Guest guest Posted November 5, 2009 Report Share Posted November 5, 2009 Idealists insist that we can't perceive no thing but perception itself, that existents outside perception are only unverifiable inferences. Yet, they make an exception for spiritual perceptions, they give in to the temptation to posit a God, a Ground, or any other word posing as an understudy for God as existing outside perception itself. I view this as simply confabulation. Pete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 6, 2009 Report Share Posted November 6, 2009 Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6 wrote: > > Idealists insist that we can't perceive > no thing but perception itself, that > existents outside perception are only > unverifiable inferences. Yet, they make > an exception for spiritual perceptions, > they give in to the temptation to posit > a God, a Ground, or any other word > posing as an understudy for God as > existing outside perception itself. > > I view this as simply confabulation. > > Pete As long as someone has something underlying or overlaying, there are separated layers. Layers require conceptual divisions. Divisions require a divider separate from the divided. Seeing things in terms of a lens of division will always be limited. Division upon division, it multiplies endlessly. It seems to generate meaning, but ultimately is meaningless. See this, and divisions dissolve. - Dan - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 7, 2009 Report Share Posted November 7, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6@> wrote: > > > > Idealists insist that we can't perceive > > no thing but perception itself, that > > existents outside perception are only > > unverifiable inferences. Yet, they make > > an exception for spiritual perceptions, > > they give in to the temptation to posit > > a God, a Ground, or any other word > > posing as an understudy for God as > > existing outside perception itself. > > > > I view this as simply confabulation. > > > > Pete > > > As long as someone has something underlying or overlaying, there are separated layers. > > Layers require conceptual divisions. > > Divisions require a divider separate from the divided. > > Seeing things in terms of a lens of division will always be limited. > > Division upon division, it multiplies endlessly. > > It seems to generate meaning, but ultimately is meaningless. > > See this, and divisions dissolve. > > - Dan - True. And yet, 'what actually is', isn't really anything more meaningful. Simply... whole. Undivided. Unfragmented. Healed of both life and death. Simultaneously after all endings, and prior to all beginnings. Neither having, nor lacking meaning. Not needing any. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 7, 2009 Report Share Posted November 7, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6@> wrote: > > > > > > Idealists insist that we can't perceive > > > no thing but perception itself, that > > > existents outside perception are only > > > unverifiable inferences. Yet, they make > > > an exception for spiritual perceptions, > > > they give in to the temptation to posit > > > a God, a Ground, or any other word > > > posing as an understudy for God as > > > existing outside perception itself. > > > > > > I view this as simply confabulation. > > > > > > Pete > > > > > > As long as someone has something underlying or overlaying, there are separated layers. > > > > Layers require conceptual divisions. > > > > Divisions require a divider separate from the divided. > > > > Seeing things in terms of a lens of division will always be limited. > > > > Division upon division, it multiplies endlessly. > > > > It seems to generate meaning, but ultimately is meaningless. > > > > See this, and divisions dissolve. > > > > - Dan - > > True. > > And yet, 'what actually is', isn't really anything more meaningful. Not really anything meaningful, Tim ? This is the idea of a proud nihilist, but it is wrong. If you have tooth ache, isn't that meaningful ? If you are hungry, happy, depressed, sad, suffering from pain, having sex, enjoying your own smartness etc ... isn't that meaningful ? 'What is' is its own meaning. The inherent meaning of what is can get expressed through words but thought and words are only created to enventually communicate the inherent meaning of what is. And the inherent meaning of what is does exist without words, without thoughts. Werner > > Simply... whole. > > Undivided. > > Unfragmented. > > Healed of both life and death. > > Simultaneously after all endings, and prior to all beginnings. > > Neither having, nor lacking meaning. > > Not needing any. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 7, 2009 Report Share Posted November 7, 2009 > Not really anything meaningful, Tim ? This is the idea of a proud nihilist, but it is wrong.> If you have tooth ache, isn't that meaningful ?> If you are hungry, happy, depressed, sad, suffering from pain, having sex, enjoying your own smartness etc ... isn't that meaningful ?> 'What is' is its own meaning. The inherent meaning of what is can get expressed through words but thought and words are only created to entually communicate the inherent meaning of what is.> And the inherent meaning of what is does exist without words, without thoughts.