Guest guest Posted July 11, 2006 Report Share Posted July 11, 2006 > > Whatever the feeling, whatever the 'state' > > there is " adjustment " going on. Adjustment is > > the nature of the mechanism. No need to > > think, " I am adjusting. " Just as well to > > consider, " I am not part of this. " > > > > > > > > Bill > > > would be easier to just use the very old concepts.... > you could name " adjustment " .... " karma " ..... the term 'karma' tends to have a personal connotation. I.e. it is generally thought that " someone " *has* the karma. I prefer " adjustment " because I prefer to think in terms of a dynamic system. The system is fluctuating, going through adjustments... no need to suppose an " anyone " involved. Bill > this " adjustments " is like running karma..... > > karma is related to past actions..... > > some are saying that the law of karma is even " present " ...within > every actions..... > means....whatever one do....now......the fruits (good or bad > fruits)......are already present....at same time... > maybe this is the case when there is more " consciousness " ....or > more " awareness " > > maybe the more one is attached to the fiction of an individual body- > mind-intellect......the more this imaginary entity is involved into > this law of karma.... > means...the more " adjustment " is happening..... > and also the longer it take to the imaginary individuality to be > conscious about the fact of karma > > when the imaginary individuality of body-mind-intellect come to an > end...... > > there is liberation..... > > difficult to talk about " adjustment " still....when there is > liberation...... > > what/who is there to be adjusted still.....? > > Marc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2006 Report Share Posted July 11, 2006 Nisargadatta , Luz y Sombras <pliantheart wrote: > > > > Whatever the feeling, whatever the 'state' > > > there is " adjustment " going on. Adjustment is > > > the nature of the mechanism. No need to > > > think, " I am adjusting. " Just as well to > > > consider, " I am not part of this. " > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > would be easier to just use the very old concepts.... > > you could name " adjustment " .... " karma " ..... > > the term 'karma' tends to have a personal connotation. > I.e. it is generally thought that " someone " *has* the > karma. > > I prefer " adjustment " because I prefer to think in > terms of a dynamic system. The system is fluctuating, > going through adjustments... no need to suppose an > " anyone " involved. > > Bill ok....i see what you mean.... but if " nobody " is involved...... there is also no system which is fluctuating.... Marc > > > > this " adjustments " is like running karma..... > > > > karma is related to past actions..... > > > > some are saying that the law of karma is even " present " ...within > > every actions..... > > means....whatever one do....now......the fruits (good or bad > > fruits)......are already present....at same time... > > maybe this is the case when there is more " consciousness " ....or > > more " awareness " > > > > maybe the more one is attached to the fiction of an individual body- > > mind-intellect......the more this imaginary entity is involved into > > this law of karma.... > > means...the more " adjustment " is happening..... > > and also the longer it take to the imaginary individuality to be > > conscious about the fact of karma > > > > when the imaginary individuality of body-mind-intellect come to an > > end...... > > > > there is liberation..... > > > > difficult to talk about " adjustment " still....when there is > > liberation...... > > > > what/who is there to be adjusted still.....? > > > > Marc > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2006 Report Share Posted July 11, 2006 Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , Luz y Sombras <pliantheart@> > wrote: > > > > > > Whatever the feeling, whatever the 'state' > > > > there is " adjustment " going on. Adjustment is > > > > the nature of the mechanism. No need to > > > > think, " I am adjusting. " Just as well to > > > > consider, " I am not part of this. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > would be easier to just use the very old concepts.... > > > you could name " adjustment " .... " karma " ..... > > > > the term 'karma' tends to have a personal connotation. > > I.e. it is generally thought that " someone " *has* the > > karma. > > > > I prefer " adjustment " because I prefer to think in > > terms of a dynamic system. The system is fluctuating, > > going through adjustments... no need to suppose an > > " anyone " involved. > > > > Bill > > > ok....i see what you mean.... > > but if " nobody " is involved...... > there is also no system which is fluctuating.... > > > Marc > > > > > > > this " adjustments " is like running karma..... > > > > > > karma is related to past actions..... > > > > > > some