Guest guest Posted December 15, 2009 Report Share Posted December 15, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe wrote: > > Thanks for using my second-favourite mantra The favourite m. > is no mantra (silence) of course. > > K (Jiddu -- name reminds one of the Jedi -- oh, well) would say > that [direct] perception is not to be confused with intellectual understanding. > > Intellectually speaking the *absolute* would be something which > never moves or changes. Its just that something is no thing BUT > movement and change. Is there something to that movement, which never moves/changes then? Intellectually speaking: yes there is > and that is the fact (truth if you will) that some thing is BUT > movement and change. > > Voila! Thats liberation for one from the word about one. So far > the intellect: the absolute to the movement -- and the movement > itself is the same. Something - nothing: the same. Relativeness > and ultimateness - all the same. > > Question: could I have said this had there never been a thought > -free moment, a word-less moment - when it was all clear? > > That's a good question as we say when we do not know the answer. > > Yours cheerfully > -Lene the " best " answer. occurs without happening.. when nobody knows the question. in Effervescence..the Dimensional Apparent Ever-Time.. " Nobody " never questions anything... Thus: " Same Is the Nobody " which ever and never answers to no one. the above and beyond is baba's 12th favorite whatever. right in line with all the other just ducky things.. that musically mollycoddle the mind. the mind that isn't here nor there. don't mind me.. it can't be helped. choice is not an option. ..b b.b. p.s. this message in 5 seconds will never self destruct. but during the duration of that particulate of 5 seconds.. as calculated not by any atomic timepiece.. anything can and will happen. it's anybody's game. but nobody cares what anybody thinks. don't look for meaning in the above nor below. the above-below IS....meaning is not. Each stand Alone... without a thing to stand on i might add. but there's nothing to add the the nothing that is. that's just silly. the Joker doth Jest. for both Heaven and Hell.... " It " . what else is there to do in the Between and Betwixt? before photons came to be or be seen.. there was no before so this doesn't come after. the hope prevails that this answers all your questions... and..or but.. questions all your answers. consider without thought: when the two become one.. " IT " is Won. but of course then too.. It was never lost. what's for lunch? [.bx3] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 15, 2009 Report Share Posted December 15, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Right on > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Couple a years ago I would talk a lot about nothingness and > > > > > > > > > > > emptiness and not distinguish between them. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A person, familiar with buddhism, kindly told me a couple of > > > > > > > > > > > times or more that in buddhism emptiness and nothingness are > > > > > > > > > > > not the same. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I never really understood the difference till last night. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Lene > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What happened last night? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > P: Nothing! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Right. You have hereby answered your own question to me: > > > > > > > > what is the difference between emptiness and nothingness. > > > > > > > > Thanks vm - always appreciate it when others do the hard > > > > > > > > work for me ... if you will excuse du conventional lingo. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Lene > > > > > > > > > > > > > > P: No, I didn't answer, but I could, since you don't want > > > > > > > to. Emptiness in Buddhist is a concept that indicates > > > > > > > lack of independent self-hood. When a Buddhist says, all > > > > > > > things are empty, it means no thing can exist of itself, > > > > > > > but comes into being in relation. This applies even to > > > > > > > Buddhahood, and emptiness itself. Nothing means total absence, > > > > > > > including the absence of the presence of absence. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nothingness, of course, doesn't exist. A perfect vacuum has been > > > > > > > demonstrated to have the negative energy of virtual particles > > > > > > > appearing and disappearing in space. Nothing is just another > > > > > > > word for unconsciousness, total not knowing. Of course, I'm > > > > > > > not saying my understanding is th same as yours. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the explanation. > > > > > > > > > > > > Our understanding is not different from one another regarding > > > > > > emptiness and nothingness. > > > > > > > > > > > > Will try to remember the expression " self-hood " . I never know > > > > > > what to call it. > > > > > > > > > > > > The whole thing became clear to me in a dream this morning. I > > > > > > am talking about the difference between dream where self-hood > > > > > > is present - and dream when self-hood is absent, and there is > > > > > > but relating without a relator (self, observer, thinker etc.) > > > > > > Empty center. At a certain point in the dream a self-creature > > > > > > entered which created incredible havoc - because the self was > > > > > > like outside the dream and interfering with what was going on > > > > > > from its apparently outside-of-the-dream position. The result > > > > > > was conflict of course as always, when there is this distance > > > > > > between one and one, which makes for the illusion that one is > > > > > > two - but then the whole dream is an illusion already so what > > > > > > the heck - except the dream is much nicer, when there is only > > > > > > one present - when it is but one presence -- relating with it > > > > > > self. > > > > > > > > > > > > It (little red selfhood) came (not a surprise) in the form of > > > > > > thinking, speculation, reflection about what was taking place > > > > > > in the dream. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And most important - qua this creation of division which breeds > > > > > confusion and conflict -- this " self " wants to be in control of > > > > > the confusion which its very own entering the stage has created > > > > > and what used to be " just a flow of a little of everything " now becomes a veritable battle-field. > > > > > > > > > > -Lene > > > > > > > > P: Thanks for your answer. Emptiness and co-dependent > > > > origination go together like this in Buddhism: Awareness > > > > has no independent self. Awareness exist because the world > > > > exist, the world exist because awareness exists. Both > > > > depend on each other. They arise together luck in an > > > > inescapable sine qua non. Reactivity to the world we > > > > see abates when we realize that. Awareness and the world > > > > will forever march in luck step changing as they go. > > > > There is nothing to fight, it will change of itself like > > > > a dream. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks P. > > > > > > I asked a teacher of religion this question: what is it that > > > relates to what when it's given that everything is relative, > > > ie but relations without any separate selves relating to one > > > another, and given that this relativity is the only reality? > > > > > > We sort of agreed, that each of us are the world and what is > > > relating then is the world relating to the world relating to > > > the world. I am the world, you are the world, we are the ONE > > > world relating to ITself. > > > > > > This world however is an illusion (in that the beginning and > > > ending of it is the same & happens simulataneously wherefore > > > nothing is happening as a matter of fact and this nothing is > > > the world). > > > > > > Thoughts communicate the (n)ever happening relations, and it > > > is thought which fixates what cannot be fixated - or IS that > > > fixation of the non-fixable rather. > > > > > > That fixation is the known -- but what is known is, was, and > > > will be eternally no thing happening. > > > > > > It is words which keep the wheel turning - not money > > > > > > -Lene > > > > > > Relativity is " half of the truth. " > > > > Mm. I am aware that in a certain school of buddhism (ask the > experts they operate with two aspects of the truth, but I > am one stubborn donkey, and every time I see the word two, I > freeze completely and refuse to take another step. > > As soon as there is the word: one is all there is and one is > none - this ass gets moving again - as cheerfully as had the > word two or the word half never been spoken. > > 1 = ½ + ½ is also dividing what canNOT BE divided, first and > last and in between, because there is nothing consist-ant to > it - no lasting content. Since it is content-less - there is > nothing to it, which can be divided into fragments or halves. > > By and by > > -Lene There's nothing wrong with two. It's just another number. There's nothing special about one or none. They are as conceptual as any other concepts. There is no special understanding to be had. Oh well. The sky is clear. A lone sparrow moving by my window as I type. - Dan - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 15, 2009 Report Share Posted December 15, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Right on > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Couple a years ago I would talk a lot about nothingness and > > > > > > > > > > > > emptiness and not distinguish between them. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A person, familiar with buddhism, kindly told me a couple of > > > > > > > > > > > > times or more that in buddhism emptiness and nothingness are > > > > > > > > > > > > not the same. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I never really understood the difference till last night. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Lene > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What happened last night? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > P: Nothing! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Right. You have hereby answered your own question to me: > > > > > > > > > what is the difference between emptiness and nothingness. > > > > > > > > > Thanks vm - always appreciate it when others do the hard > > > > > > > > > work for me ... if you will excuse du conventional lingo. