levels and translations ( prattle, ramble, burp and fart)

[Guest guest]

Dharma wrote:

> "Do not judge, lest you be judged."

 

Yes. This is the 'argument' to which I have been pointing. The argument is

the argument. Break the argument.

 

Draw a traingle point up.

 

On the point that faces 'up' place a +/- sign and label it truth....

 

On the point that is to the 'left' place a - sign and call it 'judgement'...

 

On the point that is to the 'right' place a + sign and call it

'perception'...

 

Note: the use of the words perception and judgement are used to denote

positive

and negative but are understood to be interchangable.

 

This theory is not a truth in itself.. we may never know the entire

'truth'...

;o)... this is a 'representation' of the 'dynamic' of truth and how one

should

understand their own understanding 'of' truth...

 

No matter what you think, say, or do whether it be positive or negative it

is

positive to you as you can only 'do' truth... as we perceive your 'doing' we

 

decide (perceive/judge) if it is positive or negative. If we decide it is

positive, then we have truth. If we decide it is negative then we have the

'other' half to 'your' truth thus the expression of truth lies between...

 

Consider this when you read something here..... for this theory of the

'dynamic

of truth' that I have merely 'outlined'... as the explaintion is a

demonstration

best shown in person... for at best, you can only reach a tie... two

sides...

same coin...

 

This is where the seed (jewel) of tolerance can be found. In other words...

'consider' that you 'may' be wrong whether you believe it or not...

 

BTW... The gate to 'advaita' or whatever term you may use may be found by

intersecting the three corners in the

center then, some how, one way or another, you must find a way to occupy and

 

focus your mind on this point. (or so I am told)....

 

It is the gate to 'common sense' that which makes us 'one'. We rely too

heavily on our 'perception' that we ignore our 'instinct'. We

'instinctively' do good which is reflected in our 'intentions' but, ever

since 'we' ate that damn 'apple' containing the 'knowledge' of 'good and

evil', which is the 'knowledge of creation', which is manifestion in its

perputual 'argument', we have forgotten that indeed, we are made in God's

glorious image and he has given us that which we desired most. The gift of

creation. What is more, he has given us all eternity and all that 'is' to

create with, which means that 'all' things are within our grapse. We are

each a drop of water ( a universe on its own)... a part of the ocean of

common sense that contains us as one. And, yet, we, each Gods ( 'Even' Jesus

said 'you all' are gods), we use our powers of 'creation' and our false

illusion that we are 'right', to 'sum' up to nothing more than a rain storm.

An infinity of peebles dropping ( God Realization essay from some time back)

into a very small pool... no 'one' of us amounting to 'nothing' in the

backdrop of time.

 

The human potential lost is truely a yoke of shame we all carry. Don't do

evil in the name of good. Good contends with what it perceives/judges as

evil. Evil contends with what it perceives/judges as evil. Neither good nor

evil contend with that which they perceive/judge as good. Be Good.

 

It 'really' is 'that' simple.

 

 

Gentle Peace.

 

Tim Harris

[Guest guest]

Tim Harris wrote:

>...... We rely too

> heavily on our 'perception' that we ignore our 'instinct'.

 

To me, perception tells me what is 'here, now', instincts are from the

past.

>We 'instinctively' do good which is reflected in our 'intentions'

 

My instincts tell me to do what I like! Good or bad (for others). I

think you probably meant intuition?

>...but ever since 'we' ate that damn 'apple' containing the 'knowledge' of

'good and

> evil', which is the 'knowledge of creation',

 

I don't understand. How is 'knowledge of good and evil' the equivalent

of 'knowledge of creation'? In my view there is much in creation that

has nothing to do with being 'good or evil'.

> which is manifestion in its

> perputual 'argument', we have forgotten that indeed, we are made in God's

> glorious image

 

Did we ever really know it?

>... and he has given us that which we desired most. The gift of

> creation.

 

?? Noun or verb? All I ever desired was understanding?

> What is more, he has given us all eternity and all that 'is' to

> create with,

 

I don't sense that I have all eternity and all that 'is'. Only 'God'

has. Maybe you mean that 'I'am 'God' i.s.o. this lousy, non-existent

image??