> Werner Meaning is based on comparing one thing with another, such as a percept with a concept. If there is no comparision, there's no meaning. Meaning arises only relative to something else and other. Therefore, there is inherently no meaning to anything arising whatsoever. Meaning is brought to, imposed upon, what "is". A toothache doesn't mean anything in and of itself. Nor does anything else (sensation, thought, concept, perception, image, etc). Nor does this post! :-)) If there's no response of "memory", no naming, no comparing, no judging, no movement of thought, etc...there's no "meaning"...there's only and just "meaninglessness"...and meaninglessness doesn't mean anything. So, tell me Werner, what does a "toothache" *mean*. Hell's Bells, what IS a "toothache"? I won't hold my breath waiting for you to (not) answer these questions! ~M Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 7, 2009 Report Share Posted November 7, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Michael Adamson " <adamson wrote: > > > > > Not really anything meaningful, Tim ? This is the idea of a proud nihilist, but it is wrong. > > If you have tooth ache, isn't that meaningful ? > > If you are hungry, happy, depressed, sad, suffering from pain, having sex, enjoying your own smartness etc ... isn't that meaningful ? > > 'What is' is its own meaning. The inherent meaning of what is can get expressed through words but thought and words are only created to entually communicate the inherent meaning of what is. > > And the inherent meaning of what is does exist without words, without thoughts. > > Werner > > Meaning is based on comparing one thing with another, such as a percept with a concept. If there is no comparision, there's no meaning. Meaning arises only relative to something else and other. Therefore, there is inherently no meaning to anything arising whatsoever. Meaning is brought to, imposed upon, what " is " . A toothache doesn't mean anything in and of itself. Nor does anything else (sensation, thought, concept, perception, image, etc). Nor does this post! :-)) If there's no response of " memory " , no naming, no comparing, no judging, no movement of thought, etc...there's no " meaning " ...there's only and just " meaninglessness " ...and meaninglessness doesn't mean anything. > > So, tell me Werner, what does a " toothache " *mean*. Hell's Bells, what IS a " toothache " ? I won't hold my breath waiting for you to (not) answer these questions! > > ~M > Wait till your next tooth ache, Michael, and then you not only, without any need for comparison, will understand the meaning of tooth ache but also what it IS. Till then you can spend your time with holding your breath and experience the meaning of holding one's breath (which also doesn't need any comparison to understand it). Werner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 8, 2009 Report Share Posted November 8, 2009 > So, tell me Werner, what does a "toothache" *mean*. Hell's Bells, what IS a "toothache"? I won't hold my breath waiting for you to (not) answer these questions!> > ~M>Wait till your next tooth ache, Michael, and then you not only, without any need for comparison, will understand the meaning of tooth ache but also what it IS.Till then you can spend your time with holding your breath and experience the meaning of holding one's breath (which also doesn't need any comparison to understand it).WernerWerner, You still can't, won't, or aren't able to answer a simple question. You perpetually turn and twist things around. I've had a toothache and bunches of other aches, and in and of themselves as "pure" perception mean absolutely nothing. It's only when that *sensation* is interpreted, when thought as memory is added to it, that it takes on meaning. So what does it "mean" that you don't, won't, or aren't able to respond to a simple question? ~M Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 8, 2009 Report Share Posted November 8, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Michael Adamson " <adamson wrote: > > > > > So, tell me Werner, what does a " toothache " *mean*. Hell's Bells, what IS a " toothache " ? I won't hold my breath waiting for you to (not) answer these questions! > > > > ~M > > > > Wait till your next tooth ache, Michael, and then you not only, without any need for comparison, will understand the meaning of tooth ache but also what it IS. > > Till then you can spend your time with holding your breath and experience the meaning of holding one's breath (which also doesn't need any comparison to understand it). > > Werner > > Werner, > > You still can't, won't, or aren't able to answer a simple question. You perpetually turn and twist things around. I've had a toothache and bunches of other aches, and in and of themselves as " pure " perception mean absolutely nothing. It's only when that *sensation* is interpreted, when thought as memory is added to it, that it takes on meaning. So what does it " mean " that you don't, won't, or aren't able to respond to a simple question? > > ~M > Michael, You are to much occupied with telling me how much I perpetually twist things around that you no longer can be that simple and receptive to what I am trying to tell you: Meaning is inherent to what is and does not need the intellect to get obvious. Example: In a warm summerday you are lying in a meadow watching the clouds. Insects are passing by, a soft breeze is touching your face carrying the scent of the flowers around you. The whole scenery has an inherent meaning not touched by the intellect. If you