Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

Thought

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

In a message dated 3/5/2006 6:45:16 AM Pacific Standard Time,

lastrain writes:

 

> Again, violence is simply resistance to

> >What Is. Nothing more, nothing less.

> >

> >

> >Bill

 

L.E: Resistence is simply resistance to

>What Is. Nothing more, nothing less.

Why call it violence?

 

Larry

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Love is violence,

it destroys everything that is unlike itself..in the act of

breathing...

 

Ana

 

>

>

>

> Thought is violence.

>

**

>

> 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.

>

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote:

>

>

>

>

>

> Thought is violence.

>

 

Not sure what you mean by " thought " .

*Thinking* is not inherently violent.

Contemplating a software problem is

thinking in some sense of the term.

But such contemplation can be free and

open, unattached to outcome, and unburdened

by any *particular thought*. Such contemplation

is like a stream flowing, with destination

unknown, and with its passage being fleet,

and light.

 

Again, violence is simply resistance to

What Is. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

 

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote:

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > Thought is violence.

> >

>

> Not sure what you mean by " thought " .

> *Thinking* is not inherently violent.

> Contemplating a software problem is

> thinking in some sense of the term.

> But such contemplation can be free and

> open, unattached to outcome, and unburdened

> by any *particular thought*. Such contemplation

> is like a stream flowing, with destination

> unknown, and with its passage being fleet,

> and light.

>

> Again, violence is simply resistance to

> What Is. Nothing more, nothing less.

>

>

> Bill

>

 

 

 

The one thinking has been conceptually carved and maintained.out of what is.

 

 

 

toombaru

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

In a message dated 3/5/2006 3:09:22 PM Pacific Standard Time,

lissbon2002 writes:

 

> Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain

> wrote:

>

> >Thought is violence.

>

>

> Pretty often.

>

> Len

 

Sometimes.

 

Larry

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

In a message dated 3/5/2006 5:34:47 AM Pacific Standard Time,

Nisargadatta writes:

 

Sun, 05 Mar 2006 08:00:46 -0000

" toombaru2006 " <lastrain

Thought

 

 

 

 

 

Thought is violence.

 

 

 

Stop that!.........Pass me a scone, will ya?

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> wrote:

> >

> > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote:

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Thought is violence.

> > >

> >

> > Not sure what you mean by " thought " .

> > *Thinking* is not inherently violent.

> > Contemplating a software problem is

> > thinking in some sense of the term.

> > But such contemplation can be free and

> > open, unattached to outcome, and unburdened

> > by any *particular thought*. Such contemplation

> > is like a stream flowing, with destination

> > unknown, and with its passage being fleet,

> > and light.

> >

> > Again, violence is simply resistance to

> > What Is. Nothing more, nothing less.

> >

> >

> > Bill

> >

>

>

>

> The one thinking has been conceptually carved and maintained.out of

what is.

>

>

>

> toombaru

>

 

Then that is not the What Is I am talking about.

 

Nothing is *maintained* in What Is.

 

And the " thinking " I spoke of has no thinker.

 

It is just as " writing " , that can happen without

a " writer " .

 

Or wind that can blow without a " blower " .

 

But to one for whom everything that happens

have a *doer*, this will all be senseless,

meaningless, incorrect. Well, it cannot be helped.

 

 

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...