Guest guest Posted April 5, 2008 Report Share Posted April 5, 2008 Nisargadatta , souldreamone wrote: > > > In a message dated 4/2/2008 11:22:51 AM Eastern Standard Time, > Roberibus111 writes: > > > Realization is an impediment to clarity? > > > there is no such thing as enlightenment. > > the idea that there is...or that it is needed.. > > is the very lack of clarity spoken of here. > > again you misunderstand. > > it's that pride of 'head' thing that's in your way of discernment. > > you even speak of that below: > > > ***** " Realization is an impediment to clarity " is clearly unclear. It seems > to imply that clarity is what gets in the way of clarity. If what was meant > is that the idea of enlightenment is what gets in the way of enlightenment, > then I might agree, but it seems that's not what was meant either. > > It's not necessary to erase words from the dictionary because a word isn't > understood by many. While that can give the impression of some kind of subtle > superior knowingness, it's only necessary to clarify what it means. > Enlightenment happens to no one because that's the nature of the Realization. It's an > event that occurs through the vehicle that ends suffering by removing the > illusory belief in the identity. As the only event through which human suffering > ever ends, perhaps it at least deserves a word in the dictionary. > > > > >Does that translate to 'Ego would rather know the concepts than loose > it's head'? > > Phil > > > well phil.. > > the suggestion is: > > that you loose that love affair with both head and ego. > > it's not only unbecoming.. > > it's deluded. > > need a spell out or translation again? > > it likely won't help (pearls before swine and all that rot). > > end of story. > > a true friend in peace and proper prosperity i remain as always, > > > > > ****And that last line is by far the ugliest thing you've said; like you > just took Truth out in the back alley and raped her mercillessly. However, I've > learned that Truth can and does take care of herself. > Phil a little review here seems apropos. and so goes the dialogue: ..b b.b.: " end of story. a true friend in peace and proper prosperity i remain as always. " philly (in response): " And that last line is by far the ugliest thing you've said; like you just took Truth out in the back alley and raped her mercillessly. " ..b b.b.(responding now) and that's the prettiest thing you're capable of saying phillip. philly: " Remember, I'm really, really stupid so you gotta spell stuff out fer me. ~ " ..b b.b.: y-o-u- d-o-n-'-t k-n-o-w w-h-a-t y-o-u- a-r-e- t-a-l-k-i-n-g a-b-o-u-t p-h-i-l. :-) ..b bobji baba Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 5, 2008 Report Share Posted April 5, 2008 Nisargadatta , souldreamone wrote: > > > In a message dated 4/4/2008 2:51:52 PM Pacific Daylight Time, > Roberibus111 writes: > > Nisargadatta , souldreamone@ wrote: > > > > > > In a message dated 4/1/2008 1:30:42 AM Pacific Daylight Time, > > Roberibus111@ writes: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Hakim " <chabakat@> wrote: > > > > > > What impediments? What clarity? > > > > > > What fluff and feathers ? > > > > > > )) > > > Hakim > > > > > > > > > > > > you said it triple-chin. > > > > it's swell that you caught on. > > > > don't bother expressing gratitude or showing appreciation to baba. > > > > the way is shown freely and thanks are neither required nor accepted. > > > > but.. > > > > the 'impediments'..the 'fluff and feathers'.. > > > > uhm...that was referring to what you had posted before. > > > > the clarity is what you didn't. > > > > but i trust with the little help from your friend who shows you.. > > > > that you won't go on now dreaming or searching for that which is not. > > > > THAT which IS... is all there is. > > > > THAT (the One and Only)... > > > > should suffice for all and everything. > > > > it always does.... > > > > without holiness or respect. > > > > in TRUTH..It finds that stuff silly and superfluous. > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > > > > > What finds it silly and superfluous? > > > > > > TRUTH finds all things my dense friend. > > but you seem incapable of finding IT. > > not strange at all in your case. > > LOL! > You mean " The One and Only " ? > > > > that's not what i mean. > > that's what you mistakenly believe that i mean. > > > ****Since you won't clarify, I'll assume that's what you mean. assuming, as you do all the time, is a fatal flaw. only the uncomprehending are forced to assume. all is clear from the first. 'you' are your one and only obscurity to that clearnes. i won't assume that you understand. i don't work with conjecture. the facts... and what you have continually said and assumed.. speak volumes regarding your inability to understand anything. we will work on that together chum. i will explain.. you will not understand.. then you will mistakenly assume. and then i will re-clarify. reprise...reprise...reprise. get the picture? likely not. it's a recurring situation. facts are facts. no matter what you WANT to assume. There's > nothing outside the human experience that has the capacity to find anything silly > and superfluous or holy and respectful. All that, along with the rest of this > nonsense, goes on in the human mind only. > Phil " There's nothing " ... would suffice phil. the rest of your inane comment is like trying to add wetness to water. wholly unholy and entirely superfluous. :-) friend for your needs and erudition, ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 5, 2008 Report Share Posted April 5, 2008 Eggzakly, that's the