Guest guest Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 if i am not what i am then did i never came into existence in the first place? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 I alone am, the world exists like a mirage within me. -mahesh CANJEEVARAM -PADMANABAN-THIAGARAJAN <thiagacp44Nisargadatta Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 11:00:26 AM i am that if i am not what i am then did i never came into existence in the first place? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 Nisargadatta , Mahesh Kamat <mv.kamat wrote: > > I alone am, the world exists like a mirage within me. > -mahesh > > There is no YOU in which is existing an image. You ARE that image. Werner > > > ________________________________ > CANJEEVARAM -PADMANABAN-THIAGARAJAN <thiagacp44 > Nisargadatta > Friday, March 13, 2009 11:00:26 AM > i am that > > > if i am not what i am then did i never came into existence in the first place? > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 oh gee that's big of you. that's the that that you are when you say " i am that " . if you are thoughtlessness.. why express so many thoughts? and incorrect ones at that. i'd say that was rather thoughtless.. except obviously it's just not knowing what's what. i forgive you. that's big of me. there's nothing to forgive. how big can you get? :-) ..b b.b. Nisargadatta , Mahesh Kamat <mv.kamat wrote: > > i admit that i am neither mahesh nor werner nor marc or bbb or whatever. who is confronting, for what & why? nothing at all. > waves of thoughts rising & falling in the vast expanse of thoughtlessness. > -mahesh > > > > ________________________________ > dennis_travis33 <dennis_travis33 > Nisargadatta > Friday, March 13, 2009 2:49:05 PM > Re: i am that > > > Nisargadatta, " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta, Mahesh Kamat <mv.kamat@> wrote: > > > > > > " I " is not a personal being. > > > -mahesh > > > > > > > > > > > > And the " I " also is no impersonal being. > > > > There is no YOU in which is existing an image. > > > > You ARE that image. > > > > Werner > > > > > > now we have a problem.... > > neither Mahesh want to admit that he Is Werner... > and Werner don't want to admit that he Is Mahesh... > > let's follow the further situation... . > > better without any consciousness about/of anything at all....lol > > Marc > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 Nisargadatta , " anabebe57 " <kailashana wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , Mahesh Kamat <mv.kamat@> wrote: > > > > > > i admit that i am neither mahesh nor werner nor marc or bbb or whatever. who is confronting, for what & why? nothing at all. > > > waves of thoughts rising & falling in the vast expanse of thoughtlessness. > > > -mahesh > > > > > > > > > > what is the IQ of nothingness? > > > > > > Marc > > > > > It's astronomical, imo, nothingness has the potentiality, ability and the eventuality to transform itself into all-that-is, based on thought alone. > > ~A > do you think so?... Marc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anabebe57 " <kailashana@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Mahesh Kamat <mv.kamat@> wrote: > > > > > > > > i admit that i am neither mahesh nor werner nor marc or bbb or whatever. who is confronting, for what & why? nothing at all. > > > > waves of thoughts rising & falling in the vast expanse of thoughtlessness. > > > > -mahesh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > what is the IQ of nothingness? > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > It's astronomical, imo, nothingness has the potentiality, ability and the eventuality to transform itself into all-that-is, based on thought alone. > > > > ~A > > > > do you think so?... > > Marc > Ps: i thought that ~A had more IQ than this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 What is Nothingness? Warm regards, Ricardo Nisargadatta , " anabebe57 " <kailashana wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , Mahesh Kamat <mv.kamat@> wrote: > > > > > > i admit that i am neither mahesh nor werner nor marc or bbb or whatever. who is confronting, for what & why? nothing at all. > > > waves of thoughts rising & falling in the vast expanse of thoughtlessness. > > > -mahesh > > > > > > > > > > what is the IQ of nothingness? > > > > > > Marc > > > > > It's astronomical, imo, nothingness has the potentiality, ability and the eventuality to transform itself into all-that-is, based on thought alone. > > ~A > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 There's really nothing to talk about. ..b b.b. Nisargadatta , " kipalmazy " <kipalmazy wrote: > > What is Nothingness? > Warm regards, > Ricardo > > Nisargadatta , " anabebe57 " <kailashana@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 " <dennis_travis33@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , Mahesh Kamat <mv.kamat@> wrote: > > > > > > > > i admit that i am neither mahesh nor werner nor marc or bbb or whatever. who is confronting, for what & why? nothing at all. > > > > waves of thoughts rising & falling in the vast expanse of