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

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

Expand Messages
  • Bruce Morgen
    ... ...or very canny, given the culture he lived in.... ... A sheltered life doesn t imply physical shelter. ... Thanks for the reassuring instruction.
    Message 1 of 16 , Apr 3, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      jasonjamesmorgan wrote:

      >Hello,
      >
      >You say ramana had a shelterd life. This I dont get. Leaving home,
      >to sit on a mountain side the rest of the life, with no concern for
      >food or shelter????? This is non-dual.
      >
      ...or very canny, given the
      culture he lived in....

      >The ashram was not built
      >around him for many years, who sheltered him before this?
      >
      >
      A "sheltered life" doesn't
      imply physical shelter.

      >Working and paying rent, buying food, having sex etc. this is
      >qualified non-dual"ism". There is no shame in this. Just be real.
      >
      >
      Thanks for the reassuring
      instruction. ;-)

      >Your skillfull avoidence of my questions, I see right thru. Do you
      >accept my awareness? Or am I a figment of your imagination?
      >
      >
      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.

      >Why do you remove the splinter? Because you feel, you are aware of
      >your foot. Was ramana aware of his legs?
      >
      Who knows? Who cares?

      >As for calling him
      >foolish, I know you mean this this in a loving, joking context, but
      >come on. I mean, do you really believe that the satguru for the 1900
      >was a fool?
      >
      >
      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.

      >Namaste
      >Om Namah Shivaya
      >Jason James Morgan
      >
      >
      >
      >--- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Morgen
      ><editor@j...> wrote:
      >
      >
      >>jasonjamesmorgan wrote:
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >>>Hello,
      >>>
      >>>1. If you were to get a splinter in your foot, do you remove it?
      >>>
      >>>
      >>>
      >>Of course!
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >>>Or do you realize there is no foot, no splinter, no pain.
      >>>
      >>>
      >>>
      >>>
      >>That too....
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >>>Ramana sat to close to the fire once and severely burnt his legs.
      >>>
      >>>
      >>>
      >>>
      >>The revered saint was also
      >>a foolish little man in a
      >>dhoti.
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >>>2. I am told you non-dual types believe in nothing.
      >>>
      >>>
      >>>
      >>Who are these "non-dual types?"
      >>Non-duality, being who and what
      >>we are, requires no belief.
      >>Given that as a visceral and
      >>ongoing realization, the psyche
      >>has no need to believe other
      >>than as a simple, situationsal
      >>survival device -- e.g. the
      >>local weather forecast.
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >>>Do you believe
      >>>in yourself? If you only accept your awareness, do you accept
      >>>
      >>>
      >mine?
      >
      >
      >>>
      >>>
      >>>
      >>>
      >>There isn't anything above
      >>that requires belief or
      >>acceptance from here, is
      >>there? There questions
      >>are moot.
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >>>If you accept mine, you must accept God.
      >>>
      >>>
      >>>
      >>See above -- awareness has no
      >>owner, and acceptance isn't
      >>necessary or relevant.
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >>>That in which we live, move
      >>>and have our being.
      >>>
      >>>
      >>>
      >>...aka "maya," the essentially
      >>illusory realm of form, the
      >>manifest universe -- is this
      >>"God?"
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >>>Qualified non-dualism.
      >>>
      >>>
      >>>
      >>>
      >>Iirc, Jesus is reported to have
      >>said," Be thou in this world but
      >>no of it."
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >>>3. Do you accept qualified non-dualism? Or do you only practice
      >>>
      >>>
      >non-
      >
      >
      >>>dualsim?
      >>>
      >>>
      >>>
      >>The suffix "ism" implies a
      >>belief system, therefore the
      >>adherent of "non-dualism" is
      >>a believer more akin to a
      >>conventional religionist than
      >>to the realizer(s) s/he sees
      >>as "guru" or some such.
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >>>If so, do you have sex, enjoy food, etc.?
      >>>
      >>>
      >>>
      >>Yes, intensely. :-P
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >>>The difference
      >>>between tasting sugar and being sugar. Do you act non-dual(ie
      >>>Ramana) or are you a hipocrit and really practice qualified non-
      >>>dualism(ie papaji). Act non-dual as well as talk non-dual.
      >>>
      >>>
      >>>
      >>>
      >>The realizer is human, Ramana
      >>had a sheltered life and the
      >>option of eccentrically
      >>acting out "non-dual" for his
      >>chelas visitors.
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >>>Namaste
      >>>Om Namah Shivaya
      >>>Jason James Morgan
      >>>
      >>>
      >>>
      >>>
      >>Right back atcha!
      >>
      >>
    • jasonjamesmorgan
      Hello, Thanks for playing with me. ... This is qualified non-dualsim. ... Was not Ramana a housholder before he left. This seems a copout, and an insult to
      Message 2 of 16 , Apr 3, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        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
      • Bruce Morgen
        ... OK, label noted. ... No, he went from his parents home directly to renunciation afaik. ... If Bhagavan is insulted, perhaps he ll somehow let me know --
        Message 3 of 16 , Apr 3, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          jasonjamesmorgan wrote:

          >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.
          >
          >
          >
          >
          OK, label noted.

          >
          >
          >
          >>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.
          >
          No, he went from his parents'
          home directly to renunciation
          afaik.

          >This seems a copout, and
          >an insult to ramanas greatness.
          >
          If Bhagavan is insulted,
          perhaps he'll somehow let me
          know -- I'll gladly apologize.
          :-P

          >Of course indian society does
          >support the renuciates.
          >
          Indeed it does.

          >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.
          >
          >
          Free dental care might be a
          nice bonus!

          >This is my point, westerners need to realize the difference between
          >qualified non-dualsim and non-dualism.
          >
          >
          If you say so -- I don't see
          any such need, especially since
          it would be such a remarkable
          event for a Ramana-like course
          of life to occur here in the
          west. The cultural acceptance
          of the sadhu as a respectable,
          even revered member of society
          is what facilitated (along with
          his personal determination, of
          course) the iconic Ramana so
          many of use admire today. I
          would maintain that such would
          not be possible in the west.
          The same goes for the Buddha,
          who also made his livelihood
          with a beggar's bowl -- for
          such a life to occur requires
          tolerance, approval, and support
          from those who must earn their
          daily bread. That is not to be
          had in the cities of America and
          Europe today.

          >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.
          >
          >
          We all taste, even Ramana
          did. Imo he was skillfully
          playing a chosen role as an
          extended teaching device.

          >There is nothing wrong with tasting the sugar.
          >
          There is no choice about it
          -- to be incarnated is to
          taste. Period.

          >Unless they delude
          >themselves with papaji teachings and only talk the talk, and dont
          >walk the walk.
          >
          >
          It seems we are in agreement
          concerning Papaji and his
          several western disciples
          with their untenable reliance
          on Adviataspeak[tm]. :-)

          >Much love
          >Namaste
          >Om Namah Shivaya
          >Jason James Morgan
          >
          >
          ...and to you, sir!
        • jasonjamesmorgan
          Hello, Honestly, I dont feel that being recognized for your renuciation has anything to do with it. What of the dudes that go into the forest, and are never
          Message 4 of 16 , Apr 3, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            Hello,

            Honestly, I dont feel that being recognized for your renuciation has
            anything to do with it. What of the dudes that go into the forest,
            and are never helped. I have heard of one renuciate, who has rich
            family in toronto, but spends his time on the streets of calgary. He
            seemed to me, to be just like any other renuciate you might meet in
            india.

            Although I have found that eating and sleeping with homeless addicts
            is not conducive to sadhana, I do not think it would make it
            impossible. Who knows how many people renounce in north america.
            For as you say, who would be here to revere them. They would go
            unnoticed.

            I know I was not steadfast eneogh to be a renunciate here in
            calgary. But that may be because of my former relation to the
            underground.

            Anyways, much love to you, and thank you for your time.
            I salute you.

