Guest guest Posted September 22, 2006 Report Share Posted September 22, 2006 Nisargadatta , " adithya_comming " <adithya_comming wrote: > > [...] > > > > > The " I " that thinks that it is looking IS whats going on....and in > > > > responding.........it is defending its imaginary stance. > > > > > > That is not my experience, Toomabaru. > > > > > > You are not anything other then your accumulated experience. > > Speak for yourself. > > > There is no " me " in what I expereince. > > All the experiences happen 'inside' me. > > > > > > There is no 'I' outside of that. > > It is other way around... > > There is no expereince that is outside me! > > > > > > > > > > > There are times when I am defending > > > > > The 'I' is always defending its illusory self. > > That's what it does. > > That's what it is. > > > > Speak for yourself! > > Say: > > > Toombaru is always defending its illusory self. > That's what Toombaru does. > That's what Toombaru is. > > And, I might believe you! > > > Don't claim to know me better than myself! > > You don't. So, quit pretending! > > > [However, if wrote the above only referring > to Toombaru... it is Fine. But, it is not > really clear by reading the context.] > > > > > > > > There are also times when I am > completely Open, Naked, Vulnerable, All > > > Out in Open with all defenses suspended. > > > > > > The 'I' can never be 'out in the open' > > anymore then a shadow can be > > out in the sun. > > Speak for yourself! > > Say: > > I [Toombaru] can never be out in the open. > I [Toombaru] am always defending myself! > > > Don't try projecting your stories onto me. > > You don't know me. > > Stick with it and try being 'honest' > and Clear about it for a change. > > I don't like discussing anything with > people who can not stick to 'what they really know' > and keep projecting their 'personal stories > onto people they know nothing about. > > Please, quit doing that... if you can. > > Can you? > > > Again if wrote the above only referring > to Toombaru... it is Fine. But, it is not > really clear by reading the context. > Make it clear and explicit next time. > > For example don't The 'I'... just > simple I might make it claer that you > are talking about Toombaru. If you really > want to be 'honest' about it, you can > find a way. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>If you are ever going to get out of this mess...... > > > > > > > > > > What are you calling a " mess " ? > > > > > > > > The illusory dream of separation......the 'suffering'......the > > > 'quiet despiration'. > > > > > > I don't see a 'dream of separation', Toombaru! > > > > > > Anything downstream from the statement 'I' > is separation (albeit > imaginary) of 'I' and 'other'. > > > > There is no 'other' in... I. > > I is Complete. > > I is Whole. > > > 'Other' is created only in [some of] what I thinks. > > > > > > > If there is an 'I' that thinks that > it sees...... > > I sees... > > > I doesn't need to 'think' that it sees! > > > > that which it thinks > it sees is imagined to be other then it > ........That is what separation is. > > > Yes, I can think many things... > > I has capacity to think many things. > > And, I don't see any problem is it! > > > If you have a problem with it, > please try to deal with it without projecting > it onto me. > > Can you? > > > > > > > > > > > I can't say I ever have. > > > > > > Neither am I looking for some kind of union. > > > > > > There is nothing else that will make you content. > > 'Discontentment' is nothing more than a thought. > > [This] Thought can appaer and dissapear on its own. > It can also dissapear when I doesn't think or when > I thinks 'something else'! > > It requires no 'uinion' to happen for this thought > to dissapear. It dissapear on its own many, many > times during the day and... night! > > > > > > There is a realization that 'union' never can occur > .......because separation simply never happened. > > > Both 'union' and 'separation' are simply " thoughts " . > They can appear and disappear at anytime and that > has nothing to with realization. > > In order to 'not think' I don't need to undersatnd > anything about... 'union' or 'separtion'. > > That 'understanding' of 'union' and 'separation' > is simply... " more thoughts " which too will > dissapear some time... like all other thoughts! > > There is no 'permanent' thought... > including the 'thought' of suffering, separtion... > including 'thought' of 'union', 'knowledge' or 'realization'! > > > > > > > > > Suffering I can understand and relate to... > > > > > > I understand it as 'bitter', harse harmones > > > flowing inside my body... > > > > > > and, that I see just as the part of What Is. > > > > > > It is there for some purpose... > > > and, they operate based on certain laws... > > > > There in no puropose. > > That is what you understood??? > > Purpose of brain is to be able to think... > that is one way of 'looking' at it! > > Similarilly purpose of many harmones > is to keep body alert, ready for fight > or flight and out of comfort and sleep. > > That is one way of 'looking' at it. > > > Don't try to present your view as the universal > truth. > > It is not. > > In fact, sometimes it is rather uninformed and ignorant. > > > > > > Purpose presupposes an entity to whom it