are a poet or a painter you may feel driven to catch the magic of the moment in words or picture. Werner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 9, 2009 Report Share Posted November 9, 2009 Nisargadatta , " wwoehr " <wwoehr wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Michael Adamson " <adamson@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > So, tell me Werner, what does a " toothache " *mean*. Hell's Bells, what IS a " toothache " ? I won't hold my breath waiting for you to (not) answer these questions! > > > > > > ~M > > > > > > > Wait till your next tooth ache, Michael, and then you not only, without any need for comparison, will understand the meaning of tooth ache but also what it IS. > > > > Till then you can spend your time with holding your breath and experience the meaning of holding one's breath (which also doesn't need any comparison to understand it). > > > > Werner > > > > Werner, > > > > You still can't, won't, or aren't able to answer a simple question. You perpetually turn and twist things around. I've had a toothache and bunches of other aches, and in and of themselves as " pure " perception mean absolutely nothing. It's only when that *sensation* is interpreted, when thought as memory is added to it, that it takes on meaning. So what does it " mean " that you don't, won't, or aren't able to respond to a simple question? > > > > ~M > > > > > Michael, > > You are to much occupied with telling me how much I perpetually twist things around that you no longer can be that simple and receptive to what I am trying to tell you: > > Meaning is inherent to what is and does not need the intellect to get obvious. > > Example: > > In a warm summerday you are lying in a meadow watching the clouds. Insects are passing by, a soft breeze is touching your face carrying the scent of the flowers around you. > > The whole scenery has an inherent meaning not touched by the intellect. > > If you are a poet or a painter you may feel driven to catch the magic of the moment in words or picture. > > Werner that reply has no meaning. nor does this response. you both are acting like children. it is what it is without needing to look for meaning. but neither of you want to face the facts. just as children do not wish to face facts. not that that's a bad thing.. it is what it is. it's simple. don't blink. ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 9, 2009 Report Share Posted November 9, 2009 > Michael,> You are to much occupied with telling me how much I perpetually twist things around that you no longer can be that simple and receptive to what I am trying to tell you:> Meaning is inherent to what is and does not need the intellect to get obvious.> Example:> In a warm summerday you are lying in a meadow watching the clouds. Insects are passing by, a soft breeze is touching your face carrying the scent of the flowers around you.> The whole scenery has an inherent meaning not touched by the intellect.> If you are a poet or a painter you may feel driven to catch the magic of the moment in words or picture.> Werner Bullshit, Werner. If there's no thinking about anything, no distance or separation between the perceived and perceiver = only merely and just "perceiving", there is NO meaning. No perceiver = no meaning! Now, how's this for simplicity, which you say I can no longer be, "Tell me, Werner. What IS a cloud? What IS a breeze? What IS a flower?" But you won't. You can't. End of story! ~M Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 9, 2009 Report Share Posted November 9, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Michael Adamson " <adamson wrote: > > > > > Michael, > > > You are to much occupied with telling me how much I perpetually twist things around that you no longer can be that simple and receptive to what I am trying to tell you: > > > Meaning is inherent to what is and does not need the intellect to get obvious. > > > Example: > > > In a warm summerday you are lying in a meadow watching the clouds. Insects are passing by, a soft breeze is touching your face carrying the scent of the flowers around you. > > > The whole scenery has an inherent meaning not touched by the intellect. > > > If you are a poet or a painter you may feel driven to catch the magic of the moment in words or picture. > > > Werner > > Bullshit, Werner. If there's no thinking about anything, no distance or separation between the perceived and perceiver = only merely and just " perceiving " , there is NO meaning. No perceiver = no meaning! Now, how's this for simplicity, which you say I can no longer be, " Tell me, Werner. What IS a cloud? What IS a breeze? What IS a flower? " But you won't. You can't. End of story! > > ~M never a story there was... nor bullshit. ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 9, 2009 Report Share Posted November 9, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Michael Adamson " <adamson wrote: > > > > > Michael, > > > You are to much occupied with telling me how much I perpetually twist things around that you no longer can be that simple and receptive to what I am trying to tell you: > > > Meaning is inherent to what is and does not need the intellect to get obvious. > > > Example: > > > In a warm summerday you are lying in a meadow watching the clouds. Insects are passing by, a soft breeze is touching your face carrying the scent of the flowers around you. > > > The whole scenery has an inherent meaning not touched by the intellect. > > > If you are a poet or a painter you may feel driven to catch the magic of the moment in words or picture. > > > Werner > > Bullshit, Werner. If there's no thinking about anything, no distance or separation between the perceived and perceiver = only merely and just " perceiving " , there is NO meaning. No perceiver = no meaning! Now, how's this for simplicity, which you say I can no longer be, " Tell me, Werner. What IS a cloud? What IS a breeze? What IS a flower? " But you won't. You can't. End of story! > > ~M > Ha ha, Michael, Rarely, but sometimes I am too using that word 'bullshit' - mostly when I am disappointed. And so, slowly by slowly, I suspect that you are disappointed that I don't tell you what something IS. Well I would like to but I simply can't, because I never can know what something IS. Why ? It is simply because of the the way the uman consciousness is working: Only changes will get conscious but never a stasis. Werner Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 10, 2009 Report Share Posted November 10, 2009 > Ha ha, Michael,> Rarely, but sometimes I am too using that word 'bullshit' - mostly when I am disappointed. I don't use the word bullshit when I'm disappointed. Only when something seems like something is not true. > And so, slowly by slowly, I suspect that you are disappointed that I don't tell you what something IS. Yes, you are "suspect". And, I'm not disappointed that you refuse or aren't able to or aren't willing to answer a simple question! I won't find whatever you do or don't do to be disappointing as I have no standards for your bahaviour. An expectation based on your past posts, yes, but no standards that I expect you to live up to. > Well I would like to but I simply can't, because I never can know what something IS. Why ?> It is simply because of the the way thuman consciousness is working: Only changes will get conscious but never a stasis.> Werner At last, you approach directness and simplicity and honesty! Why didn't you just say "I simply can't" when I asked you that simple question, "What IS a neuron?" and other simple versions of the same question? Wouldn't it have been much easier to do that in first place. instead of running around in circles in a round house looking for a corner to pee in? :-)) ~M Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 10, 2009 Report Share Posted November 10, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Michael Adamson " <adamson wrote: > > > > Ha ha, Michael, > > Rarely, but sometimes I am too using that word 'bullshit' - mostly when I am disappointed. > > I don't use the word bullshit when I'm disappointed. Only when something seems like something is not true. > > > And so, slowly by slowly, I suspect that you are disappointed that I don't tell you what something IS. > > Yes, you are " suspect " . And, I'm not disappointed that you refuse or aren't able to or aren't willing to answer a simple question! I won't find whatever you do or don't do to be disappointing as I have no standards for your bahaviour. An expectation based on your past posts, yes, but no standards that I expect you to live up to. > > > Well I would like to but I simply can't, because I never can know what something IS. Why ? > > It is simply because of the the way thuman consciousness is working: Only changes will get conscious but never a stasis. > > Werner > > At last, you approach directness and simplicity and honesty! Why didn't you just say " I simply can't " when I asked you that simple question, " What IS a neuron? " and other simple versions of the same question? Wouldn't it have been much easier to do that in first place. instead of running around in circles in a round house looking for a corner to pee in? :-)) Michael, What I answer, how and when, is not your decision. I have my standards and you have your's. If you have any expectations how others should respond to you then now is a good start for you to preactice modesty and humbleness. Werner > > ~M > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 11, 2009 Report Share Posted November 11, 2009 > Michael,> What I answer, how and when, is not your decision.> I have my standards and you have your's.> If you have any expectations how others should respond to you then now is a good start for you to preactice modesty and humbleness.> Werner Again, more bullshit. It's obvious to me that you didn't closely read what I posted about expectations. I 'm sure not trying to decide "how, when, and what" you answer...I've just been asking FOR a staight *answer*...not for deflections, refusals, etc, which is what your "responses" (aka: non-answers) consisted of. As for "prEACtice"[ing] modesty and humbleness"...only one so vain would recommend and/or attempt such a futile exercise in self-deception. :-)) So, I'll answer my own question! "What IS a neuron?" Answer: I don't know what it IS and never will know what it or anything else IS. Case closed! ~M Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 Nisargadatta , " BobN " <Roberibus111 wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " wwoehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Michael Adamson " <adamson@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > So, tell me Werner, what does a " toothache " *mean*. Hell's Bells, what IS a " toothache " ? I won't hold my breath waiting for you to (not) answer