thoughtlessness. > > > > -mahesh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > what is the IQ of nothingness? > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > > It's astronomical, imo, nothingness has the potentiality, ability and the eventuality to transform itself into all-that-is, based on thought alone. > > > > ~A > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 Nisargadatta , " roberibus111 " <Roberibus111 wrote: > > There's really nothing to talk about. > > .b b.b. > > yes! and especially Nothing to talk about It with this kipalmazy jam! lol Marc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 14, 2009 Report Share Posted March 14, 2009 the calmness of the sky is not affected by the wind dispersing the clouds. -mahesh roberibus111 <Roberibus111Nisargadatta Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 6:46:12 PM Re: i am that oh gee that's big of you.that's the that that you are when you say "i am that".if you are thoughtlessness. .why express so many thoughts?and incorrect ones at that.i'd say that was rather thoughtless. .except obviously it's just not knowing what's what.i forgive you.that's big of me.there's nothing to forgive.how big can you get?:-).b b.b.Nisargadatta, Mahesh Kamat <mv.kamat@.. .> wrote:>> i admit that i am neither mahesh nor werner nor marc or bbb or whatever. who is confronting, for what & why? nothing at all.> waves of thoughts rising & falling in the vast expanse of thoughtlessness.> -mahesh > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __> dennis_travis33 <dennis_travis33@ ...>> Nisargadatta> Friday, March 13, 2009 2:49:05 PM> Re: i am that> > > Nisargadatta, "Werner Woehr" <wwoehr@> wrote:> >> > Nisargadatta, Mahesh Kamat <mv.kamat@> wrote:> > >> > > "I" is not a personal being.> > > -mahesh> > > > > >> > > > > > And the "I" also is no impersonal being.> > > > There is no YOU in which is existing an image.> > > > You ARE that image.> > > > Werner> > > > > > now we have a problem....> > neither Mahesh want to admit that he Is Werner...> and Werner don't want to admit that he Is Mahesh...> > let's follow the further situation... .> > better without any consciousness about/of anything at all....lol> > Marc> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 14, 2009 Report Share Posted March 14, 2009 yeah well that's what i just said. what's your point? you talkin' just to hear yourself talk? maybe something silent is scaring you. ..b b.b. Nisargadatta , Mahesh Kamat <mv.kamat wrote: > > the calmness of the sky is not affected by the wind dispersing the clouds. > -mahesh > > > > > ________________________________ > roberibus111 <Roberibus111 > Nisargadatta > Friday, March 13, 2009 6:46:12 PM > Re: i am that > > > oh gee that's big of you. > > that's the that that you are when you say " i am that " . > > if you are thoughtlessness. . > > why express so many thoughts? > > and incorrect ones at that. > > i'd say that was rather thoughtless. . > > except obviously it's just not knowing what's what. > > i forgive you. > > that's big of me. > > there's nothing to forgive. > > how big can you get? > > :-) > > .b b.b. > > Nisargadatta, Mahesh Kamat <mv.kamat@ .> wrote: > > > > i admit that i am neither mahesh nor werner nor marc or bbb or whatever. who is confronting, for what & why? nothing at all. > > waves of thoughts rising & falling in the vast expanse of thoughtlessness. > > -mahesh > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > dennis_travis33 <dennis_travis33@ ...> > > Nisargadatta > > Friday, March 13, 2009 2:49:05 PM > > Re: i am that > > > > > > Nisargadatta, " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta, Mahesh Kamat <mv.kamat@> wrote: > > > > > > > > " I " is not a personal being. > > > > -mahesh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And the " I " also is no impersonal being. > > > > > > There is no YOU in which is existing an image. > > > > > > You ARE that image. > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > > > now we have a problem.... > > > > neither Mahesh want to admit that he Is Werner... > > and Werner don't want to admit that he Is Mahesh... > > > > let's follow the further situation... . > > > > better without any consciousness about/of anything at all....lol > > > > Marc > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 15, 2009 Report Share Posted March 15, 2009 NO--- On Fri, 3/13/09, CANJEEVARAM -PADMANABAN-THIAGARAJAN <thiagacp44 wrote: CANJEEVARAM -PADMANABAN-THIAGARAJAN <thiagacp44 i am thatNisargadatta Date: Friday, March 13, 2009, 11:00 AM if i am not what i am then did i never came into existence in the first place? