Guest guest Posted January 29, 2009 Report Share Posted January 29, 2009 Institutionalizing thought by calling it meany or ego will just create the illusion of a devil one can sprinkle with the holy waters of meditation and sitting cross-legged to overcome it. But that's just a trick to avoid getting confronted with the main drive sitting behind each thought: Arrogance ! Each thought which arrives is arrogantly claiming to be true, to bring truth - else it wouldn't arrive, or would it ? Have you ever had a thought introducing itself right from the beginning as lying ? No, you haven't. Neither did I. And that convincing arrogance of thought is the reason one never is questioning it and doubting it. Therefore the first characteristic one has to observe and to grasp about thought is that each thought which is entering is trying to convince to be truth incarnate. Have you ever before already asked yourself what are the means to doubt thought ? Most likely not. But here you have got the means: Seeing that each thought is arrogant already means doubting thought. Werner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 29, 2009 Report Share Posted January 29, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr wrote: > > Institutionalizing thought by calling it meany or ego will just > create the illusion of a devil one can sprinkle with the holy waters > of meditation and sitting cross-legged to overcome it. > > But that's just a trick to avoid getting confronted with the main > drive sitting behind each thought: Arrogance ! > > Each thought which arrives is arrogantly claiming to be true, to > bring truth - else it wouldn't arrive, or would it ? > > Have you ever had a thought introducing itself right from the > beginning as lying ? No, you haven't. Neither did I. And that > convincing arrogance of thought is the reason one never is > questioning it and doubting it. > > Therefore the first characteristic one has to observe and to grasp > about thought is that each thought which is entering is trying to > convince to be truth incarnate. > > > > > Have you ever before already asked yourself what are the means to > doubt thought ? Most likely not. But here you have got the means: > > Seeing that each thought is arrogant already means doubting thought. > > Werner > fantastic thoughts, Werner.... Marc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr wrote: > > Institutionalizing thought by calling it meany or ego will just > create the illusion of a devil one can sprinkle with the holy waters > of meditation and sitting cross-legged to overcome it. > > But that's just a trick to avoid getting confronted with the main > drive sitting behind each thought: Arrogance ! > > Each thought which arrives is arrogantly claiming to be true, to > bring truth - else it wouldn't arrive, or would it ? > > Have you ever had a thought introducing itself right from the > beginning as lying ? No, you haven't. Neither did I. And that > convincing arrogance of thought is the reason one never is > questioning it and doubting it. > > Therefore the first characteristic one has to observe and to grasp > about thought is that each thought which is entering is trying to > convince to be truth incarnate. > > > > > Have you ever before already asked yourself what are the means to > doubt thought ? Most likely not. But here you have got the means: > > Seeing that each thought is arrogant already means doubting thought. > > Werner Is that which is calling thoughts arrogant, different from thoughts? Is that which is doubting thoughts different from thought? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > Institutionalizing thought by calling it meany or ego will just > > create the illusion of a devil one can sprinkle with the holy waters > > of meditation and sitting cross-legged to overcome it. > > > > But that's just a trick to avoid getting confronted with the main > > drive sitting behind each thought: Arrogance ! > > > > Each thought which arrives is arrogantly claiming to be true, to > > bring truth - else it wouldn't arrive, or would it ? > > > > Have you ever had a thought introducing itself right from the > > beginning as lying ? No, you haven't. Neither did I. And that > > convincing arrogance of thought is the reason one never is > > questioning it and doubting it. > > > > Therefore the first characteristic one has to observe and to grasp > > about thought is that each thought which is entering is trying to > > convince to be truth incarnate. > > > > > > > > > > Have you ever before already asked yourself what are the means to > > doubt thought ? Most likely not. But here you have got the means: > > > > Seeing that each thought is arrogant already means doubting thought. > > > > Werner > > > Is that which is calling thoughts arrogant, different from thoughts? > Is that which is doubting thoughts different from thought? > Hi, Surely not. What I posted about the arrogance of course implied that. Werner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > > > Institutionalizing thought by calling it meany or ego will just > > > create the illusion of a devil one can sprinkle with the holy > waters > > > of meditation and sitting cross-legged to overcome it. > > > > > > But that's just a trick to avoid getting confronted with the main > > > drive sitting behind each thought: Arrogance ! > > > > > > Each thought which arrives is arrogantly claiming to be true, to > > > bring truth - else it wouldn't arrive, or would it ? > > > > > > Have you ever had a thought introducing itself right from the > > > beginning as lying ? No, you haven't. Neither did I. And that > > > convincing arrogance of thought is the reason one never is > > > questioning it and doubting it. > > > > > > Therefore the first characteristic one has to observe and to grasp > > > about thought is that each thought which is entering is trying to > > > convince to be truth incarnate. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Have you ever before already asked yourself what are the means to > > > doubt thought ? Most likely not. But here you have got the means: > > > > > > Seeing that each thought is arrogant already means doubting > thought. > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > Is that which is calling thoughts arrogant, different from thoughts? > > Is that which is doubting thoughts different from thought? > > > > > Hi, > > Surely not. What I posted about the arrogance of course implied that. > > Werner And what´s the point of posting a bunch of arrogant thoughts about arrogant thoughts? The boredom, i guess... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Institutionalizing thought by calling it meany or ego will just > > > > create the illusion of a devil one can sprinkle with the holy > > waters > > > > of meditation and sitting cross-legged to overcome it. > > > > > > > > But that's just a trick to avoid getting confronted with the main > > > > drive sitting behind each thought: Arrogance ! > > > > > > > > Each thought which arrives is arrogantly claiming to be true, to > > > > bring truth - else it wouldn't arrive, or would it ? > > > > > > > > Have you ever had a thought introducing itself right from the > > > > beginning as lying ? No, you haven't. Neither did I. And that > > > > convincing arrogance of thought is the reason one never is > > > > questioning it and doubting it. > > > > > > > > Therefore the first characteristic one has to observe and to grasp > > > > about thought is that each thought which is entering is trying to > > > > convince to be truth incarnate. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Have you ever before already asked yourself what are the means to > > > > doubt thought ? Most likely not. But here you have got the means: > > > > > > > > Seeing that each thought is arrogant already means doubting > > thought. > > > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > > Is that which is calling thoughts arrogant, different from thoughts? > > > Is that which is doubting thoughts different from thought? > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > Surely not. What I posted about the arrogance of course implied that. > > > > Werner > > > And what´s the point of posting a bunch of arrogant thoughts about > arrogant thoughts? The boredom, i guess... > What you wrote sounds pretty arrogant But I will forgive you because I know that accepting the arrogance of thought is an unsurmountabele challenge which no one can solve, neither you nor me. The only we can do is to shut up. You start first Werner Werner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > > > Institutionalizing thought by calling it meany or ego will just > > > create the illusion of a devil one can sprinkle with the holy > waters > > > of meditation and sitting cross-legged to overcome it. > > > > > > But that's just a trick to avoid getting confronted with the main > > > drive sitting behind each thought: Arrogance ! > > > > > > Each thought which arrives is arrogantly claiming to be true, to > > > bring truth - else it wouldn't arrive, or would it ? > > > > > > Have you ever had a thought introducing itself right from the > > > beginning as lying ? No, you haven't. Neither did I. And that > > > convincing arrogance of thought is the reason one never is > > > questioning it and doubting it. > > > > > > Therefore the first characteristic one has to observe and to grasp > > > about thought is that each thought which is entering is trying to > > > convince to be truth incarnate. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Have you ever before already asked yourself what are the means to > > > doubt thought ? Most likely not. But here you have got the means: > > > > > > Seeing that each thought is arrogant already means doubting > thought. > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > Is that which is calling thoughts arrogant, different from thoughts? > > Is that which is doubting thoughts different from thought? > > > > > Hi, > > Surely not. What I posted about the arrogance of course implied that. > > Werner > Who knows from where thought comes? How do we make them *mine*? (Which, of course, IS the epitome of arrogance.) Quite silly when one thinks about it. ;-) But have a nice day, Werner-thought and Lisbon-thought. Spring is around the corner, I saw my first robin. Love, Anna-thought ~Anna Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 Nisargadatta , " anabebe57 " <kailashana wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Institutionalizing thought by calling it meany or ego will just > > > > create the illusion of a devil one can sprinkle with the holy > > waters > > > > of meditation and sitting cross-legged to overcome it. > > > > > > > > But that's just a trick to avoid getting confronted with the main > > > > drive sitting behind each thought: Arrogance ! > > > > > > > > Each thought which arrives is arrogantly claiming to be true, to > > > > bring truth - else it wouldn't arrive, or would it ? > > > > > > > > Have you ever had a thought introducing itself right from the > > > > beginning as lying ? No, you haven't. Neither did I. And that > > > > convincing arrogance of thought is the reason one never is > > > > questioning it and doubting it. > > > > > > > > Therefore the first characteristic one has to observe and to grasp > > > > about thought is that each thought which is entering is trying to > > > > convince to be truth incarnate. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Have you ever before already asked yourself what are the means to > > > > doubt thought ? Most likely not. But here you have got the means: > > > > > > > > Seeing that each thought is arrogant already means doubting > > thought. > > > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > > Is that which is calling thoughts arrogant, different from thoughts? > > > Is that which is doubting thoughts different from thought? > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > Surely not. What I posted about the arrogance of course implied that. > > > > Werner > > > > > > Who knows from where thought comes? How do we make them *mine*? > (Which, of course, IS the epitome of arrogance.) > > Quite silly when one thinks about it. ;-) Yes, indeed Anna, quite silly. And it is in no way pleasant to get reminded of that arrogance by each thought appearing. Especailly when realizing that thought is MINE. Werner-Thought > > But have a nice day, Werner-thought and Lisbon-t thought. Spring > is around the corner, I saw my first robin. > > Love, > Anna-thought > > ~Anna > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 Nisargadatta , " anabebe57 " <kailashana wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Institutionalizing thought by calling it meany or ego will just > > > > create the illusion of a devil one can sprinkle with the holy > > waters > > > > of meditation and sitting cross-legged to overcome it. > > > > > > > > But that's just a trick to avoid getting confronted with the main > > > > drive sitting behind each thought: Arrogance ! > > > > > > > > Each thought which arrives is arrogantly claiming to be true, to > > > > bring truth - else it wouldn't arrive, or would it ? > > > > > > > > Have you ever had a thought introducing itself right from the > > > > beginning as lying ? No, you haven't. Neither did I. And that > > > > convincing arrogance of thought is the reason one never is > > > > questioning it and doubting it. > > > > > > > > Therefore the first characteristic one has to observe and to grasp > > > > about thought is that each thought which is entering is trying to > > > > convince to be truth incarnate. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Have you ever before already asked yourself what are the means to > > > > doubt thought ? Most likely not. But here you have got the means: > > > > > > > > Seeing that each thought is arrogant already means doubting > > thought. > > > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > > Is that which is calling thoughts arrogant, different from thoughts? > > > Is that which is doubting thoughts different from thought? > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > Surely not. What I posted about the arrogance of course implied that. > > > > Werner > > > > > > Who knows from where thought comes? How do we make them *mine*? > (Which, of course, IS the epitome of arrogance.) > > Quite silly when one thinks about it. ;-) > > But have a nice day, Werner-thought and Lisbon-thought. Spring > is around the corner, I saw my first robin. > > Love, > Anna-thought > > ~Anna > The brain secretes thoughts like the liver secretes bile. Thought can think of any-thing but itself. Thought thinks of thought as a thing. When its the name given to should be " thoughting " . And the one that assumes that it is the center of the thoughting is itself merely an accumulation of solidified fragmentary thoughts. ......and anna............there is no such thing as a " first robin " . ......so you couldn't have seen one. :-0 toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 > > Yes, indeed Anna, quite silly. > > And it is in no way pleasant to get reminded of that arrogance by > each thought appearing. Especailly when realizing that thought is > MINE. > > Werner-Thought > > Is it arrogance to assume that there is a psychological center that is arrogant? toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > > > > > Yes, indeed Anna, quite silly. > > > > And it is in no way pleasant to get reminded of that arrogance by > > each thought appearing. Especailly when realizing that thought is > > MINE. > > > > Werner-Thought > > > > > > > Is it arrogance to assume that there is a psychological center that is > arrogant? > > > > toombaru > Asking questions is not arrogant, Toomb. Maybe there are two centers ? One is arrogant and constantly making statements and the other center is non-arrogant and asking questions. Werner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Yes, indeed Anna, quite silly. > > > > > > And it is in no way pleasant to get reminded of that arrogance by > > > each thought appearing. Especailly when realizing that thought is > > > MINE. > > > > > > Werner-Thought > > > > > > > > > > > > Is it arrogance to assume that there is a psychological center that > is > > arrogant? > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > Asking questions is not arrogant, Toomb. > > Maybe there are two centers ? > > One is arrogant and constantly making statements and the other center > is non-arrogant and asking questions. > > Werner > Questions about the perceptions of a psychological center arise from the assumption of its actuality. Perhaps " arrogance " is the wrong word. :-) toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > > > > > Yes, indeed Anna, quite silly. > > > > And it is in no way pleasant to get reminded of that arrogance by > > each thought appearing. Especailly when realizing that thought is > > MINE. > > > > Werner-Thought > > > > > > > Is it arrogance to assume that there is a psychological center that is > arrogant? > > > > toombaru > Is it arrogance to assume that there is a centre at all? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, indeed Anna, quite silly. > > > > > > > > And it is in no way pleasant to get reminded of that arrogance by > > > > each thought appearing. Especailly when realizing that thought is > > > > MINE. > > > > > > > > Werner-Thought > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is it arrogance to assume that there is a psychological center that > > is > > > arrogant? > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > Asking questions is not arrogant, Toomb. > > > > Maybe there are two centers ? > > > > One is arrogant and constantly making statements and the other center > > is non-arrogant and asking questions. > > > > Werner > > > > > > Questions about the perceptions of a psychological center arise from > the assumption of its actuality. > > Perhaps " arrogance " is the wrong word. > > > > > :-) > > > toombaru > Maybe when hesitantly expressing one's thoughts by using lots of " perhaps " , " maybe " , " it seems " or " eventually " etc shows that the speaker or writer already realized the arrogance of thought or least started to realize it. Btw, the above was a statement disguised as a question. Werner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, indeed Anna, quite silly. > > > > > > > > > > And it is in no way pleasant to get reminded of that > arrogance by > > > > > each thought appearing. Especailly when realizing that > thought is > > > > > MINE. > > > > > > > > > > Werner-Thought > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is it arrogance to assume that there is a psychological center > that > > > is > > > > arrogant? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > > > > > > > > > Asking questions is not arrogant, Toomb. > > > > > > Maybe there are two centers ? > > > > > > One is arrogant and constantly making statements and the other > center > > > is non-arrogant and asking questions. > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > > > > Questions about the perceptions of a psychological center arise from > > the assumption of its actuality. > > > > Perhaps " arrogance " is the wrong word. > > > > > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > toombaru > > > > > Maybe when hesitantly expressing one's thoughts by using lots > of " perhaps " , " maybe " , " it seems " or " eventually " etc shows that the > speaker or writer already realized the arrogance of thought or least > started to realize it. > > Btw, the above was a statement disguised as a question. > > > > Werner > There is a crack in the dream. :-) toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 31, 2009 Report Share Posted January 31, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Institutionalizing thought by calling it meany or ego will > just > > > > > create the illusion of a devil one can sprinkle with the holy > > > waters > > > > > of meditation and sitting cross-legged to overcome it. > > > > > > > > > > But that's just a trick to avoid getting confronted with the > main > > > > > drive sitting behind each thought: Arrogance ! > > > > > > > > > > Each thought which arrives is arrogantly claiming to be true, > to > > > > > bring truth - else it wouldn't arrive, or would it ? > > > > > > > > > > Have you ever had a thought introducing itself right from the > > > > > beginning as lying ? No, you haven't. Neither did I. And that > > > > > convincing arrogance of thought is the reason one never is > > > > > questioning it and doubting it. > > > > > > > > > > Therefore the first characteristic one has to observe and to > grasp > > > > > about thought is that each thought which is entering is > trying to > > > > > convince to be truth incarnate. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Have you ever before already asked yourself what are the > means to > > > > > doubt thought ? Most likely not. But here you have got the > means: > > > > > > > > > > Seeing that each thought is arrogant already means doubting > > > thought. > > > > > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > > > > > Is that which is calling thoughts arrogant, different from > thoughts? > > > > Is that which is doubting thoughts different from thought? > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > Surely not. What I posted about the arrogance of course implied > that. > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > And what´s the point of posting a bunch of arrogant thoughts about > > arrogant thoughts? The boredom, i guess... > > > > > What you wrote sounds pretty arrogant > > But I will forgive you because I know that accepting the arrogance of > thought is an unsurmountabele challenge which no one can solve, > neither you nor me. Who cares, as long as we can keep harping on this... What else are we to do? > The only we can do is to shut