Guest guest Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Hi Doug - > > There is only one undivided present moment - and this is it. > > It's not " either this or something else, or maybe this way like someone said, or maybe this other way like someone else said. " > > It's just as it is. > > It's already here. > > It's always now. Precisely what the 'me', which is attempted staticity, attempted situated-ness, finds so difficult to accept. The attempt to have staticity, is the attempt to change. There is an attempt to have a center, which can change things, which has volition, which can get from 'here' to 'there'. Therefore, this attempt can't accept that it's already here, as it is, right now. If the attempt to " have staticity, from which to change things " drops -- it's obviously here as it is, right now. And 'right now' is the very change, the very newness, the very freedom, which the attempted staticity was seeking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > Hi Doug - > > > > There is only one undivided present moment - and this is it. > > > > It's not " either this or something else, or maybe this way like someone said, or maybe this other way like someone else said. " > > > > It's just as it is. > > > > It's already here. > > > > It's always now. > > Precisely what the 'me', which is attempted staticity, attempted situated-ness, finds so difficult to accept. > > The attempt to have staticity, is the attempt to change. > > There is an attempt to have a center, which can change things, which has volition, which can get from 'here' to 'there'. > > Therefore, this attempt can't accept that it's already here, as it is, right now. > > If the attempt to " have staticity, from which to change things " drops -- it's obviously here as it is, right now. > > And 'right now' is the very change, the very newness, the very freedom, which the attempted staticity was seeking. This post, and your previous post, strike me as utterly on-target. Hitting the mark. Not sinful. ;-) Thanks - - Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > Hi Doug - > > > > > > There is only one undivided present moment - and this is it. > > > > > > It's not " either this or something else, or maybe this way like someone said, or maybe this other way like someone else said. " > > > > > > It's just as it is. > > > > > > It's already here. > > > > > > It's always now. > > > > Precisely what the 'me', which is attempted staticity, attempted situated-ness, finds so difficult to accept. > > > > The attempt to have staticity, is the attempt to change. > > > > There is an attempt to have a center, which can change things, which has volition, which can get from 'here' to 'there'. > > > > Therefore, this attempt can't accept that it's already here, as it is, right now. > > > > If the attempt to " have staticity, from which to change things " drops -- it's obviously here as it is, right now. > > > > And 'right now' is the very change, the very newness, the very freedom, which the attempted staticity was seeking. > > This post, and your previous post, strike me as utterly on-target. > > Hitting the mark. > > Not sinful. > > ;-) Thankya lo'... oh, thankya, lo'.. Praise Gaw....;-). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi Doug - > > > > > > > > There is only one undivided present moment - and this is it. Nope. That WAS it. .........well not really. A 'moment " cannot be isolated and referred to as " the one undivided moment " . ......well...it can.....but it is as meaningless as any other statement concerning the nature of reality beyond the conceptual overlay. There are no moments.....no seconds....outside of the conceptual mind. > > > > > > > > It's not " either this or something else, or maybe this way like someone said, or maybe this other way like someone else said. " > > > > > > > > It's just as it is. Nope. That is merely the conceptual mind trying to fast freeze its perceptions and put in its personal perceptions in an album that can be referred to later in its dream. > > > > > > > > It's already here. > > > > > > > > It's always now. Nope. There is no " now " . Oh.....I know.....you believe in " now " . Perhaps you could show it to me. > > > > > > Precisely what the 'me', which is attempted staticity, attempted situated-ness, finds so difficult to accept. > > > > > > The attempt to have staticity, is the attempt to change. > > > > > > There is an attempt to have a center, which can change things, which has volition, which can get from 'here' to 'there'. > > > > > > Therefore, this attempt can't accept that it's already here, as it is, right now. To it....it certainly appears like that. But you thought the people in your dream last night were real. > > > > > > If the attempt