Guest guest Posted March 15, 2006 Report Share Posted March 15, 2006 between " you " and " God " is " you " God is God.... nobody else Marc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 15, 2006 Report Share Posted March 15, 2006 Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33 wrote: > > > > between " you " and " God " is " you " > > God is God.... > > nobody else > > Marc > that's why you are god Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 15, 2006 Report Share Posted March 15, 2006 Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > between " you " and " God " is " you " > > > > God is God.... > > > > nobody else > > > > Marc > > > > that's why you are god no...lol.... God is God....and not " you " ...or " me " ...or " thought234 " Marc > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 15, 2006 Report Share Posted March 15, 2006 Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > between " you " and " God " is " you " > > > > > > God is God.... > > > > > > nobody else > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > that's why you are god > > no...lol.... > > God is God....and not " you " ...or " me " ...or " thought234 " > > Marc > > > your ignorance is surprising Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 15, 2006 Report Share Posted March 15, 2006 Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > between " you " and " God " is " you " > > > > > > > > God is God.... > > > > > > > > nobody else > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > that's why you are god > > > > no...lol.... > > > > God is God....and not " you " ...or " me " ...or " thought234 " > > > > Marc > > > > > > > your ignorance is surprising so: bigwaaba is God....if you want.....why not..... nobody realy care Marc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 15, 2006 Report Share Posted March 15, 2006 Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > between " you " and " God " is " you " > > > > > > > > > > God is God.... > > > > > > > > > > nobody else > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > that's why you are god > > > > > > no...lol.... > > > > > > God is God....and not " you " ...or " me " ...or " thought234 " > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > your ignorance is surprising > > so: bigwaaba is God....if you want.....why not..... > nobody realy care > > > > Marc > i do not want to have anything to do with god, his prayers and imprecations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 15, 2006 Report Share Posted March 15, 2006 Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > between " you " and " God " is " you " > > > > > > > > > > > > God is God.... > > > > > > > > > > > > nobody else > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that's why you are god > > > > > > > > no...lol.... > > > > > > > > God is God....and not " you " ...or " me " ...or " thought234 " > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your ignorance is surprising > > > > so: bigwaaba is God....if you want.....why not..... > > nobody realy care > > > > > > > > Marc > > > i do not want to have anything to do with god, his prayers and > imprecations. i could understand your fears ....concerning the need to pray...one day.....for more " understanding " .... Marc > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 15, 2006 Report Share Posted March 15, 2006 Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > between " you " and " God " is " you " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > God is God.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > nobody else > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that's why you are god > > > > > > > > > > no...lol.... > > > > > > > > > > God is God....and not " you " ...or " me " ...or " thought234 " > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your ignorance is surprising > > > > > > so: bigwaaba is God....if you want.....why not..... > > > nobody realy care > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > i do not want to have anything to do with god, his prayers and > > imprecations. > > > i could understand your fears ....concerning the need to pray...one > day.....for more " understanding " .... > > > > Marc > > > Ok, Marc, your words: between " you " and " God " is " you " God is God.... nobody else Now, saying that " you " is the between between " you " and " God " is sayng that there is no between, hence no separation. the result of it is that the sentence " you are God " is acceptable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 15, 2006 Report Share Posted March 15, 2006 Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > between " you " and " God " is " you " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > God is God.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > nobody else > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that's why you are god > > > > > > > > > > > > no...lol.... > > > > > > > > > > > > God is God....and not " you " ...or " me " ...or " thought234 " > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your ignorance is surprising > > > > > > > > so: bigwaaba is God....if you want.....why not..... > > > > nobody realy care > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > i do not want to have anything to do with god, his prayers and > > > imprecations. > > > > > > i could understand your fears ....concerning the need to pray...one > > day.....for more " understanding " .... > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > Ok, Marc, your words: > > > between " you " and " God " is " you " > God is God.... > nobody else > > Now, saying that " you " is the between between " you " and " God " is > sayng that there is no between, hence no separation. > the result of it is that the sentence " you are God " is acceptable. no bigwaaba.....this is not what i wanted to express the " you " itself is what make the difference to " God " in reality, there is no individuality like a " you " and " me " and " he " and " she " .... the sentence " you are God " is indeed very popular sentence .... it give a nice " role " for little individualities....to play....without " bondage " .....with the happiness of a child......feeling Love for the One..... " producer God " .... Marc > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 15, 2006 Report Share Posted March 15, 2006 Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " > <bigwaaba@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > between " you " and " God " is " you " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > God is God.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > nobody else > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that's why you are god > > > > > > > > > > > > > > no...lol.