Guest guest Posted April 18, 2005 Report Share Posted April 18, 2005 In a message dated 4/18/05 6:59:37 AM, dan330033 writes: > Hey Pete- > > I'm saying that who I am can't be categorized as > existing or not existing. > > Words refer to existences and the termination of existences. > > Words can't contain who I am. > > I don't know who I am by virtue of words, meanings, or memories. > > I just use them to communicate. > > :-) > > -- Dan > P: Well, I'm going to agree with you. Is that OK? I don't want you to reply that there was never anyone to agree, or to be in agreement with, and nothing was ever said. OK? Just kidding! Yes, and communication can be only about mis-interpretations of " existence. " Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 18, 2005 Report Share Posted April 18, 2005 In a message dated 4/18/05 8:00:30 AM, dan330033 writes: > Yes, it's okay. Just fine. > > The funny thing about communicating about mis-interpretations > of existence is that if one is misinterpreting existence, > one will also misinterpret the communications offered to one. > > If one isn't mistinterpreting existence, then one doesn't > require or involve any communications in one's knowing. > > Funny joke! > > A reminder not to take such communications or > such communicators too seriously! > > -- Dan > P; Isn't that a bitch! If I had a choice, I would unplug the danm PC. But I don't. I'm just another sweaty slave rowing at this cyber-galley. Another bad meta4, not to be taken literally. > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 18, 2005 Report Share Posted April 18, 2005 Nisargadatta , Pedsie2@a... wrote: > P: Correct! And you said that very nicely, you, devilish, non- > existent, > > typeholic, little entity. > > D: Nope, one doesn't get to land on " existence. " > Wrong address! > > P: If Dan can talk about about it, so can he, and so can I. > And you're outnumber two of our zeros to your lonely zero. > What are you disagreeing about, anyway? How is your sentence > above different from his " No one exist, there is only existence. " > What were you trying to say? > Who could be that one who doesn't exist, and doesn't > get to land? > Anyway, you know you can only answer a toomb's post in jest, > you have a better change to teach your monitor > nonduality, than to teach toomb anything. Hey Pete- I'm saying that who I am can't be categorized as existing or not existing. Words refer to existences and the termination of existences. Words can't contain who I am. I don't know who I am by virtue of words, meanings, or memories. I just use them to communicate. :-) -- Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 18, 2005 Report Share Posted April 18, 2005 Nisargadatta , Pedsie2@a... wrote: > > In a message dated 4/18/05 6:59:37 AM, dan330033 writes: > > > > Hey Pete- > > > > I'm saying that who I am can't be categorized as > > existing or not existing. > > > > Words refer to existences and the termination of existences. > > > > Words can't contain who I am. > > > > I don't know who I am by virtue of words, meanings, or memories. > > > > I just use them to communicate. > > > > :-) > > > > -- Dan > > > > P: Well, I'm going to agree with you. Is that OK? > I don't want you to reply that there was never > anyone to agree, or to be in agreement with, > and nothing was ever said. OK? Just kidding! > > Yes, and communication can be only about > mis-interpretations of " existence. " > > Pete Pete -- Yes, it's okay. Just fine. The funny thing about communicating about mis-interpretations of existence is that if one is misinterpreting existence, one will also misinterpret the communications offered to one. If one isn't mistinterpreting existence, then one doesn't require or involve any communications in one's knowing. Funny joke! A reminder not to take such communications or such communicators too seriously! -- Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 18, 2005 Report Share Posted April 18, 2005 Nisargadatta , Pedsie2@a... wrote: > P; Isn't that a bitch! If I had a choice, I would unplug > the danm PC. But I don't. I'm just another sweaty slave > rowing at this cyber-galley. Another bad meta4, > not to be taken literally. Urgh! