Guest guest Posted March 9, 2006 Report Share Posted March 9, 2006 Nisargadatta , ADHHUB wrote: > > > In a message dated 3/8/2006 8:10:10 PM Pacific Standard Time, > Nisargadatta writes: > > Thu, 09 Mar 2006 03:14:01 -0000 > " billrishel " <illusyn > Re: The sense of " me " > > > Why so much insistence on the disappearance > > of *sense of me*, Bill? > > I am saying that if there *is* a sense of " me " , > then it is unreal. Is 'unreal' a problem for you? > > I am saying that simply a sense of " within " is > unreal. Is that a problem? > > I don't think those points are generally understood. Why these 'points' need be 'understood'? There are so many things that we don't fully undersatnd: - birth - death - brain - consciousness - memory - atom - quanam physics - gravity - dark matter - white energy Why 'understanding' the so-caled 'unreality' of *sense of me* is so important? > > Bill > [...] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 9, 2006 Report Share Posted March 9, 2006 > > Why 'understanding' the so-caled 'unreality' > of *sense of me* is so important? > > The I-am is the only door into the dream of separation....and the only door back out. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 9, 2006 Report Share Posted March 9, 2006 --- Arvind <adithya_comming a écrit : Nisargadatta , ADHHUB wrote: > > > > Why so much insistence on the disappearance > > of *sense of me*, Bill? > > I am saying that if there *is* a sense of " me " , > then it is unreal. Is 'unreal' a problem for you? > > I am saying that simply a sense of " within " is > unreal. Is that a problem? > > I don't think those points are generally understood. Why these 'points' need be 'understood'? There are so many things that we don't fully undersatnd: - birth - death - brain - consciousness - memory - atom - quanam physics - gravity - dark matter - white energy Why 'understanding' the so-caled 'unreality' of *sense of me* is so important? Bill > ..........................................> <Why 'understanding' the so-called 'unreality' of *sense of me* is so important?> I wonder why!? `Cause I am weary of knowedge, that kind of knowedge..I`ve been building a castle of <true>concepts regarding unreality, still this castle is made of sand. Full of irrefutable smoke, creating bigger divisions, even in the best of intentions. I am doing the thing that CAN`T be DONE : Recede in my own self, stay put into quietude, where the store house of everything lays. Patricia [...] ** 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 March 10, 2006 Report Share Posted March 10, 2006 Nisargadatta , ADHHUB wrote: > > > In a message dated 3/8/2006 8:10:10 PM Pacific Standard Time, > Nisargadatta writes: > > Thu, 09 Mar 2006 03:14:01 -0000 > " billrishel " <illusyn > Re: The sense of " me " > > > Why so much insistence on the disappearance > > of *sense of me*, Bill? > > I am saying that if there *is* a sense of " me " , > then it is unreal. Is 'unreal' a problem for you? > > I am saying that simply a sense of " within " is > unreal. Is that a problem? > > I don't think those points are generally understood. Why these 'points' need be 'understood'? There are so many things that we don't fully undersatnd: - birth - death - brain - consciousness - memory - atom - quanam physics - gravity - dark matter - white energy Why 'understanding' the so-caled 'unreality' of *sense of me* is so important? > > Bill > [...] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 10, 2006 Report Share Posted March 10, 2006 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > > > > > Why 'understanding' the so-caled 'unreality' > > of *sense of me* is so important? > > > > > > > The I-am is the only door into the dream of separation....and the only door back out. > > > toombaru > Shazaam!! The I-am is the first lie. All the rest is just glitter stuck to it. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 10, 2006 Report Share Posted March 10, 2006 <Why 'understanding' the so-called 'unreality' of *sense of me* is so important?> I wonder why!? `Cause I am weary of knowedge, that kind of knowedge..I`ve been building a castle of <true>concepts regarding unreality, still this castle is made of sand. Full of irrefutable smoke, creating bigger divisions, even in the best of intentions. I am doing the thing that CAN`T be DONE : Recede in my own self, stay put into quietude, where the store house of everything lays. Patricia ~~~~~~~~~ words of a mystic Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 10, 2006 Report Share Posted March 10, 2006 Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn wrote: > > You bring up problems. > You bring up questions. > Your problems, your questions. > > If you wish to engage in dialog, > engage in dialog. > > Rhetorical questions do not so engage. > > Bill Feel free to only answer what is complimentary or, that which *fulfills* your version of *self image*, Bill! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 10, 2006 Report Share Posted March 10, 2006 --- billrishel <illusyn a écrit : Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > > > > > Why 'understanding' the so-caled 'unreality' > > of *sense of me* is so important? > > > > > > > The I-am is the only door into the dream of separation....and the only door back out. > > > toombaru > Shazaam!! The I-am is the first lie. All the rest is just glitter stuck to it. Bill ........................................................ he he I like that. The first lie needs to be faced, Trying to face all the others simply multiply them. Patricia ** 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 March 10, 2006 Report Share Posted March 10, 2006 Nisargadatta , OConnor Patricia <gdtige wrote: > > > --- billrishel <illusyn a écrit : > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " > <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Why 'understanding' the so-caled 'unreality' > > > of *sense of me* is so important? > > > > > > > > > > > > The I-am is the only door into the dream of > separation....and the > only door back out. > > > > > > toombaru > > > > Shazaam!! > > The I-am is the first lie. > All the rest is just glitter stuck to it. > > > Bill > ....................................................... > he he I like that. The first lie needs to be faced, > Trying to face all the others simply multiply them. > Patricia > > > Kill the root......and the tree dies. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 10, 2006 Report Share Posted March 10, 2006 Nisargadatta , OConnor Patricia <gdtige wrote: > > > --- billrishel <illusyn a écrit : > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " > <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Why 'understanding' the so-caled 'unreality' > > > of *sense of me* is so important? > > > > > > > > > > > > The I-am is the only door into the dream of > separation....and the > only door back out. > > > > > > toombaru > > > > Shazaam!! > > The I-am is the first lie. > All the rest is just glitter stuck to it. > > > Bill > ....................................................... he he I like that. The first lie needs to be faced, Trying to face all the others simply multiply them. Patricia ~~~~~ ahhh... that's right isn't it Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 10, 2006 Report Share Posted March 10, 2006 Nisargadatta , " Arvind " <adithya_comming wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > wrote: > > > > You bring up problems. > > You bring up questions. > > Your problems, your questions. > > > > If you wish to engage in dialog, > > engage in dialog. > > > > Rhetorical questions do not so engage. > > > > Bill > > > Feel free to only answer > what is complimentary > > or, that which *fulfills* your version > of *self image*, Bill! > Now you are being snide, ac. It does not become you. As toombaru suggested recently: can we abstain from ad hominem? Perhaps you are frustrated that I don't take your rhetorical questions seriously? You shouldn't be. Rhetorical questions are a form of trash-talk and not suitable for dignified discussion. Bill 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.