|
|
Post by laughter on Jun 23, 2017 21:38:26 GMT -5
Oh, ok, were you serious? Seriously?  Do you want me to go back, take it seriously and reply to it as if it wasn't a joke? I mean, no worries dude. I'll be glad to. But first you have to unequivocally say that you weren't joking, ok?  I'm just confused. Wow. Really?? I mean ... that like .. never happens with you satch'. I'm surprised man.  But .. like, are you so confused that you don't remember if you were joking or not?? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2017 21:50:28 GMT -5
Wow. Really?? I mean ... that like .. never happens with you satch'. I'm surprised man. But .. like, are you so confused that you don't remember if you were joking or not?? Oh it happens. Like I was in a washroom at London Heathrow airport and the water coming out of the taps was scalding hot. There was even a sign warning that the water was hot. Why was the water so hot that you couldn't wash your hands. Now that confused me. Why didn't they have cooler water? I'm still confused about that. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Jun 23, 2017 22:03:58 GMT -5
Wow. Really?? I mean ... that like .. never happens with you satch'. I'm surprised man. But .. like, are you so confused that you don't remember if you were joking or not?? Oh it happens. Like I was in a washroom at London Heathrow airport and the water coming out of the taps was scalding hot. There was even a sign warning that the water was hot. Why was the water so hot that you couldn't wash your hands. Now that confused me. Why didn't they have cooler water? I'm still confused about that. Is that why your satchickamanda thingy is red now? |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 23, 2017 22:32:34 GMT -5
Yes, that's what I've been trying to explain to you. Are we clear now? As long as one or the other of you agrees that the other one has been explaining it correctly all along, it will be all clear. Otherwise, just unending speaking past each other. Obviously. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2017 22:33:53 GMT -5
Oh it happens. Like I was in a washroom at London Heathrow airport and the water coming out of the taps was scalding hot. There was even a sign warning that the water was hot. Why was the water so hot that you couldn't wash your hands. Now that confused me. Why didn't they have cooler water? I'm still confused about that. Is that why your satchickamanda thingy is red now? It looks more like a subliminal representation of his instruction.. The answer is that this discussion is getting in the way of experiencing so stop it now! |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 23, 2017 22:33:57 GMT -5
He never spoke about something he never spoke about. Apparently, he spoke about axeing. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 23, 2017 22:36:03 GMT -5
The sense of existing is not a false I. Sugar and sand mixed together still tastes sweet. Wet footprints in the sand. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jun 23, 2017 22:36:10 GMT -5
Come on Laffy. You know that's not true. That Niz used the phrase "I am" to refer to the simple sense of aliveness unassociated with ego or really, even a sense of division of any sort is exactly what I have been saying incessantly since I arrived here and will continue to say. It's very clear from what I write. I'm actually quite shocked you would suggest otherwise. So is that like a sense of humor test?  Sorry dude, this one takes first place tonight.  I just have my phone right now, and it won't let me link. But I will say, satch needs to go back and read some of his own posts. ... |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 23, 2017 22:37:43 GMT -5
Attending ego to remove ego. Perhaps you've stumbled onto a new practice? It's as old as the hills. Attending ego strengthens and enhances ego. Don't try this at home, kids. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 23, 2017 22:39:38 GMT -5
If a false I is just a conceptual "I," then, yes, Niz suggests putting it on the chopping block. Is the sense of existing the false I? no. Is the false I rooted in the sense of existence? Yes. How can it not be? What refreshing clarity! He just agreed that nobody has talked about axeing the 'I'. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 23, 2017 22:41:40 GMT -5
Anyone that entertains them . I mean ramana wanted to keep / maintain / attain a level of perfection because the so called high standard dropped off somewhat . It was never going to be maintained forever, it was never mean't to be maintained forever . Bliss can seem to have addictive qualities when it starts to wane .For some, potentially it can become counterproductive in like one is chasing a dream . If peeps believe that they cannot control the outcome or the calling of grace, it would be futile to try and control the outcome after the initial outcome . Does this mean you don't believe in the perpetugasm? GASP!  |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jun 23, 2017 22:44:02 GMT -5
It's as old as the hills. Attending ego strengthens and enhances ego. Don't try this at home, kids. No. Satch is right on this, it takes the energy out of ego-structure. If you don't ~see~ ego, it remains unconsciously active. (Connect this to the new Let's just make this simple, thread). |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 23, 2017 22:45:52 GMT -5
I don't have a problem equating I with ego. 'I am', however, as used by Niz, refers to the sense of existence. I didn't coin the phrase, I'm just using it as Niz did. It neither works for me or doesn't work for me. Pronouns are such treacherous thingys. It's so very confusing for peeps looking for a nice, simple explanation of it all.  Seems like it IS simple. We all have a sense of existing, and we've all created stories about what it is that exists. We don't even have to quote from some teacher to be able to talk about it. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jun 23, 2017 22:54:36 GMT -5
Pronouns are such treacherous thingys. It's so very confusing for peeps looking for a nice, simple explanation of it all. Seems like it IS simple. We all have a sense of existing, and we've all created stories about what it is that exists. We don't even have to quote from some teacher to be able to talk about it. OK, then tell me about this illusory separate self business again, and what SR IS. As most people are not-SR, then most people live-through the illusory self, then wherefrom commeth this "we all have a sense of existing"? We all have a sense of existing from something that doesn't exist? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2017 22:55:18 GMT -5
He just agreed that nobody has talked about axeing the 'I'. No he didn't. He just said Niz did. |
|
Sorry dude, 