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Lene > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > P: No, I didn't answer, but I could, since you don't want > > > > > > > > to. Emptiness in Buddhist is a concept that indicates > > > > > > > > lack of independent self-hood. When a Buddhist says, all > > > > > > > > things are empty, it means no thing can exist of itself, > > > > > > > > but comes into being in relation. This applies even to > > > > > > > > Buddhahood, and emptiness itself. Nothing means total absence, > > > > > > > > including the absence of the presence of absence. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nothingness, of course, doesn't exist. A perfect vacuum has been > > > > > > > > demonstrated to have the negative energy of virtual particles > > > > > > > > appearing and disappearing in space. Nothing is just another > > > > > > > > word for unconsciousness, total not knowing. Of course, I'm > > > > > > > > not saying my understanding is th same as yours. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the explanation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Our understanding is not different from one another regarding > > > > > > > emptiness and nothingness. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Will try to remember the expression " self-hood " . I never know > > > > > > > what to call it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The whole thing became clear to me in a dream this morning. I > > > > > > > am talking about the difference between dream where self-hood > > > > > > > is present - and dream when self-hood is absent, and there is > > > > > > > but relating without a relator (self, observer, thinker etc.) > > > > > > > Empty center. At a certain point in the dream a self-creature > > > > > > > entered which created incredible havoc - because the self was > > > > > > > like outside the dream and interfering with what was going on > > > > > > > from its apparently outside-of-the-dream position. The result > > > > > > > was conflict of course as always, when there is this distance > > > > > > > between one and one, which makes for the illusion that one is > > > > > > > two - but then the whole dream is an illusion already so what > > > > > > > the heck - except the dream is much nicer, when there is only > > > > > > > one present - when it is but one presence -- relating with it > > > > > > > self. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It (little red selfhood) came (not a surprise) in the form of > > > > > > > thinking, speculation, reflection about what was taking place > > > > > > > in the dream. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And most important - qua this creation of division which breeds > > > > > > confusion and conflict -- this " self " wants to be in control of > > > > > > the confusion which its very own entering the stage has created > > > > > > and what used to be " just a flow of a little of everything " now becomes a veritable battle-field. > > > > > > > > > > > > -Lene > > > > > > > > > > P: Thanks for your answer. Emptiness and co-dependent > > > > > origination go together like this in Buddhism: Awareness > > > > > has no independent self. Awareness exist because the world > > > > > exist, the world exist because awareness exists. Both > > > > > depend on each other. They arise together luck in an > > > > > inescapable sine qua non. Reactivity to the world we > > > > > see abates when we realize that. Awareness and the world > > > > > will forever march in luck step changing as they go. > > > > > There is nothing to fight, it will change of itself like > > > > > a dream. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks P. > > > > > > > > I asked a teacher of religion this question: what is it that > > > > relates to what when it's given that everything is relative, > > > > ie but relations without any separate selves relating to one > > > > another, and given that this relativity is the only reality? > > > > > > > > We sort of agreed, that each of us are the world and what is > > > > relating then is the world relating to the world relating to > > > > the world. I am the world, you are the world, we are the ONE > > > > world relating to ITself. > > > > > > > > This world however is an illusion (in that the beginning and > > > > ending of it is the same & happens simulataneously wherefore > > > > nothing is happening as a matter of fact and this nothing is > > > > the world). > > > > > > > > Thoughts communicate the (n)ever happening relations, and it > > > > is thought which fixates what cannot be fixated - or IS that > > > > fixation of the non-fixable rather. > > > > > > > > That fixation is the known -- but what is known is, was, and > > > > will be eternally no thing happening. > > > > > > > > It is words which keep the wheel turning - not money > > > > > > > > -Lene > > > > > > > > > Relativity is " half of the truth. " > > > > > > > > Mm. I am aware that in a certain school of buddhism (ask the > > experts they operate with two aspects of the truth, but I > > am one stubborn donkey, and every time I see the word two, I > > freeze completely and refuse to take another step. > > > > As soon as there is the word: one is all there is and one is > > none - this ass gets moving again - as cheerfully as had the > > word two or the word half never been spoken. > > > > 1 = ½ + ½ is also dividing what canNOT BE divided, first and > > last and in between, because there is nothing consist-ant to > > it - no lasting content. Since it is content-less - there is > > nothing to it, which can be divided into fragments or halves. > > > > By and by > > > > -Lene > > > There's nothing wrong with two. > > It's just another number. > > There's nothing special about one or none. > > They are as conceptual as any other concepts. > > > There is no special understanding to be had. > > Oh well. > > > The sky is clear. > > A lone sparrow moving by my window as I type. > > > - Dan - there's nothing special about that either. just another bad attempt at a zen thingy. the pulp paperbacks about bullshit enlightenment and stuf.. are overloaded with that claptrap nowadays. the only special thing would for people to stop imitating.. the pen strokes made by long dead little japanese dudes. they also spoke about self-reliance and non-dependence.. on written words from anywhere or from anytime or written by anyone. it would be very special if you paid attention to that. a little sparrow just dropped some white stuff. ewwwwwwwwwwwww! that pisses me off. and you know what? there's more truth and realization in those last three lines.. than all that flowery (non haiku-worthy) la-ti-da of yours.. i say this as a friend... no i don't. i just say it. nothing wrong with that. and nothing right about it either. it's just another number. ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 16, 2009 Report Share Posted December 16, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Right on > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Couple a years ago I would talk a lot about nothingness and > > > > > > > > > > > > emptiness and not distinguish between them. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A person, familiar with buddhism, kindly told me a couple of > > > > > > > > > > > > times or more that in buddhism emptiness and nothingness are > > > > > > > > > > > > not the same. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I never really understood the difference till last night. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Lene > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What happened last night? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > P: Nothing! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Right. You have hereby answered your own question to me: > > > > > > > > > what is the difference between emptiness and nothingness. > > > > > > > > > Thanks vm - always appreciate it when others do the hard > > > > > > > > > work for me ... if you will excuse du conventional lingo. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Lene > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > P: No, I didn't answer, but I could, since you don't want > > > > > > > > to. Emptiness in Buddhist is a concept that indicates > > > > > > > > lack of independent self-hood. When a Buddhist says, all > > > > > > > > things are empty, it means no thing can exist of itself, > > > > > > > > but comes into being in relation. This applies even to > > > > > > > > Buddhahood, and emptiness itself. Nothing means total absence, > > > > > > > > including the absence of the presence of absence. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nothingness, of course, doesn't exist. A perfect vacuum has been > > > > > > > > demonstrated to have the negative energy of virtual particles > > > > > > > > appearing and disappearing in space. Nothing is just another > > > > > > > > word for unconsciousness, total not knowing. Of course, I'm > > > > > > > > not saying my understanding is th same as yours. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the explanation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Our understanding is not different from one another regarding > > > > > > > emptiness and nothingness. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Will try to remember the expression " self-hood " . I never know > > > > > > > what to call it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The whole thing became clear to me in a dream this morning. I > > > > > > > am talking about the difference between dream where self-hood > > > > > > > is present - and dream when self-hood is absent, and there is > > > > > > > but relating without a relator (self, observer, thinker etc.) > > > > > > > Empty center. At a certain point in the dream a self-creature > > > > > > > entered which created incredible havoc - because the self was > > > > > > > like outside the dream and interfering with what was going on > > > > > > > from its apparently outside-of-the-dream position. The result > > > > > > > was conflict of course as always, when there is this distance > > > > > > > between one and one, which makes for the illusion that one is > > > > > > > two - but then the whole dream is an illusion already so what > > > > > > > the heck - except the dream is much nicer, when there is only > > > > > > > one present - when it is but one presence -- relating with it > > > > > > > self. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It (little red selfhood) came (not a surprise) in the form of > > > > > > > thinking, speculation, reflection about what was taking place > > > > > > > in the dream. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And most important - qua this creation of division which breeds > > > > > > confusion and conflict -- this " self " wants to be in control of > > > > > > the confusion which its very own entering the stage has created > > > > > > and what used to be " just a flow of a little of everything " now becomes a veritable battle-field. > > > > > > > > > > > > -Lene > > > > > > > > > > P: Thanks for your answer. Emptiness and co-dependent > > > > > origination go together like this in Buddhism: Awareness > > > > > has no independent self. Awareness exist because the world > > > > > exist, the world exist because awareness exists. Both > > > > > depend on each other. They arise together luck in an > > > > > inescapable sine qua non. Reactivity to the world we > > > > > see abates when we realize that. Awareness and the world > > > > > will forever march in luck step changing as they go. > > > > > There is nothing to fight, it will change of itself like > > > > > a dream. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks P. > > > > > > > > I asked a teacher of religion this question: what is it that > > > > relates to what when it's given that everything is relative, > > > > ie but relations without any separate selves relating to one > > > > another, and given that this relativity is the only reality? > > > > > > > > We sort of agreed, that each of us are the world and what is > > > > relating then is the world relating to the world relating to > > > > the world. I am the world, you are the world, we are the ONE > > > > world relating to ITself. > > > > > > > > This world however is an illusion (in that the beginning and > > > > ending of it is the same & happens simulataneously wherefore > > > > nothing is happening as a matter of fact and this nothing is > > > > the world). > > > > > > > > Thoughts communicate the (n)ever happening relations, and it > > > > is thought which fixates what cannot be fixated - or IS that > > > > fixation of the non-fixable rather. > > > > > > > > That fixation is the known -- but what is known is, was, and > > > > will be eternally no thing happening. > > > > > > > > It is words which keep the wheel turning - not money > > > > > > > > -Lene > > > > > > > > > Relativity is " half of the truth. " > > > > > > > > Mm. I am aware that in a certain school of buddhism (ask the > > experts they operate with two aspects of the truth, but I > > am one stubborn donkey, and every time I see the word two, I > > freeze completely and refuse to take another step. > > > > As soon as there is the word: one is all there is and one is > > none - this ass gets moving again - as cheerfully as had the > > word two or the word half never been spoken. > > > > 1 = ½ + ½ is also dividing what canNOT BE divided, first and > > last and in between, because there is nothing consist-ant to > > it - no lasting content. Since it is content-less - there is > > nothing to it, which can be divided into fragments or halves. > > > > By and by > > > > -Lene > > > There's nothing wrong with two. > > It's just another number. > > There's nothing special about one or none. > > They are as conceptual as any other concepts. > > > There is no special understanding to be had. > > Oh well. > > > The sky is clear. > > A lone sparrow moving by my window as I type. > > > - Dan - Ok. When you speak like that how can I contradict you? Wink wink I just keep telling people that what they think they know they do in fact not know because knowledge 'consists' of 'memories' which can not be put into little boxes and exhibited on hillsides, plus thought communicating that 'content' of which itself is part, and thus thoughts can also not be put into little boxes and exhibited. The purpose? To help people stop worry of course - because seeing the reality of all this sets one free, liberates one, the memory/ thought creature(s) - nothing but 'hot air' - and those of us who know are free except in the sense that we cannot just shut up and leave the mess to those, who are stuck in the prison of their ig- norance. No offense! Evidently. That is our Waterloo. We can not escape the mess which we are but we can see THAT we are the mess, and WHAT the mess 'consists' of. That is freedom - if you ask me. Urs cheerfully -Lene Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 16, 2009 Report Share Posted December 16, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Right on > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Couple a years ago I would talk a lot about nothingness and > > > > > > > > > > > > > emptiness and not distinguish between them. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A person, familiar with buddhism, kindly told me a couple of > > > > > > > > > > > > > times or more that in buddhism emptiness and nothingness are > > > > > > > > > > > > > not the same. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I never really understood the difference till last night. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Lene > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What happened last night? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > P: Nothing! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Right. You have hereby answered your own question to me: > > > > > > > > > > what is the difference between emptiness and nothingness. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks vm - always appreciate it when others do the hard > > > > > > > > > > work for me ... if you will excuse du conventional lingo. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Lene > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > P: No, I didn't answer, but I could, since you don't want > > > > > > > > > to. Emptiness in Buddhist is a concept that indicates > > > > > > > > > lack of independent self-hood. When a Buddhist says, all > > > > > > > > > things are empty, it means no thing can exist of itself, > > > > > > > > > but comes into being in relation. This applies even to > > > > > > > > > Buddhahood, and emptiness itself. Nothing means total absence, > > > > > > > > > including the absence of the presence of absence. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nothingness, of course, doesn't exist. A perfect vacuum has been > > > > > > > > > demonstrated to have the negative energy of virtual particles > > > > > > > > > appearing and disappearing in space. Nothing is just another > > > > > > > > > word for unconsciousness, total not knowing. Of course, I'm > > > > > > > > > not saying my understanding is th same as yours. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the explanation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Our understanding is not different from one another regarding > > > > > > > > emptiness and nothingness. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Will try to remember the expression " self-hood " . I never know > > > > > > > > what to call it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The whole thing became clear to me in a dream this morning. I > > > > > > > > am talking about the difference between dream where self-hood > > > > > > > > is present - and dream when self-hood is absent, and there is > > > > > > > > but relating without a relator (self, observer, thinker etc.) > > > > > > > > Empty center. At a certain point in the dream a self-creature > > > > > > > > entered which created incredible havoc - because the self was > > > > > > > > like outside the dream and interfering with what was going on > > > > > > > > from its apparently outside-of-the-dream position. The result > > > > > > > > was conflict of course as always, when there is this distance > > > > > > > > between one and one, which makes for the illusion that one is > > > > > > > > two - but then the whole dream is an illusion already so what > > > > > > > > the heck - except the dream is much nicer, when there is only > > > > > > > > one present - when it is but one presence -- relating with it > > > > > > > > self. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It (little red selfhood) came (not a surprise) in the form of > > > > > > > > thinking, speculation, reflection about what was taking place > > > > > > > > in the dream. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And most important - qua this creation of division which breeds > > > > > > > confusion and conflict -- this " self " wants to be in control of > > > > > > > the confusion which its very own entering the stage has created > > > > > > > and what used to be " just a flow of a little of everything " now becomes a veritable battle-field. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Lene > > > > > > > > > > > > P: Thanks for your answer. Emptiness and co-dependent > > > > > > origination go together like this in Buddhism: Awareness > > > > > > has no independent self. Awareness exist because the world > > > > > > exist, the world exist because awareness exists. Both > > > > > > depend on each other. They arise together luck in an > > > > > > inescapable sine qua non. Reactivity to the world we > > > > > > see abates when we realize that. Awareness and the world > > > > > > will forever march in luck step changing as they go. > > > > > > There is nothing to fight, it will change of itself like > > > > > > a dream. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks P. > > > > > > > > > > I asked a teacher of religion this question: what is it that > > > > > relates to what when it's given that everything is relative, > > > > > ie but relations without any separate selves relating to one > > > > > another, and given that this relativity is the only reality? > > > > > > > > > > We sort of agreed, that each of us are the world and what is > > > > > relating then is the world relating to the world relating to > > > > > the world. I am the world, you are the world, we are the ONE > > > > > world relating to ITself. > > > > > > > > > > This world however is an illusion (in that the beginning and > > > > > ending of it is the same & happens simulataneously wherefore > > > > > nothing is happening as a matter of fact and this nothing is > > > > > the world). > > > > > > > > > > Thoughts communicate the (n)ever happening relations, and it > > > > > is thought which fixates what cannot be fixated - or IS that > > > > > fixation of the non-fixable rather. > > > > > > > > > > That fixation is the known -- but what is known is, was, and > > > > > will be eternally no thing happening. > > > > > > > > > > It is words which keep the wheel turning - not money > > > > > > > > > > -Lene > > > > > > > > > > > > Relativity is " half of the truth. " > > > > > > > > > > > > Mm. I am aware that in a certain school of buddhism (ask the > > > experts they operate with two aspects of the truth, but I > > > am one stubborn donkey, and every time I see the word two, I > > > freeze completely and refuse to take another step. > > > > > > As soon as there is the word: one is all there