these questions! > > > > > > > > ~M > > > > > > > > > > Wait till your next tooth ache, Michael, and then you not only, without any need for comparison, will understand the meaning of tooth ache but also what it IS. > > > > > > Till then you can spend your time with holding your breath and experience the meaning of holding one's breath (which also doesn't need any comparison to understand it). > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > Werner, > > > > > > You still can't, won't, or aren't able to answer a simple question. You perpetually turn and twist things around. I've had a toothache and bunches of other aches, and in and of themselves as " pure " perception mean absolutely nothing. It's only when that *sensation* is interpreted, when thought as memory is added to it, that it takes on meaning. So what does it " mean " that you don't, won't, or aren't able to respond to a simple question? > > > > > > ~M > > > > > > > > > Michael, > > > > You are to much occupied with telling me how much I perpetually twist things around that you no longer can be that simple and receptive to what I am trying to tell you: > > > > Meaning is inherent to what is and does not need the intellect to get obvious. > > > > Example: > > > > In a warm summerday you are lying in a meadow watching the clouds. Insects are passing by, a soft breeze is touching your face carrying the scent of the flowers around you. > > > > The whole scenery has an inherent meaning not touched by the intellect. > > > > If you are a poet or a painter you may feel driven to catch the magic of the moment in words or picture. > > > > Werner > > > that reply has no meaning. > > nor does this response. > > you both are acting like children. > > it is what it is without needing to look for meaning. > > but neither of you want to face the facts. > > just as children do not wish to face facts. > > not that that's a bad thing.. > > it is what it is. > > it's simple. > > don't blink. > > .b b.b. > There are no children, there are no facts, there is no looking for meaning, there is neither bad thing nor good thing, blinking is all there is. w.w.w. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 Nisargadatta , " wwoehr " <wwoehr wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " BobN " <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " wwoehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Michael Adamson " <adamson@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So, tell me Werner, what does a " toothache " *mean*. Hell's Bells, what IS a " toothache " ? I won't hold my breath waiting for you to (not) answer these questions! > > > > > > > > > > ~M > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wait till your next tooth ache, Michael, and then you not only, without any need for comparison, will understand the meaning of tooth ache but also what it IS. > > > > > > > > Till then you can spend your time with holding your breath and experience the meaning of holding one's breath (which also doesn't need any comparison to understand it). > > > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > Werner, > > > > > > > > You still can't, won't, or aren't able to answer a simple question. You perpetually turn and twist things around. I've had a toothache and bunches of other aches, and in and of themselves as " pure " perception mean absolutely nothing. It's only when that *sensation* is interpreted, when thought as memory is added to it, that it takes on meaning. So what does it " mean " that you don't, won't, or aren't able to respond to a simple question? > > > > > > > > ~M > > > > > > > > > > > > > Michael, > > > > > > You are to much occupied with telling me how much I perpetually twist things around that you no longer can be that simple and receptive to what I am trying to tell you: > > > > > > Meaning is inherent to what is and does not need the intellect to get obvious. > > > > > > Example: > > > > > > In a warm summerday you are lying in a meadow watching the clouds. Insects are passing by, a soft breeze is touching your face carrying the scent of the flowers around you. > > > > > > The whole scenery has an inherent meaning not touched by the intellect. > > > > > > If you are a poet or a painter you may feel driven to catch the magic of the moment in words or picture. > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > that reply has no meaning. > > > > nor does this response. > > > > you both are acting like children. > > > > it is what it is without needing to look for meaning. > > > > but neither of you want to face the facts. > > > > just as children do not wish to face facts. > > > > not that that's a bad thing.. > > > > it is what it is. > > > > it's simple. > > > > don't blink. > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > There are no children, > > there are no facts, > > there is no looking for meaning, > > there is neither bad thing nor good thing, > > blinking is all there is. > > w.w.w. > A blinking of a non-eye, by no-one, which never starts, finishes nor changes? Who can refute such NON sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 Nisargadatta , " wwoehr " <wwoehr wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " BobN " <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " wwoehr " <wwoehr@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Michael Adamson " <adamson@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So, tell