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > God is God....and not " you " ...or " me " ...or " thought234 " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your ignorance is surprising > > > > > > > > > > so: bigwaaba is God....if you want.....why not..... > > > > > nobody realy care > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > i do not want to have anything to do with god, his prayers and > > > > imprecations. > > > > > > > > > i could understand your fears ....concerning the need to > pray...one > > > day.....for more " understanding " .... > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > Ok, Marc, your words: > > > > > > between " you " and " God " is " you " > > God is God.... > > nobody else > > > > Now, saying that " you " is the between between " you " and " God " is > > sayng that there is no between, hence no separation. > > the result of it is that the sentence " you are God " is acceptable. > > no bigwaaba.....this is not what i wanted to express > > the " you " itself is what make the difference to " God " > > in reality, there is no individuality like a " you " and " me " and " he " > and " she " .... > > the sentence " you are God " is indeed very popular sentence .... > it give a nice " role " for little individualities....to > play....without " bondage " .....with the happiness of a > child......feeling Love for the One..... " producer God " .... > > > > Marc > it doesn't matter what you wanted to express my previous mail is the honesty of what you wrote. are you denying it? again, you write that the " you " is what makes the difference to " God " and soon after you write there is no individuality like " you " . hence there is no individuality like " you " that is making any difference to " God " . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 15, 2006 Report Share Posted March 15, 2006 Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " > > <bigwaaba@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > between " you " and " God " is " you " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > God is God.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > nobody else > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that's why you are god > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > no...lol.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > God is God....and not " you " ...or " me " ...or " thought234 " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your ignorance is surprising > > > > > > > > > > > > so: bigwaaba is God....if you want.....why not..... > > > > > > nobody realy care > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > i do not want to have anything to do with god, his prayers > and > > > > > imprecations. > > > > > > > > > > > > i could understand your fears ....concerning the need to > > pray...one > > > > day.....for more " understanding " .... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ok, Marc, your words: > > > > > > > > > between " you " and " God " is " you " > > > God is God.... > > > nobody else > > > > > > Now, saying that " you " is the between between " you " and " God " is > > > sayng that there is no between, hence no separation. > > > the result of it is that the sentence " you are God " is acceptable. > > > > no bigwaaba.....this is not what i wanted to express > > > > the " you " itself is what make the difference to " God " > > > > in reality, there is no individuality like a " you " and " me " > and " he " > > and " she " .... > > > > the sentence " you are God " is indeed very popular sentence .... > > it give a nice " role " for little individualities....to > > play....without " bondage " .....with the happiness of a > > child......feeling Love for the One..... " producer God " .... > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > it doesn't matter what you wanted to express > my previous mail is the honesty of what you wrote. > are you denying it? > again, you write that the " you " is what makes the difference to > " God " and soon after you write there is no individuality like " you " . > hence there is no individuality like " you " that is making any > difference to " God " . you could " think " little about the written words.... there is a " you " ...and there is no " you " ...... there is a " you " as for example....dreaming to be in action.....while sleeping during night..... there is a " you " as for example....dreaming to be in action.....while " you " write this " your " messages..... to percieve this " you " ....now....in reading " your " words.....there is a need of a " me " .....indeed...... but all this happen in mind only...... " God " couldn't write...and read.... " himself " .....any words.......from somebody......to somebody......or to Him Marc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 15, 2006 Report Share Posted March 15, 2006 Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " > <bigwaaba@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " > > > <bigwaaba@> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > between " you " and " God " is " you " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > God is God.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > nobody else > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that's why you are god > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > no...lol.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > God is God....and > not " you " ...or " me " ...or " thought234 " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your ignorance is surprising > > > > > > > > > > > > > > so: bigwaaba is God....if you want.....why not..... > > > > > > > nobody realy care > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > i do not want to have anything to do with god, his prayers > > and > > > > > > imprecations. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > i could understand your fears ....concerning the need to > > > pray...one > > > > > day.....for more " understanding " .... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ok, Marc, your words: > > > > > > > > > > > > between " you " and " God " is " you " > > > > God is God.... > > > > nobody else > > > > > > > > Now, saying that " you " is the between between " you " and " God " > is > > > > sayng that there is no between, hence no separation. > > > > the result of it is that the sentence " you are God " is > acceptable. > > > > > > no bigwaaba.....this is not what i wanted to express > > > > > > the " you " itself is what make the difference to " God " > > > > > > in reality, there is no individuality like a " you " and " me " > > and " he " > > > and " she " .... > > > > > > the sentence " you are God " is indeed very popular sentence .... > > > it give a nice " role " for little individualities....to > > > play....without " bondage " .....with the happiness of a > > > child......feeling Love for the One..... " producer God " .... > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > it doesn't matter what you wanted to express > > my previous mail is the honesty of what you wrote. > > are you denying it? > > again, you write that the " you " is what makes the difference to > > " God " and soon after you write there is no individuality > like " you " . > > hence there is no individuality like " you " that is making any > > difference to " God " . > > > you could " think " little about the written words.... > > there is a " you " ...and there is no " you " ...... > > there is a " you " as for example....dreaming to be in action.....while > sleeping during night..... > > there is a " you " as for example....dreaming to be in > action.....while " you " write this " your " messages..... > > to percieve this " you " ....now....in reading " your " words.....there is > a need of a " me " .....indeed...... > > but all this happen in mind only...... > > " God " couldn't write...and read.... " himself " .....any words.......from > somebody......to somebody......or to Him > > Marc > it is not clear Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 15, 2006 Report Share Posted March 15, 2006 Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " > > <bigwaaba@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " > > > > <bigwaaba@> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > > > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > between " you " and " God " is " you " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > God is God.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > nobody else > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that's why you are god > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > no...lol.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > God is God....and > > not " you " ...or " me " ...or " thought234 " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your ignorance is surprising > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > so: bigwaaba is God....if you want.....why not..... > > > > > > > > nobody realy care > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > i do not want to have anything to do with god, his > prayers > > > and > > > > > > > imprecations. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > i could understand your fears ....concerning the need to > > > > pray...one > > > > > > day.....for more " understanding " .... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ok, Marc, your words: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > between " you " and " God " is " you " > > > > > God is God.... > > > > > nobody else > > > > > > > > > > Now, saying that " you " is the between between " you " and " God " > > is > > > > > sayng that there is no between, hence no separation. > > > > > the result of it is that the sentence " you are God " is > > acceptable. > > > > > > > > no bigwaaba.....this is not what i wanted to express > > > > > > > > the " you " itself is what make the difference to " God " > > > > > > > > in reality, there is no individuality like a " you " and " me " > > > and " he " > > > > and " she " .... > > > > > > > > the sentence " you are God " is indeed very popular sentence .... > > > > it give a nice " role " for little individualities....to > > > > play....without " bondage " .....with the happiness of a > > > > child......feeling Love for the One..... " producer God " .... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > it doesn't matter what you wanted to express > > > my previous mail is the honesty of what you wrote. > > > are you denying it? > > > again, you write that the " you " is what makes the difference to > > > " God " and soon after you write there is no individuality > > like " you " . > > > hence there is no individuality like " you " that is making any > > > difference to " God " . > > > > > > you could " think " little about the written words.... > > > > there is a " you " ...and there is no " you " ...... > > > > there is a " you " as for example....dreaming to be in > action.....while > > sleeping during night..... > > > > there is a " you " as for example....dreaming to be in > > action.....while " you " write this " your " messages..... > > > > to percieve this " you " ....now....in reading " your " words.....there > is > > a need of a " me " .....indeed...... > > > > but all this happen in mind only...... > > > > " God " couldn't write...and read.... " himself " .....any > words.......from > > somebody......to somebody......or to Him > > > > Marc > > > > it is not clear words concern mind when the words talk about " God " .... it try to talk about what is behind mind to write....whatever....it need the energy of " God " ..... to be in " move " ....there need to be a relation to something....not in move Marc > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 15, 2006 Report Share Posted March 15, 2006 Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " > <bigwaaba@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " > > > <bigwaaba@> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " > > > > > <bigwaaba@> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > > > > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > between " you " and " God " is " you " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > God is God.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > nobody else > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that's why you are god > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > no...lol.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > God is God....and > > > not " you " ...or " me " ...or " thought234 " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your ignorance is surprising > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > so: bigwaaba is God....if you want.....why not..... > > > > > > > > > nobody realy care > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > i do not want to have anything to do with god, his > > prayers > > > > and > > > > > > > > imprecations. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > i could understand your fears ....concerning the need to > > > > > pray...one > > > > > > > day.....for more " understanding " .... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ok, Marc, your words: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > between " you " and " God " is " you " > > > > > > God is God.... > > > > > > nobody else > > > > > > > > > > > > Now, saying that " you " is the between between " you " > and " God " > > > is > > > > > > sayng that there is no between, hence no separation. > > > > > > the result of it is that the sentence " you are God " is > > > acceptable. > > > > > > > > > > no bigwaaba.....this is not what i wanted to express > > > > > > > > > > the " you " itself is what make the difference to " God " > > > > > > > > > > in reality, there is no individuality like a " you " and " me " > > > > and " he " > > > > > and " she " .... > > > > > > > > > > the sentence " you are God " is indeed very popular > sentence .... > > > > > it give a nice " role " for little individualities....to > > > > > play....without " bondage " .....with the happiness of a > > > > > child......feeling Love for the One..... " producer God " .... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > it doesn't matter what you wanted to express > > > > my previous mail is the honesty of what you wrote. > > > > are you denying it? > > > > again, you write that the " you " is what makes the difference to > > > > " God " and soon after you write there is no individuality > > > like " you " . > > > > hence there is no individuality like " you " that is making any > > > > difference to " God " . > > > > > > > > > you could " think " little about the written words.... > > > > > > there is a " you " ...and there is no " you " ...... > > > > > > there is a " you " as for example....dreaming to be in > > action.....while > > > sleeping during night..... > > > > > > there is a " you " as for example....dreaming to be in > > > action.....while " you " write this " your " messages..... > > > > > > to percieve this " you " ....now....in reading " your " > words.....there > > is > > > a need of a " me " .....indeed...... > > > > > > but all this happen in mind only...... > > > > > > " God " couldn't write...and read.... " himself " .....any > > words.......from > > > somebody......to somebody......or to Him > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > it is not clear > > > words concern mind > > when the words talk about " God " .... > > it try to talk about what is behind mind > > to write....whatever....it need the energy of " God " ..... > > to be in " move " ....there need to be a relation to something....not > in move > > Marc ok, thank you. now, my point is that what is behind the mind is another concept. so the word trying to talk about another word is destined to fail. i ask you Marc, have you experienced what is behind the mind? are you referring , pointing to something when using that concept? my experience is that behind the mind there is nothing. and yours? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 15, 2006 Report Share Posted March 15, 2006 Marc, What would you do if your guru would give you the task for one year not to use and think the word God ? Poor Marc ... Werner Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " > <bigwaaba@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " > > > <bigwaaba@> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " > > > > > <bigwaaba@> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > > > > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > between " you " and " God " is " you " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > God is God.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > nobody else > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that's why you are god > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > no...lol.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > God is God....and > > > not " you " ...or " me " ...or " thought234 " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your ignorance is surprising > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > so: bigwaaba is God....if you want.....why not..... > > > > > > > > > nobody realy care > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > i do not want to have anything to do with god, his > > prayers > > > > and > > > > > > > > imprecations. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > i could understand your fears ....concerning the need to > > > > > pray...one > > > > > > > day.....for more " understanding " .... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ok, Marc, your words: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > between " you " and " God " is " you " > > > > > > God is God.... > > > > > > nobody else > > > > > > > > > > > > Now, saying that " you " is the between between " you " > and " God " > > > is > > > > > > sayng that there is no between, hence no separation. > > > > > > the result of it is that the sentence " you are God " is > > > acceptable. > > > > > > > > > > no bigwaaba.....this is not what i wanted to express > > > > > > > > > > the " you " itself is what make the difference to " God " > > > > > > > > > > in reality, there is no individuality like a " you " and " me " > > > > and " he " > > > > > and " she " .... > > > > > > > > > > the sentence " you are God " is indeed very popular > sentence .... > > > > > it give a nice " role " for little individualities....to > > > > > play....without " bondage " .....with the happiness of a > > > > > child......feeling Love for the One..... " producer God " .... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > it doesn't matter what you wanted to express > > > > my previous mail is the honesty of what you wrote. > > > > are you denying it? > > > > again, you write that the " you " is what makes the difference to > > > > " God " and soon after you write there is no individuality > > > like " you " . > > > > hence there is no individuality like " you " that is making any > > > > difference to " God " . > > > > > > > > > you could " think " little about the written words.... > > > > > > there is a " you " ...and there is no " you " ...... > > > > > > there is a " you " as for example....dreaming to be in > > action.....while > > > sleeping during night..... > > > > > > there is a " you " as for example....dreaming to be in > > > action.....while " you " write this " your " messages..... > > > > > > to percieve this " you " ....now....in reading " your " > words.....there > > is > > > a need of a " me " .....indeed...... > > > > > > but all this happen in mind only...... > > > > > > " God " couldn't write...and read.... " himself " .....any > > words.......from > > > somebody......to somebody......or to Him > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > it is not clear > > > words concern mind > > when the words talk about " God " .... > > it try to talk about what is behind mind > > to write....whatever....it need the energy of " God " ..... > > to be in " move " ....there need to be a relation to something....not > in move > > Marc > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 15, 2006 Report Share Posted March 15, 2006 Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " > > <bigwaaba@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " > > > > <bigwaaba@> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > > > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " > > > > > > <bigwaaba@> > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > > > > > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > between " you " and " God " is " you " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > God is God.