Guest guest Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 It is absolutely certain that what is perceived to be 'outside the body' (including the outside surface of the body) is, in fact, within. I would say that what is within is 'outside', but what was formerly perceived to be " within " -- isn't there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > It is absolutely certain that what is perceived to be 'outside the body' (including the outside surface of the body) is, in fact, within. > > I would say that what is within is 'outside', but what was formerly perceived to be " within " -- isn't there. > Tim, What an obsolete crap are all this non-dual mental speculations and logic. The language does contain such helpful preporsitions for daily living. Tell a 6 year old child when it is taking a foto of a house that the house is inside the camera and the child will tell you that only the image of that house projected through the lenses upon the cmos chip is inside. The child will regard you as a retarted idiot telling it such obsolete insights which every child already knows. Tell any mentally healthy person person who is not spoilt by non-dual philosophy that streets, houses and trees are within and that person will ask you what he can buy for such wonderful insights. And you Tim ? You are so proud of that shit. Werner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " wwoehr " <wwoehr wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > It is absolutely certain that what is perceived to be 'outside the body' (including the outside surface of the body) is, in fact, within. > > > > I would say that what is within is 'outside', but what was formerly perceived to be " within " -- isn't there. > > > > > > Tim, > > What an obsolete crap are all this non-dual mental speculations and logic. The language does contain such helpful preporsitions for daily living. > > Tell a 6 year old child when it is taking a foto of a house that the house is inside the camera and the child will tell you that only the image of that house projected through the lenses upon the cmos chip is inside. The child will regard you as a retarted idiot telling it such obsolete insights which every child already knows. > > Tell any mentally healthy person person who is not spoilt by non-dual philosophy that streets, houses and trees are within and that person will ask you what he can buy for such wonderful insights. > > And you Tim ? > > You are so proud of that shit. > > Werner > Werner darling, do not be so hard on our child ( ;-) ). He's confused. Everything is inside... yet experienced outside until the inside and outside merge. This is where folks get confused. The nothing that is experienced in that merging is ummm... hard to describe. The experiencer disappears into the perception of the experience. However, thankfully s/he returns to live his/her life. There's a period of adjustment until one can talk sense. ;-) ~A Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 - wwoehr Nisargadatta Saturday, September 19, 2009 4:41 AM Re: Within/without Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > It is absolutely certain that what is perceived to be 'outside the body' > (including the outside surface of the body) is, in fact, within. > > I would say that what is within is 'outside', but what was formerly > perceived to be " within " -- isn't there. > Tim, What an obsolete crap are all this non-dual mental speculations and logic. The language does contain such helpful preporsitions for daily living. Tell a 6 year old child when it is taking a foto of a house that the house is inside the camera and the child will tell you that only the image of that house projected through the lenses upon the cmos chip is inside. The child will regard you as a retarted idiot telling it such obsolete insights which every child already knows. Tell any mentally healthy person person who is not spoilt by non-dual philosophy that streets, houses and trees are within and that person will ask you what he can buy for such wonderful insights. And you Tim ? You are so proud of that shit. Werner Dear werner, since bbb left you assumed his personality, his mood and his language. Why? Pure immitation? -geo- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > wwoehr > Nisargadatta > Saturday, September 19, 2009 4:41 AM > Re: Within/without > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > It is absolutely certain that what is perceived to be 'outside the body' > > (including the outside surface of the body) is, in fact, within. > > > > I would say that what is within is 'outside', but what was formerly > > perceived to be " within " -- isn't there. > > > > Tim, > > What an obsolete crap are all this non-dual mental speculations and logic. > The language does contain such helpful preporsitions for daily living. > > Tell a 6 year old child when it is taking a foto of a house that the house > is inside the camera and the child will tell you that only the image of that > house projected through the lenses upon the cmos chip is inside. The child > will regard you as a retarted idiot telling it such obsolete insights which > every child already knows. > > Tell any mentally healthy person person who is not spoilt by non-dual > philosophy that streets, houses and trees are within and that person will > ask you what he can buy for such wonderful insights. > > And you Tim ? > > You are so proud of that shit. > > Werner > > Dear werner, since bbb left you assumed his personality, his mood and his > language. Why? Pure immitation? > -geo- P: It's a nasty job, but someone has to do it. You might be called someday to clean nondual toilets. So thank Werner for his sacrifice. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 - cerosoul Nisargadatta Saturday, September 19, 2009 11:59 AM Re: Within/without Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > wwoehr > Nisargadatta > Saturday, September 19, 2009 4:41 AM > Re: Within/without > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > It is absolutely certain that what is perceived to be 'outside the body' > > (including the outside surface of the body) is, in fact, within. > > > > I would say that what is within is 'outside', but what was formerly > > perceived to be " within " -- isn't there. > > > > Tim, > > What an obsolete crap are all this non-dual mental speculations and logic. > The language does contain such helpful preporsitions for daily living. > > Tell a 6 year old child when it is taking a foto of a house that the house > is inside the camera and the child will tell you that only the image of > that > house projected through the lenses upon the cmos chip is inside. The child > will regard you as a retarted idiot telling it such obsolete insights > which > every child already knows. > > Tell any mentally healthy person person who is not spoilt by non-dual > philosophy that streets, houses and trees are within and that person will > ask you what he can buy for such wonderful insights. > > And you Tim ? > > You are so proud of that shit. > > Werner > > Dear werner, since bbb left you assumed his personality, his mood and his > language. Why? Pure immitation? > -geo- P: It's a nasty job, but someone has to do it. You might be called someday to clean nondual toilets. So thank Werner for his sacrifice. geo> Yea and when the shit to clean was yours...you booted bbb. LOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 - geo Nisargadatta Saturday, September 19, 2009 12:45 PM Re: Re: Within/without - cerosoul Nisargadatta Saturday, September 19, 2009 11:59 AM Re: Within/without Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > - > wwoehr > Nisargadatta > Saturday, September 19, 2009 4:41 AM > Re: Within/without > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > It is absolutely certain that what is perceived to be 'outside the body' > > (including the outside surface of the body) is, in fact, within. > > > > I would say that what is within is 'outside', but what was formerly > > perceived to be " within " -- isn't there. > > > > Tim, > > What an obsolete crap are all this non-dual mental speculations and logic. > The language does contain such helpful preporsitions for daily living. > > Tell a 6 year old child when it is taking a foto of a house that the house > is inside the camera and the child will tell you that only the image of > that > house projected through the lenses upon the cmos chip is inside. The child > will regard you as a retarted idiot telling it such obsolete insights > which > every child already knows. > > Tell any mentally healthy person person who is not spoilt by non-dual > philosophy that streets, houses and trees are within and that person will > ask you what he can buy for such wonderful insights. > > And you Tim ? > > You are so proud of that shit. > > Werner > > Dear werner, since bbb left you assumed his personality, his mood and his > language. Why? Pure immitation? > -geo- P: It's a nasty job, but someone has to do it. You might be called someday to clean nondual toilets. So thank Werner for his sacrifice. geo> Why did werner beg for hur to boot bbb then? I guess he wants the cleaning award for himself alone. OK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 - > > P: It's a nasty job, but someone has to > do it. You might be called someday to > clean nondual toilets. So thank Werner > for his sacrifice. > > geo> Yea and when the shit to clean was yours...you booted bbb. LOL P: Let's get the record straight. He was cleaning Dan's ass with his boot, not mine. I just placed him on moderation for that, and he d himself. Lot's of people claim not to exist, but are easily offended. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " anna " <kailashana wrote: > > > Werner darling, do not be so hard on our child ( ;-) ). He's > confused. Not at all, Anna. All is completely clear here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " wwoehr " <wwoehr wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > It is absolutely certain that what is perceived to be 'outside the body' (including the outside surface of the body) is, in fact, within. > > > > I would say that what is within is 'outside', but what was formerly perceived to be " within " -- isn't there. > > > > > > Tim, > > What an obsolete crap are all this non-dual mental speculations and > logic. Sorry to hear it doesn't seem real to you, Werner. You could, instead, be honest: " This doesn't make sense to me. To me, this is all mental speculation and logic, even if it is a living reality to you " . Honesty is a good thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " wwoehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > It is absolutely certain that what is perceived to be 'outside the body' (including the outside surface of the body) is, in fact, within. > > > > > > I would say that what is within is 'outside', but what was formerly perceived to be " within " -- isn't there. > > > > > > > > > > > Tim, > > > > What an obsolete crap are all this non-dual mental speculations and > logic. > > Sorry to hear it doesn't seem real to you, Werner. > > You could, instead, be