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 18, 2005 Report Share Posted April 18, 2005 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , Pedsie2@a... wrote: > > > > In a message dated 4/18/05 6:59:37 AM, dan330033 writes: > > > > > > > Hey Pete- > > > > > > I'm saying that who I am can't be categorized as > > > existing or not existing. > > > > > > Words refer to existences and the termination of existences. > > > > > > Words can't contain who I am. > > > > > > I don't know who I am by virtue of words, meanings, or memories. > > > > > > I just use them to communicate. > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > -- Dan > > > > > > > P: Well, I'm going to agree with you. Is that OK? > > I don't want you to reply that there was never > > anyone to agree, or to be in agreement with, > > and nothing was ever said. OK? Just kidding! > > > > Yes, and communication can be only about > > mis-interpretations of " existence. " > > > > Pete > > Pete -- > > Yes, it's okay. Just fine. > > The funny thing about communicating about mis-interpretations > of existence is that if one is misinterpreting existence, > one will also misinterpret the communications offered to one. > > If one isn't mistinterpreting existence, then one doesn't > require or involve any communications in one's knowing. > > Funny joke! > > A reminder not to take such communications or > such communicators too seriously! > > -- Dan The Great Communicator...............That which communicates...reminding its self not to take its self too seriously...... Do you get a picture of what's happening here? You have to be fast to see it......Oh...there it goes.... Geeeesssee......You missed it again. Don't worry......It'll be back....... maybe. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 18, 2005 Report Share Posted April 18, 2005 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , Pedsie2@a... wrote: > > > P; Isn't that a bitch! If I had a choice, I would unplug > > the danm PC. But I don't. I'm just another sweaty slave > > rowing at this cyber-galley. Another bad meta4, > > not to be taken literally. > > Urgh! > > Well.......as one seething clot of metaphores to another......I'm pretty sure that I could turn off my computer.....but first...i'm gonna read a few more posts.....then I'm turnin that sucker off! toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 18, 2005 Report Share Posted April 18, 2005 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , Pedsie2@a... wrote: > > P: Correct! And you said that very nicely, you, devilish, > non- > > existent, > > > typeholic, little entity. > > > > D: Nope, one doesn't get to land on " existence. " > > Wrong address! > > > > P: If Dan can talk about about it, so can he, and so > can I. > > And you're outnumber two of our zeros to your lonely zero. > > What are you disagreeing about, anyway? How is your > sentence > > above different from his " No one exist, there is only > existence. " > > What were you trying to say? > > Who could be that one who doesn't exist, and doesn't > > get to land? > > Anyway, you know you can only answer a toomb's post > in jest, > > you have a better change to teach your monitor > > nonduality, than to teach toomb anything. > > Hey Pete- > > I'm saying that who I am can't be categorized as > existing or not existing. > > Words refer to existences and the termination of existences. > > Words can't contain who I am. > > I don't know who I am by virtue of words, meanings, or memories. > > I just use them to communicate. > > :-) > > -- Dan ** Why, thanks...I'll have a Schweppes, too! ;+] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 19, 2005 Report Share Posted April 19, 2005 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , Pedsie2@a... wrote: > > > > > > In a message dated 4/18/05 6:59:37 AM, dan330033 writes: > > > > > > > > > > Hey Pete- > > > > > > > > I'm saying that who I am can't be categorized as > > > > existing or not existing. > > > > > > > > Words refer to existences and the termination of existences. > > > > > > > > Words can't contain who I am. > > > > > > > > I don't know who I am by virtue of words, meanings, or memories. > > > > > > > > I just use them to communicate. > > > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > > > -- Dan > > > > > > > > > > P: Well, I'm going to agree with you. Is that OK? > > > I don't want you to reply that there was never > > > anyone to agree, or to be in agreement with, > > > and nothing was ever said. OK? Just kidding! > > > > > > Yes, and communication can be only about > > > mis-interpretations of " existence. " > > > > > > Pete > > > > Pete -- > > > > Yes, it's okay. Just fine. > > > > The funny thing about communicating about mis-interpretations > > of existence is that if one is misinterpreting existence, > > one will also misinterpret the communications offered to one. > > > > If one isn't mistinterpreting existence, then one doesn't > > require or involve any communications in one's knowing. > > > > Funny joke! > > > > A reminder not to take such communications or > > such communicators too seriously! > > > > -- Dan > > > The Great Communicator...............That which communicates...reminding