            Namaste
            Om Namah Shivaya
            Jason James Morgan



            --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Morgen
            <editor@j...> wrote:
            > jasonjamesmorgan wrote:
            >
            > >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.
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > OK, label noted.
            >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >>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.
            > >
            > No, he went from his parents'
            > home directly to renunciation
            > afaik.
            >
            > >This seems a copout, and
            > >an insult to ramanas greatness.
            > >
            > If Bhagavan is insulted,
            > perhaps he'll somehow let me
            > know -- I'll gladly apologize.
            > :-P
            >
            > >Of course indian society does
            > >support the renuciates.
            > >
            > Indeed it does.
            >
            > >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.
            > >
            > >
            > Free dental care might be a
            > nice bonus!
            >
            > >This is my point, westerners need to realize the difference
            between
            > >qualified non-dualsim and non-dualism.
            > >
            > >
            > If you say so -- I don't see
            > any such need, especially since
            > it would be such a remarkable
            > event for a Ramana-like course
            > of life to occur here in the
            > west. The cultural acceptance
            > of the sadhu as a respectable,
            > even revered member of society
            > is what facilitated (along with
            > his personal determination, of
            > course) the iconic Ramana so
            > many of use admire today. I
            > would maintain that such would
            > not be possible in the west.
            > The same goes for the Buddha,
            > who also made his livelihood
            > with a beggar's bowl -- for
            > such a life to occur requires
            > tolerance, approval, and support
            > from those who must earn their
            > daily bread. That is not to be
            > had in the cities of America and
            > Europe today.
            >
            > >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.
            > >
            > >
            > We all taste, even Ramana
            > did. Imo he was skillfully
            > playing a chosen role as an
            > extended teaching device.
            >
            > >There is nothing wrong with tasting the sugar.
            > >
            > There is no choice about it
            > -- to be incarnated is to
            > taste. Period.
            >
            > >Unless they delude
            > >themselves with papaji teachings and only talk the talk, and dont
            > >walk the walk.
            > >
            > >
            > It seems we are in agreement
            > concerning Papaji and his
            > several western disciples
            > with their untenable reliance
            > on Adviataspeak[tm]. :-)
            >
            > >Much love
            > >Namaste
            > >Om Namah Shivaya
            > >Jason James Morgan
            > >
            > >
            > ...and to you, sir!
          • Greg Goode
            Nice dialoguing, Bruce! --Greg ________________________________ From: Bruce Morgen [mailto:editor@juno.com] Sent: Sunday, April 03, 2005 5:32 PM To:
            Message 5 of 16 , Apr 4, 2005
            • 0 Attachment
              Section 1

              Nice dialoguing, Bruce!

               

              --Greg

               


              From: Bruce Morgen [mailto:editor@...]
              Sent: Sunday, April 03, 2005 5:32 PM
              To: meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: Re: [Meditation Society of America] Qualified non-dualism or non-dualism

               

              jasonjamesmorgan wrote:

              >Hello,
              >
              >Thanks for playing with me.
              >
              >
              >

            • Bruce Morgen
              Thank you, old friend -- and thanks also to that fine Canadian fellow who spells his surname so strangely! :-) Much love -- Bruce
              Message 6 of 16 , Apr 4, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                Thank you, old friend -- and
                thanks also to that fine
                Canadian fellow who spells
                his surname so strangely! :-)

                Much love -- Bruce


                Greg Goode wrote:

                > Nice dialoguing, Bruce!
                >
                >
                >
                > --Greg
                >
                >
                >
                > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                >
                > *From:* Bruce Morgen [mailto:editor@...]
                > *Sent:* Sunday, April 03, 2005 5:32 PM
                > *To:* meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com
                > *Subject:* Re: [Meditation Society of America] Qualified non-dualism
                > or non-dualism
                >
                >
                >
                > jasonjamesmorgan wrote:
                >
                >>Hello,
                >>
                >>Thanks for playing with me.
                >>
                >>
                >
              • Jeff Belyea
                Nice log rolling, Greg. ... or
                Message 7 of 16 , Apr 4, 2005
                • 0 Attachment
                  Nice log rolling, Greg.