honest: > > " This doesn't make sense to me. To me, this is all mental speculation and logic, even if it is a living reality to you " . > > Honesty is a good thing. > Is that what you did when a lady at NDS spoke of grieving for her child (again)? And you dismissed her? Was that your honesty, Tim? Have you ever lost a child that you can *Honestly* give some valuable insight? ~A Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " anna " <kailashana wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " wwoehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > It is absolutely certain that what is perceived to be 'outside the body' (including the outside surface of the body) is, in fact, within. > > > > > > > > I would say that what is within is 'outside', but what was formerly perceived to be " within " -- isn't there. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tim, > > > > > > What an obsolete crap are all this non-dual mental speculations and > logic. > > > > Sorry to hear it doesn't seem real to you, Werner. > > > > You could, instead, be honest: > > > > " This doesn't make sense to me. To me, this is all mental speculation and logic, even if it is a living reality to you " . > > > > Honesty is a good thing. > > > > > Is that what you did when a lady at NDS spoke of grieving for her > child (again)? And you dismissed her? I didn't dismiss her. I was trying to communicate something to her... that she was using her grief as a reason to suffer, including suffering the slams of 'hardcore nondualists' on the list. I'm sorry that didn't work for you, Anna. There's nothing I can do about it. Once something is past, it is over and gone. To realize this clearly is freedom, non-grasping. > Was that your honesty, Tim? Yes it was, Anna. Again, I'm sorry you didn't like it. > Have you ever lost a child that you can *Honestly* give some > valuable insight? > > ~A As a human being, I've lost much, as we all have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anna " <kailashana@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " wwoehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > It is absolutely certain that what is perceived to be 'outside the body' (including the outside surface of the body) is, in fact, within. > > > > > > > > > > I would say that what is within is 'outside', but what was formerly perceived to be " within " -- isn't there. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Tim, > > > > > > > > What an obsolete crap are all this non-dual mental speculations and > logic. > > > > > > Sorry to hear it doesn't seem real to you, Werner. > > > > > > You could, instead, be honest: > > > > > > " This doesn't make sense to me. To me, this is all mental speculation and logic, even if it is a living reality to you " . > > > > > > Honesty is a good thing. > > > > > > > > > Is that what you did when a lady at NDS spoke of grieving for her > > child (again)? And you dismissed her? > > I didn't dismiss her. > > I was trying to communicate something to her... that she was using her grief as a reason to suffer, including suffering the slams of 'hardcore nondualists' on the list. > > I'm sorry that didn't work for you, Anna. > > There's nothing I can do about it. Once something is past, it is over and gone. To realize this clearly is freedom, non-grasping. > > > Was that your honesty, Tim? > > Yes it was, Anna. > > Again, I'm sorry you didn't like it. > > > Have you ever lost a child that you can *Honestly* give some > > valuable insight? > > > > ~A > > As a human being, I've lost much, as we all have. > You need not apologize to me, Tim. And I don't rightly care whether you are sorry that I didn't like your answer. You need to apologize to the right person. Your *helping her* hurt her immensely...you know why? Because you haven't understood one iota of compassion. It's not up to you to tell someone how to feel about something whether or not she said repeated her sorrow/pain 10 times or 10 times 10 times. In compassion we listen. Anything else is just plain bullshit we spout because we don't want to faceour own demons. Additionally, how she wrote at that time was less of any *complaint* than a *sharing*...from which you might have learned something new had you not been so fast to profess your ignorance. It had nothing to do with any hard-core nondualism... Now I have excised this demon. Perhaps you'll feel enough compassion to say you're sorry to the right person. Being human is about suffering. Don't lie to yourself as if you've overcome it once and for all. ~A Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " anna " <kailashana wrote: > > You need not apologize to me, Tim. And I don't rightly care whether > you are sorry that I didn't like your answer. Thanks for the honesty. > Your *helping her* hurt her immensely...you know why? Because you > haven't understood one iota of compassion. No, you haven't, Anna. > Now I have excised this demon. Why don't I believe you? You cling, and cling, and cling, and cling. If 'this demon' is really gone, it's time to find something else to cling to. If ya need any help, lemme know ;-). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anna " <kailashana@> wrote: > > > > You need not apologize to me, Tim. And I don't rightly care whether > you are sorry that I didn't like your answer. > > Thanks for the honesty. > > > Your *helping her* hurt her immensely...you know why? Because you > haven't understood one iota of compassion. > > No, you haven't, Anna. > > > Now I have excised this demon. > > Why don't I believe you? > > You cling, and cling, and cling, and cling. > > If 'this demon' is really gone, it's time to find something else to cling to. > > If ya need any help, lemme know ;-). > Lol, Tim. Clinging happens.. tears happen...and fucking up happens... now go say a perfect act of contrition and sin no more. ;-) Oh.. in case you didn't see it at nondualsalon: http://celebrity.aol.co.uk/2009/08/28/you-think-britains-got-talent-check-out-th\ e-ukraine-winner/ See, you don't have to understand the language when compassion is understood. Your spiritual mama, ~A Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " anna " <kailashana wrote: > > Oh.. in case you didn't see it at nondualsalon: > > http://celebrity.aol.co.uk/2009/08/28/you-think-britains-got-talent-check-out-th\ e-ukraine-winner/ > > > See, you don't have to understand the language when compassion is understood. > > Your spiritual mama, > > ~A Bless you, oh Great One... I understand nothing of compassion, or love, or life. You are Great, Wise and all-Powerful. I await Your further Blessings. Thank You for helping little me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anna " <kailashana@> wrote: > > > > Oh.. in case you didn't see it at nondualsalon: > > > > http://celebrity.aol.co.uk/2009/08/28/you-think-britains-got-talent-check-out-th\ e-ukraine-winner/ > > > > > > See, you don't have to understand the language when compassion is understood. > > > > Your spiritual mama, > > > > ~A > > Bless you, oh Great One... > > I understand nothing of compassion, or love, or life. > > You are Great, Wise and all-Powerful. > > I await Your further Blessings. > > Thank You for helping little me. P.S. funny how the words " I " and " me " apply always to the reader, eh? I bet it felt funny to read the sentence " I understand nothing of compassion, or love, or life " , even though " somebody else " supposedly wrote it. Is there anyone else? ;-). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " anna " <kailashana@> wrote: > > > > > > Oh.. in case you didn't see it at nondualsalon: > > > > > > http://celebrity.aol.co.uk/2009/08/28/you-think-britains-got-talent-check-out-th\ e-ukraine-winner/ > > > > > > > > > See, you don't have to understand the language when compassion is understood. > > > > > > Your spiritual mama, > > > > > > ~A > > > > Bless you, oh Great One... > > > > I understand nothing of compassion, or love, or life. > > > > You are Great, Wise and all-Powerful. > > > > I await Your further Blessings. > > > > Thank You for helping little me. > > P.S. funny how the words " I " and " me " apply always to the reader, eh? > > I bet it felt funny to read the sentence " I understand nothing of compassion, or love, or life " , even though " somebody else " supposedly wrote it. > > Is there anyone else? ;-). > Are you being (face)tious? ;-) ~A Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " anna " <kailashana wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anna " <kailashana@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Oh.. in case you didn't see it at nondualsalon: > > > > > > > > http://celebrity.aol.co.uk/2009/08/28/you-think-britains-got-talent-check-out-th\ e-ukraine-winner/ > > > > > > > > > > > > See, you don't have to understand the language when compassion is understood. > > > > > > > > Your spiritual mama, > > > > > > > > ~A > > > > > > Bless you, oh Great One... > > > > > > I understand nothing of compassion, or love, or life. > > > > > > You are Great, Wise and all-Powerful. > > > > > > I await Your further Blessings. > > > > > > Thank You for helping little me. > > > > P.S. funny how the words " I " and " me " apply always to the reader, eh? > > > > I bet it felt funny to read the sentence " I understand nothing of compassion, or love, or life " , even though " somebody else " supposedly wrote it. > > > > Is there anyone else? ;-). > > > > > Are you being (face)tious? ;-) > > ~A No, I'm being Anna ;-). Anna reads this now. Anna writes, composes and sends. Anna replies. Where is the other? A projection, in memory, in thought. Anna's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anna " <kailashana@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " anna " <kailashana@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Oh.. in case you didn't see it at nondualsalon: > > > > > > > > > > http://celebrity.aol.co.uk/2009/08/28/you-think-britains-got-talent-check-out-th\ e-ukraine-winner/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > See, you don't have to understand the language when compassion is understood. > > > > > > > > > > Your spiritual mama, > > > > > > > > > > ~A > > > > > > > > Bless you, oh Great One... > > > > > > > > I understand nothing of compassion, or love, or life. > > > > > > > > You are Great, Wise and all-Powerful. > > > > > > > > I await Your further Blessings. > > > > > > > > Thank You for helping little me. > > > > > > P.S. funny how the words " I " and " me " apply always to the reader, eh? > > > > > > I bet it felt funny to read the sentence " I understand nothing of compassion, or love, or life " , even though " somebody else " supposedly wrote it. > > > > > > Is there anyone else? ;-). > > > > > > > > > Are you being (face)tious? ;-) > > > > ~A > > No, I'm being Anna ;-). > > Anna reads this now. > > Anna writes, composes and sends. > > Anna replies. > > Where is the other? > > A projection, in memory, in thought. > > Anna's. ^^^ When this is never 'forgotten'... one is 'awake'. Where there is no other, there is no self, either. That doesn't mean one can't talk to 'others'. But the " scenery " is a little bit different, viewed in quite a different light. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 Where there is no other, there is no self, either.That doesn't mean one can't talk to 'others'.But the "scenery" is a little bit different, viewed in quite a different light.-tim- Toomba questions god for deep inside he still has doubts. Tim questions the existence of others for deep inside he is still in doubt. -geo- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 19, 2009 Report Share Posted September 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > Where there is no other, there is no self, either. > > > > That doesn't mean one can't talk to 'others'. > > > > But the " scenery " is a little bit different, viewed in quite a different light. > > -tim- > > > > Toomba questions god for deep inside he still has doubts. > > Tim questions the existence of others for deep inside he is still in > doubt. > > -geo- > > Tim doesn't question the existence of others, Geo. > > Nor is there a " deep inside " in which doubt can exist, or not exist. > > Would Geo like it if Tim were in doubt, and questioning? Maybe Tim > would be more like Geo, if it were so? P.S. it's perfectly possible to talk to others, when there are no others. People do it all the time, and there are no others for anybody. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 20, 2009 Report Share Posted September 20, 2009 Nisargadatta , " fewtch " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > Where there is no other, there is no self, either. > > > > > > That doesn't mean one can't talk to 'others'. > > > > > > But the " scenery " is a little bit different, viewed in quite a different light. > > > -tim- > > > > > > Toomba questions god for deep inside he still has doubts. > > > Tim questions the existence of others for deep inside he is still in > doubt. > > > -geo- > > > > Tim doesn't question the existence of others, Geo. > > > > Nor is there a " deep inside " in which doubt can exist, or not exist. > > > > Would Geo like it if Tim were in doubt, and questioning? Maybe Tim > would be more like Geo, if it were so? > > P.S. it's perfectly possible to talk to others, when there are no others. > > People do it all the time, and there are no others for anybody. Conceptually speaking, of course, there are others, and there is " myself " . Obviously, this is why folks remain " stuck " in the conceptual realm, why it has become an emotional addiction. Because, beyond thought/concept (imagination), there is no self and there are no others. And people want there to be others, and want there to be a self. Including those who claim to be seeking the self's riddance. Perhaps, especially those claiming to be seeking its riddance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 20, 2009 Report Share Posted September 20, 2009 Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6 wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > - > > wwoehr > > Nisargadatta > > Saturday, September 19, 2009 4:41 AM > > Re: Within/without > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > It is absolutely certain that what is perceived to be 'outside the body' > > > (including the outside surface of the body) is, in fact, within. > > > > > > I would say that what is within is 'outside', but what was formerly > > > perceived to be " within " -- isn't there. > > > > > > > Tim, > > > > What an obsolete crap are all this non-dual mental speculations and logic. > > The language does contain such helpful preporsitions for daily living. > > > > Tell a 6 year old child when it is taking a foto of a house that the house > > is inside the camera and the child will tell you that only the image of that > > house projected through the lenses upon the cmos chip is inside. The child > > will regard you as a retarted idiot telling it such obsolete insights which > > every child already knows. > > > > Tell any mentally healthy person person who is not spoilt by non-dual > > philosophy that streets, houses and trees are within and that person will > > ask you what he can buy for such wonderful insights. > > > > And you Tim ? > > > > You are so proud of that shit. > > > > Werner > > > > Dear werner, since bbb left you assumed his personality, his mood and his > > language. Why? Pure immitation? > > -geo- > > P: It's a nasty job, but someone has to > do it. You might be called someday to > clean nondual toilets. So thank Werner > for his sacrifice. D: No. First insight - then speak as you will. No other will you be contending with. The spring rain washes the dust off the grass. No need for some kind of toilet repair person. So many people busy cleaning the toilets of others. It's a dead give-away. - D - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 20, 2009 Report Share Posted September 20, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " anna " <kailashana@> wrote: > > > > > > Werner darling, do not be so hard on our child ( ;-) ). He's > > confused. > > Not at all, Anna. > > All is completely clear here. Tim - The difficulty ensues once you communicate it. Once you speak of clarity - the fact of communicating itself, infers self and other. And you will find many wanting to play the part of " other " to you, and wanting to view you as " other. " And I'm sure you've noticed this - I'm not telling you anything new - just stating the obvious. How often is there communication that doesn't assume separation of the " sender " and " receiver " of the communicating? - D - 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.