Guest guest Posted January 29, 2010 Report Share Posted January 29, 2010 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > so you want nothing. > > > > > > with one exception? > > > > > > smiles, > > > > > > dan > > > > > > > Everybody seems to want something, even though they've already " got " everything ;-). > > > > When that's clear, nothing is wanted. > > > > One is full of what one is, which is everything. > > > > Unless half of it is being pushed away, in order to keep half to oneself. > > > > One wants to have a body and a mind to oneself, and push everything else away, except for a few things that 'belong to that body'. > > > > Crazy, huh? ;-). > > Thanks for the clarity on this. > > Crazy, perhaps. > > Yet, it's the story of history across cultures. > > So, maybe necessary, given the way human conceptuality organizes. P.S. I guess that's humanity's issue, then. Whoever this " humanity " fellow/gal is. Ya know, the fellow/gal who crosses cultures in the story of history, and who has a given way he/she organizes. This must be the same fellow/gal we're talking about, when we talk to " each other " . Ya know, the dude who's there from the perspective of " each other " ;-). We all love that dude. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 29, 2010 Report Share Posted January 29, 2010 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > so you want nothing. > > > > > > > > with one exception? > > > > > > > > smiles, > > > > > > > > dan > > > > > > > > > > Everybody seems to want something, even though they've already " got " everything ;-). > > > > > > When that's clear, nothing is wanted. > > > > > > One is full of what one is, which is everything. > > > > > > Unless half of it is being pushed away, in order to keep half to oneself. > > > > > > One wants to have a body and a mind to oneself, and push everything else away, except for a few things that 'belong to that body'. > > > > > > Crazy, huh? ;-). > > > > Thanks for the clarity on this. > > > > Crazy, perhaps. > > > > Yet, it's the story of history across cultures. > > > > So, maybe necessary, given the way human conceptuality organizes. > > P.S. I guess that's humanity's issue, then. > > Whoever this " humanity " fellow/gal is. > > Ya know, the fellow/gal who crosses cultures in the story of history, and who has a given way he/she organizes. > > This must be the same fellow/gal we're talking about, when we talk to " each other " . > > Ya know, the dude who's there from the perspective of " each other " ;-). > > We all love that dude. Well, feel free to disregard anything to do with science, perception, history, or time. Yet, the timeless is time. The nonceptual conceptualizes. The formless forms. If you want to keep your food from rotting, you put it in a refrigerator. You use a refrigerator, no? You eat to keep the body alive, no? Although verbally, you can say there are no necessities, and no " dude. " Yet, you take care of the dude, or you wouldn't be typing any messages. - D - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 29, 2010 Report Share Posted January 29, 2010 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > so you want nothing. > > > > > > > > > > with one exception? > > > > > > > > > > smiles, > > > > > > > > > > dan > > > > > > > > > > > > > Everybody seems to want something, even though they've already " got " everything ;-). > > > > > > > > When that's clear, nothing is wanted. > > > > > > > > One is full of what one is, which is everything. > > > > > > > > Unless half of it is being pushed away, in order to keep half to oneself. > > > > > > > > One wants to have a body and a mind to oneself, and push everything else away, except for a few things that 'belong to that body'. > > > > > > > > Crazy, huh? ;-). > > > > > > Thanks for the clarity on this. > > > > > > Crazy, perhaps. > > > > > > Yet, it's the story of history across cultures. > > > > > > So, maybe necessary, given the way human conceptuality organizes. > > > > P.S. I guess that's humanity's issue, then. > > > > Whoever this " humanity " fellow/gal is. > > > > Ya know, the fellow/gal who crosses cultures in the story of history, and who has a given way he/she organizes. > > > > This must be the same fellow/gal we're talking about, when we talk to " each other " . > > > > Ya know, the dude who's there from the perspective of " each other " ;-). > > > > We all love that dude. > > Well, feel free to disregard anything to do with science, > perception, history, or time. I actually do largely disregard science, history, etc. It's all the 'conceptual realm', which I don't find all that interesting. > Yet, the timeless is time. > > The nonceptual conceptualizes. > > The formless forms. > > If you want to keep your food from rotting, you put it in a refrigerator. > > You use a refrigerator, no? Sure. > > You eat to keep the body alive, no? Sure. > Although verbally, you can say there are no necessities, and > no " dude. " > > Yet, you take care of the dude, or you wouldn't be typing any > messages. > > - D - Oh, sure, there's me, and then there's what I take care of, such as the body. LOL :-). