Guest guest Posted April 25, 2006 Report Share Posted April 25, 2006 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > > > > > > Doesn't have to be that at all. > > I said in one of my replies on this thread that > > making " silent mind " an objective is a serious > > danger, and is one reason I tend to avoid talking > > about it. > > > > > > A danger to whom? > > You assume that there is an automomous self that can somehow put > itself in jeopardy through its own volitional action. > > You talk as if you have a choice about what words flow through your > mouth............almost as if you believe that you are something more > then a character in the movie. > > > > toombaru > no whom at all... if there is any " objective " with respect to experience there is confusion just a fact that an objective is operative does not entail that there is any who for whom it is operative any such " who " is purely imaginary what imagines...? we could say it is the brain... whatever it is... it is outside the realm of discussion this discussion occurs within imagination Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 25, 2006 Report Share Posted April 25, 2006 Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , ADHHUB@ wrote: > > > > > > In a message dated 4/22/2006 1:50:46 AM Pacific Daylight Time, > > Nisargadatta writes: > > > > Sat, 22 Apr 2006 03:15:16 -0000 > > " billrishel " <illusyn@> > > Re: Bill's Account of Inner Exploration > > > > ...Peace is when it *really doesn't matter*. > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > Yup, and maybe if it really, truly doesn't matter, the 0 becomes a > 1. That > > damn well better be the case or I'll really be mad! Hehe. > > > > > If it really, truly doesn´t matter, then the understanding doesn´t > matter. I don´t think there is such a thing as " doesn´t matter " , > this is just another goal ego sets to avoid suffering. > Suffering does matter, understanding does matter, freedom from > illusions does matter, goodness does matter. > It´s just that suffering cannot end through escape, through a fight > against it, so we have no other choice then going through pain. But > pretending that pain doesn´t matter makes us insensitive and not > capable of understanding. It is not fun, we cannot make ourselves > indifferent, we can only pretend to be indifferent, which will make > us dumb, insensitive. > If we are interested in understanding, it is exactly because it does > matter, more then anything. Understanding is the purpose of life. > > Len > so you *believe*? so much theory in these words... Now just is indifferent to whatever words Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 26, 2006 Report Share Posted April 26, 2006 Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn wrote: > any *preference* with respect to experience > is the jaws of confusion itself > > > Bill Jaws, confusion, who cares? No preferences, right? ;-) Len Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 26, 2006 Report Share Posted April 26, 2006 Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> wrote: > > > > any *preference* with respect to experience > > is the jaws of confusion itself > > > > > > Bill > > > Jaws, confusion, who cares? No preferences, right? ;-) > > Len > nobody cares Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 26, 2006 Report Share Posted April 26, 2006 Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > wrote: > > If it really, truly doesn´t matter, then the understanding doesn´t > > matter. I don´t think there is such a thing as " doesn´t matter " , > > this is just another goal ego sets to avoid suffering. > > Suffering does matter, understanding does matter, freedom from > > illusions does matter, goodness does matter. > > It´s just that suffering cannot end through escape, through a fight > > against it, so we have no other choice then going through pain. But > > pretending that pain doesn´t matter makes us insensitive and not > > capable of understanding. It is not fun, we cannot make ourselves > > indifferent, we can only pretend to be indifferent, which will make > > us dumb, insensitive. > > If we are interested in understanding, it is exactly because it does > > matter, more then anything. Understanding is the purpose of life. > > > > Len > so you *believe*? No, things just do matter to me. A lot. I´m not clinging to being indifferent in order not to feel, in order to avoid suffering, because this is sick. And a denial. I care about my own life an about others, and if this leads to suffering, I go right in it and through it and I suffer as much as it takes. And the beautiful thing is, that this suffering is not only cleansing, but when it ends, there is no left over, no emotion, no clinging, no sorrow, no fear, no " me " , just clarity of freedom. > so much theory in these words... No theory whatsoever. > Now just is > > indifferent to whatever words > > > Bill > You wish. This is what I call theory ;-) Len Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 26, 2006 Report Share Posted April 26, 2006 Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> wrote: > > > > > > > any *preference* with respect to experience > > > is the jaws of confusion itself > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > Jaws, confusion, who cares? No preferences, right? ;-) > > > > Len > > > > nobody cares > > > Bill True, nobody´s here, nobody cares, Peace and Bliss all over. Len Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 26, 2006 Report Share Posted April 26, 2006 Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > > wrote: > > > > > If it really, truly doesn´t matter, then the understanding > doesn´t > > > matter. I don´t think there is such a thing as " doesn´t matter " , > > > this is just another goal ego sets to avoid suffering. > > > Suffering does matter, understanding does matter, freedom from > > > illusions does matter, goodness does matter. > > > It´s just that suffering cannot end through escape, through a > fight > > > against it, so we have no other choice then going through pain. > But > > > pretending that pain doesn´t matter makes us insensitive and not > > > capable of understanding. It is not fun, we cannot make > ourselves > > > indifferent, we can only pretend to be indifferent, which will > make > > > us dumb, insensitive. > > > If we are interested in understanding, it is exactly because it > does > > > matter, more then anything. Understanding is the purpose of life. > > > > > > Len > > > > > so you *believe*? > > > > No, things just do matter to me. A lot. > I´m not clinging to being indifferent in order not to feel, in order > to avoid suffering, because this is sick. And a denial. > I care about my own life an about others, and if this leads to > suffering, I go right in it and through it and I suffer as much as > it takes. And the beautiful thing is, that this suffering is not > only cleansing, but when it ends, there is no left over, no emotion, > no clinging, no sorrow, no fear, no " me " , just clarity of freedom. > So it is good for you then... follow the path that suits you... But what is for you is not necessarily for others. > > so much theory in these words... > > > No theory whatsoever. > > > > > Now just is > > > > indifferent to whatever words > > > > > > Bill > > > > > You wish. where there are no words, how can words possibly matter? 