its self not to take its self too seriously...... > > Do you get a picture of what's happening here? > > You have to be fast to see it......Oh...there it goes.... > > Geeeesssee......You missed it again. > > Don't worry......It'll be back....... > > > > maybe. > > > toombaru ** Sorry, I'm not getting you. Your meaning is obscure. Ken Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 19, 2005 Report Share Posted April 19, 2005 Nisargadatta , " kenj02001 " <kenj02001> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Pedsie2@a... wrote: > > > > > > > > In a message dated 4/18/05 6:59:37 AM, dan330033 writes: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hey Pete- > > > > > > > > > > I'm saying that who I am can't be categorized as > > > > > existing or not existing. > > > > > > > > > > Words refer to existences and the termination of existences. > > > > > > > > > > Words can't contain who I am. > > > > > > > > > > I don't know who I am by virtue of words, meanings, or > memories. > > > > > > > > > > I just use them to communicate. > > > > > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > > > > > -- Dan > > > > > > > > > > > > > P: Well, I'm going to agree with you. Is that OK? > > > > I don't want you to reply that there was never > > > > anyone to agree, or to be in agreement with, > > > > and nothing was ever said. OK? Just kidding! > > > > > > > > Yes, and communication can be only about > > > > mis-interpretations of " existence. " > > > > > > > > Pete > > > > > > Pete -- > > > > > > Yes, it's okay. Just fine. > > > > > > The funny thing about communicating about mis-interpretations > > > of existence is that if one is misinterpreting existence, > > > one will also misinterpret the communications offered to one. > > > > > > If one isn't mistinterpreting existence, then one doesn't > > > require or involve any communications in one's knowing. > > > > > > Funny joke! > > > > > > A reminder not to take such communications or > > > such communicators too seriously! > > > > > > -- Dan > > > > > > The Great Communicator...............That which > communicates...reminding its self not to take its self too > seriously...... > > > > Do you get a picture of what's happening here? > > > > You have to be fast to see it......Oh...there it goes.... > > > > Geeeesssee......You missed it again. > > > > Don't worry......It'll be back....... > > > > > > > > maybe. > > > > > > toombaru > > ** Sorry, I'm not getting you. Your meaning is obscure. > > Ken Ken, All descriptions of any matters spiritual are...... obscure. With that in mind: Within each mnemonic-bubble......somewhere amind the swirling-self-referential debris....there appears to be a " blind spot " .....a " place " where the illusory-identified-entity is attached to All-That-Is. Most bubbles spend " their " life totally oblivious to this attachment point. A few...seem to become aware of it......but most shy away after their first contact..... ......in that it appears like a vast emptiness..... " the void " . A very few are compelled to seek it out........ Some like Dan or Charlie........actually stick their heads through....and try to explain what they " saw' A few like Anna ....flirt with It....... If it is your destiny......It will get you.........no matter what you " do " . toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 19, 2005 Report Share Posted April 19, 2005 - toombaru2004 Nisargadatta Tuesday, April 19, 2005 10:38 AM Re: Existence/Pete Nisargadatta , " kenj02001 " <kenj02001> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Pedsie2@a... wrote: > > > > > > > > In a message dated 4/18/05 6:59:37 AM, dan330033 writes: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hey Pete- > > > > > > > > > > I'm saying that who I am can't be categorized as > > > > > existing or not existing. > > > > > > > > > > Words refer to existences and the termination of existences. > > > > > > > > > > Words can't contain who I am. > > > > > > > > > > I don't know who I am by virtue of words, meanings, or > memories. > > > > > > > > > > I just use them to communicate. > > > > > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > > > > > -- Dan > > > > > > > > > > > > > P: Well, I'm going to agree with you. Is that OK? > > > > I don't want you to reply that there was never > > > > anyone to agree, or to be in agreement with, > > > > and nothing was ever said. OK? Just kidding! > > > > > > > > Yes, and communication can be only about > > > > mis-interpretations of " existence. " > > > > > > > > Pete > > > > > > Pete -- > > > > > > Yes, it's okay. Just fine. > > > > > > The funny thing about communicating about mis-interpretations > > > of existence is that if one is misinterpreting