to " have staticity, from which to change things " drops -- it's obviously here as it is, right now. > > > > > > And 'right now' is the very change, the very newness, the very freedom, which the attempted staticity was seeking. > > > > This post, and your previous post, strike me as utterly on-target. > > > > Hitting the mark. There is no mark......and no shooter. We are all hooting shadows at the moon. > > > > Not sinful. > > > > ;-) > But there is something new and light in your words Tim. It looks like your sense of self is dissolving. a bow toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hi Doug - > > > > > > > > > > There is only one undivided present moment - and this is it. > > > > > Nope. > > That WAS it. " Was " is memory, appearing now. There is no such thing as " was " . Nothing ever happened. Only an imaginary character is the past. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Doug - > > > > > > > > > > > > There is only one undivided present moment - and this is it. > > > > > > > > > > Nope. > > > > That WAS it. > > " Was " is memory, appearing now. > > There is no such thing as " was " . > > Nothing ever happened. > > Only an imaginary character > > is > > the past. > Does the imaginary character live in the now? toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > > Does the imaginary character live in the now? The imaginary character lives for the question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > Does the imaginary character live in the now? > > The imaginary character lives for the question. > To whom or what does the concept " now " pertain? toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > Does the imaginary character live in the now? > > The imaginary character lives for the question. Here is a semi-answer to the question: Parse the above sentence, this way-- " doooooeeessss... aaaannnnn..... immmmmaaagggginnnnnarrrryyy.... ccchhhaaarrrractttteeerrr... " Read the above sentence as-if in slow motion. Each instant of reading is 'in the now'. Does the question, read this way, have meaning? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Does the imaginary character live in the now? > > > > The imaginary character lives for the question. > > Here is a semi-answer to the question: > > Parse the above sentence, this way-- > > " doooooeeessss... aaaannnnn..... immmmmaaagggginnnnnarrrryyy.... ccchhhaaarrrractttteeerrr... " > > Read the above sentence as-if in slow motion. > > Each instant of reading is 'in the now'. > > Does the question, read this way, have meaning? > So.........an imaginary character lives in an imaginary now..... ....this is getting curiouser and curiouser. :-0 toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Does the imaginary character live in the now? > > > > > > The imaginary character lives for the question. > > > > Here is a semi-answer to the question: > > > > Parse the above sentence, this way-- > > > > " doooooeeessss... aaaannnnn..... immmmmaaagggginnnnnarrrryyy.... ccchhhaaarrrractttteeerrr... " > > > > Read the above sentence as-if in slow motion. > > > > Each instant of reading is 'in the now'. > > > > Does the question, read this way, have meaning? > > > > > > So.........an imaginary character lives in an imaginary now..... A conclusion that, given the above, could only be drawn by an imaginary character, Which is nothing but a repeating tendency to hold onto what isn't there. > ...this is getting curiouser and curiouser. What's truly curious is that right now, this very moment, as these words are being read, nothing of the past is here, and never was. Yet, something seems to 'refer back', as though desperate to hold onto what isn't here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Does the imaginary character live in the now? > > > > > > > > The imaginary character lives for the question. > > > > > > Here is a semi-answer to the question: > > > > > > Parse the above sentence, this way-- > > > > > > " doooooeeessss... aaaannnnn..... immmmmaaagggginnnnnarrrryyy.... ccchhhaaarrrractttteeerrr... " > > > > > > Read the above sentence as-if in slow motion. > > > > > > Each instant of reading is 'in the now'. > > > > > > Does the question, read this way, have meaning? > > > > > > > > > > > So.........an imaginary character lives in an imaginary now..... > > A conclusion that, given the above, could only be drawn by an imaginary character, > > Which is nothing but a repeating tendency to hold onto what isn't there. > > > ...this is getting curiouser and curiouser. > > What's truly curious > > is that right now, this very moment, > > as these words are being read, > > nothing of the past is here, and never was. > > Yet, something seems to 'refer back', > > as though desperate to