <dan330033> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Adithya K > > > > > > > <adithya_comming> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > # > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin is an avoidable ...act, thought or emotion that > > > causes > > > > > > > > ...Suffering ! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin is a suffering-causing act, thought or emotion > that > > > can > > > > > have > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > avoided ...if, there is enough Consciousness PRESENT to > > > See, > > > > > know > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > understand what, why, how is going on. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin is any suffering-causing act that can be avoided, > > > > > changed or > > > > > > > > transformed, if there is PRESENCE to See, examine and > if > > > > > necessary > > > > > > > > ...dissolve its roots and to watch and learn from its > > > > > reflection, > > > > > > > > impact and after-effect! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ..... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Suffering is its fruit, and unconsciousness is its > > > roots. > > > > > And, > > > > > > > > whether one that suffers is ...body, minds, me, him, > > > > > her, ...or > > > > > > > them, > > > > > > > > ...doesn't matter that much ! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My idea is...........that ALL suffering..........can be > > > > > > > > > avoided.............by......intense..........awareness.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Divisionless awareness avoids nothing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All-inclusive, holographic. > > > > > > > > > > > > Divisionless awareness is a regression into oblivion. True > > > > > awareness > > > > > > is so much smarter than that! > > > > > > > > > > Divisionless oblivion is a regression into awareness. > > > > > > > > > > True oblivion is so much less than you. > > > > > > > > I don't understand what you mean here. Can you explain it in > > > another way? > > > > > > No. > > > > > > (You thrive way too much on explanations.) > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > Remember the most important word: > > > > > > No. > > > > A swami once said in a satsang: " Remove the No and only Yes remains " > > That most definitely is not how it works. > > Yes is meaningless without no. > > Just goes to show, swamis are just as likely to lead > you down the garden path as any used car salesman. > > I have a feeling the one you just quoted, lives in the > mind of Anders only. > > But regardless of that -- if you meet a swami on the > road, kill him. :-) > > -- Dan You operate from the level of the intellect, while the swami is coming from a level above the intellect perhaps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 6, 2005 Report Share Posted February 6, 2005 Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " > > <dan330033> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " > > > > <dan330033> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Adithya K > > > > > > > > <adithya_comming> > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > # > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin is an avoidable ...act, thought or emotion that > > > > causes > > > > > > > > > ...Suffering ! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin is a suffering-causing act, thought or emotion > > that > > > > can > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > avoided ...if, there is enough Consciousness PRESENT to > > > > See, > > > > > > know > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > understand what, why, how is going on. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin is any suffering-causing act that can be avoided, > > > > > > changed or > > > > > > > > > transformed, if there is PRESENCE to See, examine and > > if > > > > > > necessary > > > > > > > > > ...dissolve its roots and to watch and learn from its > > > > > > reflection, > > > > > > > > > impact and after-effect! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ..... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Suffering is its fruit, and unconsciousness is its > > > > roots. > > > > > > And, > > > > > > > > > whether one that suffers is ...body, minds, me, him, > > > > > > her, ...or > > > > > > > > them, > > > > > > > > > ...doesn't matter that much ! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My idea is...........that ALL suffering..........can be > > > > > > > > > > > avoided.............by......intense..........awareness.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Divisionless awareness avoids nothing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All-inclusive, holographic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Divisionless awareness is a regression into oblivion. True > > > > > > awareness > > > > > > > is so much smarter than that! > > > > > > > > > > > > Divisionless oblivion is a regression into awareness. > > > > > > > > > > > > True oblivion is so much less than you. > > > > > > > > > > I don't understand what you mean here. Can you explain it in > > > > another way? > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > (You thrive way too much on explanations.) > > > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > > > Remember the most important word: > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > A swami once said in a satsang: " Remove the No and only Yes remains " > > > > That most definitely is not how it works. > > > > Yes is meaningless without no. > > > > Just goes to show, swamis are just as likely to lead > > you down the garden path as any used car salesman. > > > > I have a feeling the one you just quoted, lives in the > > mind of Anders only. > > > > But regardless of that -- if you meet a swami on the > > road, kill him. :-) > > > > -- Dan > > You operate from the level of the intellect, while the swami is coming > from a level above the intellect perhaps. intellect is intellect t. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 6, 2005 Report Share Posted February 6, 2005 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " > > > <dan330033> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " > > > > > <dan330033> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Adithya K > > > > > > > > > <adithya_comming> > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > # > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin is an avoidable ...act, thought or emotion that > > > > > causes > > > > > > > > > > ...Suffering ! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin is a suffering-causing act, thought or emotion > > > that > > > > > can > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > avoided ...if, there is enough Consciousness PRESENT to > > > > > See, > > > > > > > know > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > understand what, why, how is going on. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin is any suffering-causing act that can be avoided, > > > > > > > changed or > > > > > > > > > > transformed, if there is PRESENCE to See, examine and > > > if > > > > > > > necessary > > > > > > > > > > ...dissolve its roots and to watch and learn from its > > > > > > > reflection, > > > > > > > > > > impact and after-effect! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ..... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Suffering is its fruit, and unconsciousness is its > > > > > roots. > > > > > > > And, > > > > > > > > > > whether one that suffers is ...body, minds, me, him, > > > > > > > her, ...or > > > > > > > > > them, > > > > > > > > > > ...doesn't matter that much ! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My idea is...........that ALL suffering..........can be > > > > > > > > > > > > > avoided.............by......intense..........awareness.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Divisionless awareness avoids nothing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All-inclusive, holographic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Divisionless awareness is a regression into oblivion. True > > > > > > > awareness > > > > > > > > is so much smarter than that! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Divisionless oblivion is a regression into awareness. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > True oblivion is so much less than you. > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't understand what you mean here. Can you explain it in > > > > > another way? > > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > > > (You thrive way too much on explanations.) > > > > > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > > > > > Remember the most important word: > > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > A swami once said in a satsang: " Remove the No and only Yes remains " > > > > > > That most definitely is not how it works. > > > > > > Yes is meaningless without no. > > > > > > Just goes to show, swamis are just as likely to lead > > > you down the garden path as any used car salesman. > > > > > > I have a feeling the one you just quoted, lives in the > > > mind of Anders only. > > > > > > But regardless of that -- if you meet a swami on the > > > road, kill him. :-) > > > > > > -- Dan > > > > You operate from the level of the intellect, while the swami is coming > > from a level above the intellect perhaps. > > > > intellect is intellect > > > t. Yes, I am not denying that, and probably nor is the swami. ;-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 6, 2005 Report Share Posted February 6, 2005 Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " > > <dan330033> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " > > > > <dan330033> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Adithya K > > > > > > > > <adithya_comming> > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > # > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin is an avoidable ...act, thought or emotion that > > > > causes > > > > > > > > > ...Suffering ! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin is a suffering-causing act, thought or emotion > > that > > > > can > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > avoided ...if, there is enough Consciousness PRESENT to > > > > See, > > > > > > know > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > understand what, why, how is going on. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin is any suffering-causing act that can be avoided, > > > > > > changed or > > > > > > > > > transformed, if there is PRESENCE to See, examine and > > if > > > > > > necessary > > > > > > > > > ...dissolve its roots and to watch and learn from its > > > > > > reflection, > > > > > > > > > impact and after-effect! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ..... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Suffering is its fruit, and unconsciousness is its > > > > roots. > > > > > > And, > > > > > > > > > whether one that suffers is ...body, minds, me, him, > > > > > > her, ...or > > > > > > > > them, > > > > > > > > > ...doesn't matter that much ! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My idea is...........that ALL suffering..........can be > > > > > > > > > > > avoided.............by......intense..........awareness.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Divisionless awareness avoids nothing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All-inclusive, holographic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Divisionless awareness is a regression into oblivion. True > > > > > > awareness > > > > > > > is so much smarter than that! > > > > > > > > > > > > Divisionless oblivion is a regression into awareness. > > > > > > > > > > > > True oblivion is so much less than you. > > > > > > > > > > I don't understand what you mean here. Can you explain it in > > > > another way? > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > (You thrive way too much on explanations.) > > > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > > > Remember the most important word: > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > A swami once said in a satsang: " Remove the No and only Yes remains " > > > > That most definitely is not how it works. > > > > Yes is meaningless without no. > > > > Just goes to show, swamis are just as likely to lead > > you down the garden path as any used car salesman. > > > > I have a feeling the one you just quoted, lives in the > > mind of Anders only. > > > > But regardless of that -- if you meet a swami on the > > road, kill him. :-) > > > > -- Dan > > You operate from the level of the intellect, while the swami is coming > from a level above the intellect perhaps. ** Oh sure, Anders, whatever suits your (pathetic) fancy! Btw, it's the attempts, the investments in all your spiritual crap that's " pathetic. " I.e, it has never 'worked'-- never resolved anything. Step one is to admit that--to yourself, for yourself. No one else can do that for you. Ken Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 6, 2005 Report Share Posted February 6, 2005 Nisargadatta , " kenj02001 " <kenj02001> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " > <dan330033> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " > > > <dan330033> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " > > > > > <dan330033> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Adithya K > > > > > > > > > <adithya_comming> > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > # > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin is an avoidable ...act, thought or emotion > that > > > > > causes > > > > > > > > > > ...Suffering ! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin is a suffering-causing act, thought or > emotion > > > that > > > > > can > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > avoided ...if, there is enough Consciousness > PRESENT to > > > > > See, > > > > > > > know > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > understand what, why, how is going on. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin is any suffering-causing act that can be > avoided, > > > > > > > changed or > > > > > > > > > > transformed, if there is PRESENCE to See, examine > and > > > if > > > > > > > necessary > > > > > > > > > > ...dissolve its roots and to watch and learn from > its > > > > > > > reflection, > > > > > > > > > > impact and after-effect! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ..... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Suffering is its fruit, and unconsciousness is > its > > > > > roots. > > > > > > > And, > > > > > > > > > > whether one that suffers is ...body, minds, me, > him, > > > > > > > her, ...or > > > > > > > > > them, > > > > > > > > > > ...doesn't matter that much ! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My idea is...........that ALL > suffering..........can be > > > > > > > > > > > > > avoided.............by......intense..........awareness.