'indifference' as used there is not an *attitude*... it refers to a non-distinguishing you are quick to judge perhaps you have no understanding of what I am saying which is OK I am not expecting my words to be understood they are just there for consideration Bill > This is what I call theory ;-) > > Len > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 26, 2006 Report Share Posted April 26, 2006 Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > any *preference* with respect to experience > > > > is the jaws of confusion itself > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > Jaws, confusion, who cares? No preferences, right? ;-) > > > > > > Len > > > > > > > nobody cares > > > > > > Bill > > > True, nobody´s here, nobody cares, Peace and Bliss all over. > > Len > bliss? a low and minor state don't hang onto it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 26, 2006 Report Share Posted April 26, 2006 Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > If it really, truly doesn´t matter, then the understanding > > doesn´t > > > > matter. I don´t think there is such a thing as " doesn´t matter " , > > > > this is just another goal ego sets to avoid suffering. > > > > Suffering does matter, understanding does matter, freedom from > > > > illusions does matter, goodness does matter. > > > > It´s just that suffering cannot end through escape, through a > > fight > > > > against it, so we have no other choice then going through pain. > > But > > > > pretending that pain doesn´t matter makes us insensitive and not > > > > capable of understanding. It is not fun, we cannot make > > ourselves > > > > indifferent, we can only pretend to be indifferent, which will > > make > > > > us dumb, insensitive. > > > > If we are interested in understanding, it is exactly because it > > does > > > > matter, more then anything. Understanding is the purpose of life. > > > > > > > > Len > > > > > > > > > so you *believe*? > > > > > > > > No, things just do matter to me. A lot. > > I´m not clinging to being indifferent in order not to feel, in order > > to avoid suffering, because this is sick. And a denial. > > I care about my own life an about others, and if this leads to > > suffering, I go right in it and through it and I suffer as much as > > it takes. And the beautiful thing is, that this suffering is not > > only cleansing, but when it ends, there is no left over, no emotion, > > no clinging, no sorrow, no fear, no " me " , just clarity of freedom. > > > > So it is good for you then... follow the path > that suits you... > > But what is for you is not necessarily for others. > > > > > so much theory in these words... > > > > > > No theory whatsoever. > > > > > > > > > Now just is > > > > > > indifferent to whatever words > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > You wish. > > where there are no words, how can words possibly > matter? > > 'indifference' as used there is not an *attitude*... > it refers to a non-distinguishing > > you are quick to judge > > perhaps you have no understanding of what I am saying > > which is OK > > I am not expecting my words to be understood > > they are just there for consideration > > > Bill > > > > This is what I call theory ;-) > > > > Len I only replied to your message, Bill. You were talking about belief and theory in my attitude, but this is not the case. I don´t expect my words to be understood either. However, it could be a nice surprise ;-) Len Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 26, 2006 Report Share Posted April 26, 2006 Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > any *preference* with respect to experience > > > > > is the jaws of confusion itself > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > Jaws, confusion, who cares? No preferences, right? ;-) > > > > > > > > Len > > > > > > > > > > nobody cares > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > True, nobody´s here, nobody cares, Peace and Bliss all over. > > > > Len > > > > bliss? > > a low and minor state > > don't hang onto it! Sorry for even having mentioned this minor state. It´s only Peace, right? Len Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 26, 2006 Report Share Posted April 26, 2006 Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " > <lissbon2002@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > any *preference* with respect to experience > > > > > > is the jaws of confusion itself > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jaws, confusion, who cares? No preferences, right? ;-) > > > > > > > > > > Len > > > > > > > > > > > > > nobody cares > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > True, nobody´s here, nobody cares, Peace and Bliss all over. > > > > > > Len > > > > > > > bliss? > > > > a low and minor state > > > > don't hang onto it! > > > Sorry for even having mentioned this minor state. > It´s only Peace, right? > > Len > No it is blISs sat chit ananda Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 26, 2006 Report Share Posted April 26, 2006 In a message dated 4/25/2006 4:40:18 PM Pacific Daylight Time, Nisargadatta writes: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 23:14:18 -0000 " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002 Re: Bill's Account of Inner Exploration Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > wrote: > > If it really, truly doesn´t matter, then the understanding doesn´t > > matter. I don´t think there is such a thing as " doesn´t