concept, and the reason it cannot be negated is that the idea that there is something here to negate it is part of the illusion. We've all been 'caught up in it' since we were two years old and the seeking in some form has been happening ever since. The seeking must end, but it does not end by grasping the concept that there is no seeking. This concept is not a realization and so the spontaneous functioning of mind continues to delude itself even when the imagined ego overlay insists 'there is no seeking, there is no seeking.' The only way the seeking ends is when the futility of the seeking is clearly seen, not the ending of the seeking as yet another method of seeking. The falseness of the illusion is revealed by exploring the illusion, not by avoiding or negating it. How did you come to the realization that you could not find permanent happiness within the illusion? You tried every possible way you could think of until it became clear that it was futile, right? No matter how many times you heard the concept that happiness is fleeting and momentary, you needed to see for yourself, and so it continued. Nobody could have ended the pursuit of ultimate dualistic happiness with a concept. The idea that I'm going to stop the seeking because there is no seeker, is just another seeking game. As you say, there is no seeker, and so there also is nobody to stop the seeking. The seeking continues, though perhaps in a less efficient way than it might. Phil In a message dated 4/5/2008 6:01:51 AM Pacific Daylight Time, chabakat writes: There is the illusion that somebody is seeking, and it's a very strong illusion. You may negate it for a moment, but you'll soon be caught up by it, swallowed up by it! ))H.Nisargadatta , souldreamone wrote:>> > In a message dated 4/2/2008 5:55:51 AM Eastern Standard Time, > chabakat writes:> > > > > > > We're not enlightened like you.> > Phil> > > > > > Who said that?> H.> > > > Well, nobody did, but that would be the only reason for the ending of the > seeking, right? Is there somebody present who can stop it before it ends? > Phil> > > > **************Planning your summer road trip? Check out AOL Travel Guides. > (http://travel.aol.com/travel-guide/united-states?ncid=aoltrv00030000000016)>---Planning your summer road trip? Check out AOL Travel Guides. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 5, 2008 Report Share Posted April 5, 2008 In a message dated 4/5/2008 1:23:35 PM Pacific Daylight Time, Roberibus111 writes: > Enlightenment happens to no one because that's the nature of theRealization. It's an > event that occurs through the vehicle that ends suffering byremoving the > illusory belief in the identity.no siree.'enlightenment' doesn't happen in time.IT is NOT an event.it's ALL that ever was, is, or will be.it seems paradoxical..but it's not. ****In the same way that the word 'enlightenment' doesn't need to be disputed, neither does the tern 'event'. It's clear enough and there is no need to turn it into a paradox. The event is the realization of something that never was; the ending of an illusion. p.s.blessed are those who like you can't see but attend to the baba. ****But I can see myself losing interest in attending to your needs, and so it would seem that's coming to an end. I hope I'm still blessed. Phil Planning your summer road trip? Check out AOL Travel Guides. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 7, 2008 Report Share Posted April 7, 2008 In a message dated 4/6/2008 8:19:42 PM Pacific Daylight Time, Roberibus111 writes: ..b b.b.:"end of story.a true friend in peace and proper prosperity i remain as always."philly (in response):"And that last line is by far the ugliest thing you've said; like youjust took Truth out in the back alley and raped her mercillessly.".b b.b.(responding now)and that's the prettiest thing you're capable of saying phillip. I have the magical woo woo power of being able to see what is in your heart as you wrote the words of friendship and peace above, and the disparity between the two was noticed and there was a need to point it out. There was no intention to offend, but of course it was inevitable, so I appologize for that. I welcome your hate and disgust. It's honest and true, at least for the moment. PhilPlanning your summer road trip? Check out AOL Travel Guides. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 7, 2008 Report Share Posted April 7, 2008 In a message dated 4/6/2008 8:19:52 PM Pacific Daylight Time, Roberibus111 writes: There's > nothing outside the human experience that has the capacity to findanything silly > and superfluous or holy and respectful. All that, along with therest of this > nonsense, goes on in the human mind only.> Phil"There's nothing"... would suffice phil.the rest of your inane comment is like trying to add wetness to water.wholly unholy and entirely superfluous. True, but you seemed to require the clarity. PhilPlanning your summer road trip? Check out AOL Travel Guides. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 7, 2008 Report Share Posted April 7, 2008 Nisargadatta , souldreamone wrote: > > > In a message dated 4/5/2008 1:23:35 PM Pacific Daylight Time, > Roberibus111 writes: > > > > Enlightenment happens to no one because that's the nature of the > Realization. It's an > > event that occurs through the vehicle that ends suffering by > removing the > > illusory belief in the identity. no siree. > > 'enlightenment' doesn't happen in time. > > IT is NOT an event. > > it's ALL that ever was, is, or will be. > > it seems paradoxical..but it's not. > > > > > ****In the same way that the word 'enlightenment' doesn't need to be > disputed, neither does the tern 'event'. It's clear enough and there is no need to > turn it into a paradox. it isn't turned into a paradox. it is a paradox. paradoxes don't 'develop'. they either are or are not a paradox. 