Dryball discussion of LOVE
About: dry balls & dry biscuits
Tags
- pellick
- dryball
- dry biscuit
- dry balls
- love
- the word love
- love thyself
Comments
Mark de LA says
A hint of but different:
A hint of but different:
Mark de LA says
Maybe move it somewhere else – you have missed the point! I like the 
thought, but context is everything & love is undefinable – almost a sleevejob – worshipped by poets, touted by religionists & Newagies & the people at Contrived Platitudes & singers & said in one way or another to people we meet.
No 2 people have the same definition or experience of whatever it is. Somewhere I have Werner Erhards def which is similar to a sleevejob – ontologically [sic] I mean what you mean when you say the words “I love you” – (reflective & empty & meaningless!) – niceness!
← the fortune cookie of life
2016-04-11 05:51:57 [item 20781#51049]
True love is most excellent and especially love of self, for only in loving oneself completely and unconditionally can one one truly love another in an uncluttered way. This is the doorway to knowing one’s complete self … the slightest resistance to loving oneself in any way becomes an ink blot that spreads and covers a whole quadrant of one’s awareness.
thought, but context is everything & love is undefinable – almost a sleevejob – worshipped by poets, touted by religionists & Newagies & the people at Contrived Platitudes & singers & said in one way or another to people we meet.No 2 people have the same definition or experience of whatever it is. Somewhere I have Werner Erhards def which is similar to a sleevejob – ontologically [sic] I mean what you mean when you say the words “I love you” – (reflective & empty & meaningless!) – niceness!
← the fortune cookie of life
Mark de LA says
Nathan, that sounds like your peculiar kind of “love”. I would hesitate to generalize it to others.
Lots of people talk about undefinable words, & bandy them about & pretend they point to something from sublime to the ridiculous – one of my favorite ones is unbornedness – perhaps the ultimate that can’t be put inside a box. Zen is full of them. Nirvana being just one of the top of my head. Kindly make a new thought about it somewhere else. BTW, the most amusing, illusive word, like love, is sleevejob.
2016-04-11 05:51:57 [item 20781#51049]
True love is most excellent and especially love of self, for only in loving oneself completely and unconditionally can one one truly love another in an uncluttered way. This is the doorway to knowing one’s complete self … the slightest resistance to loving oneself in any way becomes an ink blot that spreads and covers a whole quadrant of one’s awareness.
2016-04-12 00:30:41 [item 20781#51083]
Nathan, that sounds like your peculiar kind of “love”. I would hesitate to generalize it to others.
2016-04-12 03:57:51 [item 20781#51084]
I would hesitate to qualify love and put it in a box. In fact, I defiantly would not. If love in your world is thus qualified, then it is not love. It is only a trunk or a leg or a tail, not the elephant.
..Yep still at it folks – this thought is NO LONGER about Being of Beings Being.
-
Lots of people talk about undefinable words, & bandy them about & pretend they point to something from sublime to the ridiculous – one of my favorite ones is unbornedness – perhaps the ultimate that can’t be put inside a box. Zen is full of them. Nirvana being just one of the top of my head. Kindly make a new thought about it somewhere else.
BTW, the most amusing, illusive word, like love, is sleevejob.
Mark de LA says
Nate’s RWG shit!
2016-04-12 08:59:37 [item 20781#51091]
You can always tell now when Mark is making a drive by statement that even he knows in his heart is not a spoken truth. He invariably terminates those threads. When there is truth in what he says, he leaves them open for comment. 
Mark de LA says
I finally found the appropriate group for this shit! 
2016-04-12 09:04:18 [item 20781#51093]
Don’t take my word for it … no RWG required. Simply look and feel. You’ll notice how the threads Mark terminates, like that last one about RWG, don’t ring true. And how the one’s he doesn’t have that true feeling to them. It’s as plain as the text in the FBI posts … my opinion not required. 
Seth says
?
2016-04-12 08:51:34 [item 20781#51087]
thanks, mark, for fixing your complaint … ya !
ya ! 2016-04-12 08:53:22 [item 20781#51088]
Next time I just curate!
2016-04-12 08:53:56 [item 20781#51089]
2016-04-12 09:54:42 [item 20781#51096]
well when mark made this dialog independent of his excellent focus, … me, i got a little twinge of given, and received. ← just an example of what we are talking about … this thingy happening in the wilds as it were.
given, and received. ← just an example of what we are talking about … this thingy happening in the wilds as it were. 2016-04-12 09:58:14 [item 20781#51097]
? thanks to the wizzard
& tiger for making it possible – that which was not possible in fbi1 
& tiger for making it possible – that which was not possible in fbi1
Mark de LA says
?