matter " , > > this is just another goal ego sets to avoid suffering. > > Suffering does matter, understanding does matter, freedom from > > illusions does matter, goodness does matter. > > It´s just that suffering cannot end through escape, through a fight > > against it, so we have no other choice then going through pain. But > > pretending that pain doesn´t matter makes us insensitive and not > > capable of understanding. It is not fun, we cannot make ourselves > > indifferent, we can only pretend to be indifferent, which will make > > us dumb, insensitive. > > If we are interested in understanding, it is exactly because it does > > matter, more then anything. Understanding is the purpose of life. > > > > Len > so you *believe*? No, things just do matter to me. A lot. I´m not clinging to being indifferent in order not to feel, in order to avoid suffering, because this is sick. And a denial. I care about my own life an about others, and if this leads to suffering, I go right in it and through it and I suffer as much as it takes. And the beautiful thing is, that this suffering is not only cleansing, but when it ends, there is no left over, no emotion, no clinging, no sorrow, no fear, no " me " , just clarity of freedom. Yes, that's a pursuit of truth. No games, no pretenses, just always looking to see how it is, how it's actually being seen, how it actually feels, what is actually believed, feared, desired. Phil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 26, 2006 Report Share Posted April 26, 2006 Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " > <lissbon2002@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > any *preference* with respect to experience > > > > > > is the jaws of confusion itself > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jaws, confusion, who cares? No preferences, right? ;-) > > > > > > > > > > Len > > > > > > > > > > > > > nobody cares > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > True, nobody´s here, nobody cares, Peace and Bliss all over. > > > > > > Len > > > > > > > bliss? > > > > a low and minor state > > > > don't hang onto it! > > > Sorry for even having mentioned this minor state. > It´s only Peace, right? > > Len > Not if " Peace " is considered a " state " ... Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 26, 2006 Report Share Posted April 26, 2006 Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " > <lissbon2002@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > If it really, truly doesn´t matter, then the understanding > > > doesn´t > > > > > matter. I don´t think there is such a thing as " doesn´t > matter " , > > > > > this is just another goal ego sets to avoid suffering. > > > > > Suffering does matter, understanding does matter, freedom > from > > > > > illusions does matter, goodness does matter. > > > > > It´s just that suffering cannot end through escape, through > a > > > fight > > > > > against it, so we have no other choice then going through > pain. > > > But > > > > > pretending that pain doesn´t matter makes us insensitive and > not > > > > > capable of understanding. It is not fun, we cannot make > > > ourselves > > > > > indifferent, we can only pretend to be indifferent, which > will > > > make > > > > > us dumb, insensitive. > > > > > If we are interested in understanding, it is exactly because > it > > > does > > > > > matter, more then anything. Understanding is the purpose of > life. > > > > > > > > > > Len > > > > > > > > > > > > > so you *believe*? > > > > > > > > > > > > No, things just do matter to me. A lot. > > > I´m not clinging to being indifferent in order not to feel, in > order > > > to avoid suffering, because this is sick. And a denial. > > > I care about my own life an about others, and if this leads to > > > suffering, I go right in it and through it and I suffer as much > as > > > it takes. And the beautiful thing is, that this suffering is not > > > only cleansing, but when it ends, there is no left over, no > emotion, > > > no clinging, no sorrow, no fear, no " me " , just clarity of > freedom. > > > > > > > So it is good for you then... follow the path > > that suits you... > > > > But what is for you is not necessarily for others. > > > > > > > > so much theory in these words... > > > > > > > > > No theory whatsoever. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now just is > > > > > > > > indifferent to whatever words > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > You wish. > > > > where there are no words, how can words possibly > > matter? > > > > 'indifference' as used there is not an *attitude*... > > it refers to a non-distinguishing > > > > you are quick to judge > > > > perhaps you have no understanding of what I am saying > > > > which is OK > > > > I am not expecting my words to be understood > > > > they are just there for consideration > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > This is what I call theory ;-) > > > > > > Len > > > > I only replied to your message, Bill. You were talking about belief > and theory in my attitude, but this is not the case. > I don´t expect my words to be understood either. However, it could > be a nice surprise ;-) > > Len > ahhh... yes! on all counts Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 26, 2006 Report Share Posted April 26, 2006 In a message dated 4/25/2006 4:40:18 PM Pacific Daylight Time, Nisargadatta writes: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 23:24:09 -0000 " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002 Re: Bill's Account of Inner Exploration Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> wrote: > > > > > > > any *preference* with respect to experience > > > is the jaws of confusion itself > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > Jaws, confusion, who cares? No preferences, right? ;-) > > > > Len > > > > nobody cares > > > Bill True, nobody´s here, nobody cares, Peace and Bliss all over. Len Hey Len, you got a mop over there? We need to clean up all this sticky bliss. ~ Attachment never flows into not caring. Equanimity makes it possible to care deeply without the need to cling to it or make it something other than it is. It embraces all and accepts all rather than devaluing all to the level of not caring. Phil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 26, 2006 Report Share Posted April 26, 2006 Nisargadatta , ADHHUB wrote: > > > In a message dated 4/25/2006 