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Divisionless awareness avoids nothing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All-inclusive, holographic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Divisionless awareness is a regression into oblivion. > True > > > > > > > awareness > > > > > > > > is so much smarter than that! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Divisionless oblivion is a regression into awareness. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > True oblivion is so much less than you. > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't understand what you mean here. Can you explain it > in > > > > > another way? > > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > > > (You thrive way too much on explanations.) > > > > > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > > > > > Remember the most important word: > > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > A swami once said in a satsang: " Remove the No and only Yes > remains " > > > > > > That most definitely is not how it works. > > > > > > Yes is meaningless without no. > > > > > > Just goes to show, swamis are just as likely to lead > > > you down the garden path as any used car salesman. > > > > > > I have a feeling the one you just quoted, lives in the > > > mind of Anders only. > > > > > > But regardless of that -- if you meet a swami on the > > > road, kill him. :-) > > > > > > -- Dan > > > > You operate from the level of the intellect, while the swami is > coming > > from a level above the intellect perhaps. > > ** Oh sure, Anders, whatever suits your (pathetic) fancy! > > Btw, it's the attempts, the investments in all your > spiritual crap that's " pathetic. " > > I.e, it has never 'worked'-- never resolved anything. > Step one is to admit that--to yourself, for yourself. > > No one else can do that for you. > > Ken Ken, take a look at my post about nondual logic, and you may Learn something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 6, 2005 Report Share Posted February 6, 2005 Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " kenj02001 " <kenj02001> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " > > <dan330033> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " > > > > <dan330033> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " > > > > > > <dan330033> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Adithya K > > > > > > > > > > <adithya_comming> > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > # > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin is an avoidable ...act, thought or emotion > > that > > > > > > causes > > > > > > > > > > > ...Suffering ! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin is a suffering-causing act, thought or > > emotion > > > > that > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > avoided ...if, there is enough Consciousness > > PRESENT to > > > > > > See, > > > > > > > > know > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > understand what, why, how is going on. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin is any suffering-causing act that can be > > avoided, > > > > > > > > changed or > > > > > > > > > > > transformed, if there is PRESENCE to See, examine > > and > > > > if > > > > > > > > necessary > > > > > > > > > > > ...dissolve its roots and to watch and learn from > > its > > > > > > > > reflection, > > > > > > > > > > > impact and after-effect! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ..... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Suffering is its fruit, and unconsciousness is > > its > > > > > > roots. > > > > > > > > And, > > > > > > > > > > > whether one that suffers is ...body, minds, me, > > him, > > > > > > > > her, ...or > > > > > > > > > > them, > > > > > > > > > > > ...doesn't matter that much ! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My idea is...........that ALL > > suffering..........can be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > avoided.............by......intense..........awareness.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Divisionless awareness avoids nothing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All-inclusive, holographic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Divisionless awareness is a regression into oblivion. > > True > > > > > > > > awareness > > > > > > > > > is so much smarter than that! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Divisionless oblivion is a regression into awareness. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > True oblivion is so much less than you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't understand what you mean here. Can you explain it > > in > > > > > > another way? > > > > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > > > > > (You thrive way too much on explanations.) > > > > > > > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > Remember the most important word: > > > > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > > > A swami once said in a satsang: " Remove the No and only Yes > > remains " > > > > > > > > That most definitely is not how it works. > > > > > > > > Yes is meaningless without no. > > > > > > > > Just goes to show, swamis are just as likely to lead > > > > you down the garden path as any used car salesman. > > > > > > > > I have a feeling the one you just quoted, lives in the > > > > mind of Anders only. > > > > > > > > But regardless of that -- if you meet a swami on the > > > > road, kill him. :-) > > > > > > > > -- Dan > > > > > > You operate from the level of the intellect, while the swami is > > coming > > > from a level above the intellect perhaps. > > > > ** Oh sure, Anders, whatever suits your (pathetic) fancy! > > > > Btw, it's the attempts, the investments in all your > > spiritual crap that's " pathetic. " > > > > I.e, it has never 'worked'-- never resolved anything. > > Step one is to admit that--to yourself, for yourself. > > > > No one else can do that for you. > > > > Ken > > Ken, take a look at my post about nondual logic, and you may Learn > something. ** I did. All the axioms were wrong. They posited 'parts'...of...totality. And statements ('existing') got confused with actuality... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 7, 2005 Report Share Posted February 7, 2005 > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > > > (You thrive way too much on explanations.) > > > > > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > > > > > Remember the most important word: > > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > A swami once said in a satsang: " Remove the No and only Yes > remains " > > > > > > That most definitely is not how it works. > > > > > > Yes is meaningless without no. > > > > > > Just goes to show, swamis are just as likely to lead > > > you down the garden path as any used car salesman. > > > > > > I have a feeling the one you just quoted, lives in the > > > mind of Anders only. > > > > > > But regardless of that -- if you meet a swami on the > > > road, kill him. :-) > > > > > > -- Dan > > > > You operate from the level of the intellect, while the swami is > coming > > from a level above the intellect perhaps. > > ** Oh sure, Anders, whatever suits your (pathetic) fancy! > > Btw, it's the attempts, the investments in all your > spiritual crap that's " pathetic. " > > I.e, it has never 'worked'-- never resolved anything. > Step