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 29, 2010 Report Share Posted January 29, 2010 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > so you want nothing. > > > > > > > > > > > > with one exception? > > > > > > > > > > > > smiles, > > > > > > > > > > > > dan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Everybody seems to want something, even though they've already " got " everything ;-). > > > > > > > > > > When that's clear, nothing is wanted. > > > > > > > > > > One is full of what one is, which is everything. > > > > > > > > > > Unless half of it is being pushed away, in order to keep half to oneself. > > > > > > > > > > One wants to have a body and a mind to oneself, and push everything else away, except for a few things that 'belong to that body'. > > > > > > > > > > Crazy, huh? ;-). > > > > > > > > Thanks for the clarity on this. > > > > > > > > Crazy, perhaps. > > > > > > > > Yet, it's the story of history across cultures. > > > > > > > > So, maybe necessary, given the way human conceptuality organizes. > > > > > > P.S. I guess that's humanity's issue, then. > > > > > > Whoever this " humanity " fellow/gal is. > > > > > > Ya know, the fellow/gal who crosses cultures in the story of history, and who has a given way he/she organizes. > > > > > > This must be the same fellow/gal we're talking about, when we talk to " each other " . > > > > > > Ya know, the dude who's there from the perspective of " each other " ;-). > > > > > > We all love that dude. > > > > Well, feel free to disregard anything to do with science, > > perception, history, or time. > > I actually do largely disregard science, history, etc. > > It's all the 'conceptual realm', which I don't find all that interesting. > > > Yet, the timeless is time. > > > > The nonceptual conceptualizes. > > > > The formless forms. > > > > If you want to keep your food from rotting, you put it in a refrigerator. > > > > You use a refrigerator, no? > > Sure. > > > > > You eat to keep the body alive, no? > > Sure. > > > Although verbally, you can say there are no necessities, and > > no " dude. " > > > > Yet, you take care of the dude, or you wouldn't be typing any > > messages. > > > > - D - > > Oh, sure, there's me, and then there's what I take care of, such as the body. > > LOL :-). > P.S. would you like to talk to me, or to the dude? Right now the dude seems to be typing, but I could command him to stop, and talk to you directly instead... ;-D. The two of us have all sorts of fun together, dontcha know. Me, and the fellow I take care of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 29, 2010 Report Share Posted January 29, 2010 Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor wrote: > > > P.S. would you like to talk to me, or to the dude? > > Right now the dude seems to be typing, but I could command him to stop, and > talk to you directly instead... ;-D. > > The two of us have all sorts of fun together, dontcha know. Me, and the > fellow I take care of. > -tim- > > What do you mean? > -geo- > Dan can tell ya... he's the one who's claiming I take care of somebody, wash their hair, serve them their food, etc ;-): > Yet, you take care of the dude, or you wouldn't be typing any > messages. > > - D - So, ask Dan-ji. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 30, 2010 Report Share Posted January 30, 2010 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > so you want nothing. > > > > > > > > > > > > with one exception? > > > > > > > > > > > > smiles, > > > > > > > > > > > > dan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Everybody seems to want something, even though they've already " got " everything ;-). > > > > > > > > > > When that's clear, nothing is wanted. > > > > > > > > > > One is full of what one is, which is everything. > > > > > > > > > > Unless half of it is being pushed away, in order to keep half to oneself. > > > > > > > > > > One wants to have a body and a mind to oneself, and push everything else away, except for a few things that 'belong to that body'. > > > > > > > > > > Crazy, huh? ;-). > > > > > > > > Thanks for the clarity on this. > > > > > > > > Crazy, perhaps. > > > > > > > > Yet, it's the story of history across cultures. > > > > > > > > So, maybe necessary, given the way human conceptuality organizes. > > > > > > P.S. I guess that's humanity's issue, then. > > > > > > Whoever this " humanity " fellow/gal is. > > > > > > Ya know, the fellow/gal who crosses cultures in the story of history, and who has a given way he/she organizes. > > > > > > This must be the same fellow/gal we're talking about, when we talk to " each other " . > > > > > > Ya know, the dude who's there from the perspective of " each other " ;-). > > > > > > We all love that dude. > > > > Well, feel free to disregard anything to do with science, > > perception, history, or time. > > I actually do largely disregard science, history, etc. > > It's all the 'conceptual realm', which I don't find all that interesting. > > > Yet, the timeless is time. > > > > The nonceptual conceptualizes. > > > > The formless forms. > > > > If you want to keep your food from rotting, you put it in a refrigerator. > > > > You use a refrigerator, no? > > Sure. > > > > > You eat to keep the body alive, no? > > Sure. > > > Although verbally, you can say there are no necessities, and > > no " dude. " > > > > Yet, you take care of the dude, or you wouldn't be typing any > > messages. > > > > - D - > > Oh, sure, there's me, and then there's what I take care of, such as the body. > > LOL :-). except without any " and " involved ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 30, 2010 Report Share Posted January 30, 2010 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > so you want nothing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with one exception? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > smiles, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Everybody seems to want something, even though they've already " got " everything ;-). > > > > > > > > > > > > When that's clear, nothing is wanted. > > > > > > > > > > > > One is full of what one is, which is everything. > > > > > > > > > > > > Unless half of it is being pushed away, in order to keep half to oneself. > > > > > > > > > > > > One wants to have a body and a mind to oneself, and push everything else away, except for a few things that 'belong to that body'. > > > > > > > > > > > > Crazy, huh? ;-). > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the clarity on this. > > > > > > > > > > Crazy, perhaps. > > > > > > > > > > Yet, it's the story of history across cultures. > > > > > > > > > > So, maybe necessary, given the way human conceptuality organizes. > > > > > > > > P.S. I guess that's humanity's issue, then. > > > > > > > > Whoever this " humanity " fellow/gal is. > > > > > > > > Ya know, the fellow/gal who crosses cultures in the story of history, and who has a given way he/she organizes. > > > > > > > > This must be the same fellow/gal we're talking about, when we talk to " each other " . > > > > > > > > Ya know, the dude who's there from the perspective of " each other " ;-). > > > > > > > > We all love that dude. > > > > > > Well, feel free to disregard anything to do with science, > > > perception, history, or time. > > > > I actually do largely disregard science, history, etc. > > > > It's all the 'conceptual realm', which I don't find all that interesting. > > > > > Yet, the timeless is time. > > > > > > The nonceptual conceptualizes. > > > > > > The formless forms. > > > > > > If you want to keep your food from rotting, you put it in a refrigerator. > > > > > > You use a refrigerator, no? > > > > Sure. > > > > > > > > You eat to keep the body alive, no? > > > > Sure. > > > > > Although verbally, you can say there are no necessities, and > > > no " dude. " > > > > > > Yet, you take care of the dude, or you wouldn't be typing any > > > messages. > > > > > > - D - > > > > Oh, sure, there's me, and then there's what I take care of, such as the body. > > > > LOL :-). > > > > P.S. would you like to talk to me, or to the dude? > > Right now the dude seems to be typing, but I could command him to stop, and talk to you directly instead... ;-D. > > The two of us have all sorts of fun together, dontcha know. Me, and the fellow I take care of. he's just a gorilla in the mist. i am the mist, the gorilla, and what it appears in and to. except ... without any " and " ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 30, 2010 Report Share Posted January 30, 2010 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " geo " <inandor@> wrote: > > > > > > P.S. would you like to talk to me, or to the dude? > > > > Right now the dude seems to be typing, but I could command him to stop, and > > talk to you directly instead... ;-D. > > > > The two of us have all sorts of fun together, dontcha know. Me, and the > > fellow I take care of. > > -tim- > > > > What do you mean? > > -geo- > > > > Dan can tell ya... he's the one who's claiming I take care of somebody, wash their hair, serve them their food, etc ;-): > > > Yet, you take care of the dude, or you wouldn't be typing any > > messages. > > > > - D - > > So, ask Dan-ji. Oh, so there's me and the claim I make, and Tim who comments about it, and Geo who he comments to? .... Don't worry, it all takes care of itself ... By and by and by ... Bye-bye. ;-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 30, 2010 Report Share Posted January 30, 2010 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > so you want nothing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with one exception? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > smiles, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Everybody seems to want something, even though they've already " got " everything ;-). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When that's clear, nothing is wanted. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > One is full of what one is, which is everything. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Unless half of it is being pushed away, in order to keep half to oneself. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > One wants to have a body and a mind to oneself, and push everything else away, except for a few things that 'belong to that body'. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Crazy, huh? ;-). > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the clarity on this. > > > > > > > > > > > > Crazy, perhaps. > > > > > > > > > > > > Yet, it's the story of history across cultures. > > > > > > > > > > > > So, maybe necessary, given the way human conceptuality organizes. > > > > > > > > > > P.S. I guess that's humanity's issue, then. > > > > > > > > > > Whoever this " humanity " fellow/gal is. > > > > > > > > > > Ya know, the fellow/gal who crosses cultures in the story of history, and who has a given way he/she organizes. > > > > > > > > > > This must be the same fellow/gal we're talking about, when we talk to " each other " . > > > > > > > > > > Ya know, the dude who's there from the perspective of " each other " ;-). > > > > > > > > > > We all love that dude. > > > > > > > > Well, feel free to disregard anything to do with science, > > > > perception, history, or time. > > > > > > I actually do largely disregard science, history, etc. > > > > > > It's all the 'conceptual realm', which I don't find all that interesting. > > > > > > > Yet, the timeless is time. > > > > > > > > The nonceptual conceptualizes. > > > > > > > > The formless forms. > > > > > > > > If you want to keep your food from rotting, you put it in a refrigerator. > > > > > > > > You use a refrigerator, no? > > > > > > Sure. > > > > > > > > > > > You eat to keep the body alive, no? > > > > > > Sure. > > > > > > > Although verbally, you can say there are no necessities, and > > > > no " dude. " > > > > > > > > Yet, you take care of the dude, or you wouldn't be typing any > > > > messages. > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > Oh, sure, there's me, and then there's what I take care of, such as the body. > > > > > > LOL :-). > > > > except without any " and " involved ... > > > > That's why the " LOL " . > > Your writing above says " you take care of the dude, or you wouldn't be typing any messages " . > > No, I don't take care of anybody. > > Situations arise, and take care of themselves. Well, it's possible to be fooled by language. But it is just language that seems to be fooling other language. And the interpreter who sees it this way, can't be found. Except as the word " interpreter. " - D - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 30, 2010 Report Share Posted January 30, 2010 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > so you want nothing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with one exception? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > smiles, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Everybody seems to want something, even though they've already " got " everything ;-). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When that's clear, nothing is wanted. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > One is full of what one is, which is everything. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Unless half of it is being pushed away, in order to keep half to oneself. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > One wants to have a body and a mind to oneself, and push everything else away, except for a few things that 'belong to that body'. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Crazy, huh? ;-). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the clarity on this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Crazy, perhaps. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yet, it's the story of history across cultures. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So, maybe necessary, given the way human conceptuality organizes. > > > > > > > > > > > > P.S. I guess that's humanity's issue, then. > > > > > > > > > > > > Whoever this " humanity " fellow/gal is. > > > > > > > > > > > > Ya know, the fellow/gal who crosses cultures in the story of history, and who has a given way he/she organizes. > > > > > > > > > > > > This must be the same fellow/gal we're talking about, when we talk to " each other " . > > > > > > > > > > > > Ya know, the dude who's there from the perspective of " each other " ;-). > > > > > > > > > > > > We all love that dude. > > > > > > > > > > Well, feel free to disregard anything to do with science, > > > > > perception, history, or time. > > > > > > > > I actually do largely disregard science, history, etc. > > > > > > > > It's all the 'conceptual realm', which I don't find all that interesting. > > > > > > > > > Yet, the timeless is time. > > > > > > > > > > The nonceptual conceptualizes. > > > > > > > > > > The formless forms. > > > > > > > > > > If you want to keep your food from rotting, you put it in a refrigerator. > > > > > > > > > > You use a refrigerator, no? > > > > > > > > Sure. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You eat to keep the body alive, no? > > > > > > > > Sure. > > > > > > > > > Although verbally, you can say there are no necessities, and > > > > > no " dude. " > > > > > > > > > > Yet, you take care of the dude, or you wouldn't be typing any > > > > > messages. > > > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > Oh, sure, there's me, and then there's what I take care of, such as the body. > > > > > > > > LOL :-). > > > > > > except without any " and " involved ... > > > > > > > That's why the " LOL " . > > > > Your writing above says " you take care of the dude, or you wouldn't be typing any messages " . > > > > No, I don't take care of anybody. > > > > Situations arise, and take care of themselves. > > Well, it's possible to be fooled by language. > > But it is just language that seems to be fooling other language. > > And the interpreter who sees it this way, can't be found. > > Except as the word " interpreter. " > > - D - > Well, see, this is why I don't really follow history (a.k.a. " the news " ) much. It's about language fooling other language. And it gets progressively more foolish as distance from the so-called " eye-witness " reporting on the matter increases. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 30, 2010 Report Share Posted January 30, 2010 P.S. would you like to talk to me, or to the dude? Right now the dude seems to be typing, but I could command him to stop, and talk to you directly instead... ;-D. The two of us have all sorts of fun together, dontcha know. Me, and the fellow I take care of. -tim- What do you mean? -geo- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 30, 2010 Report Share Posted January 30, 2010 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > so you want nothing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with one exception? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > smiles, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Everybody seems to want something, even though they've already " got " everything ;-). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When that's clear, nothing is wanted. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > One is full of what one is, which is everything. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Unless half of it is being pushed away, in order to keep half to oneself. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > One wants to have a body and a mind to oneself, and push everything else away, except for a few things that 'belong to that body'. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Crazy, huh? ;-). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the clarity on this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Crazy, perhaps. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yet, it's the story of history across cultures. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So, maybe necessary, given the way human conceptuality organizes. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > P.S. I guess that's humanity's issue, then. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Whoever this " humanity " fellow/gal is. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ya know, the fellow/gal who crosses cultures in the story of history, and who has a given way he/she organizes. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This must be the same fellow/gal we're talking about, when we talk to " each other " . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ya know, the dude who's there from the perspective of " each other " ;-). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We all love that dude. > > > > > > > > > > > > Well, feel free to disregard anything to do with science, > > > > > > perception, history, or time. > > > > > > > > > > I actually do largely disregard science, history, etc. > > > > > > > > > > It's all the 'conceptual realm', which I don't find all that interesting. > > > > > > > > > > > Yet, the timeless is time. > > > > > > > > > > > > The nonceptual conceptualizes. > > > > > > > > > > > > The formless forms. > > > > > > > > > > > > If you want to keep your food from rotting, you put it in a refrigerator. > > > > > > > > > > > > You use a refrigerator, no? > > > > > > > > > > Sure. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You eat to keep the body alive, no? > > > > > > > > > > Sure. > > > > > > > > > > > Although verbally, you can say there are no necessities, and > > > > > > no " dude. " > > > > > > > > > > > > Yet, you take care of the dude, or you wouldn't be typing any > > > > > > messages. > > > > > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > > > Oh, sure, there's me, and then there's what I take care of, such as the body. > > > > > > > > > > LOL :-). > > > > > > > > except without any " and " involved ... > > > > > > > > > > That's why the " LOL " . > > > > > > Your writing above says " you take care of the dude, or you wouldn't be typing any messages " . > > > > > > No, I don't take care of anybody. > > > > > > Situations arise, and take care of themselves. > > > > Well, it's possible to be fooled by language. > > > > But it is just language that seems to be fooling other language. > > > > And the interpreter who sees it this way, can't be found. > > > > Except as the word " interpreter. " > > > > - D - > > > > Well, see, this is why I don't really follow history (a.k.a. " the news " ) much. > > It's about language fooling other language. > > And it gets progressively more foolish as distance from the so-called " eye-witness " reporting on the matter increases. well, that's only if you compare more distance with less distance. but distance is distance. if there is no distance, there isn't any more or less to it. - d - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 30, 2010 Report Share Posted January 30, 2010 Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033 wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta , " dan330033 " <dan330033@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > so you want nothing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > with one exception? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > smiles, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Everybody seems to want something, even though they've already " got " everything ;-). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When that's clear, nothing is wanted. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > One is full of what one is, which is everything. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Unless half of it is being pushed away, in order to keep half to oneself. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > One wants to have a body and a mind to oneself, and push everything else away, except for a few things that 'belong to that body'. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Crazy, huh? ;-). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the clarity on this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Crazy, perhaps. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yet, it's the story of history across cultures. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So, maybe necessary, given the way human conceptuality organizes. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > P.S. I guess that's humanity's issue, then. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Whoever this " humanity " fellow/gal is. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ya know, the fellow/gal who crosses cultures in the story of history, and who has a given way he/she organizes. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This must be the same fellow/gal we're talking about, when we talk to " each other " . > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ya know, the dude who's there from the perspective of " each other " ;-). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We all love that dude. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well, feel free to disregard anything to do with science, > > > > > > > perception, history, or time. > > > > > > > > > > > > I actually do largely disregard science, history, etc. > > > > > > > > > > > > It's all the 'conceptual realm', which I don't find all that interesting. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yet, the timeless is time. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The nonceptual conceptualizes. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The formless forms. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you want to keep your food from rotting, you put it in a refrigerator. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You use a refrigerator, no? > > > > > > > > > > > > Sure. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You eat to keep the body alive, no? > > > > > > > > > > > > Sure. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Although verbally, you can say there are no necessities, and > > > > > > > no " dude. " > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yet, you take care of the dude, or you wouldn't be typing any > > > > > > > messages. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > > > > > > Oh, sure, there's me, and then there's what I take care of, such as the body. > > > > > > > > > > > > LOL :-). > > > > > > > > > > except without any " and " involved ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > That's why the " LOL " . > > > > > > > > Your writing above says " you take care of the dude, or you wouldn't be typing any messages " . > > > > > > > > No, I don't take care of anybody. > > > > > > > > Situations arise, and take care of themselves. > > > > > > Well, it's possible to be fooled by language. > > > > > > But it is just language that seems to be fooling other language. > > > > > > And the interpreter who sees it this way, can't be found. > > > > > > Except as the word " interpreter. " > > > > > > - D - > > > > > > > Well, see, this is why I don't really follow history (a.k.a. " the news " ) much. > > > > It's about language fooling other language. > > > > And it gets progressively more foolish as distance from the so-called " eye-witness " reporting on the matter increases. > > well, that's only if you compare more distance with less distance. > > but distance is distance. > > if there is no distance, there isn't any more or less to it. > > - d - If a number of folks are sitting in a circle, and one tells a story to the one next to them, the story is changed greatly at the end of the circle. That's what I was referring to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 30, 2010 Report Share Posted January 30, 2010 Nisargadatta , " Tim G. " <fewtch wrote: > > If a number of folks are sitting in a circle, and one tells a story to the one next to them, the story is changed greatly at the end of the circle. > > That's what I was referring to. Thought supposes that something has been referred to. Thought is the supposition that something can be referred to. - D - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.