existence, > > > one will also misinterpret the communications offered to one. > > > > > > If one isn't mistinterpreting existence, then one doesn't > > > require or involve any communications in one's knowing. > > > > > > Funny joke! > > > > > > A reminder not to take such communications or > > > such communicators too seriously! > > > > > > -- Dan > > > > > > The Great Communicator...............That which > communicates...reminding its self not to take its self too > seriously...... > > > > Do you get a picture of what's happening here? > > > > You have to be fast to see it......Oh...there it goes.... > > > > Geeeesssee......You missed it again. > > > > Don't worry......It'll be back....... > > > > > > > > maybe. > > > > > > toombaru > > ** Sorry, I'm not getting you. Your meaning is obscure. > > Ken Ken, All descriptions of any matters spiritual are...... obscure. With that in mind: Within each mnemonic-bubble......somewhere amind the swirling-self-referential debris....there appears to be a " blind spot " .....a " place " where the illusory-identified-entity is attached to All-That-Is. Most bubbles spend " their " life totally oblivious to this attachment point. A few...seem to become aware of it......but most shy away after their first contact..... .....in that it appears like a vast emptiness..... " the void " . A very few are compelled to seek it out........ Some like Dan or Charlie........actually stick their heads through....and try to explain what they " saw' A few like Anna ....flirt with It....... If it is your destiny......It will get you.........no matter what you " do " . toombaru (anna taking on Cher role in Moonstruck) slaps toombaru on the head " Snap out of It " I am making love, not flirting, is that what you thought that that was? Sheeshhh Now I'm going for my walk, before I go out into the real world....)) ** If you do not wish to receive individual emails, to change your subscription, sign in with your ID and go to Edit My Groups: /mygroups?edit=1 Under the Message Delivery option, choose " No Email " for the Nisargadatta group and click on Save Changes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 19, 2005 Report Share Posted April 19, 2005 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " kenj02001 " <kenj02001> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Pedsie2@a... wrote: > > > > > > > > > > In a message dated 4/18/05 6:59:37 AM, dan330033 writes: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hey Pete- > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm saying that who I am can't be categorized as > > > > > > existing or not existing. > > > > > > > > > > > > Words refer to existences and the termination of existences. > > > > > > > > > > > > Words can't contain who I am. > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't know who I am by virtue of words, meanings, or > > memories. > > > > > > > > > > > > I just use them to communicate. > > > > > > > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > -- Dan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > P: Well, I'm going to agree with you. Is that OK? > > > > > I don't want you to reply that there was never > > > > > anyone to agree, or to be in agreement with, > > > > > and nothing was ever said. OK? Just kidding! > > > > > > > > > > Yes, and communication can be only about > > > > > mis-interpretations of " existence. " > > > > > > > > > > Pete > > > > > > > > Pete -- > > > > > > > > Yes, it's okay. Just fine. > > > > > > > > The funny thing about communicating about mis- interpretations > > > > of existence is that if one is misinterpreting existence, > > > > one will also misinterpret the communications offered to one. > > > > > > > > If one isn't mistinterpreting existence, then one doesn't > > > > require or involve any communications in one's knowing. > > > > > > > > Funny joke! > > > > > > > > A reminder not to take such communications or > > > > such communicators too seriously! > > > > > > > > -- Dan > > > > > > > > > The Great Communicator...............That which > > communicates...reminding its self not to take its self too > > seriously...... > > > > > > Do you get a picture of what's happening here? > > > > > > You have to be fast to see it......Oh...there it goes.... > > > > > > Geeeesssee......You missed it again. > > > > > > Don't worry......It'll be back....... > > > > > > > > > > > > maybe. > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > ** Sorry, I'm not getting you. Your meaning is obscure. > > > > Ken > > > > > Ken, > > All descriptions of any matters spiritual are...... obscure. > > With that in mind: > > Within each mnemonic-bubble......somewhere amind the swirling-self- referential debris....there appears to be a " blind spot " .....a " place " where the illusory-identified-entity is attached to All-That-Is. > > > Most bubbles spend " their " life totally oblivious to this attachment point. > > A few...seem to become aware of it......but most shy away after their first contact..... > > .....in that it appears like a vast emptiness..... " the void " . > > > A very few are compelled to seek it out........ > > Some like Dan or Charlie........actually stick their heads through....and try to explain what they " saw' > > A few like Anna ....flirt with It....... > > > If it is your destiny......It will get you.........no matter what you " do " . > > > toombaru ************* Bullshit. No one's sticking their heads anywhere expect up their own miserable ass. " Flirting " and " loving " is more of the same sick demonstration of the emotional problem that separateness is. Lovelessness itself. Yuck! Double yuck. Judi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 20, 2005 Report Share Posted April 20, 2005 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " kenj02001 " <kenj02001> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2004 " <cptc@w...> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Pedsie2@a... wrote: > > > > > > > > > > In a message dated 4/18/05 6:59:37 AM, dan330033 writes: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hey Pete- > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm saying that who I am can't be categorized as > > > > > > existing or not existing. > > > > > > > > > > > > Words refer to existences and the termination of existences. > > > > > > > > > > > > Words can't contain who I am. > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't know who I am by virtue of words, meanings, or > > memories. > > > > > > > > > > > > I just use them to communicate. > > > > > > > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > -- Dan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > P: Well, I'm going to agree with you. Is that OK? > > > > > I don't want you to reply that there was never > > > > > anyone to agree, or to be in agreement with, > > > > > and nothing was ever said. OK? Just kidding! > > > > > > > > > > Yes, and communication can be only about > > > > > mis-interpretations of " existence. " > > > > > > > > > > Pete > > > > > > > > Pete -- > > > > > > > > Yes, it's okay. Just fine. > > > > > > > > The funny thing about communicating about mis- interpretations > > > > of existence is that if one is misinterpreting existence, > > > > one will also misinterpret the communications offered to one. > > > > > > > > If one isn't mistinterpreting existence, then one doesn't > > > > require or involve any communications in one's knowing. > > > > > > > > Funny joke! > > > > > > > > A reminder not to take such communications or > > > > such communicators too seriously! > > > > > > > > -- Dan > > > > > > > > > The Great Communicator...............That which > > communicates...reminding its self not to take its self too > > seriously...... > > > > > > Do you get a picture of what's happening here? > > > > > > You have to be fast to see it......Oh...there it goes.... > > > > > > Geeeesssee......You missed it again. > > > > > > Don't worry......It'll be back....... > > > > > > > > > > > > maybe. > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > ** Sorry, I'm not getting you. Your meaning is obscure. > > > > Ken > > > > > Ken, > > All descriptions of any matters spiritual are...... obscure. > > With that in mind: > > Within each mnemonic-bubble......somewhere amind the swirling-self- referential debris....there appears to be a " blind spot " .....a " place " where the illusory-identified-entity is attached to All-That-Is. > > > Most bubbles spend " their " life totally oblivious to this attachment point. > > A few...seem to become aware of it......but most shy away after their first contact..... > > .....in that it appears like a vast emptiness..... " the void " . > > > A very few are compelled to seek it out........ > > Some like Dan or Charlie........actually stick their heads through....and try to explain what they " saw' > > A few like Anna ....flirt with It....... > > > If it is your destiny......It will get you.........no matter what you " do " . ** " Emptiness " must be empty of itself. Truth is this present now, empty of conceptualizing. Closer than breath, thus obviating seeking, approaching/flirting, enamorizing, warrioring, explaining, describing...or even 'aware-ing.' No 'time'--hence not even constructions can happen, take place. Destinies and stories--always already ending--*here.* Ken toombaru 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.