hold onto what isn't here. > .....and all that's happening in the now?......to a non-existent entity? toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > ....and all that's happening in the now?......to a non-existent > entity? All that... what? I don't remember what was said. I am the attempt to remember, Avoiding 'what is', right now, attempting to remain in the past, as I am totally false, a falsification of what actually is, this moment, as these words are being read, a desperate attempt to hold onto... what was that, again? What was attempted to be held onto? I will, of course, refer back again, because I am anxious to be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > But there is something new and light in your words Tim. > > It looks like your sense of self is dissolving. > > > > > > a bow > > Wow, wow, (a double wow) Toomb, You are an expert in self-dissoving ? A double bow ! Werner > > > > toombaru > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > But there is something new and light in your words Tim. > > > > It looks like your sense of self is dissolving. > > > > > > > > > > > > a bow > > > > > > > Wow, wow, (a double wow) Toomb, > > You are an expert in self-dissoving ? > > A double bow ! > > Werner > > > > > > > > The sense of self is still present. But is no longer seen as the focus of intent. It.....and the other selfs......are seen as delightful and successful adaptations added to the physical organism through the highly evolved ability to name its perceptions. There appears to be most pleasant kinship when this self comes across another who has lost their opacity. And yes......there does occur a peculiar resonance when the emptiness here meets the emptiness in another. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > And yes......there does occur a peculiar resonance when the emptiness > here meets the emptiness in another. Ahh, I see. There are two emptinesses. An emptiness 'here', and an emptiness 'there'. Emptiness is split, into emptiness and... what? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > And yes......there does occur a peculiar resonance when the emptiness > here meets the emptiness in another. > > Ahh, I see. > > There are two emptinesses. > > An emptiness 'here', and an emptiness 'there'. > > Emptiness is split, into emptiness and... what? P.S. there is no such thing as a verbal-conceptual emptiness. " The emptiness here " does not meet emptiness in another. Resonance is not between two. When " here " supposedly 'meets another', what is actually happening? The million-dollar question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > And yes......there does occur a peculiar resonance when the emptiness > here meets the emptiness in another. > > Ahh, I see. > > There are two emptinesses. > > An emptiness 'here', and an emptiness 'there'. > > Emptiness is split, into emptiness and... what? > " Emptiness " and " space " are spoken of in the same context. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But there is something new and light in your words Tim. > > > > > > It looks like your sense of self is dissolving. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > a bow > > > > > > > > > > > > Wow, wow, (a double wow) Toomb, > > > > You are an expert in self-dissoving ? > > > > A double bow ! > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > > > > > The sense of self is still present. > But is no longer seen as the focus of intent. > It.....and the other selfs......are seen as delightful and successful adaptations added to the physical organism through the highly evolved ability to name its perceptions. > There appears to be most pleasant kinship when this self comes across another who has lost their opacity. > And yes......there does occur a peculiar resonance when the emptiness here meets the emptiness in another. > > Ah, Toomb ! With those words you were cementing to be indeed an expert in self-dissolving. A triple wow and a triple bow ... Werner > > > > > toombaru > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > And yes......there does occur a peculiar resonance when the emptiness > here meets the emptiness in another. > > > > Ahh, I see. > > > > There are two emptinesses. > > > > An emptiness 'here', and an emptiness 'there'. > > > > Emptiness is split, into emptiness and... what? > > P.S. there is no such thing as a verbal-conceptual emptiness. > > " The emptiness here " does not meet emptiness in another. > > Resonance is not between two. > > When " here " supposedly 'meets another', what is actually happening? > > The million-dollar question. > I'm afraid that we have reached the point where the description of our perceptions have diverged. Good night