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

Re: [Meditation Society of America] Re: Non-dual Bhakti

Expand Messages
  • Bruce Morgen
    ... You would have done well to to avoid engaging Jodyji -- he has extensive knowledge of Ramakrishna s life and considers the old master to be his avatar,
    Message 1 of 12 , Apr 9, 2005
      jasonjamesmorgan wrote:

      >Hello,
      >
      >These are fighting words. LOL
      >
      >Prove it. Your words are so rediculious, I almost did not reply.
      >
      >
      You would have done well to
      to avoid engaging Jodyji --
      he has extensive knowledge
      of Ramakrishna's life and
      considers the old master to
      be his avatar, iirc.

      The most fervent bhakti
      imaginable does not
      preclude facing the facts
      of a master's humanity --
      on the other hand, harboring
      hagiographic images of a
      Famous Dead Guy[tm] avails
      nothing whatsoever other
      than an ongoing insistence
      on more of the same.

      >Thanks for the laugh. Your ignorance of the master, is none but your
      >own fault. Appoligize to yourself.
      >
      >
      Do you have any idea how
      arrogantly ignorant the
      above paragraph reads?
      Hmm, maybe it's actually
      ignorantly arrogant....

      >
      >Namaste
      >Om Namah Shivaya
      >Jason James Morgan
      >
      >
      >--- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "jodyrrr"
      ><jodyrrr@y...> wrote:
      >
      >
      >>--- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, jasonjamesmorgan
      >><no_reply@y...> wrote:
      >>[snip]
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >>>Sri Ramakrishna was married for certain reasons. He never had
      >>>
      >>>
      >sex. He
      >
      >
      >>>demonstrated the true householder life by example. Have kids,
      >>>
      >>>
      >not sex
      >
      >
      >>>type thing. How could he get it on with his mother?
      >>>
      >>>
      >>Ramakrishna never had sex with his wife because he was
      >>for the most part a homosexual.
      >>
      >>While he embraced Kali as Mother, he rejected Her as Lover.
      >>In fact, he abhorred Her as Lover, and all women who were
      >>sexually active and potential competition for the affections
      >>of his young boy disciples.
      >>
      >>http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~kalischi
      >>
      >>After he died, his wife took up residence with a lesbian.
      >>
      >>--jody.
      >>
      >>
    • jodyrrr
      ... Read the website bozo: http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~kalischi Practically the entirety of the American Academy of Religious Studies is behind this view of
      Message 2 of 12 , Apr 9, 2005
        --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, jasonjamesmorgan
        <no_reply@y...> wrote:
        >
        > Hello,
        >
        > These are fighting words. LOL
        >
        > Prove it. Your words are so rediculious, I almost did not reply.
        > Thanks for the laugh. Your ignorance of the master, is none but your
        > own fault. Appoligize to yourself.
        >
        >
        > Namaste
        > Om Namah Shivaya
        > Jason James Morgan

        Read the website bozo:

        http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~kalischi

        Practically the entirety of the American Academy of
        Religious Studies is behind this view of Ramakrishna,
        as are famous Bengali poet Sunil Gangopadhyay as well
        as the famous Bengali author Sudhir Kakar.

        You are one of the unfortunate many whose heads are
        so clogged up with hagiography that you'll probably
        never get a chance to see who you really are.

        Good luck with yourself. Your type needs it more
        than any other in the spiritual game.

        --jody.

        >
        >
        > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "jodyrrr"
        > <jodyrrr@y...> wrote:
        > >
        > > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, jasonjamesmorgan
        > > <no_reply@y...> wrote:
        > > [snip]
        > >
        > > > Sri Ramakrishna was married for certain reasons. He never had
        > sex. He
        > > > demonstrated the true householder life by example. Have kids,
        > not sex
        > > > type thing. How could he get it on with his mother?
        > >
        > > Ramakrishna never had sex with his wife because he was
        > > for the most part a homosexual.
        > >
        > > While he embraced Kali as Mother, he rejected Her as Lover.
        > > In fact, he abhorred Her as Lover, and all women who were
        > > sexually active and potential competition for the affections
        > > of his young boy disciples.
        > >
        > > http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~kalischi
        > >
        > > After he died, his wife took up residence with a lesbian.
        > >
        > > --jody.
      • jasonjamesmorgan
        Hello, Ouch, gee, I guess I have it wrong. LOL Om Tat Sat Namaste Om Namah Shivaya Jason James Morgan ... reply. ... your ... jasonjamesmorgan ... had ...
        Message 3 of 12 , Apr 9, 2005
          Hello,

          Ouch, gee, I guess I have it wrong. LOL

          Om Tat Sat
          Namaste
          Om Namah Shivaya
          Jason James Morgan