are saying that the law of karma is even " present " ...within > > > every actions..... > > > means....whatever one do....now......the fruits (good or bad > > > fruits)......are already present....at same time... > > > maybe this is the case when there is more " consciousness " ....or > > > more " awareness " > > > > > > maybe the more one is attached to the fiction of an individual > body- > > > mind-intellect......the more this imaginary entity is involved > into > > > this law of karma.... > > > means...the more " adjustment " is happening..... > > > and also the longer it take to the imaginary individuality to be > > > conscious about the fact of karma > > > > > > when the imaginary individuality of body-mind-intellect come to > an > > > end...... > > > > > > there is liberation..... > > > > > > difficult to talk about " adjustment " still....when there is > > > liberation...... > > > > > > what/who is there to be adjusted still.....? > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > After awhile, self-correction is automatic in the reserveration in/as/of the unchanging notion and In-car-nation* of the occupation and the relation we have in perpetuity with the absolute authority of Being without a 'second', or we are at rest, in the secondless now. Being. No past. No future. YIL, Ana * who is in the drivers seat. No question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2006 Report Share Posted July 11, 2006 Nisargadatta , " anabebe57 " <kailashana wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " > <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , Luz y Sombras <pliantheart@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Whatever the feeling, whatever the 'state' > > > > > there is " adjustment " going on. Adjustment is > > > > > the nature of the mechanism. No need to > > > > > think, " I am adjusting. " Just as well to > > > > > consider, " I am not part of this. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > would be easier to just use the very old concepts.... > > > > you could name " adjustment " .... " karma " ..... > > > > > > the term 'karma' tends to have a personal connotation. > > > I.e. it is generally thought that " someone " *has* the > > > karma. > > > > > > I prefer " adjustment " because I prefer to think in > > > terms of a dynamic system. The system is fluctuating, > > > going through adjustments... no need to suppose an > > > " anyone " involved. > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > ok....i see what you mean.... > > > > but if " nobody " is involved...... > > there is also no system which is fluctuating.... > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > this " adjustments " is like running karma..... > > > > > > > > karma is related to past actions..... > > > > > > > > some are saying that the law of karma is > even " present " ...within > > > > every actions..... > > > > means....whatever one do....now......the fruits (good or bad > > > > fruits)......are already present....at same time... > > > > maybe this is the case when there is > more " consciousness " ....or > > > > more " awareness " > > > > > > > > maybe the more one is attached to the fiction of an individual > > body- > > > > mind-intellect......the more this imaginary entity is involved > > into > > > > this law of karma.... > > > > means...the more " adjustment " is happening..... > > > > and also the longer it take to the imaginary individuality to > be > > > > conscious about the fact of karma > > > > > > > > when the imaginary individuality of body-mind-intellect come > to > > an > > > > end...... > > > > > > > > there is liberation..... > > > > > > > > difficult to talk about " adjustment " still....when there is > > > > liberation...... > > > > > > > > what/who is there to be adjusted still.....? > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > After awhile, > self-correction is automatic in the reserveration > in/as/of the unchanging notion and In-car-nation* of the occupation > and the relation we have in perpetuity with the absolute authority > of Being without a 'second', or we are at rest, in the secondless > now. > > Being. No past. No future. > > > YIL, > Ana yes.....being..... just being....is only possible when there is " No past. No future " everything else is the mind-game running....and running.... as long the batteries are loaded....with/by time and space..... > > > * who is in the drivers seat. No question. nobody/nothing ever drove anywhere..... except in a fabuloes dream-bubble..... > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2006 Report Share Posted July 11, 2006 --- dennis_travis33 <dennis_travis33 wrote: > Nisargadatta , Luz y Sombras <pliantheart > wrote: > > > > > > Whatever the feeling, whatever the 'state' > > > > there is " adjustment " going on. Adjustment is > > > > the nature of the mechanism. No need to > > > > think, " I am adjusting. " Just as well to > > > > consider, " I am not part of this. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > would be easier to just use the very old concepts.... > > > you could name " adjustment " .... " karma " ..... > > > > the term 'karma' tends to have a personal connotation. > > I.e. it is generally thought that " someone " *has* the > > karma. > > > > I prefer " adjustment " because I prefer to think in > > terms of a dynamic system. The system is fluctuating, > > going through adjustments... no need to suppose an > > " anyone " involved. > > > > Bill > > > ok....i see what you mean.... > > but if " nobody " is involved...... > there is also no system which is fluctuating.... > > > Marc there is " phenomena " ... what we call " appearance " and there is constant transformation, fluctuation, change in " appearance " ... such fluctuation can be seen as " my experience " , but not necessarily. to *see it as* a dynamic system is an alternative. Just a way of seeing. To see as a dynamic system is interesting at times. But to see it in those terms is not (necessarily) to say it *is* a system. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 11, 2006 Report Share Posted July 11, 2006 Nisargadatta , pliantheart <pliantheart wrote: > > > > --- dennis_travis33 <dennis_travis33 wrote: > > > Nisargadatta , Luz y Sombras <pliantheart@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Whatever the feeling, whatever the 'state' > > > > > there is " adjustment " going on. Adjustment is > > > > > the nature of the mechanism. No need to > > > > > think, " I am adjusting. " Just as well to > > > > > consider, " I am not part of this. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > would be easier to just use the very old concepts.... > > > > you could name " adjustment " .... " karma " ..... > > > > > > the term 'karma' tends to have a personal connotation. > > > I.e. it is generally thought that " someone " *has* the > > > karma. > > > > > > I prefer " adjustment " because I prefer to think in > > > terms of a dynamic system. The system is fluctuating, > > > going through adjustments... no need to suppose an > > > " anyone " involved. > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > ok....i see what you mean.... > > > > but if " nobody " is involved...... > > there is also no system which is fluctuating.... > > > > > > Marc > > there is " phenomena " ... > what we call " appearance " > and there is constant transformation, > fluctuation, change in " appearance " ... > > such fluctuation can be seen as > " my experience " , but not necessarily. > > to *see it as* a dynamic system is an > alternative. Just a way of seeing. > To see as a dynamic system is interesting > at times. But to see it in those terms > is not (necessarily) to say it *is* > a system. > > Bill > It is strange to me that others can feel and understand " change " and fluctuation. I do not understand it at all! Everything, every sequence of events is to me individual disconnected parts that are complete things with no relation to each other... I have a massive form of dyslexia in which I can only read one letter at a time, never a whole word all at one glance. And that is how I experience life. I artifically string things together in order to participate in life events with other people. But I am just faking it. Often I am told that my statements sound cumbersome or clumsy. As I am writing this my heart is pounding and I am hyperventalating because I am touching something that feels powerful and explosive to me, something I do not often look at. In the physical game of life this is not a pro survival state, because writing my name or driving my car is imensly complicated to me... but in a spiritual sense it is an infinity of individual " selves " and " nows " , which is neither good nor bad. I am not experiencing life this way, I am Being lives this way. Nothing flows or changes, all things just are all at once to me. I often fear the future just like most other people, but I don't comprehend how it is also, at some point, the present. Thanks for letting me express all of that to each of you as it helped me see it more fully:-) Stuart > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 12, 2006 Report Share Posted July 12, 2006 Nisargadatta , " stuartkfmn " <stuartkfmn wrote: > > Nisargadatta , pliantheart <pliantheart@> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- dennis_travis33 <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > Nisargadatta , Luz y Sombras <pliantheart@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Whatever the feeling, whatever the 'state' > > > > > > there is " adjustment " going on. Adjustment is > > > > > > the nature of the mechanism. No need to > > > > > > think, " I am adjusting. " Just as well to > > > > > > consider, " I am not part of this. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > would be easier to just use the very old concepts.... > > > > > you could name " adjustment " .... " karma " ..... > > > > > > > > the term 'karma' tends to have a personal connotation. > > > > I.e. it is generally thought that " someone " *has* the > > > > karma. > > > > > > > > I prefer " adjustment " because I prefer to think in > > > > terms of a dynamic system. The system is fluctuating, > > > > going through adjustments... no need to suppose an > > > > " anyone " involved. > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > ok....i see what you mean.... > > > > > > but if " nobody " is involved...... > > > there is also no system which is fluctuating.... > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > there is " phenomena " ... > > what we call " appearance " > > and there is constant transformation, > > fluctuation, change in " appearance " ... > > > > such fluctuation can be seen as > > " my experience " , but not necessarily. > > > > to *see it as* a dynamic system is an > > alternative. Just a way of seeing. > > To see as a dynamic system is interesting > > at times. But to see it in those terms > > is not (necessarily) to say it *is* > > a system. > > > > Bill > > > > It is strange to me that others can feel and understand > " change " and fluctuation. I do not understand it at all! > > Everything, every sequence of events is to me individual disconnected > parts that are complete things with no relation to each other... > I have a massive form of dyslexia in which I can only read one letter > at a time, never a whole word all at one glance. And that is how I > experience life. > > I artifically string things together in order to participate in life > events with other people. But I am just faking it. Often I am told > that my statements sound cumbersome or clumsy. > > As I am writing this my heart is pounding and I am hyperventalating > because I am touching something that feels powerful and explosive to > me, something I do not often look at. > > In the physical game of life this is not a pro survival state, because > writing my name or driving my car is imensly complicated to me... but > in a spiritual sense it is an infinity of individual " selves " and > " nows " , which is neither good nor bad. > I am not experiencing life this way, I am Being lives this way. > Nothing flows or changes, all things just are all at once to me. > > I often fear the future just like most other people, but I don't > comprehend how it is also, at some point, the present. > > Thanks for letting me express all of that to each of you as it helped > me see it more fully:-) > > Stuart Namaste Stuart, You have it but don't see it;-) There is a Stuart, and within that/this " Stuart " was an embryo, a newborn, a toddler, a teenager, a young man, etc. and where ever you are in the being-ness and evolution of Stuart, there is still one that has not been 'experienced/lived' so the past and future Stuarts are all inherent in the present 'Stuart'. Does that help? YIL, Ana > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 12, 2006 Report Share Posted July 12, 2006 Nisargadatta , pliantheart <pliantheart wrote: > > > > --- dennis_travis33 <dennis_travis33 wrote: > > > Nisargadatta , Luz y Sombras <pliantheart@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Whatever the feeling, whatever the 'state' > > > > > there is " adjustment " going on. Adjustment is > > > > > the nature of the mechanism. No need to > > > > > think, " I am adjusting. " Just as well to > > > > > consider, " I am not part of this. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > would be easier to just use the very old concepts.... > > > > you could name " adjustment " .... " karma " ..... > > > > > > the term 'karma' tends to have a personal connotation. > > > I.e. it is generally thought that " someone " *has* the > > > karma. > > > > > > I prefer " adjustment " because I prefer to think in > > > terms of a dynamic system. The system is fluctuating, > > > going through adjustments... no need to suppose an > > > " anyone " involved. > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > ok....i see what you mean.... > > > > but if " nobody " is involved...... > > there is also no system which is fluctuating.... > > > > > > Marc > > there is " phenomena " ... > what we call " appearance " > and there is constant transformation, > fluctuation, change in " appearance " ... > > such fluctuation can be seen as > " my experience " , but not necessarily. > > to *see it as* a dynamic system is an > alternative. Just a way of seeing. > To see as a dynamic system is interesting > at times. But to see it in those terms > is not (necessarily) to say it *is* > a system. > > Bill ok.... at times.....there are some interesting things appearing.... coming...and going..... yes... Marc > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 12, 2006 Report Share Posted July 12, 2006 --- dennis_travis33 <dennis_travis33 wrote: > Nisargadatta , pliantheart <pliantheart > wrote: > > > > > > > > --- dennis_travis33 <dennis_travis33 wrote: > > > > > Nisargadatta , Luz y Sombras <pliantheart@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Whatever the feeling, whatever the 'state' > > > > > > there is " adjustment " going on. Adjustment is > > > > > > the nature of the mechanism. No need to > > > > > > think, " I am adjusting. " Just as well to > > > > > > consider, " I am not part of this. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > would be easier to just use the very old concepts.... > > > > > you could name " adjustment " .... " karma " ..... > > > > > > > > the term 'karma' tends to have a personal connotation. > > > > I.e. it is generally thought that " someone " *has* the > > > > karma. > > > > > > > > I prefer " adjustment " because I prefer to think in > > > > terms of a dynamic system. The system is fluctuating, > > > > going through adjustments... no need to suppose an > > > > " anyone " involved. > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > ok....i see what you mean.... > > > > > > but if " nobody " is involved...... > > > there is also no system which is fluctuating.... > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > there is " phenomena " ... > > what we call " appearance " > > and there is constant transformation, > > fluctuation, change in " appearance " ... > > > > such fluctuation can be seen as > > " my experience " , but not necessarily. > > > > to *see it as* a dynamic system is an > > alternative. Just a way of seeing. > > To see as a dynamic system is interesting > > at times. But to see it in those terms > > is not (necessarily) to say it *is* > > a system. > > > > Bill > > > ok.... > > at times.....there are some interesting things appearing.... > coming...and going..... > yes... > > Marc > without even getting down to " some interesting things " .... just that there are " transitions " ... nothing (that is) identifiable, and yet... change... as if there is movement but nothing that is moving What Is is alive Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 12, 2006 Report Share Posted July 12, 2006 Nisargadatta , pliantheart <pliantheart wrote: > > > > --- dennis_travis33 <dennis_travis33 wrote: > > > Nisargadatta , pliantheart <pliantheart@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- dennis_travis33 <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Luz y Sombras <pliantheart@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Whatever the feeling, whatever the 'state' > > > > > > > there is " adjustment " going on. Adjustment is > > > > > > > the nature of the mechanism. No need to > > > > > > > think, " I am adjusting. " Just as well to > > > > > > > consider, " I am not part of this. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > would be easier to just use the very old concepts.... > > > > > > you could name " adjustment " .... " karma " ..... > > > > > > > > > > the term 'karma' tends to have a personal connotation. > > > > > I.e. it is generally thought that " someone " *has* the > > > > > karma. > > > > > > > > > > I prefer " adjustment " because I prefer to think in > > > > > terms of a dynamic system. The system is fluctuating, > > > > > going through adjustments... no need to suppose an > > > > > " anyone " involved. > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > ok....i see what you mean.... > > > > > > > > but if " nobody " is involved...... > > > > there is also no system which is fluctuating.... > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > there is " phenomena " ... > > > what we call " appearance " > > > and there is constant transformation, > > > fluctuation, change in " appearance " ... > > > > > > such fluctuation can be seen as > > > " my experience " , but not necessarily. > > > > > > to *see it as* a dynamic system is an > > > alternative. Just a way of seeing. > > > To see as a dynamic system is interesting > > > at times. But to see it in those terms > > > is not (necessarily) to say it *is* > > > a system. > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > ok.... > > > > at times.....there are some interesting things appearing.... > > coming...and going..... > > yes... > > > > Marc > > > > without even getting down to " some interesting things " .... > > just that there are " transitions " ... > > nothing (that is) identifiable, and yet... > change... > > as if there is movement > but nothing that is moving > > What Is is alive > > Bill > > > yes.....nice words.... this happen in deep harmony and peace..... no more individuality.....to wish/will something no more reality.....for emotions.... just ...being Marc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 12, 2006 Report Share Posted July 12, 2006 <snip> > > > > > > ok.... > > > > > > at times.....there are some interesting things appearing.... > > > coming...and going..... > > > yes... > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > without even getting down to " some interesting things " .... > > > > just that there are " transitions " ... > > > > nothing (that is) identifiable, and yet... > > change... > > > > as if there is movement > > but nothing that is moving > > > > What Is is alive > > > > Bill > > > > > > yes.....nice words.... > > this happen in deep harmony and peace..... > > no more individuality.....to wish/will something > > no more reality.....for emotions.... > > just ...being > > Marc > yes.