Guest guest Posted July 5, 2009 Report Share Posted July 5, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > Let me look at this again. There is no ME, which means that I am not > > immersed in concepts, I am not identified with thought. > > You are concept. You are thought. > > > But the words I am > > reading point to the fact that there is defensiveness, or fear, or > > avoidance. There is no conceptual center here...but there may be > > there!! > > Wherever anyone feels a conceptual center to be around, it's *always* " here " . > > Dan: " There is only ego seeing ego " . > > If you see ego in me, it's your own ego. > > People rarely/never sees ego in themselves. Ego is always seen in " other " . And it's always the seer's ego. > There is only ego... the sense of separation. Into observing and observed, into self and other, into this and that. It's splitting the atom, it's splitting thought into infinity. I am, after all, is the original thought. ~A Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 5, 2009 Report Share Posted July 5, 2009 > You own thinking? That is all? Are you really serious? The words you are > reading where NOT chosen by your mind. They where writen by geo!!! It matters not. Interpretation is all. 100%. P.S. no " self " writes anything, nor does any " self " read anything. > Tim, you are the totality of the world that reach your senses now, BUT > YOU > ARE NOT THE TOTALITY OF THE UNIVERSE. I am one with the universe, and the universe is one. This is obvious here, but when " Tim " is being addressed (as if a named self-image existed as something real), apparently it's not obvious everywhere. -t- There is a fundamental contradiction in what you write. You are the whole universe...but something apparently it's not obvious somewhere. So evidently something is not obvious in the universe that you you are. -ggo- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 5, 2009 Report Share Posted July 5, 2009 - Tim G. Nisargadatta Sunday, July 05, 2009 4:05 AM Re: Chaos & the Brain (duality) Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > Let me look at this again. There is no ME, which means that I am not > immersed in concepts, I am not identified with thought. You are concept. You are thought. > But the words I am > reading point to the fact that there is defensiveness, or fear, or > avoidance. There is no conceptual center here...but there may be > there!! Wherever anyone feels a conceptual center to be around, it's *always* " here " . Dan: " There is only ego seeing ego " . If you see ego in me, it's your own ego. People rarely/never sees ego in themselves. Ego is always seen in " other " . And it's always the seer's ego. -tim- There is no such thing as an ego. So ego can not see any ego. There is the conceptual thinking as if there was an ego. What I see in " another " is conceptual thinking causing confusion and conflict given away through the words they write. There is a deeply ingrained conviction that should be questioned... I am the world, but I am not tim in its details concerning his localized organism. It is obvious: you dont know what geo is thinking now. And you know this - sometimes - then you dont know this - other times - and the contradiction is present. For example: you say things like " I will not answer more question folks ask.... " - so now they are not yourself, then the other way around - " it is only me writing and reading my own words " . How is that? -egg- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 6, 2009 Report Share Posted July 6, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > > There is no such thing as an ego. So ego can not see any ego. There is the > conceptual thinking as if there was an ego. What I see in " another " is > conceptual thinking causing confusion and conflict given away through the > words they write. What you see in 'another' is your own conceptual thinking. If a belief exists that there's really 'another', stop putting quotes around the word. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 6, 2009 Report Share Posted July 6, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > There is a fundamental contradiction in what you write. No, there is a fundamental contradiction in how you interpret, which means there's a fundamental contradiction in you. Have a look at it, or continue to see division and contradiction everywhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 6, 2009 Report Share Posted July 6, 2009 - Tim G. Nisargadatta Monday, July 06, 2009 7:36 AM Re: Chaos & the Brain (duality) Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > > There is no such thing as an ego. So ego can not see any ego. There is the > conceptual thinking as if there was an ego. What I see in " another " is > conceptual thinking causing confusion and conflict given away through the > words they write. -ggo- What you see in 'another' is your own conceptual thinking. If a belief exists that there's really 'another', stop putting quotes around the word. -timi- I understand your difficulty, it is really very complicated. Another chair, another car, another organism. That body burnt its arm . This bodys didnt. Very complex indeed. -geo- avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS): 090526-0, 26/05/2009 Tested on: 6/7/2009 08:01:26 avast! - copyright © 1988-2009 ALWIL Software. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 6, 2009 Report Share Posted July 6, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > Tim G. > Nisargadatta > Monday, July 06, 2009 7:36 AM > Re: Chaos & the Brain (duality) > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > There is no such thing as an ego. So ego can not see any ego. There is the > > conceptual thinking as if there was an ego. What I see in " another " is > > conceptual thinking causing confusion and conflict given away through the > > words they write. > -ggo- > > What you see in 'another' is your own conceptual thinking. If a belief > exists that there's really 'another', stop putting quotes around the word. > -timi- > > I understand your difficulty, .... the problem being, you don't understand your own. That's fine. 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.