me Werner, what does a " toothache " *mean*. Hell's Bells, what IS a " toothache " ? I won't hold my breath waiting for you to (not) answer these questions! > > > > > > > > > > ~M > > > > > > > > > > > > > Wait till your next tooth ache, Michael, and then you not only, without any need for comparison, will understand the meaning of tooth ache but also what it IS. > > > > > > > > Till then you can spend your time with holding your breath and experience the meaning of holding one's breath (which also doesn't need any comparison to understand it). > > > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > > > Werner, > > > > > > > > You still can't, won't, or aren't able to answer a simple question. You perpetually turn and twist things around. I've had a toothache and bunches of other aches, and in and of themselves as " pure " perception mean absolutely nothing. It's only when that *sensation* is interpreted, when thought as memory is added to it, that it takes on meaning. So what does it " mean " that you don't, won't, or aren't able to respond to a simple question? > > > > > > > > ~M > > > > > > > > > > > > > Michael, > > > > > > You are to much occupied with telling me how much I perpetually twist things around that you no longer can be that simple and receptive to what I am trying to tell you: > > > > > > Meaning is inherent to what is and does not need the intellect to get obvious. > > > > > > Example: > > > > > > In a warm summerday you are lying in a meadow watching the clouds. Insects are passing by, a soft breeze is touching your face carrying the scent of the flowers around you. > > > > > > The whole scenery has an inherent meaning not touched by the intellect. > > > > > > If you are a poet or a painter you may feel driven to catch the magic of the moment in words or picture. > > > > > > Werner > > > > > > that reply has no meaning. > > > > nor does this response. > > > > you both are acting like children. > > > > it is what it is without needing to look for meaning. > > > > but neither of you want to face the facts. > > > > just as children do not wish to face facts. > > > > not that that's a bad thing.. > > > > it is what it is. > > > > it's simple. > > > > don't blink. > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > There are no children, > > there are no facts, > > there is no looking for meaning, > > there is neither bad thing nor good thing, > > blinking is all there is. > > w.w.w. so what? ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 > that reply has no meaning.> nor does this response.> you both are acting like children. > it is what it is without needing to look for meaning.> but neither of you want to face the facts.> just as children do not wish to face facts.> not that that's a bad thing..> it is what it is.> it's simple.> don't blink.> .b b.b. Thanks Daddy for setting me straight. But please don't spank me and make me go to bed without eating supper again! Oh, one more thing. If I don't blink, won't my eyes will dry up and I'll go blind? ~M~M~M Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Michael Adamson " <adamson wrote: > > > > that reply has no meaning. > > nor does this response. > > you both are acting like children. > > it is what it is without needing to look for meaning. > > but neither of you want to face the facts. > > just as children do not wish to face facts. > > not that that's a bad thing.. > > it is what it is. > > it's simple. > > don't blink. > > .b b.b. > > Thanks Daddy for setting me straight. > But please don't spank me and make me go to bed without eating supper again! > Oh, one more thing. If I don't blink, won't my eyes will dry up and I'll go blind? > ~M~M~M well son.. as i said... you act like a child. not that it means anything. it doesn't. neither do my comments regarding that fact. Daddy? hmm.. what me worry? LOL! ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 13, 2009 Report Share Posted November 13, 2009 Nisargadatta , " BobN " <Roberibus111 wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Michael Adamson " <adamson@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Michael, > > > > > You are to much occupied with telling me how much I perpetually twist things around that you no longer can be that simple and receptive to what I am trying to tell you: > > > > > Meaning is inherent to what is and does not need the intellect to get obvious. > > > > > Example: > > > > > In a warm summerday you are lying in a meadow watching the clouds. Insects are passing by, a soft breeze is touching your face carrying the scent of the flowers around you. > > > > > The whole scenery has an inherent meaning not touched by the intellect. > > > > > If you are a poet or a painter you may feel driven to catch the magic of the moment in words or picture. > > > > > Werner > > > > Bullshit, Werner. If there's no thinking about anything, no distance or separation between the perceived and perceiver = only merely and just " perceiving " , there is NO meaning. No perceiver = no meaning! Now, how's this for simplicity, which you say I can no longer be, " Tell me, Werner. What IS a cloud? What IS a breeze? What IS a flower? " But you won't. You can't. End of story! > > > > ~M > > > > never a story there was... > > nor bullshit. > > .b b.b. P: Hey, great, Bob is back. Bob get your ass back to A2Z, pronto, you foul mouth old bitch. > 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.