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 12, 2006 Report Share Posted July 12, 2006 Nisargadatta , " anabebe57 " <kailashana wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " stuartkfmn " <stuartkfmn@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , pliantheart <pliantheart@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > --- dennis_travis33 <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Luz y Sombras > <pliantheart@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Whatever the feeling, whatever the 'state' > > > > > > > there is " adjustment " going on. Adjustment is > > > > > > > the nature of the mechanism. No need to > > > > > > > think, " I am adjusting. " Just as well to > > > > > > > consider, " I am not part of this. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > would be easier to just use the very old concepts.... > > > > > > you could name " adjustment " .... " karma " ..... > > > > > > > > > > the term 'karma' tends to have a personal connotation. > > > > > I.e. it is generally thought that " someone " *has* the > > > > > karma. > > > > > > > > > > I prefer " adjustment " because I prefer to think in > > > > > terms of a dynamic system. The system is fluctuating, > > > > > going through adjustments... no need to suppose an > > > > > " anyone " involved. > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > ok....i see what you mean.... > > > > > > > > but if " nobody " is involved...... > > > > there is also no system which is fluctuating.... > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > there is " phenomena " ... > > > what we call " appearance " > > > and there is constant transformation, > > > fluctuation, change in " appearance " ... > > > > > > such fluctuation can be seen as > > > " my experience " , but not necessarily. > > > > > > to *see it as* a dynamic system is an > > > alternative. Just a way of seeing. > > > To see as a dynamic system is interesting > > > at times. But to see it in those terms > > > is not (necessarily) to say it *is* > > > a system. > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > It is strange to me that others can feel and understand > > " change " and fluctuation. I do not understand it at all! > > > > Everything, every sequence of events is to me individual > disconnected > > parts that are complete things with no relation to each other... > > I have a massive form of dyslexia in which I can only read one > letter > > at a time, never a whole word all at one glance. And that is how I > > experience life. > > > > I artifically string things together in order to participate in > life > > events with other people. But I am just faking it. Often I am told > > that my statements sound cumbersome or clumsy. > > > > As I am writing this my heart is pounding and I am hyperventalating > > because I am touching something that feels powerful and explosive > to > > me, something I do not often look at. > > > > In the physical game of life this is not a pro survival state, > because > > writing my name or driving my car is imensly complicated to me... > but > > in a spiritual sense it is an infinity of individual " selves " and > > " nows " , which is neither good nor bad. > > I am not experiencing life this way, I am Being lives this way. > > Nothing flows or changes, all things just are all at once to me. > > > > I often fear the future just like most other people, but I don't > > comprehend how it is also, at some point, the present. > > > > Thanks for letting me express all of that to each of you as it > helped > > me see it more fully:-) > > > > Stuart > > > Namaste Stuart, > > You have it but don't see it;-) > > There is a Stuart, and within that/this " Stuart " was an embryo, > a newborn, a toddler, a teenager, a young man, etc. and where ever > you are in the being-ness and evolution of Stuart, there is still > one that has not been 'experienced/lived' so the past and future > Stuarts are all inherent in the present 'Stuart'. > > Does that help? > Thanks for saying it, but I do not understand what you are saying... I don't experience an evolution of me, only different Stuarts. I don't feel that I am a conglomerate of all of my history, just an army of selves, but my brain knows time and liniality and so my brain and I disagree a lot:-) Stu > > YIL, > Ana > > 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.