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 15, 2009 Report Share Posted March 15, 2009 Horsefeathers! you don't know what you're talking about pinky! what crap! but i guess..what's really cool though.. is since you never came into existence.. it's impossible for you to take umbrage to.. me pointing out your utter and uttered stupidity.. and the fact that you appear to be an idiot. ..b b.b. Nisargadatta , Pradeep Apte <prdp_apte wrote: > > NO > > --- On Fri, 3/13/09, CANJEEVARAM -PADMANABAN-THIAGARAJAN <thiagacp44 wrote: > > CANJEEVARAM -PADMANABAN-THIAGARAJAN <thiagacp44 > i am that > Nisargadatta > Friday, March 13, 2009, 11:00 AM if i am not what i am then did i never came into existence in the first place? > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 15, 2009 Report Share Posted March 15, 2009 i, you, me, him , her all expressions like the clouds in the sky, the movement is created by the wind (thoughts). the stillness & calmness of the sky is not affected by these expressions & movements. you saying you are right i saying i am right all expressing the stillness & calmness of all pervasive. -mahesh roberibus111 <Roberibus111Nisargadatta Sent: Sunday, March 15, 2009 1:25:25 AM Re: i am that yeah well that's what i just said.what's your point?you talkin' just to hear yourself talk?maybe something silent is scaring you..b b.b.Nisargadatta, Mahesh Kamat <mv.kamat@.. .> wrote:>> the calmness of the sky is not affected by the wind dispersing the clouds.> -mahesh > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __> roberibus111 <Roberibus111@ ...>> Nisargadatta> Friday, March 13, 2009 6:46:12 PM> Re: i am that> > > oh gee that's big of you.> > that's the that that you are when you say "i am that".> > if you are thoughtlessness. .> > why express so many thoughts?> > and incorrect ones at that.> > i'd say that was rather thoughtless. .> > except obviously it's just not knowing what's what.> > i forgive you.> > that's big of me.> > there's nothing to forgive.> > how big can you get?> > :-)> > .b b.b.> > Nisargadatta, Mahesh Kamat <mv.kamat@ .> wrote:> >> > i admit that i am neither mahesh nor werner nor marc or bbb or whatever. who is confronting, for what & why? nothing at all.> > waves of thoughts rising & falling in the vast expanse of thoughtlessness.> > -mahesh > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __> > dennis_travis33 <dennis_travis33@ ...>> > Nisargadatta> > Friday, March 13, 2009 2:49:05 PM> > Re: i am that> > > > > > Nisargadatta, "Werner Woehr" <wwoehr@> wrote:> > >> > > Nisargadatta, Mahesh Kamat <mv.kamat@> wrote:> > > >> > > > "I" is not a personal being.> > > > -mahesh> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > And the "I" also is no impersonal being.> > > > > > There is no YOU in which is existing an image.> > > > > > You ARE that image.> > > > > > Werner> > > > > > > > > > now we have a problem....> > > > neither Mahesh want to admit that he Is Werner...> > and Werner don't want to admit that he Is Mahesh...> > > > let's follow the further situation... .> > > > better without any consciousness about/of anything at all....lol> > > > Marc> >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 15, 2009 Report Share Posted March 15, 2009 oh brothher! ....where art thou?. LOL! ..b b.b. Nisargadatta , Mahesh Kamat <mv.kamat wrote: > > i, you, me, him , her all expressions like the clouds in the sky, the movement is created by the wind (thoughts). the stillness & calmness of the sky is not affected by these expressions & movements. you saying you are right i saying i am right all expressing the stillness & calmness of all pervasive. > -mahesh > > > > > ________________________________ > roberibus111 <Roberibus111 > Nisargadatta > Sunday, March 15, 2009 1:25:25 AM > Re: i am that > > > yeah well that's what i just said. > > what's your point? > > you talkin' just to hear yourself talk? > > maybe something silent is scaring you. > > .b b.b. > > Nisargadatta, Mahesh Kamat <mv.kamat@ .> wrote: > > > > the calmness of the sky is not affected by the wind dispersing the clouds. > > -mahesh > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > roberibus111 <Roberibus111@ ...> > > Nisargadatta > > Friday, March 13, 2009 6:46:12 PM > > Re: i am that > > > > > > oh gee that's big of you. > > > > that's the that that you are when you say " i am that " . > > > > if you are thoughtlessness. . > > > > why express so many thoughts? > > > > and incorrect ones at that. > > > > i'd say that was rather thoughtless. . > > > > except obviously it's just not knowing what's what. > > > > i forgive you. > > > > that's big of me. > > > > there's nothing to forgive. > > > > how big can you get? > > > > :-) > > > > .b b.b. > > > > Nisargadatta, Mahesh Kamat <mv.kamat@ .> wrote: > > > > > > i admit that i am neither mahesh nor werner nor marc or bbb or whatever. who is confronting, for what & why? nothing at all. > > > waves of thoughts rising & falling in the vast expanse of thoughtlessness. > > > -mahesh > > > > > > > > > > > > ____________ _________ _________ __ > > > dennis_travis33 <dennis_travis33@ ...