4:40:18 PM Pacific Daylight Time, > Nisargadatta writes: > > Tue, 25 Apr 2006 23:24:09 -0000 > " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002 > Re: Bill's Account of Inner Exploration > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > any *preference* with respect to experience > > > > is the jaws of confusion itself > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > Jaws, confusion, who cares? No preferences, right? ;-) > > > > > > Len > > > > > > > nobody cares > > > > > > Bill > > > True, nobody´s here, nobody cares, Peace and Bliss all over. > > Len > > > > Hey Len, you got a mop over there? We need to clean up all this sticky > bliss. ~ > > Attachment never flows into not caring. Equanimity makes it possible to care > deeply without the need to cling to it or make it something other than it > is. It embraces all and accepts all rather than devaluing all to the level of > not caring. > > Phil Jumping at words and not paying attention to what the conversation is about. The discussion was about " preferences with respect to experience " . It was about " not caring " about what comes up, what " presents " in experience. It did not pertain to " not caring " in the sense you use it here. So while it is quite true that: " Equanimity makes it possible to care deeply without the need to cling to it or make it something other than it is. It embraces all and accepts all rather than devaluing all to the level of not caring. " (indeed, that is an important point) that is not relevant to what was being discussed. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 27, 2006 Report Share Posted April 27, 2006 Nisargadatta , ADHHUB wrote: > > > In a message dated 4/25/2006 4:40:18 PM Pacific Daylight Time, > Nisargadatta writes: > > Tue, 25 Apr 2006 23:24:09 -0000 > " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002 > Re: Bill's Account of Inner Exploration > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > any *preference* with respect to experience > > > > is the jaws of confusion itself > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > Jaws, confusion, who cares? No preferences, right? ;-) > > > > > > Len > > > > > > > nobody cares > > > > > > Bill > > > True, nobody´s here, nobody cares, Peace and Bliss all over. > > Len > > > > Hey Len, you got a mop over there? We need to clean up all this sticky > bliss. ~ > > Attachment never flows into not caring. Equanimity makes it possible to care > deeply without the need to cling to it or make it something other than it > is. It embraces all and accepts all rather than devaluing all to the level of > not caring. > > Phil Not caring is a sickness, an expression of self which cares only about itself, and would do anything to keep itself alive and pain free. Ironically, not caring leads ultimately to a kind of inner death, only the mechanical, dead structure of self remains. Len Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 27, 2006 Report Share Posted April 27, 2006 Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn wrote: > > Nisargadatta , ADHHUB@ wrote: > > > > > > In a message dated 4/25/2006 4:40:18 PM Pacific Daylight Time, > > Nisargadatta writes: > > > > Tue, 25 Apr 2006 23:24:09 -0000 > > " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > > Re: Bill's Account of Inner Exploration > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > any *preference* with respect to experience > > > > > is the jaws of confusion itself > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > Jaws, confusion, who cares? No preferences, right? ;-) > > > > > > > > Len > > > > > > > > > > nobody cares > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > True, nobody´s here, nobody cares, Peace and Bliss all over. > > > > Len > > > > > > > > Hey Len, you got a mop over there? We need to clean up all this sticky > > bliss. ~ > > > > Attachment never flows into not caring. Equanimity makes it possible > to care > > deeply without the need to cling to it or make it something other > than it > > is. It embraces all and accepts all rather than devaluing all to the > level of > > not caring. > > > > Phil > > Jumping at words and not paying attention to what the conversation > is about. > > The discussion was about " preferences with respect to experience " . > It was about " not caring " about what comes up, what " presents " in > experience. > > It did not pertain to " not caring " in the sense you use it here. > > So while it is quite true that: > " Equanimity makes it possible to care deeply without the > need to cling to it or make it something other than it is. > It embraces all and accepts all rather than devaluing all to > the level of not caring. " (indeed, that is an important point) > > that is not relevant to what was being discussed. > > Bill I think it is. If you don´t care about what comes up, why would you care about anybody? Len Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 27, 2006 Report Share Posted April 27, 2006 Nisargadatta , OConnor Patricia <gdtige wrote: > > > --- billrishel <illusyn a ?rit : > > > > Nisargadatta , ADHHUB@ wrote: > > > > > > In a message dated 4/25/2006 4:40:18 PM Pacific > Daylight Time, > > Nisargadatta writes: > > > > Tue, 25 Apr 2006 23:24:09 -0000 > > " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > > Re: Bill's Account of Inner Exploration > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " > <illusyn@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , > " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , > " billrishel " <illusyn@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > any *preference* with respect to experience > > > > > is the jaws of confusion itself > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > Jaws, confusion, who cares? No preferences, > right? ;-) > > > > > > > > Len > > > > > > > > > > nobody cares > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > True, nobody? here, nobody cares, Peace and Bliss > all over. > > > > Len > > > > > > > > Hey Len, you got a mop over there? We need to clean > up all this sticky > > bliss. ~ > > > > Attachment never flows into not caring. Equanimity > makes it possible > to care > > deeply without the need to cling to it or make it > something other > than it > > is. It embraces all and accepts all rather than > devaluing all to the > level of > > not caring. > > > > Phil > > Jumping at words and not paying attention