Guest guest Posted August 12, 2009 Report Share Posted August 12, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > dennis_travis33 > Nisargadatta > Wednesday, August 12, 2009 9:48 AM > Re: The Contradictory " I " > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > dennis_travis33 > > Nisargadatta > > Wednesday, August 12, 2009 9:35 AM > > Re: The Contradictory " I " > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > - > > > dennis_travis33 > > > Nisargadatta > > > Wednesday, August 12, 2009 8:47 AM > > > Re: The Contradictory " I " > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > > > dennis_travis33 > > > > Nisargadatta > > > > Wednesday, August 12, 2009 7:25 AM > > > > Re: The Contradictory " I " > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > The " I " is self-contradictory. > > > > > > > > > > It wants to be a fixed/static entity, that can change itself. > > > > > > > > > > " Being fixed/static " and " changing " are mutually exclusive, > > > > > contradictory. > > > > > > > > > > In truth, the " I " was never there as an entity at all, > > > > > > > > > > merely an ever-changing series of thoughts > > > > > > > > > > arising in the present > > > > > > > > > > nonvolitionally. > > > > > > > > ....nice thoughts... > > > > > > > > but they will change nothing to It for real > > > > > > > > .... > > > > > > > > instead of thoughts and thoughts.... > > > > > > > > how about to enjoy life? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > > > Is thinking happening in some different field that of enjoyment? > > > > -geo- > > > > > > > > > > depending in the definition of this your mentionned " enjoyment " ... > > > > > > some people enjoy life.....but then, during such enjoyment....there are > > > no > > > thoughts... > > > > > > Marc > > > > > > Yes, but I mean the other way around. Can there be enjoyment and > > > thoughts > > > operating? Are all thought process responsible for " unenjoyment " ? Or > > > only > > > those that project the sense of inner entity? > > > -geo- > > > > > > > wouldn't say that thought processes alone could be responsible for > > " unenjoyment " .... > > > > thought processes lead to somewhere...with little chance...to some space > > for > > enjoyment.... > > > > but then, if such space is too much based on thought processes....such > > space > > for enjoyment is of short duration > > > > .... > > > > the more spaces of enjoyment are reached.... > > the less thoughts processes are necessary to reach it again.... > > > > ... > > > > etc > > > > Marc > > > > I suppose you mean the only one space of enjyment there is... > > -geo- > > > > what is meant by " the only one space of enjoyment there is " ?... > > Marc > > The " place " where ME is not there. > -geo- > yes... what & who could be " there " ....where there is such enjoyment....?.... ..... this so called " spiritual people " expect that somebody should/must be there......in order to get the chance to leave all this their great & fantastic " light & love " ...... why for... why for....? Marc Marc 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.