> which means that 'all' things are within our grapse. We are

> each a drop of water ( a universe on its own)... a part of the ocean of

> common sense that contains us as one. And, yet, we, each Gods ( 'Even' Jesus

> said 'you all' are gods), we use our powers of 'creation' and our false

> illusion that we are 'right', to 'sum' up to nothing more than a rain storm.

> An infinity of peebles dropping ( God Realization essay from some time back)

> into a very small pool... no 'one' of us amounting to 'nothing' in the

> backdrop of time.

 

An image, indeed, is no-thing.

> The human potential lost is truely a yoke of shame we all carry.

 

Did we ever really 'have' it?

> Don't do

> evil in the name of good. Good contends with what it perceives/judges as

> evil. Evil contends with what it perceives/judges as evil. Neither good nor

> evil contend with that which they perceive/judge as good. Be Good.

> It 'really' is 'that' simple.

 

That's reall good, Tim, or is it evil??

> Gentle Peace.

> Tim Harris.

 

Hi Tim,

Am just in a critical mood this evening. Nothing serious. Just

prattling, rambling, burping and farting!

 

Regards,

Jelke.

[Guest guest]

Jelke Wispelwey wrote:

> That's reall good, Tim, or is it evil??

 

What I am trying to say is that, according to my 'perspective', you are in

control of

your own change but what you do with 'that' is up to you. Is this not what we

'all' wish

for from God or no God? Then 'where' is the difference whether or not God

exists. We all

know the old saying 'be careful what you wish for'... Who in their life has not

wished to

be free? This is what I meant when I said I can show you, but I can not lift you

up....

is it good or evil? That is up to you but to me, based in what I 'know' as

opposed to

what I have been told, the arguments about the existence of God have positive

and

negative arguments... of course they would... right?... I for one, based on the

evidence,

believe that God exists. Why? Because 'I' didn't do any of this... someone had

to 'tell'

me. Get me? If you do not believe in God, that is fine too, after all, if I

believe in

God... the rest of the world (my 'all') is off the hook right? After all, what

ever it is

that I do or not do is truth (you can only do truth)... I am living my truth,

or, at

least what I believe is the truth... but I am also prepared to be wrong.... so I

continue

to learn... not to be 'sure'... but to decrease the margin of error.

 

>

>

> > Gentle Peace.

> > Tim Harris.

>

> Hi Tim,

> Am just in a critical mood this evening. Nothing serious. Just

> prattling, rambling, burping and farting!

>

> Regards,

> Jelke.

>

 

Good because around here (my world) that is the only language that gets any

attention...

you can force a burp and fake a fart but no one can mistaken the prattling

ramble... of

the 'thinking' mind....

 

I 'must' say here that I may be wrong.... it only stands to reason that I am....

 

Gentle Peace.

 

Tim Harris

[Guest guest]

Hello Tim,

 

<< Who in their life has not wished to be free? This is what I meant

when I said I can show you, but I can not lift you up.... is it good or

evil? That is up to you but to me, based in what I 'know' as opposed to

what I have been told, the arguments about the existence of God have

positive and negative arguments... of course they would... right?... I

for one, based on the evidence, believe that God exists. Why? Because

'I' didn't do any of this... someone had to 'tell' me. Get me? >>

 

This gives me an occasion to clarify my english, a way i have to learn

it. And i must thanks dharma for helping clarifying the meaaning of

"lest". Here is a post i sent to her, that reformulates my last post to

this list.

 

______

 

Hello Dharma,

 

I really do learn my english with you, thank you.

 

Effectively, i did not know the definition of lest.

 

"Do not judge, lest you be judged"

 

Rang more in my french mind as:

 

"Do not judge, let yourself be judged".

 

But even so, in a less subtle way,

 

"Do not judge, so that you won't be judged."

 

Stills rings to my mind as

 

"Do not judge, let yourself be judged"

 

Like you say it "seems to carry a sense of Karma. Action and reaction."

 

"Is there a level of awareness where there is no lest to be judged? If

so, how can ethic _lead_ me towards it?"

 

So i will reformulate my proposition:

 

Is there a level of awareness where there is no sense of Karma? If so,

how can ethic or a karma bearing proposition lead me towards it?

 

Thank you again for coming back on my english. I will go read

Shakespeare again with new eyes knowing that lest is not short for let

yourself.

 

Antoine

[Guest guest]

Antoine wrote:

> Thank you again for coming back on my english. I will go read

> Shakespeare again with new eyes knowing that lest is not short for let

> yourself.