is and one is > > > none - this ass gets moving again - as cheerfully as had the > > > word two or the word half never been spoken. > > > > > > 1 = ½ + ½ is also dividing what canNOT BE divided, first and > > > last and in between, because there is nothing consist-ant to > > > it - no lasting content. Since it is content-less - there is > > > nothing to it, which can be divided into fragments or halves. > > > > > > By and by > > > > > > -Lene > > > > > > There's nothing wrong with two. > > > > It's just another number. > > > > There's nothing special about one or none. > > > > They are as conceptual as any other concepts. > > > > > > There is no special understanding to be had. > > > > Oh well. > > > > > > The sky is clear. > > > > A lone sparrow moving by my window as I type. > > > > > > - Dan - > > > > Ok. When you speak like that how can I contradict you? Wink wink > > I just keep telling people that what they think they know they do > in fact not know because knowledge 'consists' of 'memories' which > can not be put into little boxes and exhibited on hillsides, plus > thought communicating that 'content' of which itself is part, and > thus thoughts can also not be put into little boxes and exhibited. > > The purpose? To help people stop worry of course - because seeing > the reality of all this sets one free, liberates one, the memory/ > thought creature(s) - nothing but 'hot air' - and those of us who > know are free except in the sense that we cannot just shut up and > leave the mess to those, who are stuck in the prison of their ig- > norance. No offense! Evidently. > > That is our Waterloo. We can not escape the mess which we are but > we can see THAT we are the mess, and WHAT the mess 'consists' of. > > That is freedom - if you ask me. > > Urs cheerfully > -Lene don't you just love it folks like our beloved danny.. say that there's nothing that can be said about " It " . indeed that there's nothing to say. but mysteriously they never tire of saying that over and over. in thousands of different ways... with thousands of different wordings... all of which say.. nothing more nor less than that they have nothing to say. don't you wish then that they would listen to themselves. instead of expecting other people to listen to them. even though they have nothing to say. because there's nothing to talk about. which do you believe that they believe most?: a.) you are a sucker. b.) they themselves are a sucker. c.) neither one because neither are anything anyway. d.) they are the God of Nothing's gift to the world that isn't. e.) they believe that they don't believe because they believe it. f.) maybe some people have already determined they're sick. g.) even though there is no way to explain " It " .. they KNOW exactly what " It " is and are closer to " It " than you.. and it is their mission to explain and expound upon this Great Truth. i'm thinking that i kind of agree with'em. they're nothing. the loudest and most sanctimonious nothing there ever was or will be. :-) ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 16, 2009 Report Share Posted December 16, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe wrote: > > Ok. When you speak like that how can I contradict you? Wink wink > > I just keep telling people that what they think they know they do > in fact not know because knowledge 'consists' of 'memories' which > can not be put into little boxes and exhibited on hillsides, plus > thought communicating that 'content' of which itself is part, and > thus thoughts can also not be put into little boxes and exhibited. > > The purpose? To help people stop worry of course - because seeing > the reality of all this sets one free, liberates one, the memory/ > thought creature(s) - nothing but 'hot air' - and those of us who > know are free except in the sense that we cannot just shut up and > leave the mess to those, who are stuck in the prison of their ig- > norance. No offense! Evidently. > > That is our Waterloo. We can not escape the mess which we are but > we can see THAT we are the mess, and WHAT the mess 'consists' of. > > That is freedom - if you ask me. > > Urs cheerfully > -Lene Hi Lene - Yes, what is known to be reality, is not. Freedom is. Why not let go of what can't be held, and be free? Free to be, free of having an existence, free of any threat of not existing. The more one tries to be free, the less one is free. Without any trying, simply being. As is. Peace, Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 16, 2009 Report Share Posted December 16, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote: > > > > > Ok. When you speak like that how can I contradict you? Wink wink > > > > I just keep telling people that what they think they know they do > > in fact not know because knowledge 'consists' of 'memories' which > > can not be put into little boxes and exhibited on hillsides, plus > > thought communicating that 'content' of which itself is part, and > > thus thoughts can also not be put into little boxes and exhibited. > > > > The purpose? To help people stop worry of course - because seeing > > the reality of all this sets one free, liberates one, the memory/ > > thought creature(s) - nothing but 'hot air' - and those of us who > > know are free except in the sense that we cannot just shut up and > > leave the mess to those, who are stuck in the prison of their ig- > > norance. No offense! Evidently. > > > > That is our Waterloo. We can not escape the mess which we are but > > we can see THAT we are the mess, and WHAT the mess 'consists' of. > > > > That is freedom - if you ask me. > > > > Urs cheerfully > > -Lene > > Hi Lene - > > Yes, what is known to be reality, is not. > > Freedom is. > > Why not let go of what can't be held, and be free? > > Free to be, free of having an existence, free of any threat of not existing. > > The more one tries to be free, the less one is free. > > Without any trying, simply being. > > As is. > > Peace, > > Dan too bad you can't free yourself from this hokum. no matter how much you don't try. and you don't try... we can Testify. :-) ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 17, 2009 Report Share Posted December 17, 2009 Nisargadatta , " BobN " <Roberibus111 wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " cerosoul " <pedsie6@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Right on > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Couple a years ago I would talk a lot about nothingness and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > emptiness and not distinguish between them. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A person, familiar with buddhism, kindly told me a couple of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > times or more that in buddhism emptiness and nothingness are > > > > > > > > > > > > > > not the same. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I never really understood the difference till last night. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Lene > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What happened last night? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > P: Nothing! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Right. You have hereby answered your own question to me: > > > > > > > > > > > what is the difference between emptiness and nothingness. > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks vm - always appreciate it when others do the hard > > > > > > > > > > > work for me ... if you will excuse du conventional lingo. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Lene > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > P: No, I didn't answer, but I could, since you don't want > > > > > > > > > > to. Emptiness in Buddhist is a concept that indicates > > > > > > > > > > lack of independent self-hood. When a Buddhist says, all > > > > > > > > > > things are empty, it means no thing can exist of itself, > > > > > > > > > > but comes into being in relation. This applies even to > > > > > > > > > > Buddhahood, and emptiness itself. Nothing means total absence, > > > > > > > > > > including the absence of the presence of absence. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nothingness, of course, doesn't exist. A perfect vacuum has been > > > > > > > > > > demonstrated to have the negative energy of virtual particles > > > > > > > > > > appearing and disappearing in space. Nothing is just another > > > > > > > > > > word for unconsciousness, total not knowing. Of course, I'm > > > > > > > > > > not saying my understanding is th same as yours. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the explanation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Our understanding is not different from one another regarding > > > > > > > > > emptiness and nothingness. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Will try to remember the expression " self-hood " . I never know > > > > > > > > > what to call it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The whole thing became clear to me in a dream this morning. I > > > > > > > > > am talking about the difference between dream where self-hood > > > > > > > > > is present - and dream when self-hood is absent, and there is > > > > > > > > > but relating without a relator (self, observer, thinker etc.) > > > > > > > > > Empty center. At a certain point in the dream a self-creature > > > > > > > > > entered which created incredible havoc - because the self was > > > > > > > > > like outside the dream and interfering with what was going on > > > > > > > > > from its apparently outside-of-the-dream position. The result > > > > > > > > > was conflict of course as always, when there is this distance > > > > > > > > > between one and one, which makes for the illusion that one is > > > > > > > > > two - but then the whole dream is an illusion already so what > > > > > > > > > the heck - except the dream is much nicer, when there is only > > > > > > > > > one present - when it is but one presence -- relating with it > > > > > > > > > self. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It (little red selfhood) came (not a surprise) in the form of > > > > > > > > > thinking, speculation, reflection about what was taking place > > > > > > > > > in the dream. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And most important - qua this creation of division which breeds > > > > > > > > confusion and conflict -- this " self " wants to be in control of > > > > > > > > the confusion which its very own entering the stage has created > > > > > > > > and what used to be " just a flow of a little of everything " now becomes a veritable battle-field. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -Lene > > > > > > > > > > > > > > P: Thanks for your answer. Emptiness and co-dependent > > > > > > > origination go together like this in Buddhism: Awareness > > > > > > > has no independent self. Awareness exist because the world > > > > > > > exist, the world exist because awareness exists. Both > > > > > > > depend on each other. They arise together luck in an > > > > > > > inescapable sine qua non. Reactivity to the world we > > > > > > > see abates when we realize that. Awareness and the world > > > > > > > will forever march in luck step changing as they go. > > > > > > > There is nothing to fight, it will change of itself like > > > > > > > a dream. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks P. > > > > > > > > > > > > I asked a teacher of religion this question: what is it that > > > > > > relates to what when it's given that everything is relative, > > > > > > ie but relations without any separate selves relating to one > > > > > > another, and given that this relativity is the only reality? > > > > > > > > > > > > We sort of agreed, that each of us are the world and what is > > > > > > relating then is the world relating to the world relating to > > > > > > the world. I am the world, you are the world, we are the ONE > > > > > > world relating to ITself. > > > > > > > > > > > > This world however is an illusion (in that the beginning and > > > > > > ending of it is the same & happens simulataneously wherefore > > > > > > nothing is happening as a matter of fact and this nothing is > > > > > > the world). > > > > > > > > > > > > Thoughts communicate the (n)ever happening relations, and it > > > > > > is thought which fixates what cannot be fixated - or IS that > > > > > > fixation of the non-fixable rather. > > > > > > > > > > > > That fixation is the known -- but what is known is, was, and > > > > > > will be eternally no thing happening. > > > > > > > > > > > > It is words which keep the wheel turning - not money > > > > > > > > > > > > -Lene > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Relativity is " half of the truth. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mm. I am aware that in a certain school of buddhism (ask the > > > > experts they operate with two aspects of the truth, but I > > > > am one stubborn donkey, and every time I see the word two, I > > > > freeze completely and refuse to take another step. > > > > > > > > As soon as there is the word: one is all there is and one is > > > > none - this ass gets moving again - as cheerfully as had the > > > > word two or the word half never been spoken. > > > > > > > > 1 = ½ + ½ is also dividing what canNOT BE divided, first and > > > > last and in between, because there is nothing consist-ant to > > > > it - no lasting content. Since it is content-less - there is > > > > nothing to it, which can be divided into fragments or halves. > > > > > > > > By and by > > > > > > > > -Lene > > > > > > > > > There's nothing wrong with two. > > > > > > It's just another number. > > > > > > There's nothing special about one or none. > > > > > > They are as conceptual as any other concepts. > > > > > > > > > There is no special understanding to be had. > > > > > > Oh well. > > > > > > > > > The sky is clear. > > > > > > A lone sparrow moving by my window as I type. > > > > > > > > > - Dan - > > > > > > > > Ok. When you speak like that how can I contradict you? Wink wink > > > > I just keep telling people that what they think they know they do > > in fact not know because knowledge 'consists' of 'memories' which > > can not be put into little boxes and exhibited on hillsides, plus > > thought communicating that 'content' of which itself is part, and > > thus thoughts can also not be put into little boxes and exhibited. > > > > The purpose? To help people stop worry of course - because seeing > > the reality of all this sets one free, liberates one, the memory/ > > thought creature(s) - nothing but 'hot air' - and those of us who > > know are free except in the sense that we cannot just shut up and > > leave the mess to those, who are stuck in the prison of their ig- > > norance. No offense! Evidently. > > > > That is our Waterloo. We can not escape the mess which we are but > > we can see THAT we are the mess, and WHAT the mess 'consists' of. > > > > That is freedom - if you ask me. > > > > Urs cheerfully > > -Lene > > > don't you just love it folks like our beloved danny.. > > say that there's nothing that can be said about " It " . > > indeed that there's nothing to say. > > but mysteriously they never tire of saying that over and over. > > in thousands of different ways... > > with thousands of different wordings... > > all of which say.. > > nothing more nor less than that they have nothing to say. > > don't you wish then that they would listen to themselves. > > instead of expecting other people to listen to them. > > even though they have nothing to say. > > because there's nothing to talk about. > > which do you believe that they believe most?: > > a.) you are a sucker. > > b.) they themselves are a sucker. > > c.) neither one because neither are anything anyway. > > d.) they are the God of Nothing's gift to the world that isn't. > > e.) they believe that they don't believe because they believe it. > > f.) maybe some people have already determined they're sick. > > g.) even though there is no way to explain " It " .. > > they KNOW exactly what " It " is and are closer to " It " than you.. > > and it is their mission to explain and expound upon this Great Truth. > > > > i'm thinking that i kind of agree with'em. > > they're nothing. > > the loudest and most sanctimonious nothing there ever was or will be. > > :-) > > .b b.b. Yeah, the me and the you and the it - always make for a good story - remove the it and there is nothing to talk about, ha ha ha ) -Lene Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 17, 2009 Report Share Posted December 17, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote: > > > > > Ok. When you speak like that how can I contradict you? Wink wink > > > > I just keep telling people that what they think they know they do > > in fact not know because knowledge 'consists' of 'memories' which > > can not be put into little boxes and exhibited on hillsides, plus > > thought communicating that 'content' of which itself is part, and > > thus thoughts can also not be put into little boxes and exhibited. > > > > The purpose? To help people stop worry of course - because seeing > > the reality of all this sets one free, liberates one, the memory/ > > thought creature(s) - nothing but 'hot air' - and those of us who > > know are free except in the sense that we cannot just shut up and > > leave the mess to those, who are stuck in the prison of their ig- > > norance. No offense! Evidently. > > > > That is our Waterloo. We can not escape the mess which we are but > > we can see THAT we are the mess, and WHAT the mess 'consists' of. > > > > That is freedom - if you ask me. > > > > Urs cheerfully > > -Lene > > Hi Lene - > > Yes, what is known to be reality, is not. > > Freedom is. > > Why not let go of what can't be held, and be free? > > Free to be, free of having an existence, free of any threat of not existing. > > The more one tries to be free, the less one is free. > > Without any trying, simply being. > > As is. > > Peace, > > Dan I could have said that but then I live in Dan-mark so ... Joking aside - yes, why not just be free? You ask the people: why are you not free? And they tell you that there can be no freedom without fighting for it or will you have it that they sit down and do nothing, huh? And they shake their little heads with the little god-like brains and call you a coward for not doing something and at least try & save the earth and the anima (soul, self) ls - living there. And you look at them and say: but hey - if there is no peace now, no freedom now -- then it must be waiting somewhere out there in an unknown future - and what good can that do us to day, here, now? Either they tell you you're selfish or they do not know what to say and they shake their little heads with the little god -like brains, pick up the flag and wander off singing onward christian soldiers or hare krishna or allah is great or some thing like that. Peace and freedom - now - or forget about it. Say I. But I am only nobody and they are not listening to nobodies. And it is just fine, for being a nobody in a room with some bodies is sooo fun. It really is. Especially when one of em feels it, and smiles at me in such a way indicates we share a secret. Those moments .. break in news .. if you ask me Thanks, Dan. -Lene Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 17, 2009 Report Share Posted December 17, 2009 Dan, My having studied J Krishnamurti has me ask you a paradoxical question: Is it possible you think, to fight for peace and freedom and be at peace and free at the same time? Meaning - can one be part of the show (fragmented or partial being) and be free from it simultaneously? Is it possible to walk the walk towards a goal and as the walking is happening realise that the endeavour is totally futile (unfragmented / unpartial being)? Oh well - just asking for the fun of it - paradoxes are fun. Smiles -Lene Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Ok. When you speak like that how can I contradict you? Wink wink > > > > > > I just keep telling people that what they think they know they do > > > in fact not know because knowledge 'consists' of 'memories' which > > > can not be put into little boxes and exhibited on hillsides, plus > > > thought communicating that 'content' of which itself is part, and > > > thus thoughts can also not be put into little boxes and exhibited. > > > > > > The purpose? To help people stop worry of course - because seeing > > > the reality of all this sets one free, liberates one, the memory/ > > > thought creature(s) - nothing but 'hot air' - and those of us who > > > know are free except in the sense that we cannot just shut up and > > > leave the mess to those, who are stuck in the prison of their ig- > > > norance. No offense! Evidently. > > > > > > That is our Waterloo. We can not escape the mess which we are but > > > we can see THAT we are the mess, and WHAT the mess 'consists' of. > > > > > > That is freedom - if you ask me. > > > > > > Urs cheerfully > > > -Lene > > > > Hi Lene - > > > > Yes, what is known to be reality, is not. > > > > Freedom is. > > > > Why not let go of what can't be held, and be free? > > > > Free to be, free of having an existence, free of any threat of not existing. > > > > The more one tries to be free, the less one is free. > > > > Without any trying, simply being. > > > > As is. > > > > Peace, > > > > Dan > > > > I could have said that but then I live in Dan-mark so ... > > Joking aside - yes, why not just be free? > > You ask the people: why are you not free? And they tell you > that there can be no freedom without fighting for it or will > you have it that they sit down and do nothing, huh? And they > shake their little heads with the little god-like brains and > call you a coward for not doing something and at least try & > save the earth and the anima (soul, self) ls - living there. > > And you look at them and say: but hey - if there is no peace > now, no freedom now -- then it must be waiting somewhere out > there in an unknown future - and what good can that do us to > day, here, now? > > Either they tell you you're selfish or they do not know what > to say and they shake their little heads with the little god > -like brains, pick up the flag and wander off singing onward > christian soldiers or hare krishna or allah is great or some > thing like that. > > Peace and freedom - now - or forget about it. Say I. > > But I am only nobody and they are not listening to nobodies. > And it is just fine, for being a nobody in a room with some > bodies is sooo fun. It really is. Especially when one of em > feels it, and smiles at me in such a way indicates we share > a secret. Those moments .. break in news .. if you ask me > > Thanks, Dan. > > -Lene > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 17, 2009 Report Share Posted December 17, 2009 Nisargadatta , " Lene " <lschwabe wrote: > > Dan, > > My having studied J Krishnamurti has me ask you a paradoxical > question: > > Is it possible you think, to fight for peace and freedom and > be at peace and free at the same time? > > Meaning - can one be part of the show (fragmented or partial > being) and be free from it simultaneously? Is it possible to > walk the walk towards a goal and as the walking is happening > realise that the endeavour is totally futile (unfragmented / > unpartial being)? > > Oh well - just asking for the fun of it - paradoxes are fun. > > Smiles > > -Lene no. i mean.. i don't know.. i mean.. i don't know anything... i mean i don't know if i know or don't know because.. i don't know. i don't even know this: that i don't know. and those who think that they do.. those ready to give answer to questions.. only know what they think they know.. and tat depends on and results in nothing. fight? ' " Waterloos " ? " see what a mess we're in " ? all claptrap. it's all reaching towards " something " . a " something other " than what now is. Which Now is...is the sum total and goal-less goal... that need not be sought. in this very not knowing that one doesn't know.. is a Knowing that surpasses.. all the imagined holy profundities which idiots spout. those clowns miss It because it's too close and too Vast to notice. they get in the way of It: the Way that Is. and then they want to preach their ridiculous " knowledge " . better it is to just laugh at the desert sages. they don't know that they don't know that you own them. they're yours not the other way 'round. they're still on the merry-go-round. and the amazing thing now.. for the know nothing Joker.. is too see all along.. the wheels never go round. in the blood and guts and the filth and slime.. you will find ME. the One you try to escape by thinking there's an escape. oh My children! ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 17, 2009 Report Share Posted December 17, 2009 Hi Lene - Nice to hear your voice on this list ... > I could have said that but then I live in Dan-mark so ... Didn't realize that. Right in the middle of all the action on the front page, these days. > Joking aside - yes, why not just be free? > > You ask the people: why are you not free? And they tell you > that there can be no freedom without fighting for it or will > you have it that they sit down and do nothing, huh? And they > shake their little heads with the little god-like brains and > call you a coward for not doing something and at least try & > save the earth and the anima (soul, self) ls - living there. Yes, there is something to fight for, to get to, to get rid of. > And you look at them and say: but hey - if there is no peace > now, no freedom now -- then it must be waiting somewhere out > there in an unknown future - and what good can that do us to > day, here, now? Freedom can only be real if it has a guarantee of tomorrow in it, and the hope of getting more and more of it ... Otherwise, I want nothing to do with it. Freedom with no guarantee, nothing to make better, nothing to get more of? Sounds like misery - as long as there is someone (separately) there, wanting it. > Either they tell you you're selfish or they do not know what > to say and they shake their little heads with the little god > -like brains, pick up the flag and wander off singing onward > christian soldiers or hare krishna or allah is great or some > thing like that. Who are you to tell me about freedom? Prove it to me. Let's see you fly. Or at least look overjoyed constantly. But as long as I look outside, for someone to be telling me things about it ... I'll be waiting a long, long, time ... > Peace and freedom - now - or forget about it. Say I. It's funny, because freedom is what we're running away from and avoiding, as we're busy pursuing our freedoms. Our freedoms to act however we want, get all the things we want, say whatever opinion we have, get rid of everything we don't like. Running away from that which involves no option to act differently than is, no thing to get, no opinion to hold. > But I am only nobody and they are not listening to nobodies. > And it is just fine, for being a nobody in a room with some > bodies is sooo fun. It really is. Especially when one of em > feels it, and smiles at me in such a way indicates we share > a secret. Those moments .. break in news .. if you ask me This moment, that begins and ends ... where? > Thanks, Dan. And thanks to you, Lene, - Dan - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 17, 2009 Report Share Posted December 17, 2009 Hi Lene - > My having studied J Krishnamurti has me ask you a paradoxical > question: > > Is it possible you think, to fight for peace and freedom and > be at peace and free at the same time? If one is free, it is a matter of being aware. In this awareness is nothing to be for or against, no thing to set against some other thing. One lives in the world, but one's being is not produced by the world. Living in the world, one's actions are seen by others, evaluated by others. It is only in terms of others that " fighting for peace and freedom " makes any sense. However the world judges, in terms of whether or not someone is fighting for peace and freedom, or is doing something else, such as baking a cake, or riding a zebra - that is the world's evaluation. In terms of awareness, of no self vs. other, - there is no one to fight for or against. I am aware. The world unfolds. Speeches are made. Events come and go. Wars happen. People maintain regimes, attack regimes, set up religions against each other. And some people gain, while others lose. And some go hungry, while others feast. Some die young and others live old. And the haves act against the have-nots, and the have-nots want to have and act against the haves. And their positions may reverse. And it continues ... What is this awareness, which can never be unfree - to which a thousand years involves no time passing? > Meaning - can one be part of the show (fragmented or partial > being) and be free from it simultaneously? There is no choice. The show is showing. The " you " of the show is happening already. It is the past. The character in the movie isn't able to step out of the movie and stop the projector. So, it is being aware that this character has no separation from the movie-whole - this is freedom. The projection of the movie is an undivided play of light and dark, simultaneously, on a screen that has no location. Is it possible to > walk the walk towards a goal and as the walking is happening > realise that the endeavour is totally futile (unfragmented / > unpartial being)? The walking isn't even happening. Seeing the light of the movie being projected - there isn't any actual walking taking place by a character on the screen. And yet, the movie plays on. The light show that never ends, or begins. Countless lives, deaths, beings, histories, locations. > Oh well - just asking for the fun of it - paradoxes are fun. Yes, endless beginningless paradox. Each sensing, each experiential moment. > Smiles De-light, - Dan - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 18, 2009 Report Share Posted December 18, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Hi Lene - > > Nice to hear your voice on this list ... > > > I could have said that but then I live in Dan-mark so ... > > Didn't realize that. Right in the middle of all the action on the front page, these days. > > > Joking aside - yes, why not just be free? > > > > You ask the people: why are you not free? And they tell you > > that there can be no freedom without fighting for it or will > > you have it that they sit down and do nothing, huh? And they > > shake their little heads with the little god-like brains and > > call you a coward for not doing something and at least try & > > save the earth and the anima (soul, self) ls - living there. > > Yes, there is something to fight for, to get to, to get rid of. who should fight? who should be fought? dream on kid. there is no " something " out there to live nor die for. you're a little don quixote jo-jo. LOL! > > And you look at them and say: but hey - if there is no peace > > now, no freedom now -- then it must be waiting somewhere out > > there in an unknown future - and what good can that do us to > > day, here, now? > > Freedom can only be real if it has a guarantee of tomorrow in it, and the hope of getting more and more of it ... that's almost ok jiminy cricket.. but..not quite. Freedom doesn't seek beyond itself. that's just your limited capability of understanding. which indicates you don't understand Freedom at all. but for a child..not bad. > Otherwise, I want nothing to do with it. Freedom really doesn't care what you do.. or do not want anything to do with.. you are insignificant and certainly of no part of Freedom. again my child.. you simply don't " get " it. > > Freedom with no guarantee, nothing to make better, nothing to get more of? Sounds like misery - as long as there is someone (separately) there, wanting it. there isn't such a Freedom. what's the matter with you? you just like to hear yourself talk. poor thing! > > Either they tell you you're selfish or they do not know what > > to say and they shake their little heads with the little god > > -like brains, pick up the flag and wander off singing onward > > christian soldiers or hare krishna or allah is