> > > > Nisargadatta > > > Friday, March 13, 2009 2:49:05 PM > > > Re: i am that > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta, " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta, Mahesh Kamat <mv.kamat@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > " I " is not a personal being. > > > > > -mahesh > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And the " I " also is no impersonal being. > > > > > > > > There is no YOU in which is existing an image. > > > > > > > > You ARE that image. > > > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > > > > > > > now we have a problem.... > > > > > > neither Mahesh want to admit that he Is Werner... > > > and Werner don't want to admit that he Is Mahesh... > > > > > > let's follow the further situation... . > > > > > > better without any consciousness about/of anything at all....lol > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 23, 2010 Report Share Posted February 23, 2010 Nisargadatta, " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > Tim G. > Nisargadatta > Sunday, February 21, 2010 6:35 PM > Re: I AM THAT. > > > > Nisargadatta, " ac " adithya_comming@ wrote: > > > > Q: How can you say that all is well? Look at the wars, the exploitation, > > the cruel strife between the citizen and the state. > > > > M: All these sufferings are man-made and it is within man's power to > put > > an end to them. > > Actually, it seems here that if it was within man's power to put an end to > them, he would have done so. > > It is not within man's power to put an end to them. > > The attempt to put an end to them, creates/maintains them. > -tim- > > He is saying that it is man-made (through division, fragmantation) and then > that each man - as an individual (non-divided) - can end it. How? > By not being divided. > -geo- > I am not sure, if I understand you correctly here, Geo. Through my reading of Maharaj, he seems to be able to answer questions in a compassionate, kind, patient and logical way and he seems to be able to answer it at the level at which the questioner is raising these questions. For examples, when someone asks about having to earn his/her livelihood, Maharaj doesn't attempt to dismiss it as the ' livelihood just being an illusion'. I suspect that in the above example of " suffering and wars in the world " too, Maharaj is compassionately talking at the questioner's level. He is not attempting to escape or evade the question by trying to force 'all (like wars, suffering) being an illusion' or, ''the world being unreal' view on the questioner. Maharaj ultimately leads most questioners to the reality within and to the non-dual truth; however, he doesn't seem to be in hurry to force that as the only reality and dismiss the practical matter of 'consciousness' . What do you think? regards, ac " All these sufferings are man-made and it is within man's power to > put > > an end to them. " yes...it's man's power..... like it's also man's power to have/create nightmares during sleep... or to dream something nice .... Marc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 23, 2010 Report Share Posted February 23, 2010 I love the way the man talks. Thanks for all of the quotes AC. What I do not get - and so far never heard any guru, any one - explain in a way which is satisfactory, is: why are we on this planet earth anyway? It is so painful so why are we here? What are we doing? All gurus are full of words - of good/ bad advice as to how to live " properly " , " the right way " on this earth and be released from " thraldom " but noone explain why we are here in the first place. If paradise - nirvana - is so sweet, what do we need the earth for - earthlife? Fun? Make mistakes? Go to paradise. Return to earth to correct the mistakes we made for fun? That looks like punishment to me. But it makes no snese, let alone sense (lol) whatsoever. It is to suffer deliberately -- me loves a good spanking, halleluja! See ya people, this is the greatest of mysteries and I have so far not heard any body, any one - let alone no one (that would be Dansan or Bobskij explain the mystery to my satisfaction. I have explained it myself of course. We are here for fun. The world, this planet, other planets, everything, is our creation, is us; we are that creation and we have initiated it ourselves, the heavens and the hells - the whole chitty bang bang. --- But there is plenty of this kind of talking (copied from below): " The entire purpose of a clean and well-ordered life is to liberate man from the thraldom of chaos and the burden of sorrow. " Excuse me, Sir? --- Listen up folks. Why initiate a game at all whose only purpose is to be liberated from it???? Good lord. Play the game for pete's sake. The game of life was and is constantly initiated by us thought- creatures. We are the game; we made it, we play it, we are it, we love it, we hate it. Cheerio -Your stand in guru now that Bob's away on his sleigh Nisargadatta , " ac " <adithya_comming wrote: > > Q: Don't you have desires and fears any more? > > M: a commoner, a humble tradesman, with little of formal education. My life was the common kind, with common desires and fears. > > When, through my faith in my teacher and obedience to his words, I realised my true being, I left behind my human nature to look after itself, until its destiny is exhausted. > > Occasionally an old reaction, emotional or mental, happens in the mind, but it is at once noticed and discarded. After all, as long as one is bur dened with a person, one is exposed to its idiosyncrasies and habits. > > > Q: Are you not afraid of death? > > M: I am dead already. > > > Q: In what sense? > > M: I am double dead. Not only am I dead to my