 

Shakespeare?

If you keep reading that stuff we'll never know what you're trying to say.

 

Translation: To us contemporary english speaking folk,

Shakespeare may as well have been French.

 

Bon Jour,

David

[Guest guest]

Antoine wrote:

> Thank you again for coming back on my english. I will go read

> Shakespeare again with new eyes knowing that lest is not short for let

> yourself.

>

> Antoine

>

 

Ho Ho! Another Shakespeare fan. I think that Shakespeare was one of the

greatest writters I have ever read. Never have I seen so many truths wrapped

up into so few words... His work is like that flower of enlightenment,

meaning over meaning under meaning in and out and through...

 

Regards.

 

Tim Harris

[Guest guest]

On Sun, 27 Jun 1999 13:01:00 -0400 David Bozzi <david.bozzi

writes:

>David Bozzi <david.bozzi

>

>Antoine wrote:

>

>> Thank you again for coming back on my english. I will go read

>> Shakespeare again with new eyes knowing that lest is not short for

>let

>> yourself.

>

>Shakespeare?

>If you keep reading that stuff we'll never know what you're trying to

>say.

>

>Translation: To us contemporary english speaking folk,

>Shakespeare may as well have been French.

>

>Bon Jour,

>David

>

I disagree, David -- old

Shakey Bill, along with the

redoubtable KJV, is the

very wellspring of

"contemporary english."

 

 

http://www.users.uniserve.com/~samuel/brucemrg.htm

http://www.users.uniserve.com/~samuel/brucsong.htm

m(_ _)m

_

 

_________________

Get the Internet just the way you want it.

Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!

Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.

[Guest guest]

Bruce Morgen wrote:

> I disagree, David -- old

> Shakey Bill, along with the

> redoubtable KJV, is the

> very wellspring of

> "contemporary english."

 

God is the very wellspring of who we are yet

how well do we understand god?

[Guest guest]

Jelke Wispelwey wrote:

> To me, perception tells me what is 'here, now', instincts are from the

> past.

 

Really?

How long did it take the light that brings you images

to reach your eyes?

 

All of our experience is the past.

Instincts, desires, dreams too.

 

What is truly now?

(don't worry, I'm with you for that one)

[Guest guest]

"Christiana P. Duranczyk" wrote:

> Is there an ethic which traverses levels of Awareness?

 

David:

> What is truly now?

 

Antoine

[Guest guest]

David Bozzi wrote:

>

> David Bozzi <david.bozzi

>

> Jelke Wispelwey wrote:

>

> > To me, perception tells me what is 'here, now', instincts are from the

> > past.

>

> Really?

> How long did it take the light that brings you images

> to reach your eyes?

 

Some a nano-second, others many light-years!

> All of our experience is the past.

> Instincts, desires, dreams too.

>

> What is truly now?

> (don't worry, I'm with you for that one)

 

The 'truly' now turns out to be an imaginary dividing line between the

past and the future. Are you with me?!

Question: What then happens to 'me', here and now? Squeezed into

nothing??

>

> --------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ----------------------------

>

> What do fashion and football have in common?

>

> They both have communities at ONElist. Find yours today!

>

> ------

[Guest guest]

Jelke Wispelwey wrote:

> > How long did it take the light that brings you images

> > to reach your eyes?

>

> Some a nano-second, others many light-years!

 

Right.

So perception is always the past & consequently always limited.

> > What is truly now?

> > (don't worry, I'm with you for that one)

>

> The 'truly' now turns out to be an imaginary dividing line between the

> past and the future. Are you with me?!

 

Past, present, future all imaginary. Yes.

Being attuned to the present, though, is like practice for paradise.

> Question: What then happens to 'me', here and now? Squeezed into

> nothing??

 

'Squeezed' suggests boundary.

But yes, I'm with you. ; )

 

David

[Guest guest]

On Sun, 27 Jun 1999 13:38:11 -0400 David Bozzi <david.bozzi

writes:

>David Bozzi <david.bozzi

>

>Bruce Morgen wrote:

>

>> I disagree, David -- old

>> Shakey Bill, along with the

>> redoubtable KJV, is the

>> very wellspring of

>> "contemporary english."

>

>God is the very wellspring of who we are yet

>how well do we understand god?

>

Point taken.

 

_________________

Get the Internet just the way you want it.

Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!

Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.