great or some > > thing like that. > > Who are you to tell me about freedom? Prove it to me. Let's see you fly. Or at least look overjoyed constantly. > > But as long as I look outside, for someone to be telling me things about it .... I'll be waiting a long, long, time ... no you won't heve to wait you little jerk. just read your own words above. you don't have to wait for anyone to tell you what freedom is. you're already trying to tell everyone else what and how it is. and you aren't inside some special loop kid. you're a sad little boy danny. grow up and heed your own advise. yipes! > > Peace and freedom - now - or forget about it. Say I. > > > It's funny, because freedom is what we're running away from and avoiding, as we're busy pursuing our freedoms. > > Our freedoms to act however we want, get all the things we want, say whatever opinion we have, get rid of everything we don't like. > > Running away from that which involves no option to act differently than is, no thing to get, no opinion to hold. Jesus Christ little one.. take the log out of your own hindered eye.. before you go on pontificating about the twig in that of another. your really blowing farts tonight boy. and they really stink.. more than usual. LOL! > > But I am only nobody and they are not listening to nobodies. > > And it is just fine, for being a nobody in a room with some > > bodies is sooo fun. It really is. Especially when one of em > > feels it, and smiles at me in such a way indicates we share > > a secret. Those moments .. break in news .. if you ask me > > This moment, that begins and ends ... where? > > > Thanks, Dan. > > And thanks to you, Lene, > > - Dan - and thank god this is for entertainment value only. Lene i know where you stand. but this kid danny actually buys his own bullshit. so we must tread lightly. :-) ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 18, 2009 Report Share Posted December 18, 2009 Nisargadatta , " BobN " <Roberibus111 wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > Hi Lene - > > > > Nice to hear your voice on this list ... > > > > > I could have said that but then I live in Dan-mark so ... > > > > Didn't realize that. Right in the middle of all the action on the front page, these days. > > > > > Joking aside - yes, why not just be free? > > > > > > You ask the people: why are you not free? And they tell you > > > that there can be no freedom without fighting for it or will > > > you have it that they sit down and do nothing, huh? And they > > > shake their little heads with the little god-like brains and > > > call you a coward for not doing something and at least try & > > > save the earth and the anima (soul, self) ls - living there. > > > > Yes, there is something to fight for, to get to, to get rid of. > > who should fight? > > who should be fought? > > dream on kid. > > there is no " something " out there to live nor die for. > > you're a little don quixote jo-jo. > > LOL! D: That's right. And that's what I'm saying. The sentence above is the voice of the people Lene is talking about. Maybe I was being too subtle. > > > > > > And you look at them and say: but hey - if there is no peace > > > now, no freedom now -- then it must be waiting somewhere out > > > there in an unknown future - and what good can that do us to > > > day, here, now? > > > > Freedom can only be real if it has a guarantee of tomorrow in it, and the hope of getting more and more of it ... that's almost ok jiminy cricket.. > > but..not quite. > > Freedom doesn't seek beyond itself. > > that's just your limited capability of understanding. > > which indicates you don't understand Freedom at all. > > but for a child..not bad. D: Yes, that's what I said - there isn't any seeking beyond itself involved. > Freedom really doesn't care what you do.. > > or do not want anything to do with.. > > you are insignificant and certainly of no part of Freedom. > > again my child.. > > you simply don't " get " it. D: So, you believe there is something to get? Ah, so that's what you're doing - trying to let everyone know you really get it. Okay then. You get it. I don't. You do. That's swell. > > > > > Freedom with no guarantee, nothing to make better, nothing to get more of? Sounds like misery - as long as there is someone (separately) there, wanting it. > > > > there isn't such a Freedom. D: Yes. That's what I said. > > what's the matter with you? > > you just like to hear yourself talk. > > poor thing! > > > Either they tell you you're selfish or they do not know what > > > to say and they shake their little heads with the little god > > > -like brains, pick up the flag and wander off singing onward > > > christian soldiers or hare krishna or allah is great or some > > > thing like that. > > > > Who are you to tell me about freedom? Prove it to me. Let's see you fly. Or at least look overjoyed constantly. > > > > But as long as I look outside, for someone to be telling me things about it .... I'll be waiting a long, long, time ... > > > > > no you won't heve to wait you little jerk. > > just read your own words above. > > you don't have to wait for anyone to tell you what freedom is. > > you're already trying to tell everyone else what and how it is. > > and you aren't inside some special loop kid. > > you're a sad little boy danny. > > grow up and heed your own advise. > > yipes! D: Yes, consider listening to your own rants. Good idea. > > > > Peace and freedom - now - or forget about it. Say I. > > > > > > It's funny, because freedom is what we're running away from and avoiding, as we're busy pursuing our freedoms. > > > > Our freedoms to act however we want, get all the things we want, say whatever opinion we have, get rid of everything we don't like. > > > > Running away from that which involves no option to act differently than is, no thing to get, no opinion to hold. > > > > Jesus Christ little one.. > > take the log out of your own hindered eye.. > > before you go on pontificating about the twig in that of another. > > your really blowing farts tonight boy. > > and they really stink.. > > more than usual. > > LOL! D: Your olfactory senses are working overtime. And guess what? There's no one else in that room you're smelling. Wake up! > > > But I am only nobody and they are not listening to nobodies. > > > And it is just fine, for being a nobody in a room with some > > > bodies is sooo fun. It really is. Especially when one of em > > > feels it, and smiles at me in such a way indicates we share > > > a secret. Those moments .. break in news .. if you ask me > > > > This moment, that begins and ends ... where? > > > > > Thanks, Dan. > > > > And thanks to you, Lene, > > > > - Dan - > > > and thank god this is for entertainment value only. > > Lene i know where you stand. > > but this kid danny actually buys his own bullshit. > > so we must tread lightly. > > :-) > > .b b.b. D: You are real high testosterone competitor. That's fun. A real competitive nothing. Bobby, the nothing competitor, lining up with Lene against Dan. Yes, you really know, and so does she. But not me. How sad. And there aren't any me's. Okay, then. Carry on with the rants. - Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 18, 2009 Report Share Posted December 18, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " BobN " <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > Hi Lene - > > > > > > Nice to hear your voice on this list ... > > > > > > > I could have said that but then I live in Dan-mark so ... > > > > > > Didn't realize that. Right in the middle of all the action on the front page, these days. > > > > > > > Joking aside - yes, why not just be free? > > > > > > > > You ask the people: why are you not free? And they tell you > > > > that there can be no freedom without fighting for it or will > > > > you have it that they sit down and do nothing, huh? And they > > > > shake their little heads with the little god-like brains and > > > > call you a coward for not doing something and at least try & > > > > save the earth and the anima (soul, self) ls - living there. > > > > > > Yes, there is something to fight for, to get to, to get rid of. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > who should fight? > > > > who should be fought? > > > > dream on kid. > > > > there is no " something " out there to live nor die for. > > > > you're a little don quixote jo-jo. > > > > LOL! > > D: That's right. And that's what I'm saying. The sentence above is the voice of the people Lene is talking about. Maybe I was being too subtle. no. it was bait to see how quickly you'd feel need to defend yourself. and you did so feel the need. just as i knew you would. > > > > And you look at them and say: but hey - if there is no peace > > > > now, no freedom now -- then it must be waiting somewhere out > > > > there in an unknown future - and what good can that do us to > > > > day, here, now? > > > > > > Freedom can only be real if it has a guarantee of tomorrow in it, and the hope of getting more and more of it ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > that's almost ok jiminy cricket.. > > > > but..not quite. > > > > Freedom doesn't seek beyond itself. > > > > that's just your limited capability of understanding. > > > > which indicates you don't understand Freedom at all. > > > > but for a child..not bad. > > D: Yes, that's what I said - there isn't any seeking beyond itself involved. no that's not what you said. read again. you're going on about " real " freedom as opposed to what? give it a rest swami. > > Freedom really doesn't care what you do.. > > > > or do not want anything to do with.. > > > > you are insignificant and certainly of no part of Freedom. > > > > again my child.. > > > > you simply don't " get " it. > D: So, you believe there is something to get? no..you do. there's nothing to get...and that's what you don't get. that's why i tell you to quit trying to sound wise. you're not. you're speaking of fairy tales. >Ah, so that's what you're doing - trying to let everyone know you really get it. Okay then. You get it. I don't. You do. That's swell. i didn't say any such thing. you're so concerned about your image.. and how it will come off vis a vis another.. you miss the entire point that there is no point. and who would you suppose that i would want to let know? you almost worry about those other phantoms.. and what they supposedly think.. as you do your own phantom self. don't worry about me. i'm not here. and drop the " ah so " bullshit grasshopper. it's ridiculous. no matter how swell you think it is. LOL! > > > Freedom with no guarantee, nothing to make better, nothing to get more of? Sounds like misery - as long as there is someone (separately) there, wanting it. > > > > > > > > there isn't such a Freedom. > > D: Yes. That's what I said. no..it's not what you said. and who is there to feel miserable? you're trying to make an observation.. separate and apart from the observed. saying: " Sounds like misery as long as there.. is someone (separately) there, wanting it. " .. IS in itself saying that you are separate and apart making such a dumb observation. you just can't seem to lose that 'self " thing. poor kid! you bite yourself in the ass every time. :-) > > what's the matter with you? > > > > you just like to hear yourself talk. > > > > poor thing! > > > > > > Either they tell you you're selfish or they do not know what > > > > to say and they shake their little heads with the little god > > > > -like brains, pick up the flag and wander off singing onward > > > > christian soldiers or hare krishna or allah is great or some > > > > thing like that. > > > Who are you to tell me about freedom? Prove it to me. Let's see you fly. Or at least look overjoyed constantly. > > > > > > But as long as I look outside, for someone to be telling me things about it ... I'll be waiting a long, long, time ... > > > > > > > > > > no you won't heve to wait you little jerk. > > > > just read your own words above. > > > > you don't have to wait for anyone to tell you what freedom is. > > > > you're already trying to tell everyone else what and how it is. > > > > and you aren't inside some special loop kid. > > > > you're a sad little boy danny. > > > > grow up and heed your own advise. > > > > yipes! > > D: Yes, consider listening to your own rants. > > Good idea. i'm not here period. and that's why i certainly won't listen to your crap danny. and those are only rants danny.. if you feel " personally " attacked. that's your problem and the one you don't see. you can't get passed your sorry little self. > > > > Peace and freedom - now - or forget about it. Say I. > > > > > > > > > It's funny, because freedom is what we're running away from and avoiding, as we're busy pursuing our freedoms. > > > > > > Our freedoms to act however we want, get all the things we want, say whatever opinion we have, get rid of everything we don't like. > > > > > > Running away from that which involves no option to act differently than is, no thing to get, no opinion to hold. > > > > > > > > Jesus Christ little one.. > > > > take the log out of your own hindered eye.. > > > > before you go on pontificating about the twig in that of another. > > > > your really blowing farts tonight boy. > > > > and they really stink.. > > > > more than usual. > > > > LOL! > > D: Your olfactory senses are working overtime. > > And guess what? > > There's no one else in that room you're smelling. > > Wake up! ROFLMAO! " wake up " ? and this from a dreamer extrodinaire! you're a cute kid danny boy. :-) > > > > But I am only nobody and they are not listening to nobodies. > > > > And it is just fine, for being a nobody in a room with some > > > > bodies is sooo fun. It really is. Especially when one of em > > > > feels it, and smiles at me in such a way indicates we share > > > > a secret. Those moments .. break in news .. if you ask me > > > > > > This moment, that begins and ends ... where? > > > > > > > Thanks, Dan. > > > > > > And thanks to you, Lene, > > > > > > - Dan - > > > > > > and thank god this is for entertainment value only. > > > > Lene i know where you stand. > > > > but this kid danny actually buys his own bullshit. > > > > so we must tread lightly. > > > > :-) > > > > .b b.b. > > D: You are real high testosterone competitor. That's fun. A real competitive nothing. > > Bobby, the nothing competitor, lining up with Lene against Dan. > > Yes, you really know, and so does she. > > But not me. > > How sad. > > And there aren't any me's. > > Okay, then. > > Carry on with the rants. > > - Dan LOL! this is great danny. you're finally getting off that sweet little bullshit bully platform kid.. there' no one against you. it's not a fight. there's nothing to win. there's nothing to lose.. (well except maybe for that phony little guru trip of yours) this is fun. i'm finally breaking through to you sonny. rant on about the rants. that's even " funner " ! :-) ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 18, 2009 Report Share Posted December 18, 2009 Nisargadatta , " BobN " <Roberibus111 wrote: > > LOL! > > this is great danny. > > you're finally getting off that sweet little bullshit bully platform > > kid.. > > there' no one against you. > > it's not a fight. > > there's nothing to win. > > there's nothing to lose.. > > (well except maybe for that phony little guru trip of yours) > > this is fun. > > i'm finally breaking through to you sonny. > > rant on about the rants. > > that's even " funner " ! > > :-) > > .b b.b. glad to hear it. - D - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 18, 2009 Report Share Posted December 18, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " BobN " <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > > LOL! > > > > this is great danny. > > > > you're finally getting off that sweet little bullshit bully platform > > > > kid.. > > > > there' no one against you. > > > > it's not a fight. > > > > there's nothing to win. > > > > there's nothing to lose.. > > > > (well except maybe for that phony little guru trip of yours) > > > > this is fun. > > > > i'm finally breaking through to you sonny. > > > > rant on about the rants. > > > > that's even " funner " ! > > > > :-) > > > > .b b.b. > > > glad to hear it. > > - D - i knew you would be. it's all for you son. ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 18, 2009 Report Share Posted December 18, 2009 Nisargadatta , " BobN " <Roberibus111 wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " BobN " <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > > > > > LOL! > > > > > > this is great danny. > > > > > > you're finally getting off that sweet little bullshit bully platform > > > > > > kid.. > > > > > > there' no one against you. > > > > > > it's not a fight. > > > > > > there's nothing to win. > > > > > > there's nothing to lose.. > > > > > > (well except maybe for that phony little guru trip of yours) > > > > > > this is fun. > > > > > > i'm finally breaking through to you sonny. > > > > > > rant on about the rants. > > > > > > that's even " funner " ! > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > glad to hear it. > > > > - D - > > > i knew you would be. > > it's all for you son. > > .b b.b. it's all for nothing. and nothing for all. and it's for John Malkovich. it's all John Malkovich. - D - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 19, 2009 Report Share Posted December 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " BobN " <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " BobN " <Roberibus111@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > LOL! > > > > > > > > this is great danny. > > > > > > > > you're finally getting off that sweet little bullshit bully platform > > > > > > > > kid.. > > > > > > > > there' no one against you. > > > > > > > > it's not a fight. > > > > > > > > there's nothing to win. > > > > > > > > there's nothing to lose.. > > > > > > > > (well except maybe for that phony little guru trip of yours) > > > > > > > > this is fun. > > > > > > > > i'm finally breaking through to you sonny. > > > > > > > > rant on about the rants. > > > > > > > > that's even " funner " ! > > > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > > > .b b.b. > > > > > > > > > glad to hear it. > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > i knew you would be. > > > > it's all for you son. > > > > .b b.b. > > > it's all for nothing. > > and nothing for all. > > and it's for John Malkovich. > > it's all John Malkovich. > > - D - a movie fan! i knew you loved fantasies danny. that's all you relate to. LOL! ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 19, 2009 Report Share Posted December 19, 2009 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > Hi Lene - > > > My having studied J Krishnamurti has me ask you a paradoxical > > question: > > > > Is it possible you think, to fight for peace and freedom and > > be at peace and free at the same time? > > If one is free, it is a matter of being aware. > > In this awareness is nothing to be for or against, no thing to set against some other thing. > > One lives in the world, but one's being is not produced by the world. > > Living in the world, one's actions are seen by others, evaluated by others. > > It is only in terms of others that " fighting for peace and freedom " makes any sense. > > However the world judges, in terms of whether or not someone is fighting for peace and freedom, or is doing something else, such as baking a cake, or riding a zebra - that is the world's evaluation. > > In terms of awareness, of no self vs. other, - there is no one to fight for or against. > > I am aware. The world unfolds. Speeches are made. Events come and go. Wars happen. People maintain regimes, attack regimes, set up religions against each other. And some people gain, while others lose. And some go hungry, while others feast. Some die young and others live old. And the haves act against the have-nots, and the have-nots want to have and act against the haves. And their positions may reverse. And it continues ... > > What is this awareness, which can never be unfree - to which a thousand years involves no time passing? > > > Meaning - can one be part of the show (fragmented or partial > > being) and be free from it simultaneously? > > There is no choice. > > The show is showing. > > The " you " of the show is happening already. > > It is the past. > > The character in the movie isn't able to step out of the movie and stop the projector. > > So, it is being aware that this character has no separation from the movie-whole - this is freedom. > > The projection of the movie is an undivided play of light and dark, simultaneously, on a screen that has no location. > > Is it possible to > > walk the walk towards a goal and as the walking is happening > > realise that the endeavour is totally futile (unfragmented / > > unpartial being)? > > The walking isn't even happening. > > Seeing the light of the movie being projected - there isn't any actual walking taking place by a character on the screen. > > And yet, the movie plays on. > > The light show that never ends, or begins. > > Countless lives, deaths, beings, histories, locations. > > > Oh well - just asking for the fun of it - paradoxes are fun. > > Yes, endless beginningless paradox. > > Each sensing, each experiential moment. > > > > Smiles > > De-light, Turkish? Thanks - for both replies - most enlightening I have nothing to add - low on virtual memory Contrapuntally yours -Lene 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.