body, but to my mind too. > > > Q: Well, you do not look dead at all! > > M: That's what you say! You seem to know my state better than I do! > > > Q: Sorry. But I just do not understand. You say you are bodyless and mindless, while I see you very much alive and articulate. > > M: A tremendously complex work is going on all the time in your brain and body, are you conscious of it? Not at all. Yet for an outsider all seems to be going on intelligently and purposefully. Why not admit that one's entire personal life may sink largely below the threshold of consciousness and yet proceed sanely and smoothly? > > > Q: Is it normal? > > M: What is normal? Is your life -- obsessed by desires and fears, full of strife and struggle, meaningless and joyless -- normal? To be acutely conscious of your body id it normal? To be torn by feelings, tortured by thoughts: is it normal? > > A healthy body, a healthy mind live largely unperceived by their owner; only occasionally, through pain or suffering they call for attention and insight. Why not extend the same to the entire personal life? One can function rightly, responding well and fully to whatever happens, without having to bring it into the focus of awareness. When self-control becomes second nature, awareness shifts its focus to deeper levels of existence and action. > > > Q: Don't you become a robot? > > M: What harm is there in making automatic, what is habitual and repetitive? It is automatic anyhow. But when it is also chaotic, it causes pain and suffering and calls for attention. > > > http://www.celextel.org/otherbooks/iamthat.html?page=4 > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 23, 2010 Report Share Posted February 23, 2010 Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe wrote: > What I do not get - and so far never heard any guru, any one - > explain in a way which is satisfactory, is: why are we on this > planet earth anyway? It is so painful so why are we here? What > are we doing? What came up within me when I read this is that we're not here and we're not doing. And then Julie says, " Bullshit, this human experience is still very real, and still a pain in the ass. " In the end, the only thing ever left is " I don't know. " > The game of life was and is constantly initiated by us thought- > creatures. > > We are the game; we made it, we play it, we are it, we love it, > we hate it. I love you for this. And immediately, the thought comes. " Why not love everyone? " Shut up, thought. In loving her I love everyone. Julie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 23, 2010 Report Share Posted February 23, 2010 Lene: why are we on this planet earth anyway? geo: When I read Gurdjieffa long time ago it became obvious to me - I bought the fish. Mankind is on earth for two absolutely different reasons. 1- To fulfill the needs - on a cosmic level - of the absolute in order to sustain the creation and maintainence of the universe. In this sense man, or organic life on earth as a whole, are needed in order to keep the ray of creation working. But for this what is needed is a mankind just like it is: mechanical, conditioned, with a sense of herd consciousness. It is as if the earth needed the wars and collective conflicts to fulfill some of its needs. To this there is nothing "we"must do - just remain ignorant and sleeping as we are. that is what is needed in a cosmic scale. 2- For a few there is the opportunity to change. That is what we are discussing in these forums (not entering in that now). This change is a turn inward. A "new" movement in its nature. This new movement is only attainable through the realization of non-separation, of "existing". It is not meant to the majority for that would disturb the other needs of the universe (#1) - but for some it is possible and necessary for the universe.... in this case not the same reasons as in #1. This can be read in Ouspensky's (G's student) book called - In Search Of The Miraculous. NOTE: Those are very quick and not very carefully chosen words up there. -geo- avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS): 100218-1, 18/02/2010Tested on: 23/2/2010 10:38:21avast! - copyright © 1988-2010 ALWIL Software. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 23, 2010 Report Share Posted February 23, 2010 " I love the way the man talks. Thanks for all of the quotes AC. What I do not get - and so far never heard any guru, any one - explain in a way which is satisfactory, is: why are we on this planet earth anyway? It is so painful so why are we here? What are we doing? ......................... " " who " has ever been " here " ....?... somebody is here? " Lene " is here?... why is " Lene " here? because " Lene " want to imagine to be " here " .... Marc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 23, 2010 Report Share Posted February 23, 2010 - Marc Nisargadatta Tuesday, February 23, 2010 11:34 AM Re: i am that " I love the way the man talks. Thanks for all of the quotes AC. What I do not get - and so far never heard any guru, any one - explain in a way which is satisfactory, is: why are we on this planet earth anyway? It is so painful so why are we here? What are we doing? ......................... " " who " has ever been " here " ....?... somebody is here? " Lene " is here?... why is " Lene " here? because " Lene " want to imagine to be " here " .... Marc She knows that marc. We have been talking about it all along. But she also sees that there are other human beings around this one here (there). So she is asking: what for? -geo- avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS): 100218-1, 18/02/2010 Tested on: 23/2/2010 11:36:16 avast! - copyright © 1988-2010 ALWIL Software. --- avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS): 100218-1, 18/02/2010 Tested on: 23/2/2010 11:39:26 avast! - copyright © 1988-2010 ALWIL Software. http://www.avast.