to what the > conversation > is about. > > The discussion was about " preferences with respect to > experience " . > It was about " not caring " about what comes up, what > " presents " in > experience. > > It did not pertain to " not caring " in the sense you > use it here. > > So while it is quite true that: > " Equanimity makes it possible to care deeply without > the > need to cling to it or make it something other than > it is. > It embraces all and accepts all rather than > devaluing all to > the level of not caring. " (indeed, that is an > important point) > > that is not relevant to what was being discussed. > > Bill > > You are talking of an ideal state here. > Can you really applie this kind of attitude of > choicelessness or is that a consequence of a reverence > for life, a complete involvement with what is.. > > Patricia I was speaking of " *preference* with respect to experience " as a *symptom*. To try to have no preference with respect to experience is like trying to make your car go faster by bending the needle of the speedometer. The remedy is always to simply stop and be-with what is. The symptoms are the flags that bring attention to the fact that all is not so great as might be imagined. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 27, 2006 Report Share Posted April 27, 2006 Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , ADHHUB@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > In a message dated 4/25/2006 4:40:18 PM Pacific Daylight Time, > > > Nisargadatta writes: > > > > > > Tue, 25 Apr 2006 23:24:09 -0000 > > > " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > > > Re: Bill's Account of Inner Exploration > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " > <lissbon2002@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " > <illusyn@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > any *preference* with respect to experience > > > > > > is the jaws of confusion itself > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jaws, confusion, who cares? No preferences, right? ;-) > > > > > > > > > > Len > > > > > > > > > > > > > nobody cares > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > True, nobody? here, nobody cares, Peace and Bliss all over. > > > > > > Len > > > > > > > > > > > > Hey Len, you got a mop over there? We need to clean up all this > sticky > > > bliss. ~ > > > > > > Attachment never flows into not caring. Equanimity makes it > possible > > to care > > > deeply without the need to cling to it or make it something other > > than it > > > is. It embraces all and accepts all rather than devaluing all to > the > > level of > > > not caring. > > > > > > Phil > > > > Jumping at words and not paying attention to what the conversation > > is about. > > > > The discussion was about " preferences with respect to experience " . > > It was about " not caring " about what comes up, what " presents " in > > experience. > > > > It did not pertain to " not caring " in the sense you use it here. > > > > So while it is quite true that: > > " Equanimity makes it possible to care deeply without the > > need to cling to it or make it something other than it is. > > It embraces all and accepts all rather than devaluing all to > > the level of not caring. " (indeed, that is an important point) > > > > that is not relevant to what was being discussed. > > > > Bill > > > > I think it is. > If you don? care about what comes up, why would you care about > anybody? > > Len > I'm amazed... Doh... if there is no preference to what comes up, then the pain of another is not an " inconvenience " , it is simply what is and there is an ability to be completely present with that. Caring is not pathos, we agree on that right? Caring is not some sentimental emotion of " oh gee shucks, that's too bad! I really feel for you! " In my work with the mentally ill I am able to be very present with them (something most of the other staff won't or can't do), and there is an interaction in the " space between " that is not based on any particular intent on my part. Amazing things happen in the very brief five minute or so interactions I am able to have with them. They *know* that I am there and open, present. They *know* that I see them without predjudice. And they really respond to that. Particularly as they get very little of that in their lives. It was the same when I worked with emotionally disturbed children. I have been practicing what I am talking about. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 27, 2006 Report Share Posted April 27, 2006 --- billrishel <illusyn a écrit : Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , ADHHUB@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > In a message dated 4/25/2006 4:40:18 PM Pacific Daylight Time, > > > Nisargadatta writes: > > > > > > Tue, 25 Apr 2006 23:24:09 -0000 > > > " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > > > Re: Bill's Account of Inner Exploration > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " > <lissbon2002@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " > <illusyn@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > any *preference* with respect to experience > > > > > > is the jaws of confusion itself > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jaws, confusion, who cares? No preferences, right? ;-) > > > > > > > > > > Len > > > > > > > > > > > > > nobody cares > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > True, nobody? here, nobody cares, Peace and Bliss all over. > > > > > > Len > > > > > > > > > > > > Hey Len, you got a mop over there? We need to clean up all this > sticky > > > bliss. ~ > > > > > > Attachment never flows into not caring. Equanimity makes it > possible > > to care > > > deeply without the need to cling to it or make it something other > > than it > > > is. It embraces all and accepts all rather than devaluing all to > the > > level of > > > not caring. > > > > > > Phil > > > > Jumping at words and not paying attention to what the conversation > > is about. > > > > The discussion was about " preferences with respect to experience " . > > It was about " not caring " about what comes up, what " presents " in > > experience. > > > > It did not pertain to " not caring " in the sense you use it here. > > > > So while it is quite true that: > > " Equanimity makes it possible to care deeply without the > > need to cling to it or make it something other