Guest guest Posted August 15, 2006 Report Share Posted August 15, 2006 B: The seductive trap of this type of forum is that one can come to feed off of approval by list members of one's postings. And with enough practice one can come to learn to speak " nondual correct " . The result is someone who seems to say the " right things " but there is not a real ring to what they say. To me the mark of someone who is really speaking from within and not " conjuring truths " is a quality of freshness. I can't define it, but I know it when I see it. Some of Stuart's recent posts, for example, I see having that quality. They may be rough, unpolished, but they have an unmistakable quality of originality, of one who is struggling to put into words from actual experience rather than assembling words from other words. Bill P: Yes, I think that beyond style, there is a quality of unpredictability, of taking you aback. It's a kind of writing that could not predictably confirm your ideas, but often shakes them. Whether Stuart's writing falls within that, or not, I don't know, but yours and Werner's, and Stefan's does often. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 15, 2006 Report Share Posted August 15, 2006 Nisargadatta , Pete S <pedsie5 wrote: > > B: The seductive trap of this type of forum is > that one can come to feed off of approval > by list members of one's postings. And with > enough practice one can come to learn to > speak " nondual correct " . The result is someone > who seems to say the " right things " but there > is not a real ring to what they say. > > To me the mark of someone who is really speaking > from within and not " conjuring truths " is a > quality of freshness. I can't define it, but I > know it when I see it. Some of Stuart's recent > posts, for example, I see having that quality. > They may be rough, unpolished, but they have > an unmistakable quality of originality, of one > who is struggling to put into words from actual > experience rather than assembling words from > other words. > > Bill > > P: Yes, I think that beyond style, there is a quality > of unpredictability, of taking you aback. It's > a kind of writing that could not predictably > confirm your ideas, but often shakes them. Whether > Stuart's writing falls within that, or not, I don't know, > but yours and Werner's, and Stefan's does often. > " taking you aback " is a good way to put it, and I always feel delighted when someone can do that for me. I *want* the other to shake me up. as for Stuart, it is not so much that he takes me aback as that what he writes is genuine through and through. But he's on the other side of the looking glass, so to understand him you have to learn to read backwards Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 15, 2006 Report Share Posted August 15, 2006 Nisargadatta , " anabebe57 " <kailashana wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " pliantheart " <pliantheart@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , Pete S <pedsie5@> wrote: > > > > > > -- In Nisargadatta , Pete S <pedsie5@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Aug 14, 2006, at 10:30 PM, Lulu Dong wrote: > > > > > > > > > I go by the handle of 1000ds of names, > > > > > each including all the others in their reflections, > > > > > stepping into my brain, impossible to say where > > > > > my reflections begin, and to look at any one, > > > > > is to include them all. > > > > > > using a pseudonym is one thing, > > > misrepresentation is another. > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > P: Exactly, Bill. What is sad about all this > > > is that most of what he writes is correct, > > > yet he thinks it must be backed up by a > > > faked archetypical identity ( the mountain > > > monk.) That points to book learning only, > > > and insecure persona is typing those thoughts. > > > > > > > The seductive trap of this type of forum is > > that one can come to feed off of approval > > by list members of one's postings. And with > > enough practice one can come to learn to > > speak " nondual correct " . The result is someone > > who seems to say the " right things " but there > > is not a real ring to what they say. > > > > To me the mark of someone who is really speaking > > from within and not " conjuring truths " is a > > quality of freshness. I can't define it, but I > > know it when I see it. Some of Stuart's recent > > posts, for example, I see having that quality. > > They may be rough, unpolished, but they have > > an unmistakable quality of originality, of one > > who is struggling to put into words from actual > > experience rather than assembling words from > > other words. > > > > Bill > > > > > > ahh Bill, > such a struggle always to return to somewhere we have left, > but in our thoughts... > > Love, > the Return of The Native Heart to its own echo, > > its call for Love... > > > Yours, > Anna > yeah... to give up the idea of having ever left... the lustre of ideas is so enchanting until realized the source of Lustre itself Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 16, 2006 Report Share Posted August 16, 2006 " pliantheart " <pliantheart wrote: > > Nisargadatta , Pete S <pedsie5@> wrote: > > > > -- In Nisargadatta , Pete S <pedsie5@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Aug 14, 2006, at 10:30 PM, Lulu Dong wrote: > > > > > > > I go by the handle of 1000ds of names, > > > > each including all the others in their reflections, > > > > stepping into my brain, impossible to say where > > > > my reflections begin, and to look at any one, > > > > is to include them all. > > > > using a pseudonym is one thing, > > misrepresentation is another. > > > > Bill > > > > P: Exactly, Bill. What is sad about all this > > is that most of what he writes is correct, > > yet he thinks it must be backed up by a > > faked archetypical identity ( the mountain > > monk.) That points to book learning only, > > and insecure persona is typing those thoughts. > > > > The seductive trap of this type of forum is > that one can come to feed off of approval > by list members of one's postings. And with > enough practice one can come to learn to > speak " nondual correct " . The result is someone > who seems to say the " right things " but there > is not a real ring to what they say. > > To me the mark of someone who is really speaking > from within and not " conjuring truths " is a > quality of freshness. I can't define it, but I > know it when I see it. Some of Stuart's recent > posts, for example, I see having that quality. > They may be rough, unpolished, but they have > an unmistakable quality of originality, of one > who is struggling to put into words from actual > experience rather than assembling words from > other words. > > Bill Thanks Bill for the vote of trust:-) I find two things, for one, the more terminology of spirituality I learn, the more I say that looks enlightened but is really the ego trying to become enlightened in order to escape pain, fear and loss. Also, the longer I stay on one spiritual list, the more limited my views get... If a person spends all day 5 days a week working in an office cubicle looking at his computer screen, that person... may... develop a space that stops at the distance to his computer or the distance to the walls of his cubicle. They are both the same phenomenon. I think its both an efficient effort to have as few variables to confront as possible and a kind of trance in which we put as much as possible on automatic as we can. Stu > 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.