                  --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "Greg Goode"
                  <goode@d...> wrote:
                  > Nice dialoguing, Bruce!
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > --Greg
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > ________________________________
                  >
                  > From: Bruce Morgen [mailto:editor@j...]
                  > Sent: Sunday, April 03, 2005 5:32 PM
                  > To: meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com
                  > Subject: Re: [Meditation Society of America] Qualified non-dualism
                  or
                  > non-dualism
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > jasonjamesmorgan wrote:
                  >
                  > >Hello,
                  > >
                  > >Thanks for playing with me.
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                • Bruce Morgen
                  The exchanging of favors or praise, as among artists, critics, or academics, Jeffji? I confess I once attempted to give Gregji an old snare drum, but he
                  Message 8 of 16 , Apr 4, 2005
                  • 0 Attachment
                    "The exchanging of favors or
                    praise, as among artists,
                    critics, or academics," Jeffji?
                    I confess I once attempted to
                    give Gregji an old snare drum,
                    but he turned me down, citing
                    lack of room for it in his
                    apartment.


                    Jeff Belyea wrote:

                    >Nice log rolling, Greg.
                    >
                    >--- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "Greg Goode"
                    ><goode@d...> wrote:
                    >
                    >
                    >>Nice dialoguing, Bruce!
                    >>
                    >>
                    >>
                    >>--Greg
                    >>
                    >>
                    >>
                    >>________________________________
                    >>
                    >>From: Bruce Morgen [mailto:editor@j...]
                    >>Sent: Sunday, April 03, 2005 5:32 PM
                    >>To: meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com
                    >>Subject: Re: [Meditation Society of America] Qualified non-dualism
                    >>
                    >>
                    >or
                    >
                    >
                    >>non-dualism
                    >>
                    >>
                    >>
                    >>jasonjamesmorgan wrote:
                    >>
                    >>
                    >>
                    >>>Hello,
                    >>>
                    >>>Thanks for playing with me.
                    >>>
                    >>>
                    >>>
                  • Jeff Belyea
                    Snare drum: Advaitaspeak (TM)? ... dualism
                    Message 9 of 16 , Apr 4, 2005
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Snare drum: Advaitaspeak (TM)?

                      --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Morgen
                      <editor@j...> wrote:
                      >
                      > "The exchanging of favors or
                      > praise, as among artists,
                      > critics, or academics," Jeffji?
                      > I confess I once attempted to
                      > give Gregji an old snare drum,
                      > but he turned me down, citing
                      > lack of room for it in his
                      > apartment.
                      >
                      >
                      > Jeff Belyea wrote:
                      >
                      > >Nice log rolling, Greg.
                      > >
                      > >--- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "Greg Goode"
                      > ><goode@d...> wrote:
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >>Nice dialoguing, Bruce!
                      > >>
                      > >>
                      > >>
                      > >>--Greg
                      > >>
                      > >>
                      > >>
                      > >>________________________________
                      > >>
                      > >>From: Bruce Morgen [mailto:editor@j...]
                      > >>Sent: Sunday, April 03, 2005 5:32 PM
                      > >>To: meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com
                      > >>Subject: Re: [Meditation Society of America] Qualified non-
                      dualism
                      > >>
                      > >>
                      > >or
                      > >
                      > >
                      > >>non-dualism
                      > >>
                      > >>
                      > >>
                      > >>jasonjamesmorgan wrote:
                      > >>
                      > >>
                      > >>
                      > >>>Hello,
                      > >>>
                      > >>>Thanks for playing with me.
                      > >>>
                      > >>>
                      > >>>
                    • Bruce Morgen
                      Not at all -- I found out that he likes to hit things rhythmically on occasion, so I figured to give him something appropriate for that activity. Sometimes a
                      Message 10 of 16 , Apr 4, 2005
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Not at all -- I found out
                        that he likes to hit things
                        rhythmically on occasion,
                        so I figured to give him
                        something appropriate for
                        that activity. Sometimes a
                        drum is just a drum and a
                        compliment is just a
                        compliment.



