... D: The reactions pro and con are with words, to other words said in contexts. There is no pro and con to being. Not even an if is involved, and thus, noMessage 1 of 48 , Oct 19, 2011View Source--- In email@example.com, "walto" <calhorn@...> wrote:
>D: The reactions pro and con
> --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "dan330033" <dan330033@> wrote:
> > The truth one is, can't be wrong.
> > Hence, it is never right.
> > Simply being.
> > Not a matter of presentation to others.
> > Being is - without an other to teach it, or to teach it to.
> > Words being exchanged in a social context, either fit that context well, or don't.
> > Did UG fit well the social contexts in which he spoke?
> > Did JK, did Ramana, did Jesus --
> > It's all a matter of perspective, of reactions, pro and con.
> If there is but one, there are no reactions pro and con.
are with words, to other words said in contexts.
There is no pro and con to being.
Not even an "if" is involved, and thus, no "then" ...
Not the word or idea of presence.
Being ... itself.
> > Yet, this being is not formed by or into a perspective.D: Or ... "as this is one" ...
> > Thus, one can say it is all perspectives, past, present, future, and all contexts in which perspectives arise, simultaneously.
> If there is but one there are neither contexts nor perspectives.
As this is one, here is not a perspective or
proposition to be explained.
Perspectives are imagined, along with the sense of "I" ...
(including the perspective "as this is one ..."
> > Or, one can say this involves no perspective to have or to impart - including any imagined "perspective of no perspective" ...As this is one, no separated self or other has ever emerged.
> Yes, one actually should because that's what follows, and as it's patently false, others (and there are others or we would not be discussing, because there could be no discussion) should reject it as nonsense.
Just this unborn being, as is.
True and false are categories of thought, for beings imagined as perspectives.
It takes a perspective to formulate what is true in contrast to what is false.
- D -
________________________________ From: Yahoo User To: email@example.com Sent: Saturday, November 5, 2011 8:26 PMMessage 48 of 48 , Nov 5, 2011View Source
From: Yahoo User <sanjivs77@...>
Sent: Saturday, November 5, 2011 8:26 PM
Subject: [Meditation Society of America] Re: A Most Unusual Deathbed SceneSean,
Thank you for expressing what I (and I assume many others) have been thinking for a long time. I value most of the posts on this forum and really appreciate all the work Bob has put in. But the few you mention seem to be in love with seeing their names on the forum associated with repetitive posts, which they may think come from an exalted state of enlightenment but are quite meaningless to lesser mortals like me. Sandeep seems to think that nothing matters, so I would ask - why bother posting here ??
-------------LOL.It is precisely because nothing matters, hence the pixelings.Incidentally, neither nothing matters............ nor......... nothing does not matter.
There was also a mention of the term "meaningless".
Meaningless is as much a meaning as any other meaning.
Hence an expression of the same creativity of thought...... which is the sense of a mind....... a sense of an individuated self.After all the sense of a a meaning (even of meaningless) ...
....has to co-exist with the sense of the entity......... for which the meaning(even of meaningless)...
..is a held meaning.
That........ to which neither a meaning, nor meaningless can be attributed....
.....cannot be referenced by even the term "That".
Or by these very pixels.