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > nobody else > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that's why you are god > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > no...lol.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > God is God....and > > > > not " you " ...or " me " ...or " thought234 " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your ignorance is surprising > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > so: bigwaaba is God....if you want.....why not..... > > > > > > > > > > nobody realy care > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > i do not want to have anything to do with god, his > > > prayers > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > imprecations. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > i could understand your fears ....concerning the need > to > > > > > > pray...one > > > > > > > > day.....for more " understanding " .... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ok, Marc, your words: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > between " you " and " God " is " you " > > > > > > > God is God.... > > > > > > > nobody else > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now, saying that " you " is the between between " you " > > and " God " > > > > is > > > > > > > sayng that there is no between, hence no separation. > > > > > > > the result of it is that the sentence " you are God " is > > > > acceptable. > > > > > > > > > > > > no bigwaaba.....this is not what i wanted to express > > > > > > > > > > > > the " you " itself is what make the difference to " God " > > > > > > > > > > > > in reality, there is no individuality like a " you " and " me " > > > > > and " he " > > > > > > and " she " .... > > > > > > > > > > > > the sentence " you are God " is indeed very popular > > sentence .... > > > > > > it give a nice " role " for little individualities....to > > > > > > play....without " bondage " .....with the happiness of a > > > > > > child......feeling Love for the One..... " producer God " .... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it doesn't matter what you wanted to express > > > > > my previous mail is the honesty of what you wrote. > > > > > are you denying it? > > > > > again, you write that the " you " is what makes the difference > to > > > > > " God " and soon after you write there is no individuality > > > > like " you " . > > > > > hence there is no individuality like " you " that is making any > > > > > difference to " God " . > > > > > > > > > > > > you could " think " little about the written words.... > > > > > > > > there is a " you " ...and there is no " you " ...... > > > > > > > > there is a " you " as for example....dreaming to be in > > > action.....while > > > > sleeping during night..... > > > > > > > > there is a " you " as for example....dreaming to be in > > > > action.....while " you " write this " your " messages..... > > > > > > > > to percieve this " you " ....now....in reading " your " > > words.....there > > > is > > > > a need of a " me " .....indeed...... > > > > > > > > but all this happen in mind only...... > > > > > > > > " God " couldn't write...and read.... " himself " .....any > > > words.......from > > > > somebody......to somebody......or to Him > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > it is not clear > > > > > > words concern mind > > > > when the words talk about " God " .... > > > > it try to talk about what is behind mind > > > > to write....whatever....it need the energy of " God " ..... > > > > to be in " move " ....there need to be a relation to something....not > > in move > > > > Marc > > > ok, thank you. > now, my point is that what is behind the mind is another concept. > so the word trying to talk about another word is destined to fail. > i ask you Marc, have you experienced what is behind the mind? > are you referring , pointing to something when using that concept? > my experience is that behind the mind there is nothing. > and yours? everything what is related (limited by) " time and space " ....is mind whatever is not concerned about " time and space " ....Is.... " nothingness " ......or " whatever " .... Marc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 15, 2006 Report Share Posted March 15, 2006 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr wrote: > > Marc, > > What would you do if your guru would give you the task for one year > not to use and think the word God ? > > Poor Marc ... > > Werner LOL i have no problem with " God " .....do you have one? Marc > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " > > <bigwaaba@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " > > > > <bigwaaba@> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > > > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " > > > > > > <bigwaaba@> > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > > > > > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > between " you " and " God " is " you " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > God is God.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > nobody else > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that's why you are god > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > no...lol.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > God is God....and > > > > not " you " ...or " me " ...or " thought234 " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your ignorance is surprising > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > so: bigwaaba is God....if you want.....why not..... > > > > > > > > > > nobody realy care > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > i do not want to have anything to do with god, his > > > prayers > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > imprecations. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > i could understand your fears ....concerning the need > to > > > > > > pray...one > > > > > > > > day.....for more " understanding " .... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ok, Marc, your words: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > between " you " and " God " is " you " > > > > > > > God is God.... > > > > > > > nobody else > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now, saying that " you " is the between between " you " > > and " God " > > > > is > > > > > > > sayng that there is no between, hence no separation. > > > > > > > the result of it is that the sentence " you are God " is > > > > acceptable. > > > > > > > > > > > > no bigwaaba.....this is not what i wanted to express > > > > > > > > > > > > the " you " itself is what make the difference to " God " > > > > > > > > > > > > in reality, there is no individuality like a " you " and " me " > > > > > and " he " > > > > > > and " she " .... > > > > > > > > > > > > the sentence " you are God " is indeed very popular > > sentence .... > > > > > > it give a nice " role " for little individualities....to > > > > > > play....without " bondage " .....with the happiness of a > > > > > > child......feeling Love for the One..... " producer God " .... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it doesn't matter what you wanted to express > > > > > my previous mail is the honesty of what you wrote. > > > > > are you denying it? > > > > > again, you write that the " you " is what makes the difference > to > > > > > " God " and soon after you write there is no individuality > > > > like " you " . > > > > > hence there is no individuality like " you " that is making any > > > > > difference to " God " . > > > > > > > > > > > > you could " think " little about the written words.... > > > > > > > > there is a " you " ...and there is no " you " ...... > > > > > > > > there is a " you " as for example....dreaming to be in > > > action.....while > > > > sleeping during night..... > > > > > > > > there is a " you " as for example....dreaming to be in > > > > action.....while " you " write this " your " messages..... > > > > > > > > to percieve this " you " ....now....in reading " your " > > words.....there > > > is > > > > a need of a " me " .....indeed...... > > > > > > > > but all this happen in mind only...... > > > > > > > > " God " couldn't write...and read.... " himself " .....any > > > words.......from > > > > somebody......to somebody......or to Him > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > it is not clear > > > > > > words concern mind > > > > when the words talk about " God " .... > > > > it try to talk about what is behind mind > > > > to write....whatever....it need the energy of " God " ..... > > > > to be in " move " ....there need to be a relation to something....not > > in move > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 15, 2006 Report Share Posted March 15, 2006 Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " > <bigwaaba@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " > > > <bigwaaba@> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " > > > > > <bigwaaba@> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > > > > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " > > > > > > > <bigwaaba@> > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > between " you " and " God " is " you " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > God is God.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > nobody else > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that's why you are god > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > no...lol.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > God is God....and > > > > > not " you " ...or " me " ...or " thought234 " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your ignorance is surprising > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > so: bigwaaba is God....if you want.....why > not..... > > > > > > > > > > > nobody realy care > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > i do not want to have anything to do with god, his > > > > prayers > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > imprecations. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > i could understand your fears ....concerning the need > > to > > > > > > > pray...one > > > > > > > > > day.....for more " understanding " .... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ok, Marc, your words: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > between " you " and " God " is " you " > > > > > > > > God is God.... > > > > > > > > nobody else > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now, saying that " you " is the between between " you " > > > and " God " > > > > > is > > > > > > > > sayng that there is no between, hence no separation. > > > > > > > > the result of it is that the sentence " you are God " is > > > > > acceptable. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > no bigwaaba.....this is not what i wanted to express > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the " you " itself is what make the difference to " God " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in reality, there is no individuality like a " you " > and " me " > > > > > > and " he " > > > > > > > and " she " .... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the sentence " you are God " is indeed very popular > > > sentence .... > > > > > > > it give a nice " role " for little individualities....to > > > > > > > play....without " bondage " .....with the happiness of a > > > > > > > child......feeling Love for the One..... " producer God " .... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it doesn't matter what you wanted to express > > > > > > my previous mail is the honesty of what you wrote. > > > > > > are you denying it? > > > > > > again, you write that the " you " is what makes the > difference > > to > > > > > > " God " and soon after you write there is no individuality > > > > > like " you " . > > > > > > hence there is no individuality like " you " that is making > any > > > > > > difference to " God " . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you could " think " little about the written words.... > > > > > > > > > > there is a " you " ...and there is no " you " ...... > > > > > > > > > > there is a " you " as for example....dreaming to be in > > > > action.....while > > > > > sleeping during night..... > > > > > > > > > > there is a " you " as for example....dreaming to be in > > > > > action.....while " you " write this " your " messages..... > > > > > > > > > > to percieve this " you " ....now....in reading " your " > > > words.....there > > > > is > > > > > a need of a " me " .....indeed...... > > > > > > > > > > but all this happen in mind only...... > > > > > > > > > > " God " couldn't write...and read.... " himself " .....any > > > > words.......from > > > > > somebody......to somebody......or to Him > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > it is not clear > > > > > > > > > words concern mind > > > > > > when the words talk about " God " .... > > > > > > it try to talk about what is behind mind > > > > > > to write....whatever....it need the energy of " God " ..... > > > > > > to be in " move " ....there need to be a relation to > something....not > > > in move > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > ok, thank you. > > now, my point is that what is behind