one is to admit that--to yourself, for yourself. > > No one else can do that for you. > > Ken ----------------------- ....interjecting now with my 2 rupees. bashing around ideas is often a *good* thing. How do you begin to make an unsubstantiated assertion that all Anders investments are " pathetic " . How do you *know* it has never worked for him? Never resolved anything for him? Wow, you must be some great anti-guru or something! Maybe it is resolving things for him even now at this moment? Ken, if it hasn't worked for you then fine. If your trying to understand it then I could understand your questions, but you don't appear to be questioning. People generally *do*/practice something until they discover it doesn't work anymore -- or die trying. Either way that's their thing. I see that in this way Ken you are no different. Your just chewing your bone from a different end is all. Oh, I forgot, there is no bone. Your still one of the members of Toombaru's famous zombee jamboree right along with everybody else. Here's an example of something that works for one and not for another: a famous celebrity used to be a real jerk (by all of his co-workers admission and eventually by his own as well.) He decided he wanted to change this character trait. One night he prayed to Jesus and all of his crappy personality disappeared. One of his celebrity co-workers was discussing this and said he didn't know how it worked but if he ever happens to fall into a jerk- like tendancy he prays again and he's better. I don't happen to follow it myself but people seem to enjoy being around him a whole lot better when he follows this *pathetic* alternative rather than when he does not follow it. My point? oh yes there is one.... Who am I to say this avenue is *wrong* or *pathetic* for him??? I may not understand it and I may point out things that make absolutely no sense to me but I'm still appear to be singing back up for Toombaru in the zombee jamoboree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 7, 2005 Report Share Posted February 7, 2005 Nisargadatta , " goldenrainbowrider " <laughterx8@h...> wrote: > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > > > > > (You thrive way too much on explanations.) > > > > > > > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > Remember the most important word: > > > > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > > > A swami once said in a satsang: " Remove the No and only Yes > > remains " > > > > > > > > That most definitely is not how it works. > > > > > > > > Yes is meaningless without no. > > > > > > > > Just goes to show, swamis are just as likely to lead > > > > you down the garden path as any used car salesman. > > > > > > > > I have a feeling the one you just quoted, lives in the > > > > mind of Anders only. > > > > > > > > But regardless of that -- if you meet a swami on the > > > > road, kill him. :-) > > > > > > > > -- Dan > > > > > > You operate from the level of the intellect, while the swami is > > coming > > > from a level above the intellect perhaps. > > > > ** Oh sure, Anders, whatever suits your (pathetic) fancy! > > > > Btw, it's the attempts, the investments in all your > > spiritual crap that's " pathetic. " > > > > I.e, it has never 'worked'-- never resolved anything. > > Step one is to admit that--to yourself, for yourself. > > > > No one else can do that for you. > > > > Ken > > ----------------------- > > ...interjecting now with my 2 rupees. > > bashing around ideas is often a *good* thing. > > How do you begin to make an unsubstantiated assertion that all > Anders investments are " pathetic " . > > How do you *know* it has never worked for him? Never resolved > anything for him? Wow, you must be some great anti-guru or > something! > > Maybe it is resolving things for him even now at this moment? > > Ken, if it hasn't worked for you then fine. If your trying to > understand it then I could understand your questions, but you don't > appear to be questioning. > > People generally *do*/practice something until they discover it > doesn't work anymore -- or die trying. > Either way that's their thing. > > I see that in this way Ken you are no different. Your just chewing > your bone from a different end is all. Oh, I forgot, there is no > bone. Your still one of the members of Toombaru's famous zombee > jamboree right along with everybody else. > > > > Here's an example of something that works for one and not for > another: > a famous celebrity used to be a real jerk (by all of his co-workers > admission and eventually by his own as well.) > He decided he wanted to change this character trait. > One night he prayed to Jesus and all of his crappy personality > disappeared. > One of his celebrity co-workers was discussing this and said he > didn't know how it worked but if he ever happens to fall into a jerk- > like tendancy he prays again and he's better. > > I don't happen to follow it myself but people seem to enjoy being > around him a whole lot better when he follows this *pathetic* > alternative rather than when he does not follow it. > > > My point? oh yes there is one.... Who am I to say this avenue is > *wrong* or *pathetic* for him??? I may not understand it and I may > point out things that make absolutely no sense to me but I'm still > appear to be singing back up for Toombaru in the zombee jamoboree. And they moved.....stiff legged.....clinging tightly to each other..........through the rhythm of endless night........ LOL toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 7, 2005 Report Share Posted February 7, 2005 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " goldenrainbowrider " <laughterx8@h...> wrote: > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (You thrive way too much on explanations.) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Remember the most important word: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > > > > > A swami once said in a satsang: " Remove the No and only Yes > > > remains " > > > > > > > > > > That most definitely is not how it works. > > > > > > > > > > Yes is meaningless without no. > > > > > > > > > > Just goes to show, swamis are just as likely to lead > > > > > you down the garden path as any used car salesman. > > > > > > > > > > I have a feeling the one you just quoted, lives in the > > > > > mind of Anders only. > > > > > > > > > > But regardless of that -- if you meet a swami on the > > > > > road, kill him. :-) > > > > > > > > > > -- Dan > > > > > > > > You operate from the level of the intellect, while the swami is > > > coming > > > > from a level above the intellect perhaps. > > > > > > ** Oh sure, Anders, whatever suits your (pathetic) fancy! > > > > > > Btw, it's the attempts, the investments in all your > > > spiritual crap that's " pathetic. " > > > > > > I.e, it has never 'worked'-- never resolved anything. > > > Step one is to admit that--to yourself, for yourself. > > > > > > No one else can do that for you. > > > > > > Ken > > > > ----------------------- > > > > ...interjecting now with my 2 rupees. > > > > bashing around ideas is often a *good* thing. > > > > How do you begin to make an unsubstantiated assertion that all > > Anders investments are " pathetic " . > > > > How do you *know* it has never worked for him? Never resolved > > anything for him? Wow, you must be some great anti-guru or > > something! > > > > Maybe it is resolving things for him even now at this moment? > > > > Ken, if it hasn't worked for you then fine. If your trying to > > understand it then I could understand your questions, but you don't > > appear to be questioning. > > > > People generally *do*/practice something until they discover it > > doesn't work anymore -- or die trying. > > Either way that's their thing. > > > > I see that in this way Ken you are no different. Your just chewing > > your bone from a different end is all. Oh, I forgot, there is no > > bone. Your still one of the members of Toombaru's famous zombee > > jamboree right along with everybody else. > > > > > > > > Here's an example of something that works for one and not for > > another: > > a famous celebrity used to be a real jerk (by all of his co- workers > > admission and eventually by his own as well.) > > He decided he wanted to change this character trait. > > One night he prayed to Jesus and all of his crappy personality > > disappeared. > > One of his celebrity co-workers was discussing this and said he > > didn't know how it worked but if he ever happens to fall into a jerk- > > like tendancy he prays again and he's better. > > > > I don't happen to follow it myself but people seem to enjoy being > > around him a whole lot better when he follows this *pathetic* > > alternative rather than when he does not follow it. > > > > > > My point? oh yes there is one.... Who am I to say this avenue is > > *wrong* or *pathetic* for him??? I may not understand it and I may > > point out things that make absolutely no sense to me but I'm still > > appear to be singing back up for Toombaru in the zombee jamoboree. > > > > And they moved.....stiff legged.....clinging tightly to each other..........through the rhythm > of endless night........ > > > > LOL > > > toombaru -------------------------- just wondering where you fit in with the rhythm. Are you singing chorus perhaps? lol. I hear ben-gay works wonders for those stiff joints. Zoloft also works wonders for chemical imbalances. Too many chemical drugs in youth can mess with those synapses man. ~G. -------------- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 7, 2005 Report Share Posted February 7, 2005 Nisargadatta , " kenj02001 " <kenj02001> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > .... > > > > Ken, take a look at my post about nondual logic, and you may Learn > > something. > > ** I did. All the axioms were wrong. > They posited 'parts'...of...totality. > And statements ('existing') got confused with actuality... That is not good news. I was thinking of preparing a doctoral thesis about my newly created mind-baby called 'nondual logic'. And now you are telling me that this great finding of mine is crap? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 7, 2005 Report Share Posted February 7, 2005 Nisargadatta , " goldenrainbowrider " <laughterx8@h...> wrote: > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > > > > > (You thrive way too much on explanations.) > > > > > > > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > Remember the most important word: > > > > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > > > A swami once said in a satsang: " Remove the No and only Yes > > remains " > > > > > > > > That most definitely is not how it works. > > > > > > > > Yes is meaningless without no. > > > > > > > > Just goes to show, swamis are just as likely to lead > > > > you down the garden path as any used car salesman. > > > > > > > > I have a feeling the one you just quoted, lives in the > > > > mind of Anders only. > > > > > > > > But regardless of that -- if you meet a swami on the > > > > road, kill him. :-) > > > > > > > > -- Dan > > > > > > You operate from the level of the intellect, while the swami is > > coming > > > from a level above the intellect perhaps. > > > > ** Oh sure, Anders, whatever suits your (pathetic) fancy! > > > > Btw, it's the attempts, the investments in all your > > spiritual crap that's " pathetic. " > > > > I.e, it has never 'worked'-- never resolved anything. > > Step one is to admit that--to yourself, for yourself. > > > > No one else can do that for you. > > > > Ken > > ----------------------- > > ...interjecting now with my 2 rupees. > > bashing around ideas is often a *good* thing. > > How do you begin to make an unsubstantiated assertion that all > Anders investments are " pathetic " . > > How do you *know* it has never worked for him? Never resolved > anything for him? Wow, you must be some great anti-guru or > something! > > Maybe it is resolving things for him even now at this moment? > > Ken, if it hasn't worked for you then fine. If your trying to > understand it then I could understand your questions, but you don't > appear to be questioning. > > People generally *do*/practice something until they discover it > doesn't work anymore -- or die trying. > Either way that's their thing. > > I see that in this way Ken you are no different. Your just chewing > your bone from a different end is all. Oh, I forgot, there is no > bone. Your still one of the members of Toombaru's famous zombee > jamboree right along with everybody else. > > > > Here's an example of something that works for one and not for > another: > a famous celebrity used to be a real jerk (by all of his co- workers > admission and eventually by his own as well.) > He decided he wanted to change this character trait. > One night he prayed to Jesus and all of his crappy personality > disappeared. > One of his celebrity co-workers was discussing this and said he > didn't know how it worked but if he ever happens to fall into a jerk- > like tendancy he prays again and he's better. > > I don't happen to follow it myself but people seem to enjoy being > around him a whole lot better when he follows this *pathetic* > alternative rather than when he does not follow it. > > > My point? oh yes there is one.... Who am I to say this avenue is > *wrong* or *pathetic* for him??? I may not understand it and I may > point out things that make absolutely no sense to me but I'm still > appear to be singing back up for Toombaru in the zombee jamoboree. ** G., we're on a different wavelength here, I think. You seem to be interpreting various comments as being about religion, or perhaps psychology and therapy, whereas the context in which I made those comments to Anders was what's called 'non-dual inquiry.' So it's not about techniques or practices, or something that anyone might use to resolve personality/behavior issues or traits, etc. Some of these discussions have been going on for years, on various lists! Ken Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 7, 2005 Report Share Posted February 7, 2005 Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " kenj02001 " <kenj02001> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > ... > > > > > > Ken, take a look at my post about nondual logic, and you may Learn > > > something. > > > > ** I did. All the axioms were wrong. > > They posited 'parts'...of...totality. > > And statements ('existing') got confused with actuality... > > That is not good news. I was thinking of preparing a doctoral thesis > about my newly created mind-baby called 'nondual logic'. And now you > are telling me that this great finding of mine is crap? One doesn't have to sort out the false ideas from the true ideas........ All ideas deal with things.....all things are conceptual separations...... All ideas are untrue. (yes....this one too) toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 7, 2005 Report Share Posted February 7, 2005 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " kenj02001 " <kenj02001> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > > Ken, take a look at my post about nondual logic, and you may Learn > > > > something. > > > > > > ** I did. All the axioms were wrong. > > > They posited 'parts'...of...totality. > > > And statements ('existing') got confused with actuality... > > > > That is not good news. I was thinking of preparing a doctoral thesis > > about my newly created mind-baby called 'nondual logic'. And now you > > are telling me that this great finding of mine is crap? > > > > One doesn't have to sort out the false ideas from the true ideas........ > > > All ideas deal with things.....all things are conceptual separations...... > > > All ideas are untrue. > > (yes....this one too) > > toombaru The idea with nondual logic is that everything is, _everything_. True or false ideas are a part of what is too. /AL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 7, 2005 Report Share Posted February 7, 2005 Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " > > <dan330033> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " > > > > <dan330033> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Adithya K > > > > > > > > <adithya_comming> > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > # > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin is an avoidable ...act, thought or emotion that > > > > causes > > > > > > > > > ...Suffering ! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin is a suffering-causing act, thought or emotion > > that > > > > can > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > avoided ...if, there is enough Consciousness PRESENT to > > > > See, > > > > > > know > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > understand what, why, how is going on. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin is any suffering-causing act that can be avoided, > > > > > > changed or > > > > > > > > > transformed, if there is PRESENCE to See, examine and > > if > > > > > > necessary > > > > > > > > > ...dissolve its roots and to watch and learn from its > > > > > > reflection, > > > > > > > > > impact and after-effect! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ..... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Suffering is its fruit, and unconsciousness is its > > > > roots. > > > > > > And, > > > > > > > > > whether one that suffers is ...body, minds, me, him, > > > > > > her, ...or > > > > > > > > them, > > > > > > > > > ...doesn't matter that much ! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My idea is...........that ALL suffering..........can be > > > > > > > > > > > avoided.............by......intense..........awareness.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Divisionless awareness avoids nothing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All-inclusive, holographic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Divisionless awareness is a regression into oblivion. True > > > > > > awareness > > > > > > > is so much smarter than that! > > > > > > > > > > > > Divisionless oblivion is a regression into awareness. > > > > > > > > > > > > True oblivion is so much less than you. > > > > > > > > > > I don't understand what you mean here. Can you explain it in > > > > another way? > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > (You thrive way too much on explanations.) > > > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > > > Remember the most important word: > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > A swami once said in a satsang: " Remove the No and only Yes remains " > > > > That most definitely is not how it works. > > > > Yes is meaningless without no. > > > > Just goes to show, swamis are just as likely to lead > > you down the garden path as any used car salesman. > > > > I have a feeling the one you just quoted, lives in the > > mind of Anders only. > > > > But regardless of that -- if you meet a swami on the > > road, kill him. :-) > > > > -- Dan > > You operate from the level of the intellect, while the swami is coming > from a level above the intellect perhaps. Anders, you've received massive amounts of feedback from a number of posters here about your continuing and continuing mind games. So, it means nothing to have you talk about a swami coming from above. You seem very fascinated with your thought-forms, and evading your own death. No amount of feedback about it is going to avail, because you simply aren't hearing what you don't want to hear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 7, 2005 Report Share Posted February 7, 2005 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " > <dan330033> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " > > > <dan330033> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " > > > > > <dan330033> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Adithya K > > > > > > > > > <adithya_comming> > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > # > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin is an avoidable ...act, thought or emotion > that > > > > > causes > > > > > > > > > > ...Suffering ! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin is a suffering-causing act, thought or > emotion > > > that > > > > > can > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > avoided ...if, there is enough Consciousness > PRESENT to > > > > > See, > > > > > > > know > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > understand what, why, how is going on. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin is any suffering-causing act that can be > avoided, > > > > > > > changed or > > > > > > > > > > transformed, if there is PRESENCE to See, examine > and > > > if > > > > > > > necessary > > > > > > > > > > ...dissolve its roots and to watch and learn from > its > > > > > > > reflection, > > > > > > > > > > impact and after-effect! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ..... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Suffering is its fruit, and unconsciousness is > its > > > > > roots. > > > > > > > And, > > > > > > > > > > whether one that suffers is ...body, minds, me, > him, > > > > > > > her, ...or > > > > > > > > > them, > > > > > > > > > > ...doesn't matter that much ! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My idea is...........that ALL > suffering..........can be > > > > > > > > > > > > > avoided.............by......intense..........awareness.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Divisionless awareness avoids nothing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All-inclusive, holographic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Divisionless awareness is a regression into oblivion. > True > > > > > > > awareness > > > > > > > > is so much smarter than that! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Divisionless oblivion is a regression into awareness. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > True oblivion is so much less than you. > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't understand what you mean here. Can you explain it > in > > > > > another way? > > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > > > (You thrive way too much on explanations.) > > > > > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > > > > > Remember the most important word: > > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > A swami once said in a satsang: " Remove the No and only Yes > remains " > > > > > > That most definitely is not how it works. > > > > > > Yes is meaningless without no. > > > > > > Just goes to show, swamis are just as likely to lead > > > you down the garden path as any used car salesman. > > > > > > I have a feeling the one you just quoted, lives in the > > > mind of Anders only. > > > > > > But regardless of that -- if you meet a swami on the > > > road, kill him. :-) > > > > > > -- Dan > > > > You operate from the level of the intellect, while the swami is > coming > > from a level above the intellect perhaps. > > Anders, you've received massive amounts of feedback > from a number of posters here about your continuing > and continuing mind games. > > So, it means nothing to have you talk about a swami coming > from above. > > You seem very fascinated with your thought-forms, and > evading your own death. > > No amount of feedback about it is going to avail, because > you simply aren't hearing what you don't want to hear. The mind blocks new things out until it is ready to receive them. /AL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 7, 2005 Report Share Posted February 7, 2005 Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " kenj02001 " <kenj02001> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " > > <dan330033> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " > > > > <dan330033> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " > > > > > > <dan330033> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Adithya K > > > > > > > > > > <adithya_comming> > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > # > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin is an avoidable ...act, thought or emotion > > that > > > > > > causes > > > > > > > > > > > ...Suffering ! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin is a suffering-causing act, thought or > > emotion > > > > that > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > avoided ...if, there is enough Consciousness > > PRESENT to > > > > > > See, > > > > > > > > know > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > understand what, why, how is going on. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin is any suffering-causing act that can be > > avoided, > > > > > > > > changed or > > > > > > > > > > > transformed, if there is PRESENCE to See, examine > > and > > > > if > > > > > > > > necessary > > > > > > > > > > > ...dissolve its roots and to watch and learn from > > its > > > > > > > > reflection, > > > > > > > > > > > impact and after-effect! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ..... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Suffering is its fruit, and unconsciousness is > > its > > > > > > roots. > > > > > > > > And, > > > > > > > > > > > whether one that suffers is ...body, minds, me, > > him, > > > > > > > > her, ...or > > > > > > > > > > them, > > > > > > > > > > > ...doesn't matter that much ! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My idea is...........that ALL > > suffering..........can be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > avoided.............by......intense..........awareness.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Divisionless awareness avoids nothing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All-inclusive, holographic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Divisionless awareness is a regression into oblivion. > > True > > > > > > > > awareness > > > > > > > > > is so much smarter than that! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Divisionless oblivion is a regression into awareness. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > True oblivion is so much less than you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't understand what you mean here. Can you explain it > > in > > > > > > another way? > > > > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > > > > > (You thrive way too much on explanations.) > > > > > > > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > Remember the most important word: > > > > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > > > A swami once said in a satsang: " Remove the No and only Yes > > remains " > > > > > > > > That most definitely is not how it works. > > > > > > > > Yes is meaningless without no. > > > > > > > > Just goes to show, swamis are just as likely to lead > > > > you down the garden path as any used car salesman. > > > > > > > > I have a feeling the one you just quoted, lives in the > > > > mind of Anders only. > > > > > > > > But regardless of that -- if you meet a swami on the > > > > road, kill him. :-) > > > > > > > > -- Dan > > > > > > You operate from the level of the intellect, while the swami is > > coming > > > from a level above the intellect perhaps. > > > > ** Oh sure, Anders, whatever suits your (pathetic) fancy! > > > > Btw, it's the attempts, the investments in all your > > spiritual crap that's " pathetic. " > > > > I.e, it has never 'worked'-- never resolved anything. > > Step one is to admit that--to yourself, for yourself. > > > > No one else can do that for you. > > > > Ken > > Ken, take a look at my post about nondual logic, and you may Learn > something. A. - Take a look at yourself, and not others and what they are looking at. And you may learn something. -- D. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 7, 2005 Report Share Posted February 7, 2005 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " kenj02001 " <kenj02001> > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " > <dan330033> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " > > > <dan330033> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " > > > > > <dan330033> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " > > > > > > > <dan330033> > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Adithya K > > > > > > > > > > > <adithya_comming> > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > # > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin is an avoidable ...act, thought or > emotion > > > that > > > > > > > causes > > > > > > > > > > > > ...Suffering ! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin is a suffering-causing act, thought or > > > emotion > > > > > that > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > avoided ...if, there is enough Consciousness > > > PRESENT to > > > > > > > See, > > > > > > > > > know > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > understand what, why, how is going on. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin is any suffering-causing act that can be > > > avoided, > > > > > > > > > changed or > > > > > > > > > > > > transformed, if there is PRESENCE to See, > examine > > > and > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > necessary > > > > > > > > > > > > ...dissolve its roots and to watch and learn > from > > > its > > > > > > > > > reflection, > > > > > > > > > > > > impact and after-effect! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ..... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Suffering is its fruit, and unconsciousness > is > > > its > > > > > > > roots. > > > > > > > > > And, > > > > > > > > > > > > whether one that suffers is ...body, minds, > me, > > > him, > > > > > > > > > her, ...or > > > > > > > > > > > them, > > > > > > > > > > > > ...doesn't matter that much ! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My idea is...........that ALL > > > suffering..........can be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > avoided.............by......intense..........awareness.