Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

13776Re: [Meditation Society of America] Qualified non-dualism or non-dualism

Expand Messages
  • jasonjamesmorgan
    Apr 3, 2005
      Hello,

      Thanks for playing with me.



      > Your question remains moot
      > -- the closing elaboration
      > is just plain silly. There
      > are organisms and there is
      > awareness, which is only
      > nominally owned by
      > organisms.

      This is qualified non-dualsim.




      > Yes, and also of course a
      > sage. His "sheltered" status
      > facilitated both -- those of
      > us with householder
      > responsibilities don't have
      > the option of acting out
      > non-duality so overtly.
      >

      Was not Ramana a housholder before he left. This seems a copout, and
      an insult to ramanas greatness. Of course indian society does
      support the renuciates. But if you were so inclined, you could
      renounce the world here in the west as well. Homeless shelters would
      feed you and house you, etc.

      This is my point, westerners need to realize the difference between
      qualified non-dualsim and non-dualism.

      The difference between tasting sugar(qualified non-dualism) and being
      sugar(non-dual)

      non-dualism is ramana.
      qualified non-dualism is ramakrishna
      A hipocrit who says he is sugar, but really tastes sugar is Papaji.

      There is nothing wrong with tasting the sugar. Unless they delude
      themselves with papaji teachings and only talk the talk, and dont
      walk the walk.

      Much love
      Namaste
      Om Namah Shivaya
      Jason James Morgan
    • Show all 16 messages in this topic