than it is. > > It embraces all and accepts all rather than devaluing all to > > the level of not caring. " (indeed, that is an important point) > > > > that is not relevant to what was being discussed. > > > > Bill > > > > I think it is. > If you don? care about what comes up, why would you care about > anybody? > > Len > I'm amazed... Doh... if there is no preference to what comes up, then the pain of another is not an " inconvenience " , it is simply what is and there is an ability to be completely present with that. Caring is not pathos, we agree on that right? Caring is not some sentimental emotion of " oh gee shucks, that's too bad! I really feel for you! " In my work with the mentally ill I am able to be very present with them (something most of the other staff won't or can't do), and there is an interaction in the " space between " that is not based on any particular intent on my part. Amazing things happen in the very brief five minute or so interactions I am able to have with them. They *know* that I am there and open, present. They *know* that I see them without predjudice. And they really respond to that. Particularly as they get very little of that in their lives. It was the same when I worked with emotionally disturbed children. I have been practicing what I am talking about. Bill What you just wrote evoque my last post, and it is a lot about not being in the way, and yet fully blossomed in what is : a flower fully is, it doesn`t give or care, it is the full exxpression of its beauty and fragrance, no matter what. Those aren`t mystical words. They are an ultimate reality as far as I can see. And it has to be tasted. 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 April 27, 2006 Report Share Posted April 27, 2006 Nisargadatta , OConnor Patricia <gdtige wrote: > > > --- billrishel <illusyn a écrit : > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " > <lissbon2002@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " > <illusyn@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , ADHHUB@ > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > In a message dated 4/25/2006 4:40:18 PM Pacific > Daylight Time, > > > > Nisargadatta writes: > > > > > > > > Tue, 25 Apr 2006 23:24:09 -0000 > > > > " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > > > > Re: Bill's Account of Inner > Exploration > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , > " billrishel " <illusyn@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , > " lissbon2002 " > > <lissbon2002@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , > " billrishel " > > <illusyn@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > any *preference* with respect to > experience > > > > > > > is the jaws of confusion itself > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jaws, confusion, who cares? No preferences, > right? ;-) > > > > > > > > > > > > Len > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > nobody cares > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > True, nobody? here, nobody cares, Peace and > Bliss all over. > > > > > > > > Len > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hey Len, you got a mop over there? We need to > clean up all this > > sticky > > > > bliss. ~ > > > > > > > > Attachment never flows into not caring. > Equanimity makes it > > possible > > > to care > > > > deeply without the need to cling to it or make > it something other > > > than it > > > > is. It embraces all and accepts all rather than > devaluing all to > > the > > > level of > > > > not caring. > > > > > > > > Phil > > > > > > Jumping at words and not paying attention to what > the conversation > > > is about. > > > > > > The discussion was about " preferences with respect > to experience " . > > > It was about " not caring " about what comes up, > what " presents " in > > > experience. > > > > > > It did not pertain to " not caring " in the sense > you use it here. > > > > > > So while it is quite true that: > > > " Equanimity makes it possible to care deeply > without the > > > need to cling to it or make it something other > than it is. > > > It embraces all and accepts all rather than > devaluing all to > > > the level of not caring. " (indeed, that is an > important point) > > > > > > that is not relevant to what was being discussed. > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > I think it is. > > If you don? care about what comes up, why would you > care about > > anybody? > > > > Len > > > > I'm amazed... > > Doh... if there is no preference to what comes up, > then the > pain of another is not an " inconvenience " , it is > simply what > is and there is an ability to be completely present > with that. > Caring is not pathos, we agree on that right? Caring > is not > some sentimental emotion of " oh gee shucks, that's too > bad! > I really feel for you! " > > In my work with the mentally ill I am able to be very > present > with them (something most of the other staff won't or > can't do), > and there is an interaction in the " space between " > that is not > based on any particular intent on my part. Amazing > things happen > in the very brief five minute or so interactions I am > able to > have with them. > > They *know* that I am there and open, present. They > *know* that > I see them without predjudice. And they really respond > to that. > Particularly as they get very little of that in their > lives. > > It was the same when I worked with emotionally > disturbed children. > I have been practicing what I am talking about. > > Bill > > What you just wrote evoque my last post, and it is a > lot about not being in the way, and yet fully > blossomed in what is : > a flower fully is, > it doesn`t give or care, > it is the full exxpression of its beauty and > fragrance, no matter what. > Those aren`t mystical words. > They are an ultimate reality as far as I can see. > And it has to be tasted. > > Patricia > > > > And you.......are one of God's better tasters. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 27, 2006 Report Share Posted April 27, 2006 <snip> > > > > Hey Len, you got a mop over there? We need to > clean up all this > > sticky > > > > bliss. ~ > > > > > > > > Attachment never flows into not caring. > Equanimity makes it > > possible > > > to care > > > > deeply without the need to cling to it or make > it something other > > > than it > > > > is. It embraces all and accepts all rather than > devaluing all to > > the > > > level of > > > > not caring. > > > > > > > > Phil > > > > > > Jumping at words and not paying attention to what > the conversation > > > is about. > > > > > > The discussion was about " preferences with respect > to experience " . > > > It was about " not caring " about what comes up, > what " presents " in > > > experience. > > > > > > It did not pertain to " not caring " in the sense > you use it here. > > > > > > So while it is quite true that: > > > " Equanimity makes it possible to care deeply > without the > > > need to cling to it or make it something other > than it is. > > > It embraces all and accepts all rather than > devaluing all to > > > the level of not caring. " (indeed, that is an > important point) > > > > > > that is not relevant to what was being discussed. > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > I think it is. > > If you don? care about what comes up, why would you > care about > > anybody? > > > > Len > > > > I'm amazed... > > Doh... if there is no preference to what comes up, > then the > pain of another is not an " inconvenience " , it is > simply what > is and there is an ability to be completely present > with that. > Caring is not pathos, we agree on that right? Caring > is not > some sentimental emotion of " oh gee shucks, that's too > bad! > I really feel for you! " > > In my work with the mentally ill I am able to be very > present > with them (something most of the other staff won't or > can't do), > and there is an interaction in the " space between " > that is not > based on any particular intent on my part. Amazing > things happen > in the very brief five minute or so interactions I am > able to > have with them. > > They *know* that I am there and open, present. They > *know* that > I see them without predjudice. And they really respond > to that. > Particularly as they get very little of that in their > lives. > > It was the same when I worked with emotionally > disturbed children. > I have been practicing what I am talking about. > > Bill > > What you just wrote evoque my last post, and it is a > lot about not being in the way, and yet fully > blossomed in what is : > a flower fully is, > it doesn`t give or care, > it is the full exxpression of its beauty and > fragrance, no matter what. > Those aren`t mystical words. > They are an ultimate reality as far as I can see. > And it has to be tasted. > > Patricia Interesting word you use there: " tasted " Nisargadatta makes frequent use of the term " taste " , as in: [the jnani's] state is not so desolate. It tastes of the pure, uncaused, undiluted bliss. And I am brought to recall the words of a friend who himself has gone " beyond " into silence when once I spoke of the " sweetness " of inner silence and emptiness. He said, " That's a sure sign of someone who has really experienced it, to speak of the 'sweetness' of it! " Your fluid words speaking of the fragrance and the taste are evidence that you speak from an actuality of experience, and not from cogitations. [Will the cogitators will find your words heretical and declare them as nonsense?] re: > What you just wrote... is a > lot about not being in the way, and yet fully > blossomed in what is : > a flower fully is, > it doesn`t give or care, > it is the full exxpression of its beauty and > fragrance, no matter what. You are absolutely right about the " not being in the way " . The work I described with the mentally ill is just like that... there is no doer, and so the " magic " can happen, which you refer to here with the image of a blossom unfolding. And your image of the flower conveys the futher meaning that what unfolds is not arbitrary or chance, but as rooted in the depth of What Is as the unfolding of a flower is rooted in the seed. In short, what you say here is astonishingly profound. But I had to really read carefully to grasp the many layers of meaning. I'm afraid many readers here will not take that trouble. You refer to your immediately prior post. I went back and looked at that. It is very short: There is a very center of what is. There is only that very very center, allowing whatever, being quiet, attentive and small so as not to shadow anything. Not here but with... I already responded to that, saying that I didn't get what you meant by " center of what is " . Now that I have read your comments in *this* post I better understand what you mean by " center of what is " . It seems to me that what you mean by the " center " in relation to " what is " is like the relation of the seed to the flower. And seeing it that way what you wrote in that previous post makes beautiful sense. And you have shown me a profound, deeper way of looking at the matter of being quite simply and openly in the Now. You are so completely outside the [mainstreet nondual] box in what you have to say! Some (many?) here seem to speak as if from a central doctrine of some sort. Certain things are clearly " wrong " from such a view. But there is a big difference betweeen nondualism as a " philosophy " and nondual living/being in dynamic manifestation. Such dynamic manifestation cares not for rules and says what it pleases. How unruly! But anything else (read: less) is simply vapors of yearning. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 27, 2006 Report Share Posted April 27, 2006 Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn wrote: > > Nisargadatta , OConnor Patricia <gdtige@> wrote: > > > > > > --- billrishel <illusyn@> a ?rit : > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , ADHHUB@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > In a message dated 4/25/2006 4:40:18 PM Pacific > > Daylight Time, > > > Nisargadatta writes: > > > > > > Tue, 25 Apr 2006 23:24:09 -0000 > > > " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > > > Re: Bill's Account of Inner Exploration > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " > > <illusyn@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , > > " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , > > " billrishel " <illusyn@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > any *preference* with respect to experience > > > > > > is the jaws of confusion itself > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jaws, confusion, who cares? No preferences, > > right? ;-) > > > > > > > > > > Len > > > > > > > > > > > > > nobody cares > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > True, nobody? here, nobody cares, Peace and Bliss > > all over. > > > > > > Len > > > > > > > > > > > > Hey Len, you got a mop over there? We need to clean > > up all this sticky > > > bliss. ~ > > > > > > Attachment never flows into not caring. Equanimity > > makes it possible > > to care > > > deeply without the need to cling to it or make it > > something other > > than it > > > is. It embraces all and accepts all rather than > > devaluing all to the > > level of > > > not caring. > > > > > > Phil > > > > Jumping at words and not paying attention to what the > > conversation > > is about. > > > > The discussion was about " preferences with respect to > > experience " . > > It was about " not caring " about what comes up, what > > " presents " in > > experience. > > > > It did not pertain to " not caring " in the sense you > > use it here. > > > > So while it is quite true that: > > " Equanimity makes it possible to care deeply without > > the > > need to cling to it or make it something other than > > it is. > > It embraces all and accepts all rather than > > devaluing all to > > the level of not caring. " (indeed, that is an > > important point) > > > > that is not relevant to what was being discussed. > > > > Bill > > > > You are talking of an ideal state here. > > Can you really applie this kind of attitude of > > choicelessness or is that a consequence of a reverence > > for life, a complete involvement with what is.. > > > > Patricia > > I was speaking of " *preference* with respect to experience " > as a *symptom*. > > To try to have no preference with respect to experience > is like trying to make your car go faster by bending > the needle of the speedometer. > > The remedy is always to simply stop and be-with what is. > The symptoms are the flags that bring attention to the > fact that all is not so great as might be imagined. > > Bill I think Patricia has a point. You talk a lot about " symptoms " . An awful lot. The one who´s really in peace doesn´t talk about peace. He knows this is pointless. Talking about some idealized state isn´t going to bring peace closer to you, the opposite is true: it only feeds the ego. You babble a lot about some idealized state, but have no interest in paying the price for understanding. The price is high, you would have to stopp babbling and start observing the confusion. And this is not peaceful nor pleasurable. Len Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 27, 2006 Report Share Posted April 27, 2006 Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , ADHHUB@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > In a message dated 4/25/2006 4:40:18 PM Pacific Daylight Time, > > > > Nisargadatta writes: > > > > > > > > Tue, 25 Apr 2006 23:24:09 -0000 > > > > " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > > > > Re: Bill's Account of Inner Exploration > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illusyn@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " > > <lissbon2002@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " billrishel " > > <illusyn@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > any *preference* with respect to experience > > > > > > > is the jaws of confusion itself > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jaws, confusion, who cares? No preferences, right? ;-) > > > > > > > > > > > > Len > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > nobody cares > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > True, nobody? here, nobody cares, Peace and Bliss all over. > > > > > > > > Len > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hey Len, you got a mop over there? We need to clean up all this > > sticky > > > > bliss. ~ > > > > > > > > Attachment never flows into not caring. Equanimity makes it > > possible > > > to care > > > > deeply without the need to cling to it or make it something other > > > than it > > > > is. It embraces all and accepts all rather than devaluing all to > > the > > > level of > > > > not caring. > > > > > > > > Phil > > > > > > Jumping at words and not paying attention to what the conversation > > > is about. > > > > > > The discussion was about " preferences with respect to experience " . > > > It was about " not caring " about what comes up, what " presents " in > > > experience. > > > > > > It did not pertain to " not caring " in the sense you use it here. > > > > > > So while it is quite true that: > > > " Equanimity makes it possible to care deeply without the > > > need to cling to it or make it something other than it is. > > > It embraces all and accepts all rather than devaluing all to > > > the level of not caring. " (indeed, that is an important point) > > > > > > that is not relevant to what was being discussed. > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > I think it is. > > If you don? care about what comes up, why would you care about > > anybody? > > > > Len > > > > I'm amazed... > > Doh... if there is no preference to what comes up, then the > pain of another is not an " inconvenience " , it is simply what > is and there is an ability to be completely present with that. > Caring is not pathos, we agree on that right? Caring is not > some sentimental emotion of " oh gee shucks, that's too bad! > I really feel for you! " > > In my work with the mentally ill I am able to be very present > with them (something most of the other staff won't or can't do), > and there is an interaction in the " space between " that is not > based on any particular intent on my part. Amazing things happen > in the very brief five minute or so interactions I am able to > have with them. > > They *know* that I am there and open, present. They *know* that > I see them without predjudice. And they really respond to that. > Particularly as they get very little of that in their lives. > > It was the same when I worked with emotionally disturbed children. > I have been practicing what I am talking about. > > Bill This is possible, but we weren´t talking about that. I´m responding to what you wrote above. You talk about preferences as being the jaws of confusion. I´m saying that you do have preferences, like anybody else. For instance you would rather avoid the jaws of confusion ;-) So I suggest, you just enter the jaws of confusion through recognizing that you do have preferences. And see what happens then. Len 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.