                        Jeff Belyea wrote:

                        >Snare drum: Advaitaspeak (TM)?
                        >
                        >--- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Morgen
                        ><editor@j...> wrote:
                        >
                        >
                        >>"The exchanging of favors or
                        >>praise, as among artists,
                        >>critics, or academics," Jeffji?
                        >>I confess I once attempted to
                        >>give Gregji an old snare drum,
                        >>but he turned me down, citing
                        >>lack of room for it in his
                        >>apartment.
                        >>
                        >>
                        >>Jeff Belyea wrote:
                        >>
                        >>
                        >>
                        >>>Nice log rolling, Greg.
                        >>>
                        >>>--- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "Greg Goode"
                        >>><goode@d...> wrote:
                        >>>
                        >>>
                        >>>
                        >>>
                        >>>>Nice dialoguing, Bruce!
                        >>>>
                        >>>>
                        >>>>
                        >>>>--Greg
                        >>>>
                        >>>>
                        >>>>
                        >>>>________________________________
                        >>>>
                        >>>>From: Bruce Morgen [mailto:editor@j...]
                        >>>>Sent: Sunday, April 03, 2005 5:32 PM
                        >>>>To: meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com
                        >>>>Subject: Re: [Meditation Society of America] Qualified non-
                        >>>>
                        >>>>
                        >dualism
                        >
                        >
                        >>>>
                        >>>>
                        >>>>
                        >>>>
                        >>>or
                        >>>
                        >>>
                        >>>
                        >>>
                        >>>>non-dualism
                        >>>>
                        >>>>
                        >>>>
                        >>>>jasonjamesmorgan wrote:
                        >>>>
                        >>>>
                        >>>>
                        >>>>
                        >>>>
                        >>>>>Hello,
                        >>>>>
                        >>>>>Thanks for playing with me.
                        >>>>>
                        >>>>>
                        >>>>>
                      • Jeff Belyea
                        And sometimes a pun is just a pun.
                        Message 11 of 16 , Apr 4, 2005
                        • 0 Attachment
                          And sometimes a pun
                          is just a pun.

                          --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Morgen
                          <editor@j...> wrote:
                          >
                          > Not at all -- I found out
                          > that he likes to hit things
                          > rhythmically on occasion,
                          > so I figured to give him
                          > something appropriate for
                          > that activity. Sometimes a
                          > drum is just a drum and a
                          > compliment is just a
                          > compliment.
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > Jeff Belyea wrote:
                          >
                          > >Snare drum: Advaitaspeak (TM)?
                          > >
                          > >--- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Morgen
                          > ><editor@j...> wrote:
                          > >
                          > >
                          > >>"The exchanging of favors or
                          > >>praise, as among artists,
                          > >>critics, or academics," Jeffji?
                          > >>I confess I once attempted to
                          > >>give Gregji an old snare drum,
                          > >>but he turned me down, citing
                          > >>lack of room for it in his
                          > >>apartment.
                          > >>
                          > >>
                          > >>Jeff Belyea wrote:
                          > >>
                          > >>
                          > >>
                          > >>>Nice log rolling, Greg.
                          > >>>
                          > >>>--- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "Greg Goode"
                          > >>><goode@d...> wrote:
                          > >>>
                          > >>>
                          > >>>
                          > >>>
                          > >>>>Nice dialoguing, Bruce!
                          > >>>>
                          > >>>>
                          > >>>>
                          > >>>>--Greg
                          > >>>>
                          > >>>>
                          > >>>>
                          > >>>>________________________________
                          > >>>>
                          > >>>>From: Bruce Morgen [mailto:editor@j...]
                          > >>>>Sent: Sunday, April 03, 2005 5:32 PM
                          > >>>>To: meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com
                          > >>>>Subject: Re: [Meditation Society of America] Qualified non-
                          > >>>>
                          > >>>>
                          > >dualism
                          > >
                          > >
                          > >>>>
                          > >>>>
                          > >>>>
                          > >>>>
                          > >>>or
                          > >>>
                          > >>>
                          > >>>
                          > >>>
                          > >>>>non-dualism
                          > >>>>
                          > >>>>
                          > >>>>
                          > >>>>jasonjamesmorgan wrote:
                          > >>>>
                          > >>>>
                          > >>>>
                          > >>>>
                          > >>>>
                          > >>>>>Hello,
                          > >>>>>
                          > >>>>>Thanks for playing with me.
                          > >>>>>
                          > >>>>>
                          > >>>>>
                        • Sandeep
                          Yoo-hoo JJM, A somewhat dated post... Some two cents... ... From: jasonjamesmorgan To: meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, April 04, 2005
                          Message 12 of 16 , Apr 7, 2005
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Yoo-hoo JJM,
                             
                            A somewhat dated post...
                             