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 23, 2010 Report Share Posted February 23, 2010 Marc Nisargadatta Tuesday, February 23, 2010 11:34 AM Re: i am that " I love the way the man talks. Thanks for all of the quotes AC. What I do not get - and so far never heard any guru, any one - explain in a way which is satisfactory, is: why are we on this planet earth anyway? It is so painful so why are we here? What are we doing? ............. ......... ... " " who " has ever been " here " ....?. .. somebody is here? " Lene " is here?... why is " Lene " here? because " Lene " want to imagine to be " here " .... Marc She knows that marc. We have been talking about it all along. But she also sees that there are other human beings around this one here (there). So she is asking: what for? -geo- if she knew this already......good .... " there are other human beings around this one here...what for? " .... because she already forgot that " Lene " want them to be " there " .... Marc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 23, 2010 Report Share Posted February 23, 2010 - Marc Nisargadatta Tuesday, February 23, 2010 12:07 PM Re: Re: i am that Marc Nisargadatta Tuesday, February 23, 2010 11:34 AM Re: i am that " I love the way the man talks. Thanks for all of the quotes AC. What I do not get - and so far never heard any guru, any one - explain in a way which is satisfactory, is: why are we on this planet earth anyway? It is so painful so why are we here? What are we doing? ............. ......... ... " " who " has ever been " here " ....?. .. somebody is here? " Lene " is here?... why is " Lene " here? because " Lene " want to imagine to be " here " .... Marc She knows that marc. We have been talking about it all along. But she also sees that there are other human beings around this one here (there). So she is asking: what for? -geo- if she knew this already......good .... " there are other human beings around this one here...what for? " .... because she already forgot that " Lene " want them to be " there " .... Marc No. It was not " lene " . -geo- avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS): 100218-1, 18/02/2010 Tested on: 23/2/2010 12:49:27 avast! - copyright © 1988-2010 ALWIL Software. --- avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS): 100218-1, 18/02/2010 Tested on: 23/2/2010 12:56:31 avast! - copyright © 1988-2010 ALWIL Software. http://www.avast.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 23, 2010 Report Share Posted February 23, 2010 - Marc Nisargadatta Tuesday, February 23, 2010 12:07 PM Re: Re: i am that Marc Nisargadatta Tuesday, February 23, 2010 11:34 AM Re: i am that " I love the way the man talks. Thanks for all of the quotes AC. What I do not get - and so far never heard any guru, any one - explain in a way which is satisfactory, is: why are we on this planet earth anyway? It is so painful so why are we here? What are we doing? ............. ......... ... " " who " has ever been " here " ....?. .. somebody is here? " Lene " is here?... why is " Lene " here? because " Lene " want to imagine to be " here " .... Marc She knows that marc. We have been talking about it all along. But she also sees that there are other human beings around this one here (there). So she is asking: what for? -geo- if she knew this already..... .good .... " there are other human beings around this one here...what for? " .... because she already forgot that " Lene " want them to be " there " .... Marc No. It was not " lene " . -geo- " who " else.....could appear to/from/because of " Lene " ....? Marc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 23, 2010 Report Share Posted February 23, 2010 Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe wrote: > > > What I do not get - and so far never heard any guru, any one - > explain in a way which is satisfactory, is: why are we on this > planet earth anyway? It is so painful so why are we here? What > are we doing? > Whether the answer comes from the personal dual or the impersonal nondual angle, I don't think we just want to know why we are here but our motivation is how we can continue to exist and achieve some sort of immortality. All spiritual teachings offer a promise of immortality. Nondual teachings are more subltle and yet they serve the same purpose...it's still something to hold on to for us. 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.