2016-04-12 11:05:55 [item 20781#51100]
of course, group pellick is your closed group … oh sure the dialogue can continue in the thought … but some may cop an aug re the context you have composed here. Context being King … this is a peculiar kind of context given to us, very much dripping with an unconditional love of mark’s expression. Now, i understand, and i have no such aug with speaking my mind re a deep dimension of my soul even within this context. But that is just me. we see what happens else wise ...
2016-04-12 11:12:28 [item 20781#51101]
So what? What can’t you do that you want to do in the way of commenting & editing? I could request making it open, but then what. Pellick is a very characteristic designation. !
2016-04-12 11:18:39 [item 20781#51102]
well like i said (or thought i implied) that *I* don’t have a problem with the context of the group or even the context in the thought the dialogued was projected into … it is so very mark … which i accept … almost unconditionally. “So what?” for me = so no problem. Else wise, we will see …
Mark de LA says
What I see is that you have not come to the place where you agree with N & he is going to repeat himself over & over till you do. 
2016-04-12 08:36:36 [item 20781#51086]
Yep, “love” is just a 4 lettered English word which does not necessarily point to the same thing in each of us. It is touted as the “highest” human emotion … ok, i can go with that … but the “highest” emotion that i have does not depend on me being its object as Nathan described about his highest emotion. That is not me putting “love” in a box … just me recognizing that it is something different in each of us. How could it be otherwise since in that deepest dimension, we are each of us so very unique and free to be defined by ourselves.
I recognize something that i call “love”, which does not have the characteristics that Nathan says about what he calls “love”. ← that is all i am saying.
I recognize something that i call “love”, which does not have the characteristics that Nathan says about what he calls “love”. ← that is all i am saying.
2016-04-12 08:56:08 [item 20781#51090]
Actually, love is one of the few words which does point to the same thing in all beings … it is only that most humans have drawn artificial boxes around it. Most things humans experience are their own creation of it, love is not. Love is a universal aspect of reality itself, like The Law of Attraction, and the temperature absolute zero, and the speed of light. There is one aspect of love that once you frame love that way, you will undeniably agree it is truth. Most subjects we can talk about would not be that way. The above statement I made is only a contextual twinkle of it of course.
2016-04-12 09:10:44 [item 20781#51095]
except then *i* do not love, because my loving does not require “loving myself completely and unconditionally” … my love of others is independent of my love of myself. So you have cast me out of what in your story is called “love”. Do you see a problem with that story?
2016-04-12 11:51:16 [item 20781#51104]
What I see is that you have not come to the place where you feel how loving others IS loving yourself. People start out in a place where those seem separate. Eventually people reach a place where they no longer are separate. Once taken, that journey arrives at the same place for anyone who does take it. It is simply what I see from the perspective I have shifted to. I don’t see it or myself as better than you in any way. I am simply standing here and looking and you are standing there and looking and I tell you truthfully what I see, just as you tell it truthful what you see.
Mark de LA says
?
2016-04-12 08:36:36 [item 20781#51086]
Yep, “love” is just a 4 lettered English word which does not necessarily point to the same thing in each of us. It is touted as the “highest” human emotion … ok, i can go with that … but the “highest” emotion that i have does not depend on me being its object as Nathan described about his highest emotion. That is not me putting “love” in a box … just me recognizing that it is something different in each of us. How could it be otherwise since in that deepest dimension, we are each of us so very unique and free to be defined by ourselves.
I recognize something that i call “love”, which does not have the characteristics that Nathan says about what he calls “love”. ← that is all i am saying.
I recognize something that i call “love”, which does not have the characteristics that Nathan says about what he calls “love”. ← that is all i am saying.
2016-04-12 08:56:08 [item 20781#51090]
Actually, love is one of the few words which does point to the same thing in all beings … it is only that most humans have drawn artificial boxes around it. Most things humans experience are their own creation of it, love is not. Love is a universal aspect of reality itself, like The Law of Attraction, and the temperature absolute zero, and the speed of light. There is one aspect of love that once you frame love that way, you will undeniably agree it is truth. Most subjects we can talk about would not be that way. The above statement I made is only a contextual twinkle of it of course.
