|
|
Post by Reefs on Nov 5, 2013 4:23:03 GMT -5
Is Steve running this forum now?
lol
|
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Nov 5, 2013 4:30:03 GMT -5
unmoderated version
|
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Nov 5, 2013 4:32:41 GMT -5
Is Steve running this forum now? lol (** the body of muttley dutifully waves in sympathetic resonance to the movement of his tail **) |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Nov 5, 2013 4:49:51 GMT -5
This forum really only knows extremes.  |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Nov 5, 2013 5:08:22 GMT -5
It's not possible to position a post out of chronological order, so instead I created a new thread with a No Attack name and shifted all the posts over to the new thread. Ta Daaa! P Thanks Pete! (** glances around nervously **)  Here, I'll repeat what I put in the Meta-Awareness thread here: To my eye there are several ongoing conversations here that don't belong in a no-attack thread (for example, most of my jokes at Andy's expense!), so I'll remind everyone that there's nothing personal or shameful about having content moved -- it's not a judgement on the poster, just a mechanism to vary the potential user experience over the forum. That's ridiculous changing the thread title after 43 pages. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Nov 5, 2013 5:13:50 GMT -5
This forum really only knows extremes.  |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Nov 5, 2013 5:17:16 GMT -5
Thanks Pete! (** glances around nervously **) Here, I'll repeat what I put in the Meta-Awareness thread here: To my eye there are several ongoing conversations here that don't belong in a no-attack thread (for example, most of my jokes at Andy's expense!), so I'll remind everyone that there's nothing personal or shameful about having content moved -- it's not a judgement on the poster, just a mechanism to vary the potential user experience over the forum. That's ridiculous changing the thread title after 43 pages. Regardless if it should be the policy moving forward I'd step-up to it in the context of a transition anyway. I could anticipate someone making that decision after seeing the thread move away from where they'd intended it to go, but it does make for an interesting situation with the personal conversations with momentum all their own already running. |
|
|
|
Post by tzujanli on Nov 5, 2013 6:24:41 GMT -5
Greetings.. Greetings.. 'Duality' is the fundamental condition that allows 'you' to discern the components/parts that compose the imagery you 'think' is the illusion you see through.. duality is the fundamental principle that creates the contrast between what is 'seen', and what is on the other side of 'seen through'.. If it is not 'realized' that the bulk of the discussions advocating non-duality/oneness are conceived from imagined meanings assigned to actual happenings, then.. the endless banter of trying to convince believers that their beliefs are valid will never move past the search for non-believers with whom to try to convince the beliefs of oneness/non-duality are valid.. it is not the non-believers that the oneness advocates seek to convince, it is themselves.. they are ever aware that they are not that which they imagine, that they are not those that do not agree with their imagined beliefs, so.. they remain stuck in an identity loop, attached to the beliefs they have imagined, and aware that it is they that have imagined the beliefs.. The still mind remains open and unattached, fully present.. while the active attached mind is compelled to talk endlessly about the illusions it can conjure.. Be well.. That's just it, there is no "more".. even the desired effect of your transparent sarcasm is too much, and by 'too much' i am referring to your 'desire'.. Be well.. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Nov 5, 2013 20:39:42 GMT -5
I'll take that as a yes. So you think just the recognition of being alive, awake (not in the speerichull sense), is just a play of ideas. Do you exist? I was actually just regurgitating Andrewism. I'm surprised you didn't get that. If you are interested in futher details of how far the 'ALL' goes you hafta ask Andrew.  edit: <steve> I'm ignoring forum rules for now and having a conversation with Max. LOL </steve> |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Nov 5, 2013 23:53:40 GMT -5
<steve> I'm ignoring forum rules for now and having a conversation with Enigma. LOL </steve> There aren't actually regular club working days, are there? It seems the anti club folks have a more rigid schedule. The club has to be on duty 24/7. You never know when the beliefs of a fellow member will need to be supported. You HAVE read the club rules, haven't you?  |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Nov 6, 2013 1:54:43 GMT -5
That's ridiculous changing the thread title after 43 pages. Regardless if it should be the policy moving forward I'd step-up to it in the context of a transition anyway. I could anticipate someone making that decision after seeing the thread move away from where they'd intended it to go, but it does make for an interesting situation with the personal conversations with momentum all their own already running. I guess I just don't understand how you could act so quickly on Steve's latest whim. Maybe that was just a whim too. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 6, 2013 9:39:06 GMT -5
I'll take that as a yes. So you think just the recognition of being alive, awake (not in the speerichull sense), is just a play of ideas. Do you exist? I was actually just regurgitating Andrewism. I'm surprised you didn't get that. If you are interested in futher details of how far the 'ALL' goes you hafta ask Andrew. edit: <steve> I'm ignoring forum rules for now and having a conversation with Max. LOL </steve> Oh yea, I dint git that. 'It's all a play of idears' sounds a lot like 'it's all imaginary' or somesuch. The 'all' in either statements was niggling away. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Nov 6, 2013 20:30:07 GMT -5
I was actually just regurgitating Andrewism. I'm surprised you didn't get that. If you are interested in futher details of how far the 'ALL' goes you hafta ask Andrew. edit: <steve> I'm ignoring forum rules for now and having a conversation with Max. LOL </steve> Oh yea, I dint git that. 'It's all a play of idears' sounds a lot like 'it's all imaginary' or somesuch. The 'all' in either statements was niggling away. Yes, it's all imagination. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Nov 6, 2013 21:57:48 GMT -5
Regardless if it should be the policy moving forward I'd step-up to it in the context of a transition anyway. I could anticipate someone making that decision after seeing the thread move away from where they'd intended it to go, but it does make for an interesting situation with the personal conversations with momentum all their own already running. I guess I just don't understand how you could act so quickly on Steve's latest whim. Maybe that was just a whim too. The question of redesignation was bound to come up at some point ...  ... attribute the rapid response to my spending too much time on line the other day! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 7, 2013 10:29:31 GMT -5
Oh yea, I dint git that. 'It's all a play of idears' sounds a lot like 'it's all imaginary' or somesuch. The 'all' in either statements was niggling away. Yes, it's all imagination. Knowing, being, seeing..... |
|