                            Some two cents...
                             
                            ----- Original Message -----
                            Sent: Monday, April 04, 2005 12:28 AM
                            Subject: [Meditation Society of America] Qualified non-dualism or non-dualism


                            Hello,

                            1.  If you were to get a splinter in your foot, do you remove it?  Or
                            do you realize there is no foot, no splinter, no pain.
                             
                            There is none.
                             
                            And yet a splinter may be removed.
                             
                            Or remains embedded.
                             
                             
                             
                             

                            Ramana sat to close to the fire once and severely burnt his legs.
                             
                            Ramana did not.
                            Yes the psycho-somatic organism which maybe labeled "Ramana", Buddha", "George W Bush/Osama Ben laden".......
                             
                            ......so long such an organism is "alive"..........if it sits on a hot stove, .......the organism will rapidly ascend.
                             
                             



                            2.  I am told you non-dual types believe in nothing.
                             
                             
                            Not even that nothing.
                             
                            And there is no non-dual types.
                             
                            Or to put it in another manner........there is not a whit difference between a non-dual type and a dual-type.
                             
                             
                             
                             
                             Do you believe in yourself?
                             
                             
                            What is this "yourself"?
                             
                             
                             
                             
                              If you only accept your awareness, do you accept mine? 
                             
                             
                            There is no "your" or "my" awareness.
                             
                             

                            If you accept mine, you must accept God.  That in which we live, move
                            and have our being. Qualified non-dualism.
                             
                            Aceept whatever rocks.
                             
                            Reject whatever rocks
                             
                            Both sneezings of the dreamt up character of the last night sleep dream.
                             
                             



                            3.  Do you accept qualified non-dualism?  Or do you only practice non-
                            dualsim?
                             
                             
                            What is qualified non-dualism?
                            What is the practice non-dualism?
                             
                             
                             
                              If so, do you have sex, enjoy food, etc.?
                             
                            Very much.
                             
                            And you forgot a good Cohiba.
                             
                            Sex is mere humping,.......... while a good cigar..........now that's something.
                             
                             
                             
                             
                              The difference
                            between tasting sugar and being sugar.
                             
                             
                            Being somewhat wet-behind the ears, can you please explain what is that difference?
                             
                             
                             
                             
                              Do you act non-dual(ie
                            Ramana)
                             
                             
                            That dude in the diaper was acting?
                             
                             
                             
                             or are you a hipocrit and really practice qualified non-
                            dualism(ie papaji).
                             
                            So non-hypocrisy lies in practicing non-qualified non-dualism?
                             
                            Can any "ism" escape a qualification?
                             
                            Non-qualification..............is not a qualification?
                             
                             
                              Act non-dual as well as talk non-dual.
                             
                            How do you act non-dual?
                             
                          • jasonjamesmorgan
                            Hello, The Holy Mother prepares food according to the childs temperments. Let us see if I can cook some good old fashion, home cooked non-dual Bhakti, non-dual
                            Message 13 of 16 , Apr 7, 2005
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Hello,

                              The Holy Mother prepares food according to the childs temperments.

                              Let us see if I can cook some good old fashion, home cooked non-dual
                              Bhakti, non-dual Gnani style. I get the feeling it would be less
                              spicy.