Tim. toombaru Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain@> wrote: > > > > > > > > And yes......there does occur a peculiar resonance when the emptiness > here meets the emptiness in another. > > > > > > Ahh, I see. > > > > > > There are two emptinesses. > > > > > > An emptiness 'here', and an emptiness 'there'. > > > > > > Emptiness is split, into emptiness and... what? > > > > P.S. there is no such thing as a verbal-conceptual emptiness. > > > > " The emptiness here " does not meet emptiness in another. > > > > Resonance is not between two. > > > > When " here " supposedly 'meets another', what is actually happening? > > > > The million-dollar question. > I'm afraid that we have reached the point where the description of > our > perceptions have diverged. Yes, of course. When a self is involved, an other must be involved too.... eh? The " million dollar question " above cannot be answered by an 'other' -- .... for one very good reason. > Good night Tim. The one being said good-night to, has no more of an existence than the speaker. If we have diverged, it is because a self became involved and gave birth to an 'other', thus, the imaginary divergence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 - toombaru2006 Nisargadatta Sunday, August 09, 2009 11:35 PM Re: In Nisargadatta... (Dan) Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi Doug - > > > > > > > > There is only one undivided present moment - and this is it. Nope. That WAS it. .........well not really. A 'moment " cannot be isolated and referred to as " the one undivided moment " . ......well...it can.....but it is as meaningless as any other statement concerning the nature of reality beyond the conceptual overlay. There are no moments.....no seconds....outside of the conceptual mind. > > > > > > > > It's not " either this or something else, or maybe this way like > > > > someone said, or maybe this other way like someone else said. " > > > > > > > > It's just as it is. Nope. That is merely the conceptual mind trying to fast freeze its perceptions and put in its personal perceptions in an album that can be referred to later in its dream. > > > > > > > > It's already here. > > > > > > > > It's always now. Nope. There is no " now " . Oh.....I know.....you believe in " now " . Perhaps you could show it to me. > > > > > > Precisely what the 'me', which is attempted staticity, attempted > > > situated-ness, finds so difficult to accept. > > > > > > The attempt to have staticity, is the attempt to change. > > > > > > There is an attempt to have a center, which can change things, which > > > has volition, which can get from 'here' to 'there'. > > > > > > Therefore, this attempt can't accept that it's already here, as it is, > > > right now. To it....it certainly appears like that. But you thought the people in your dream last night were real. > > > > > > If the attempt to " have staticity, from which to change things " > > > drops -- it's obviously here as it is, right now. > > > > > > And 'right now' is the very change, the very newness, the very > > > freedom, which the attempted staticity was seeking. > > > > This post, and your previous post, strike me as utterly on-target. > > > > Hitting the mark. There is no mark......and no shooter. We are all hooting shadows at the moon. > > > > Not sinful. > > > > ;-) > But there is something new and light in your words Tim. It looks like your sense of self is dissolving. a bow toombaru Geeezz ....Dissolving?? It is getting smaller and smaller and maybe tomorrow it will be just 1% as today... -geo- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi Doug - > > > > > > > > There is only one undivided present moment - and this is it. > > > > > > > > It's not " either this or something else, or maybe this way like someone said, or maybe this other way like someone else said. " > > > > > > > > It's just as it is. > > > > > > > > It's already here. > > > > > > > > It's always now. > > > > > > Precisely what the 'me', which is attempted staticity, attempted situated-ness, finds so difficult to accept. > > > > > > The attempt to have staticity, is the attempt to change. > > > > > > There is an attempt to have a center, which can change things, which has volition, which can get from 'here' to 'there'. > > > > > > Therefore, this attempt can't accept that it's already here, as it is, right now. > > > > > > If the attempt to " have staticity, from which to change things " drops -- it's obviously here as it is, right now. > > > > > > And 'right now' is the very change, the very newness, the very freedom, which the attempted staticity was seeking. > > > > This post, and your previous post, strike me as utterly on-target. > > > > Hitting the mark. > > > > Not sinful. > > > > ;-) > > Thankya