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Divisionless awareness avoids nothing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All-inclusive, holographic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Divisionless awareness is a regression into > oblivion. > > > True > > > > > > > > > awareness > > > > > > > > > > is so much smarter than that! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Divisionless oblivion is a regression into awareness. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > True oblivion is so much less than you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't understand what you mean here. Can you explain > it > > > in > > > > > > > another way? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (You thrive way too much on explanations.) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Remember the most important word: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > > > > > A swami once said in a satsang: " Remove the No and only > Yes > > > remains " > > > > > > > > > > That most definitely is not how it works. > > > > > > > > > > Yes is meaningless without no. > > > > > > > > > > Just goes to show, swamis are just as likely to lead > > > > > you down the garden path as any used car salesman. > > > > > > > > > > I have a feeling the one you just quoted, lives in the > > > > > mind of Anders only. > > > > > > > > > > But regardless of that -- if you meet a swami on the > > > > > road, kill him. :-) > > > > > > > > > > -- Dan > > > > > > > > You operate from the level of the intellect, while the swami > is > > > coming > > > > from a level above the intellect perhaps. > > > > > > ** Oh sure, Anders, whatever suits your (pathetic) fancy! > > > > > > Btw, it's the attempts, the investments in all your > > > spiritual crap that's " pathetic. " > > > > > > I.e, it has never 'worked'-- never resolved anything. > > > Step one is to admit that--to yourself, for yourself. > > > > > > No one else can do that for you. > > > > > > Ken > > > > Ken, take a look at my post about nondual logic, and you may Learn > > something. > > A. - > > Take a look at yourself, and not others and what they are looking > at. > > And you may learn something. > > -- D. You don't need to tell anyone to take a look at themselves, because that is what they already are doing - all the time. /AL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 8, 2005 Report Share Posted February 8, 2005 Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " kenj02001 " <kenj02001> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " > > <dan330033> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " > > > > <dan330033> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " > > > > > > <dan330033> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " > > > > > > > > <dan330033> > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > > > > > > > > > > > > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Adithya K > > > > > > > > > > > > <adithya_comming> > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > # > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin is an avoidable ...act, thought or > > emotion > > > > that > > > > > > > > causes > > > > > > > > > > > > > ...Suffering ! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin is a suffering-causing act, thought or > > > > emotion > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > > have > > > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > > > avoided ...if, there is enough Consciousness > > > > PRESENT to > > > > > > > > See, > > > > > > > > > > know > > > > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > > > understand what, why, how is going on. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sin is any suffering-causing act that can be > > > > avoided, > > > > > > > > > > changed or > > > > > > > > > > > > > transformed, if there is PRESENCE to See, > > examine > > > > and > > > > > > if > > > > > > > > > > necessary > > > > > > > > > > > > > ...dissolve its roots and to watch and learn > > from > > > > its > > > > > > > > > > reflection, > > > > > > > > > > > > > impact and after-effect! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ..... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Suffering is its fruit, and unconsciousness > > is > > > > its > > > > > > > > roots. > > > > > > > > > > And, > > > > > > > > > > > > > whether one that suffers is ...body, minds, > > me, > > > > him, > > > > > > > > > > her, ...or > > > > > > > > > > > > them, > > > > > > > > > > > > > ...doesn't matter that much ! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My idea is...........that ALL > > > > suffering..........can be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > avoided.............by......intense..........awareness.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Divisionless awareness avoids nothing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All-inclusive, holographic. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Divisionless awareness is a regression into > > oblivion. > > > > True > > > > > > > > > > awareness > > > > > > > > > > > is so much smarter than that! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Divisionless oblivion is a regression into awareness. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > True oblivion is so much less than you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't understand what you mean here. Can you explain > > it > > > > in > > > > > > > > another way? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (You thrive way too much on explanations.) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Remember the most important word: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A swami once said in a satsang: " Remove the No and only > > Yes > > > > remains " > > > > > > > > > > > > That most definitely is not how it works. > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes is meaningless without no. > > > > > > > > > > > > Just goes to show, swamis are just as likely to lead > > > > > > you down the garden path as any used car salesman. > > > > > > > > > > > > I have a feeling the one you just quoted, lives in the > > > > > > mind of Anders only. > > > > > > > > > > > > But regardless of that -- if you meet a swami on the > > > > > > road, kill him. :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > -- Dan > > > > > > > > > > You operate from the level of the intellect, while the swami > > is > > > > coming > > > > > from a level above the intellect perhaps. > > > > > > > > ** Oh sure, Anders, whatever suits your (pathetic) fancy! > > > > > > > > Btw, it's the attempts, the investments in all your > > > > spiritual crap that's " pathetic. " > > > > > > > > I.e, it has never 'worked'-- never resolved anything. > > > > Step one is to admit that--to yourself, for yourself. > > > > > > > > No one else can do that for you. > > > > > > > > Ken > > > > > > Ken, take a look at my post about nondual logic, and you may Learn > > > something. > > > > A. - > > > > Take a look at yourself, and not others and what they are looking > > at. > > > > And you may learn something. > > > > -- D. > > You don't need to tell anyone to take a look at themselves, because > that is what they already are doing - all the time. > > /AL ** For the most part, humans are petty, wannabe gods-- gazing with fascination on their " creations. " Or else, petulant, wannabe devils--wanting to corrupt and destroy them. ;D 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.