the mind is another concept. > > so the word trying to talk about another word is destined to fail. > > i ask you Marc, have you experienced what is behind the mind? > > are you referring , pointing to something when using that concept? > > my experience is that behind the mind there is nothing. > > and yours? > > everything what is related (limited by) " time and space " ....is mind > > whatever is not concerned about " time and > space " ....Is.... " nothingness " ......or " whatever " .... > > Marc > does it seem to you the answer of a sane mind? it is not clear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 16, 2006 Report Share Posted March 16, 2006 Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " > > <bigwaaba@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " > > > > <bigwaaba@> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > > > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " > > > > > > <bigwaaba@> > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > > > > > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " > > > > > > > > <bigwaaba@> > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > between " you " and " God " is " you " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > God is God.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > nobody else > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that's why you are god > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > no...lol.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > God is God....and > > > > > > not " you " ...or " me " ...or " thought234 " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > your ignorance is surprising > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > so: bigwaaba is God....if you want.....why > > not..... > > > > > > > > > > > > nobody realy care > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > i do not want to have anything to do with god, > his > > > > > prayers > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > > > imprecations. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > i could understand your fears ....concerning the > need > > > to > > > > > > > > pray...one > > > > > > > > > > day.....for more " understanding " .... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ok, Marc, your words: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > between " you " and " God " is " you " > > > > > > > > > God is God.... > > > > > > > > > nobody else > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now, saying that " you " is the between between " you " > > > > and " God " > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > sayng that there is no between, hence no separation. > > > > > > > > > the result of it is that the sentence " you are God " > is > > > > > > acceptable. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > no bigwaaba.....this is not what i wanted to express > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the " you " itself is what make the difference to " God " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > in reality, there is no individuality like a " you " > > and " me " > > > > > > > and " he " > > > > > > > > and " she " .... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the sentence " you are God " is indeed very popular > > > > sentence .... > > > > > > > > it give a nice " role " for little individualities....to > > > > > > > > play....without " bondage " .....with the happiness of a > > > > > > > > child......feeling Love for the One..... " producer > God " .... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it doesn't matter what you wanted to express > > > > > > > my previous mail is the honesty of what you wrote. > > > > > > > are you denying it? > > > > > > > again, you write that the " you " is what makes the > > difference > > > to > > > > > > > " God " and soon after you write there is no individuality > > > > > > like " you " . > > > > > > > hence there is no individuality like " you " that is making > > any > > > > > > > difference to " God " . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > you could " think " little about the written words.... > > > > > > > > > > > > there is a " you " ...and there is no " you " ...... > > > > > > > > > > > > there is a " you " as for example....dreaming to be in > > > > > action.....while > > > > > > sleeping during night..... > > > > > > > > > > > > there is a " you " as for example....dreaming to be in > > > > > > action.....while " you " write this " your " messages..... > > > > > > > > > > > > to percieve this " you " ....now....in reading " your " > > > > words.....there > > > > > is > > > > > > a need of a " me " .....indeed...... > > > > > > > > > > > > but all this happen in mind only...... > > > > > > > > > > > > " God " couldn't write...and read.... " himself " .....any > > > > > words.......from > > > > > > somebody......to somebody......or to Him > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it is not clear > > > > > > > > > > > > words concern mind > > > > > > > > when the words talk about " God " .... > > > > > > > > it try to talk about what is behind mind > > > > > > > > to write....whatever....it need the energy of " God " ..... > > > > > > > > to be in " move " ....there need to be a relation to > > something....not > > > > in move > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > ok, thank you. > > > now, my point is that what is behind the mind is another concept. > > > so the word trying to talk about another word is destined to fail. > > > i ask you Marc, have you experienced what is behind the mind? > > > are you referring , pointing to something when using that concept? > > > my experience is that behind the mind there is nothing. > > > and yours? > > > > everything what is related (limited by) " time and space " ....is mind > > > > whatever is not concerned about " time and > > space " ....Is.... " nothingness " ......or " whatever " .... > > > > Marc > > > > does it seem to you the answer of a sane mind? > it is not clear. it is not clear for you ....ok everything what is behind mind can't be described.... insteed to only give your statements to written messages.... maybe one day you could write about yourself...... thank you to be more sincere....and write your opinion and view and perception of the subject..... would be glad to know and read Marc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 16, 2006 Report Share Posted March 16, 2006 > > > > it is not clear for you ....ok > > everything what is behind mind can't be described.... W: it cannot be described because it is nothing, this is clear. first things first. is is so for you, Marc? or in your view it cannot be described because of some reason? or you think it has some features but they cannot be described? or do you think those