could apply > > And, there are indeed trillions of 'entities'... > > > Stop being a Balsekar 'copy cat'! > > > > > ......and the > > existence of separate events and alternative possibilities. > > > > > > > > > > > > Some of them I underatand, some I don't... > > > > > > The 'I' understands nothing. > > > I am talking about simple 'laws' > that can be 'observed', 'learnt', > 'predicated' and 'used'. > > Humans do it all the time. > That is what is called 'science'. > > > > > > > It spends its days in a make believe conceptual overlay. > > > > > > > > Some 'laws' [that govern the flow of these bitter > > > harmones] I do underatnd... still violate them > > > sometimes... and, they flow... > > > > Paul wondered why he did the things that he did not want to. > > > > There is an answer to that. > > Paul might know it [or not]. > I have never thought on it > [to know it or not]. > > > > > > > > > > Some of these laws I don't even know and only see the impact of > > > violating them after those harsh harmones are alreday part > > > of the blood stream. > > > > > > > In a dispute between hormones and neurons........hormones always > > win.......LOL > > Not true. Harmones don't " always " win! > > > I have seen 'reason' and 'logic' win > many, many times! > > My harmones are many times ready to > have intercourse with next available > female... > > I have rarely acted on it and sex in those > scenario have rarely happend. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>it will not be through the introspective attempt to understand > > and > > > > > remove 'character defects'. > > > > > > > > > > What " mess " you are talking about? > > > > > > > > > > " Who " is planning to get out of it? > > > > > > > > > > " Who " wants to get out of it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > " You' do. > > > > > > That is not true. > > > > > > Fire burns... > > > > > > Water cools... > > > > > > Roses smell plaesant... > > > > > > Acid smells harsh... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is the part of the " nature " , part of 'what is', > > > ... I can not expect or hope to get out of it. > > > > > > When I touch fire... it burns > > > I have no burning expectation or wish of getting > > > out of this law. > > > > > > Sometimes I might touch the " fire " because > > > of ignorance, sometimes because of unawareness... > > > > > > but, when I touch... it will burn. > > > > > > > > > I can not get out of the 'system', > > > I can only be *aware* of how it *works*! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > All of your ramblings are about releasing the tension of imagined > > > > isolation. > > > > > > > > > That is not true. > > > > > > Some of my " ramblings " are simply about > > > sharing what I have observed. > > > > > > Like I have observed that: when I drink water > > > it quenches my thirst. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What you find wrong with the thing that you call 'mess' > > > > > ...that you call it a 'mess'? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Relax into the dream...........If you can. > > > > > > > > Be happy..........If you can. > > > > > > > > Be content..........If you can. > > > > > > > > > > Many times, I am in fact quite content, happy, relaxed... > > > > > > There are also times when I am not relaxed, content or happy... > > > > > > > > > I don't expect/wish/want to reach a state where > > > I am " always " relaxed, content and happy. > > > > > > That may never happen and as far as I know > > > I am fine with it. > > > > How do yo feel about dying? > > What 'dying' you are talking about? > If you are talking about death of this body > ... how can I have any feeling about it? > > I don't know how it 'feels'. > > > > Hi Toombaru: > > If you want to converse with me, > plaese try expressing yourself > 'honestly', clearly and explicitly. > > Please don't try to project your > experiences onto me. > > > Please don't try to make you > current 'partial' [and sometimes > planly wrong] understanding as > Universal Truth. > > Please talk... when you are talking; > avoid making it sound like a 'sermon' > from Mount Everest. > > And, please don't act like a Balsekar > 'copy cat' and plaese don't give me > all the Balsekar style 'garbage'. > > I have no interest in them. > > > But, real question is... > > Can you? > > > > Love, > ac. > > > Be Honest! > > And, no 'Sermon' Please! > > > > Don't tell me 'how it is'. > > > Tell me 'what you think' and tell me > 'why' you think this way. > > Then we can 'converse'. > Else, you are wasting my time! > You own time? toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 22, 2006 Report Share Posted September 22, 2006 Nisargadatta , " adithya_comming " <adithya_comming wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Richard " <richarkar@> wrote: > > > > > I think it will be more " truthful " if addressed > > > what you wrote to 'yourself' [Toombaru] than someone > > > else. Because, if you are like " me " , you are the > > > Only one that you really know about... > > > > In ancient China, two monks were walking by a pond. As they looked in > > it one of them said, " Look at that fish, swimming around without a > > care in this world " . The second monk said, " How do you know what the > > fish feels? You are not the fish " . The first monk replied, How do you > > know what I know? You are not me. " > > > > Luckily, the " fish " could not speak. > else, she might hav said: > > Sir, what you say is not true. > and, please don't pretend to > know me better than myself. > > Let me speak for myself! > Now........if you can just find it. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 23, 2006 Report Share Posted September 23, 2006 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " adithya_comming " > <adithya_comming@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Richard " <richarkar@> wrote: > > > > > > > I think it will be more " truthful " if addressed > > > > what you wrote to 'yourself' [Toombaru] than someone > > > > else. Because, if you are like " me " , you are the > > > > Only one that you really know about... > > > > > > In ancient China, two monks were walking by a pond. As they looked in > > > it one of them said, " Look at that fish, swimming around without a > > > care in this world " . The second monk said, " How do you know what the > > > fish feels? You are not the fish " . The first monk replied, How do you > > > know what I know? You are not me. " > > > > > > > Luckily, the " fish " could not speak. > > else, she might hav said: > > > > Sir, what you say is not true. > > and, please don't pretend to > > know me better than myself. > > > > Let me speak for myself! > > > > > > Now........if you can just find it. If " ever " 'finding me' was necessary, laeve it to " me " sir! My " route " to " me " is much more direct and shorter than any " route " 'you' can take to 'find me'. > > toombaru > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 23, 2006 Report Share Posted September 23, 2006 Nisargadatta , " adithya_comming " <adithya_comming wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " adithya_comming " > > <adithya_comming@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Richard " <richarkar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > I think it will be more " truthful " if addressed > > > > > what you wrote to 'yourself' [Toombaru] than someone > > > > > else. Because, if you are like " me " , you are the > > > > > Only one that you really know about... > > > > > > > > In ancient China, two monks were walking by a pond. As they > looked in > > > > it one of them said, " Look at that fish, swimming around without a > > > > care in this world " . The second monk said, " How do you know what > the > > > > fish feels? You are not the fish " . The first monk replied, How > do you > > > > know what I know? You are not me. " > > > > > > > > > > Luckily, the " fish " could not speak. > > > else, she might hav said: > > > > > > Sir, what you say is not true. > > > and, please don't pretend to > > > know me better than myself. > > > > > > Let me speak for myself! > > > > > > > > > > > Now........if you can just find it. > > > If " ever " 'finding me' was necessary, > laeve it to " me " sir! > > > > My " route " to " me " is > much more direct and shorter than > any " route " 'you' can take to 'find me'. > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > Are you saying that this 'me' thing can find itself? toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 23, 2006 Report Share Posted September 23, 2006 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " adithya_comming " > <adithya_comming@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " adithya_comming " > > > <adithya_comming@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Richard " <richarkar@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I think it will be more " truthful " if addressed > > > > > > what you wrote to 'yourself' [Toombaru] than someone > > > > > > else. Because, if you are like " me " , you are the > > > > > > Only one that you really know about... > > > > > > > > > > In ancient China, two monks were walking by a pond. As they > > looked in > > > > > it one of them said, " Look at that fish, swimming around > without a > > > > > care in this world " . The second monk said, " How do you know what > > the > > > > > fish feels? You are not the fish " . The first monk replied, How > > do you > > > > > know what I know? You are not me. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > Luckily, the " fish " could not speak. > > > > else, she might hav said: > > > > > > > > Sir, what you say is not true. > > > > and, please don't pretend to > > > > know me better than myself. > > > > > > > > Let me speak for myself! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Now........if you can just find it. > > > > > > If " ever " 'finding me' was necessary, > > laeve it to " me " sir! > > > > > > > > My " route " to " me " is > > much more direct and shorter than > > any " route " 'you' can take to 'find me'. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > > Are you saying that this 'me' thing can find itself? I am saying that if 'fining me' became ever " necessary " I have more 'direct' and 'shorther' route to attempt to 'find me' than 'you'. Therefore, I am asking you to leave 'finding me' to me. I don't find a quest to 'find me' necessary or useful. Neither I feel it is 'lost'. Love, ac. > > toombaru > 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.