                              --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "Sandeep"
                              <sandeep1960@y...> wrote:
                              > Yoo-hoo JJM,
                              >
                              > A somewhat dated post...
                              >
                              > Some two cents...
                              >
                              > ----- Original Message -----
                              > From: jasonjamesmorgan
                              > To: meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com
                              > Sent: Monday, April 04, 2005 12:28 AM
                              > Subject: [Meditation Society of America] Qualified non-dualism or
                              non-dualism
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              > Hello,
                              >
                              > 1. If you were to get a splinter in your foot, do you remove
                              it? Or
                              > do you realize there is no foot, no splinter, no pain.
                              >
                              > There is none.
                              >
                              > And yet a splinter may be removed.
                              >
                              > Or remains embedded.

                              JJM. A mental splinter, like a thought can be removed with non-
                              identification.

                              A phiscial splinter, like a splinter :), can be removed with tweezers.

                              The difference between sahaja savikalpa samadhi and sahaja nirvikalpa
                              samadhi is that one dude would have moved back from the fire, to the
                              other there was no fire, and no legs.

                              I guess the defence mechanism of refutation might come from believing
                              that you have the same power as the president.

                              A king demand a yogi tell him a special mantra. The yogi refused.
                              When asked he sayed it would not work for him. The king tripped out
                              and demanded to know why. Just then the yogi tripped out and ordered
                              a guard nearby to sieze the king. The guard did not even blink. The
                              king then got angrier and odered the guard to sieze the yogi. The
                              yogi became histarical with laughter when the gaurd grabbed him. The
                              yogi said he had just demonstrated why it would not work.

                              What if there is such things as avatars? Miracles........

                              So this distinction is valid in my books.
                              Ramana was the Man.

                              If you want to know my description of the distinction between
                              Savikalpa Samadhi and Nirvikalpa Samadhi, I am sure it is still
                              floating around on web. Type my full name in exact search in
                              google. Feel free to send me refutations. I enjoy learning more
                              than teaching.

                              >
                              > Ramana sat to close to the fire once and severely burnt his legs.
                              >
                              > Ramana did not.
                              > Yes the psycho-somatic organism which maybe labeled "Ramana",
                              Buddha", "George W Bush/Osama Ben laden".......
                              >
                              > ......so long such an organism is "alive"..........if it sits on
                              a hot stove, .......the organism will rapidly ascend.
                              >

                              JJM. So sit on a hot stove. The natural abidance in the effulgence
                              of Self, is preceded by the un-natural abidance in the effulgence of
                              Self.

                              He however was already boiled, a fresh pot.

                              Sahaja Nirvikalpa Samadhi is different than Sahaja Savikalpa
                              Samadhi. Those words of mine alluded to it.

                              See different groups post at bottom( I just typed it and dont feel
                              like retyping it)

                              >
                              > 2. I am told you non-dual types believe in nothing.
                              >
                              >
                              > Not even that nothing.
                              >
                              > And there is no non-dual types.
                              >
                              > Or to put it in another manner........there is not a whit
                              difference between a non-dual type and a dual-type.
                              >

                              JJM. See post at bottom.




                              > Do you believe in yourself?
                              >
                              >
                              > What is this "yourself"?
                              >

                              JJM. Who read and then answered this post? That is "your"Self as I
                              did not read and answer my post.



                              > If you only accept your awareness, do you accept mine?
                              >
                              >
                              > There is no "your" or "my" awareness.
                              >

                              JJM. Truth is apparent. So is honesty. Honesty is accepting neither
                              duality or oneness as you say. So, honestly, Jason is mine, Sandeep
                              is yours. I will hang on to Jason for the time being. If your
                              looking to give away Sandeep, I'll pass.


                              >
                              > If you accept mine, you must accept God. That in which we live,
                              move
                              > and have our being. Qualified non-dualism.
                              >
                              > Aceept whatever rocks.
                              >
                              > Reject whatever rocks
                              >
                              > Both sneezings of the dreamt up character of the last night sleep
                              dream.

                              JJM. The waking body is just as fleeting as the dream body. Where
                              is your body in deep sleep, or nirvikalpa samdhi. Could we chat in
                              the later "states". We are now. What does that tell ya?

                              >
                              >
                              > 3. Do you accept qualified non-dualism? Or do you only practice
                              non-
                              > dualsim?
                              >
                              >
                              > What is qualified non-dualism?
                              > What is the practice non-dualism?