features can be known but not communicated through words? > insteed to only give your statements to written messages.... > maybe one day you could write about yourself...... > > thank you to be more sincere....and write your opinion and view and > perception of the subject..... > > would be glad to know and read > > Marc > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 16, 2006 Report Share Posted March 16, 2006 Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba wrote: > > > > > > > > > > it is not clear for you ....ok > > > > everything what is behind mind can't be described.... > > W: it cannot be described because it is nothing, this is clear. > first things first. > is is so for you, Marc? > or in your view it cannot be described because of some reason? > or you think it has some features but they cannot be described? > or do you think those features can be known but not communicated > through words? > > Hi bigwaaba, yes, true....maybe the only reason one try to describe " truth " ....is ignorance so you tell that what is behind mind is nothing....i mean, clearly nothing sounds clear....indeed concerning your questions.... they look like only one question: " can there be description (for some reason)....or not? " no...there can't be description Marc > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 16, 2006 Report Share Posted March 16, 2006 Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it is not clear for you ....ok > > > > > > everything what is behind mind can't be described.... > > > > W: it cannot be described because it is nothing, this is clear. > > first things first. > > is is so for you, Marc? > > or in your view it cannot be described because of some reason? > > or you think it has some features but they cannot be described? > > or do you think those features can be known but not communicated > > through words? > > > > > Hi bigwaaba, > > yes, true....maybe the only reason one try to describe " truth " ....is > ignorance > > so you tell that what is behind mind is nothing....i mean, clearly > nothing > > sounds clear....indeed > > concerning your questions.... > they look like only one question: " can there be description (for some > reason)....or not? " > > no...there can't be description > > Marc > > > Hi Marc, realization of nothing leaves everything untouched setting everything where it belongs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 16, 2006 Report Share Posted March 16, 2006 Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it is not clear for you ....ok > > > > > > > > everything what is behind mind can't be described.... > > > > > > W: it cannot be described because it is nothing, this is clear. > > > first things first. > > > is is so for you, Marc? > > > or in your view it cannot be described because of some reason? > > > or you think it has some features but they cannot be described? > > > or do you think those features can be known but not > communicated > > > through words? > > > > > > > > Hi bigwaaba, > > > > yes, true....maybe the only reason one try to > describe " truth " ....is > > ignorance > > > > so you tell that what is behind mind is nothing....i mean, clearly > > nothing > > > > sounds clear....indeed > > > > concerning your questions.... > > they look like only one question: " can there be description (for > some > > reason)....or not? " > > > > no...there can't be description > > > > Marc > > > > > > > Hi Marc, > > realization of nothing leaves everything untouched > setting everything where it belongs " realization of nothing " ....?..... Marc > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 16, 2006 Report Share Posted March 16, 2006 Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it is not clear for you ....ok > > > > > > > > > > everything what is behind mind can't be described.... > > > > > > > > W: it cannot be described because it is nothing, this is clear. > > > > first things first. > > > > is is so for you, Marc? > > > > or in your view it cannot be described because of some > reason? > > > > or you think it has some features but they cannot be > described? > > > > or do you think those features can be known but not > > communicated > > > > through words? > > > > > > > > > > > Hi bigwaaba, > > > > > > yes, true....maybe the only reason one try to > > describe " truth " ....is > > > ignorance > > > > > > so you tell that what is behind mind is nothing....i mean, > clearly > > > nothing > > > > > > sounds clear....indeed > > > > > > concerning your questions.... > > > they look like only one question: " can there be description (for > > some > > > reason)....or not? " > > > > > > no...there can't be description > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Marc, > > > > realization of nothing leaves everything untouched > > setting everything where it belongs > > " realization of nothing " ....?..... > > Marc > > > yes no need to question it it is nothing what are you questioning? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 16, 2006 Report Share Posted March 16, 2006 Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > > > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " bigwaaba " <bigwaaba@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it is not clear for you ....ok > > > > > > > > > > > > everything what is behind mind can't be described.... > > > > > > > > > > W: it cannot be described because it is nothing, this is > clear. > > > > > first things first. > > > > > is is so for you, Marc? > > > > > or in your view it cannot be described because of some > > reason? > > > > > or you think it has some features but they cannot be > > described? > > > > > or do you think those features can be known but not > > > communicated > > > > > through words? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi bigwaaba, > > > > > > > > yes, true....maybe the only reason one try to > > > describe " truth " ....is > > > > ignorance > > > > > > > > so you tell that what is behind mind is nothing....i mean, > > clearly > > > > nothing > > > > > > > > sounds clear....indeed > > > > > > > > concerning your questions.... > > > > they look like only one question: " can there be description > (for > > > some > > > > reason)....or not? " > > > > > > > > no...there can't be description > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Marc, > > > > > > realization of nothing leaves everything untouched > > > setting everything where it belongs > > > > " realization of nothing " ....?..... > > > > Marc > > > > > > > yes > no need to question it > it is nothing > what are you questioning? i have no idea what do you mean with : " realization of nothing leaves everything untouched > > > setting everything where it belongs " you could try to explain Marc > 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.