lo'... oh, thankya, lo'.. Praise Gaw....;-). " Never been a sinner - I never sinned ... I got a friend in Jesus. So you know that when I die He's gonna set me up with The spirit in the sky. " -- D -- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hi Doug - > > > > > > > > > > There is only one undivided present moment - and this is it. > > > > > > > > > > It's not " either this or something else, or maybe this way like someone said, or maybe this other way like someone else said. " > > > > > > > > > > It's just as it is. > > > > > > > > > > It's already here. > > > > > > > > > > It's always now. > > > > > > > > Precisely what the 'me', which is attempted staticity, attempted situated-ness, finds so difficult to accept. > > > > > > > > The attempt to have staticity, is the attempt to change. > > > > > > > > There is an attempt to have a center, which can change things, which has volition, which can get from 'here' to 'there'. > > > > > > > > Therefore, this attempt can't accept that it's already here, as it is, right now. > > > > > > > > If the attempt to " have staticity, from which to change things " drops -- it's obviously here as it is, right now. > > > > > > > > And 'right now' is the very change, the very newness, the very freedom, which the attempted staticity was seeking. > > > > > > This post, and your previous post, strike me as utterly on-target. > > > > > > Hitting the mark. > > > > > > Not sinful. > > > > > > ;-) > > > > Thankya lo'... oh, thankya, lo'.. Praise Gaw....;-). > > " Never been a sinner - I never sinned ... > I got a friend in Jesus. > > So you know that when I die > He's gonna set me up with > The spirit in the sky. " > > -- D -- > From my house to yours: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JG8K4kYTpG0 ;-) Love, Anna Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 10, 2009 Report Share Posted August 10, 2009 Toom - Thought ceases. This now-moment, untouched by thought, is not defined as anything. It is not " now " as opposed to " then. " There is no thought-commenting about it being now, or something else other than now. It is timeless. Never touched by thought. Thought never grasps this. Going round and round with questions gets nowhere. There is no question here. With thought occurring, this now still is not touched. The energy of thought is " now, " yet thought never knows " now. " No belief is involved. It is remarkable, what this is. Which has never been commented upon. Pristine. - D - (nothing new below) Nisargadatta , " toombaru2006 " <lastrain wrote: > > Nope. > > That WAS it. > ........well not really. > A 'moment " cannot be isolated and referred to as " the one undivided moment " . > .....well...it can.....but it is as meaningless as any other statement concerning the nature of reality beyond the conceptual overlay. > > There are no moments.....no seconds....outside of the conceptual mind. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's not " either this or something else, or maybe this way like someone said, or maybe this other way like someone else said. " > > > > > > > > > > It's just as it is. > > > > > Nope. > > That is merely the conceptual mind trying to fast freeze its perceptions and put in its personal perceptions in an album that can be referred to later in its dream. > > > > > > > > > > > > It's already here. > > > > > > > > > > It's always now. > > > > > Nope. > > There is no " now " . > > Oh.....I know.....you believe in " now " . > > Perhaps you could show it to me. > > > > > > > Precisely what the 'me', which is attempted staticity, attempted situated-ness, finds so difficult to accept. > > > > > > > > The attempt to have staticity, is the attempt to change. > > > > > > > > There is an attempt to have a center, which can change things, which has volition, which can get from 'here' to 'there'. > > > > > > > > Therefore, this attempt can't accept that it's already here, as it is, right now. > > > > > > To it....it certainly appears like that. > But you thought the people in your dream last night were real. > > > > > > > > > If the attempt to " have staticity, from which to change things " drops -- it's obviously here as it is, right now. > > > > > > > > And 'right now' is the very change, the very newness, the very freedom, which the attempted staticity was seeking. > > > > > > This post, and your previous post, strike me as utterly on-target. > > > > > > Hitting the mark. > > > > There is no mark......and no shooter. > We are all hooting shadows at the moon. > > > > > Not sinful. > > > > > > ;-) > > > > > > But there is something new and light in your words Tim. > > It looks like your sense of self is dissolving. > > > > > > a bow > > > > > > 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.