                              JJM. Look it up.


                              >
                              >
                              > If so, do you have sex, enjoy food, etc.?
                              >
                              > Very much.
                              >
                              > And you forgot a good Cohiba.
                              >
                              > Sex is mere humping,.......... while a good cigar..........now
                              that's something.

                              Jason also enjoys the odd joint, the odd cigarrete, mexican and
                              italian food, and the Holy Mother. Does the none dual state allow of
                              parts?

                              If a tree falls in the forest does it make a sound? Only if there is
                              an ear drum around. Other wise it is just vibration.

                              The difference between tasting sugar, and being sugar.


                              > The difference
                              > between tasting sugar and being sugar.
                              >
                              >
                              > Being somewhat wet-behind the ears, can you please explain what
                              is that difference?

                              JJM. See above.


                              >
                              >
                              > Do you act non-dual(ie
                              > Ramana)
                              >
                              >
                              > That dude in the diaper was acting?
                              >

                              Yes, the part of Ramana. He did not talk for many years, in the
                              early years. I guess he was only doing guest appearnences at the
                              time. And as for his action after, he compared it to a sleep
                              walker. He said Jesus the Christ was not aware of his action. Have
                              you ever driven home and not remebered getting, like sleep walking,
                              it is just a metaphor to explain sahaja nirvikalpa samadhi. The pure
                              expression of God.

                              Living scripture.


                              >
                              > or are you a hipocrit and really practice qualified non-
                              > dualism(ie papaji).
                              >
                              > So non-hypocrisy lies in practicing non-qualified non-dualism?
                              >
                              > Can any "ism" escape a qualification?
                              >
                              > Non-qualification..............is not a qualification?
                              >
                              >
                              > Act non-dual as well as talk non-dual.
                              >
                              > How do you act non-dual?

                              Sahaja Nirvikalpa Samadhi.

                              The sadhana of gnani gets you to act right. No parts, no desire.
                              Kill desire. Etc. No male or female, means no sex. Shitty deal for
                              some. An ape is attracted to an ape. Different races are attracted
                              to their own somewhat. Daughter end up with husbands like their
                              dads. Attraction is a mental creation, enforced by past influences.

                              If you were non-dual, would you like blondes or brunnettes better?
                              Bunk question in the non-dual standpoint.


                              Anyways, If I had posted the below before you posted your response,
                              which one would you have responded to, and what would have been the
                              thought and context.


                              Posted on the "direct approach" group.

                              "Hello,

                              Natural abidance in the effulgence of Self, is preceded by un-natural
                              abidance in the effulgence of Self.

                              This whole group, Ramana, Sankara, Patanjali, Ramakrishna, etc. etc.,
                              vedanta, religion, the very chance to experience realization, would
                              not be without the cause.

                              So to deny the former, is to deny the present.

                              Without duality, there would be no whole. Get it.

                              Thank the dudes that remain un-awakened, as they give the chance for
                              us to be the polar.

                              Nirvikalpa samdhi admits of no parts, no body(hence death in most
                              cases). So it is seen that the natural state would not allow our
                              little chats. And where would be the fun in that.

                              This is sahaja savikalpa samadhi we are injoying, or you would not be
                              reading this.

                              Sahaja savikalpa (dual) samadhi or the natural abidance in the
                              effulgence of Self, is the kingdom of heaven, the kingdom of heaven
                              is inside you. Enjoy it.

                              But remember without hell, there is no heaven.

                              Om Tat Sat.

                              Ramakrishna was travelling in a cariage to some devotees house, they
                              passed a bar, with revelors and drunk merry makers. He saw the
                              revelry of the Holy Mother and went into samadhi. He shouted,
                              congratulations and happiness for them, as he leaned out of the
                              carrige and lost outward consciousness. One new devotee became
                              concerned about the masters body. His concernes were quenched by an
                              experienced devotee of the Master.

                              Namaste
                              Om Namah Shivaya
                              Jason James Morgan"



                              You dont have to accept God, to accept this.
                            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.