2016-04-12 09:10:44 [item 20781#51095]
except then *i* do not love, because my loving does not require “loving myself completely and unconditionally” … my love of others is independent of my love of myself. So you have cast me out of what in your story is called “love”. Do you see a problem with that story?
2016-04-12 11:51:16 [item 20781#51104]
What I see is that you have not come to the place where you feel how loving others IS loving yourself. People start out in a place where those seem separate. Eventually people reach a place where they no longer are separate. Once taken, that journey arrives at the same place for anyone who does take it. It is simply what I see from the perspective I have shifted to. I don’t see it or myself as better than you in any way. I am simply standing here and looking and you are standing there and looking and I tell you truthfully what I see, just as you tell it truthful what you see.
2016-04-12 12:36:01 [item 20781#51106]
okay … all true … and quite symetic, you standing there , me standing here.
thing is me, i have this love of the specific … a love which kind of precludes the same relationship to myself being to another. oh sure its qualia could feel the same … as in-you, you say “it does” … but in-me the two kinds of relationships are not at all connected by necessity, they happen independently and do not even feel the same. So your prediction that “the journey arrives at the same place” might just be based upon a presumed generalization ,which me thinks does not, and probably never will, generalize to me. ← you might wonder what you get out of claiming that it will.
thing is me, i have this love of the specific … a love which kind of precludes the same relationship to myself being to another. oh sure its qualia could feel the same … as in-you, you say “it does” … but in-me the two kinds of relationships are not at all connected by necessity, they happen independently and do not even feel the same. So your prediction that “the journey arrives at the same place” might just be based upon a presumed generalization ,which me thinks does not, and probably never will, generalize to me. ← you might wonder what you get out of claiming that it will.
Mark de LA says
or disturb your illusion. enjoy the glow!
2016-04-12 12:46:31 [item 20781#51108]
Mark’s drive by selfies are making this an uninteresting conversation. I have no desire to speak around them today. If you want to continue this in a more private venue that would be okay … and not is okay too if you wish.
2016-04-12 12:48:21 [item 20781#51109]
e.g. what happens when N doesn’t get a reflection of himself in conversations!
2016-04-12 12:49:36 [item 20781#51111]
Maybe it disturbs the nation/illusion that he creates his entire universe
2016-04-12 12:53:02 [item 20781#51116]
Maybe it is just tiresome and uses up energy I would rather put in places that replenish me instead.
Seth says
too obvious and too non specific for any interesting qualia to emerge in me
2016-04-12 12:46:31 [item 20781#51108]
Mark’s drive by selfies are making this an uninteresting conversation. I have no desire to speak around them today. If you want to continue this in a more private venue that would be okay … and not is okay too if you wish.
2016-04-12 12:48:32 [item 20781#51110]
?
2016-04-12 12:52:52 [item 20781#51115]
Too bad you folks didn’t do that in the first place instead of graffiti on my original item. 
2016-04-12 12:54:10 [item 20781#51118]
Authentic expression is not graffiti.
2016-04-12 12:54:54 [item 20781#51119]
try some then
!
!
Mark de LA says
… good play … kudos …. er, wait a moment …. an aug context trumps a love context? ← is that seriously fucked or am I ?Depends if you like pellick or not. Some like haggis, bolutes & Surstromming & munging! It is a matter of taste!
2016-04-12 12:46:31 [item 20781#51108]
Mark’s drive by selfies are making this an uninteresting conversation. I have no desire to speak around them today. If you want to continue this in a more private venue that would be okay … and not is okay too if you wish.
2016-04-12 12:48:21 [item 20781#51109]
e.g. what happens when N doesn’t get a reflection of himself in conversations!
2016-04-12 12:49:54 [item 20781#51112]
anyway, mark, i predicted this …. Context is King … ← i am sure i am not the first to say it.
2016-04-12 12:51:06 [item 20781#51113]
Pellick trumps Kingship
2016-04-12 12:52:47 [item 20781#51114]
… good play … kudos …. er, wait a moment …. an aug context trumps a love context? ← is that seriously fucked or am I ?
Si says
I have no care about who is counting words or last ones. I was hoping to have more dialog about the importance of allowing creativity and expression to blossom instead of choking it with attempted laws and traditions and right of property. Even Steiner was against ownership of property both for economic and social health reasons.