up. You start first No way, when i shut up, the crap i keep thinking of becomes even more unbearable... > > > Werner > > > Werner > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 31, 2009 Report Share Posted January 31, 2009 Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Institutionalizing thought by calling it meany or ego will > > just > > > > > > create the illusion of a devil one can sprinkle with the holy > > > > waters > > > > > > of meditation and sitting cross-legged to overcome it. > > > > > > > > > > > > But that's just a trick to avoid getting confronted with the > > main > > > > > > drive sitting behind each thought: Arrogance ! > > > > > > > > > > > > Each thought which arrives is arrogantly claiming to be true, > > to > > > > > > bring truth - else it wouldn't arrive, or would it ? > > > > > > > > > > > > Have you ever had a thought introducing itself right from the > > > > > > beginning as lying ? No, you haven't. Neither did I. And that > > > > > > convincing arrogance of thought is the reason one never is > > > > > > questioning it and doubting it. > > > > > > > > > > > > Therefore the first characteristic one has to observe and to > > grasp > > > > > > about thought is that each thought which is entering is > > trying to > > > > > > convince to be truth incarnate. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Have you ever before already asked yourself what are the > > means to > > > > > > doubt thought ? Most likely not. But here you have got the > > means: > > > > > > > > > > > > Seeing that each thought is arrogant already means doubting > > > > thought. > > > > > > > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is that which is calling thoughts arrogant, different from > > thoughts? > > > > > Is that which is doubting thoughts different from thought? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > Surely not. What I posted about the arrogance of course implied > > that. > > > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > > And what´s the point of posting a bunch of arrogant thoughts about > > > arrogant thoughts? The boredom, i guess... > > > > > > > > > What you wrote sounds pretty arrogant > > > > But I will forgive you because I know that accepting the arrogance of > > thought is an unsurmountabele challenge which no one can solve, > > neither you nor me. > > > > Who cares, as long as we can keep harping on this... > What else are we to do? > > > > > > The only we can do is to shut up. You start first > > > No way, when i shut up, the crap i keep thinking of becomes even more > unbearable... > > If you think that is you thinking......try to think what your next thought is going to be. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 31, 2009 Report Share Posted January 31, 2009 Nisargadatta , " anabebe57 " <kailashana wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " lissbon2002 " <lissbon2002@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Institutionalizing thought by calling it meany or ego will just > > > > create the illusion of a devil one can sprinkle with the holy > > waters > > > > of meditation and sitting cross-legged to overcome it. > > > > > > > > But that's just a trick to avoid getting confronted with the main > > > > drive sitting behind each thought: Arrogance ! > > > > > > > > Each thought which arrives is arrogantly claiming to be true, to > > > > bring truth - else it wouldn't arrive, or would it ? > > > > > > > > Have you ever had a thought introducing itself right from the > > > > beginning as lying ? No, you haven't. Neither did I. And that > > > > convincing arrogance of thought is the reason one never is > > > > questioning it and doubting it. > > > > > > > > Therefore the first characteristic one has to observe and to grasp > > > > about thought is that each thought which is entering is trying to > > > > convince to be truth incarnate. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Have you ever before already asked yourself what are the means to > > > > doubt thought ? Most likely not. But here you have got the means: > > > > > > > > Seeing that each thought is arrogant already means doubting > > thought. > > > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > > Is that which is calling thoughts arrogant, different from thoughts? > > > Is that which is doubting thoughts different from thought? > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > Surely not. What I posted about the arrogance of course implied that. > > > > Werner > > > > > > Who knows from where thought comes? How do we make them *mine*? Through making them *not mine* ;-) > (Which, of course, IS the epitome of arrogance.) > Quite silly when one thinks about it. ;-) > > But have a nice day, Werner-thought and Lisbon-thought. Spring > is around the corner, I saw my first robin. > > Love, > Anna-thought > > ~Anna Thank you, robin :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 31, 2009 Report Share Posted January 31, 2009 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > > > > > Yes, indeed Anna, quite silly. > > > > And it is in no way pleasant to get reminded of that arrogance by > > each thought appearing. It is arrogant to find things unpleasant. The apparent reminder of the arrogance is sheer fakeness though. To see the arrogance is the end of arrogance. To whine about arrogance is pretense. Especailly when realizing that thought is > > MINE. > > > > Werner-Thought 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.