'paradoxes' are not 'solved'. this should not be such a puzzle for you. your problem is believing in 'getting enlightened'.. there is no 'getting' or 'becoming' or 'developing'.. there is nothing 'different' between: 'enlightened' and/or the 'unenlightened'. that nonsense is promulgated by would-be saviors and avatars. but it can be a fun and profitable business. not for your types though. you'd never pull it off. The event is the realization of something that never > was; the ending of an illusion. there is no illusion that requires ending. unless you believe in fairy tales and monsters. they should all be easily seen through. but for those expecting to realize something that never was.. well all you can hope for is more of the same. > p.s. > > blessed are those who like you can't see but attend to the baba. > > > ****But I can see myself losing interest in attending to your needs, and so > it would seem that's coming to an end. I hope I'm still blessed. > > Phil no need ever to be 'attending' baba's needs.. baba has no needs. besides..the term 'attend' as used in the foregoing means: give heed (to)... for example: " the children in the audience attended the recital quietly'... or: 'phil should attend to everything baba has said'. obviously this is a proposition that you misconstrued. it doesn't matter little lamb. baba still blesses you. He can do no other. this is the gift of unconditional and freely given hallowing... and is a Great Boon for you.. even in your inconsiderate inappreciativeness. delivering all bewildered lambkins.. from corralled and over protected ignorance, we remain, yours, ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 8, 2008 Report Share Posted April 8, 2008 In a message dated 4/7/2008 9:20:52 PM Pacific Daylight Time, Roberibus111 writes: > no siree.> > 'enlightenment' doesn't happen in time.> > IT is NOT an event.> > it's ALL that ever was, is, or will be.> > it seems paradoxical..but it's not.> > > > > ****In the same way that the word 'enlightenment' doesn't need to be > disputed, neither does the tern 'event'. It's clear enough and thereis no need to > turn it into a paradox.it isn't turned into a paradox.it is a paradox.paradoxes don't 'develop'.they either are or are not a paradox. ****You just said it's not a paradox, now you say it is. A paradox DOES develop in the mind because it attempts to place two opposing concepts in the same context where they don't belong. A paradox just reveals a boundary of understanding. > blessed are those who like you can't see but attend to the baba.> > > ****But I can see myself losing interest in attending to your needs,and so > it would seem that's coming to an end. I hope I'm still blessed.> > Philno need ever to be 'attending' baba's needs..baba has no needs.besides..the term 'attend' as used in the foregoing means:give heed (to)...for example:"the children in the audience attended the recital quietly'...or:'phil should attend to everything baba has said'.obviously this is a proposition that you misconstrued. ****Gnaw, not so much really. You've misconstrued. It was just some more of my witless wit. Phil Planning your summer road trip? Check out AOL Travel Guides. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 8, 2008 Report Share Posted April 8, 2008 Nisargadatta , souldreamone wrote: > > > In a message dated 4/7/2008 9:20:52 PM Pacific Daylight Time, > Roberibus111 writes: > > > no siree. > > > > 'enlightenment' doesn't happen in time. > > > > IT is NOT an event. > > > > it's ALL that ever was, is, or will be. > > > > it seems paradoxical..but it's not. > > > > > > > > > > ****In the same way that the word 'enlightenment' doesn't need to be > > disputed, neither does the tern 'event'. It's clear enough and there > is no need to > > turn it into a paradox. > > > > > it isn't turned into a paradox. > > it is a paradox. > > paradoxes don't 'develop'. > > they either are or are not a paradox. > > > > > ****You just said it's not a paradox, now you say it is. > A paradox DOES develop in the mind because it attempts to place two opposing > concepts in the same context where they don't belong. A paradox just reveals > a boundary of understanding. that you don't see the paradox in what you wrote above.. is the same 'that'.. that is the reason baba knows... that you haven't the first clue. 'solve' 'your' own 'paradox'.. or live with the nonsense your no-nonsense, senseless, ego is become. and to think..it thinks it's right! 'you' got to love that. that's funnier than the whole enchilada. > > blessed are those who like you can't see but attend to the baba. > > > > > > ****But I can see myself losing interest in attending to your needs, > and so > > it would seem that's coming to an end. I hope I'm still blessed. > > > > Phil > > > > > > no need ever to be 'attending' baba's needs.. > > baba has no needs. > > besides..the term 'attend' as used in the foregoing means: > > give heed (to)... > > for example: > > " the children in the audience attended the recital quietly'... > > or: > > 'phil should attend to everything baba has said'. > > obviously this is a proposition that you misconstrued. > > > > ****Gnaw, not so much really. You've misconstrued. It was just some more of > my witless wit. > > Phil ok phil.. more of your wetter water we see. yawn. ..b b.b. 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.