I have been in the back alleys around Walgrove. Any artistic expression in them would have been an improvement and benefit to all. It would have allowed children and gangs an outlet for their many creative desires which are suppressed by traditional society. Vandalism is intent to do harm, to get back at the system, to gain some measure of power in a system where every whim and desire is being suppressed and resisted. Graffiti is not always vandalism and quite often can be amazing art. People should be allowed to follow their excitement. If they were, a harmonious balance would soon be reached that would benefit all. It takes a lot of repression to keep the natural order of harmony out of kilter.
https://www.graffiti.org/faq/stowers.html
2016-04-12 12:46:31 [item 20781#51108]
Mark’s drive by selfies are making this an uninteresting conversation. I have no desire to speak around them today. If you want to continue this in a more private venue that would be okay … and not is okay too if you wish.
2016-04-12 12:48:32 [item 20781#51110]
?
2016-04-12 12:52:52 [item 20781#51115]
Too bad you folks didn’t do that in the first place instead of graffiti on my original item.
2016-04-12 12:54:10 [item 20781#51118]
Authentic expression is not graffiti.
2016-04-12 12:56:07 [item 20781#51120]
?
2016-04-12 13:59:48 [item 20781#51123]
Graffiti is not only what or who, but where. V13 use to write their names on the back of Walgrove & on their side fence. I am fairly sure they were authentically expressing who they are (asssholes!)
2016-04-12 14:59:30 [item 20781#51127]
That looks to me like an ugly bunch of concrete transformed into a beautiful expression of human creativity. I’m not sure what your problem is.
2016-04-12 15:14:53 [item 20781#51129]
I have been in the back alleys around Walgrove. Any artistic expression in them would have been an improvement and benefit to all. It would have allowed children and gangs an outlet for their many creative desires which are suppressed by traditional society. Vandalism is intent to do harm, to get back at the system, to gain some measure of power in a system where every whim and desire is being suppressed and resisted. Graffiti is not always vandalism and quite often can be amazing art. People should be allowed to follow their excitement. If they were, a harmonious balance would soon be reached that would benefit all. It takes a lot of repression to keep the natural order of harmony out of kilter.
https://www.graffiti.org/faq/stowers.html
See Also
- Thought Love - Lying with 284 viewings related by tag "love".
- Thought Thinking in the Public River with 152 viewings related by tag "love".
- Thought #PseudoSpiritualPellick #FauxPellick with 144 viewings related by tag "pellick".
- Thought Golden Rule with 64 viewings related by tag "love".
- Thought What is the fear of losing control? with 31 viewings related by tag "love".
- Thought [title (25536)] with 29 viewings related by tag "love".
- Thought I am what i do with 28 viewings related by tag "love".
- Thought Thinking Domains as Assistive Technology with 21 viewings related by tag "love".
- Thought Contrast ... with 18 viewings related by tag "love".
- Thought Bookmarks Love with 15 viewings related by tag "love".
- Thought Religion of Love vs Hate with 14 viewings related by tag "love".
- Thought Tostada with 14 viewings related by tag "love".
- Thought Triangle of Love (Bhakti Yoga) with 12 viewings related by tag "love".
- Thought I love fastblogit. with 9 viewings related by tag "love".
- Thought Stepping in Dog Shit (caution romantics!) with 8 viewings related by tag "love".
- Thought Sameness of thought with 6 viewings related by tag "love".
- Thought All of Me Loves All of You with 3 viewings related by tag "love".
- Thought Cooperate vs Fight (and/or) Love vs Death with 2 viewings related by tag "love".
- Thought Song of the year with 1 viewings related by tag "love".
- Thought Love with 1 viewings related by tag "love".
- Thought Graffiti Synergy-LOA with 1 viewings related by tag "pellick".
- Thought Kids of America with 1 viewings related by tag "love".
- Thought about: Her secret story matters. She might hold the key to planetary transformation with 1 viewings related by tag "love".
- Thought Terrorists have no Human Rights! with 1 viewings related by tag "love".
- Thought God with 0 viewings related by tag "love".
- Thought Love by Declaration - Erhard with 0 viewings related by tag "love".
- Thought Love is blind with 0 viewings related by tag "love".
- Thought How does one create references to tags in their own group? with 0 viewings related by tag "love".
- Thought "love" with 0 viewings related by tag "love".
- Thought Agreement with 0 viewings related by tag "love".
- Thought Only know you love her when you let her go with 0 viewings related by tag "love".
- Thought What Attracts Someone to ISLAM? with 0 viewings related by tag "love".
- Thought [title (18175)] with 0 viewings related by tag "love".