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

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

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 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 2 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 3 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 4 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 5 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 6 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 7 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 8 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 9 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 10 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 11 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 12 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.