          --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "jodyrrr"
          <jodyrrr@y...> wrote:
          >
          > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, jasonjamesmorgan
          > <no_reply@y...> wrote:
          > >
          > > Hello,
          > >
          > > These are fighting words. LOL
          > >
          > > Prove it. Your words are so rediculious, I almost did not
          reply.
          > > Thanks for the laugh. Your ignorance of the master, is none but
          your
          > > own fault. Appoligize to yourself.
          > >
          > >
          > > Namaste
          > > Om Namah Shivaya
          > > Jason James Morgan
          >
          > Read the website bozo:
          >
          > http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~kalischi
          >
          > Practically the entirety of the American Academy of
          > Religious Studies is behind this view of Ramakrishna,
          > as are famous Bengali poet Sunil Gangopadhyay as well
          > as the famous Bengali author Sudhir Kakar.
          >
          > You are one of the unfortunate many whose heads are
          > so clogged up with hagiography that you'll probably
          > never get a chance to see who you really are.
          >
          > Good luck with yourself. Your type needs it more
          > than any other in the spiritual game.
          >
          > --jody.
          >
          > >
          > >
          > > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "jodyrrr"
          > > <jodyrrr@y...> wrote:
          > > >
          > > > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com,
          jasonjamesmorgan
          > > > <no_reply@y...> wrote:
          > > > [snip]
          > > >
          > > > > Sri Ramakrishna was married for certain reasons. He never
          had
          > > sex. He
          > > > > demonstrated the true householder life by example. Have
          kids,
          > > not sex
          > > > > type thing. How could he get it on with his mother?
          > > >
          > > > Ramakrishna never had sex with his wife because he was
          > > > for the most part a homosexual.
          > > >
          > > > While he embraced Kali as Mother, he rejected Her as Lover.
          > > > In fact, he abhorred Her as Lover, and all women who were
          > > > sexually active and potential competition for the affections
          > > > of his young boy disciples.
          > > >
          > > > http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~kalischi
          > > >
          > > > After he died, his wife took up residence with a lesbian.
          > > >
          > > > --jody.
        • jasonjamesmorgan
          Hello, Hmmm. Alright, let do this Jody. These dudes also thought his bhavamukta was a nerological disorder. They had their position brought apon them with
          Message 4 of 12 , Apr 9, 2005
            Hello,

            Hmmm. Alright, let do this Jody. These dudes also thought his
            bhavamukta was a nerological disorder. They had their position
            brought apon them with politics and feigned authority. I would die
            for my master. To say he was attracted to men, is just as rediculous
            as to say he was attracted women.

            You have my attention Jody. jasonjamesmorgan@... if you want
            to do this privately.

            By the way, you did not prove it. Have you read "sri ramakrishna and
            his divine play".

            Sri Ramakrishna is Jasons life study, living scripture and avatar.
            Swami Vivikananda is my lion. We are lions among house cats.

            I thought you were just trying to erk me. If you are serious, we
            will play.

            Om Mani Padme Hum
            Om Tat Sat
            Namaste
            Om Namah Shivaya
            Jason James Morgan



            --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "jodyrrr"
            <jodyrrr@y...> wrote:
            >
            > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, jasonjamesmorgan
            > <no_reply@y...> wrote:
            > >
            > > Hello,
            > >
            > > These are fighting words. LOL
            > >
            > > Prove it. Your words are so rediculious, I almost did not
            reply.
            > > Thanks for the laugh. Your ignorance of the master, is none but
            your
            > > own fault. Appoligize to yourself.
            > >
            > >
            > > Namaste
            > > Om Namah Shivaya
            > > Jason James Morgan
            >
            > Read the website bozo:
            >
            > http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~kalischi
            >
            > Practically the entirety of the American Academy of
            > Religious Studies is behind this view of Ramakrishna,
            > as are famous Bengali poet Sunil Gangopadhyay as well
            > as the famous Bengali author Sudhir Kakar.
            >
            > You are one of the unfortunate many whose heads are
            > so clogged up with hagiography that you'll probably
            > never get a chance to see who you really are.
            >
            > Good luck with yourself. Your type needs it more
            > than any other in the spiritual game.
            >
            > --jody.
            >
            > >
            > >
            > > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "jodyrrr"
            > > <jodyrrr@y...> wrote:
            > > >
            > > > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com,
            jasonjamesmorgan
            > > > <no_reply@y...> wrote:
            > > > [snip]
            > > >
            > > > > Sri Ramakrishna was married for certain reasons. He never
            had
            > > sex. He
            > > > > demonstrated the true householder life by example. Have
            kids,
            > > not sex
            > > > > type thing. How could he get it on with his mother?
            > > >
            > > > Ramakrishna never had sex with his wife because he was
            > > > for the most part a homosexual.
            > > >
            > > > While he embraced Kali as Mother, he rejected Her as Lover.
            > > > In fact, he abhorred Her as Lover, and all women who were
            > > > sexually active and potential competition for the affections
            > > > of his young boy disciples.
            > > >
            > > > http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~kalischi
            > > >
            > > > After he died, his wife took up residence with a lesbian.
            > > >
            > > > --jody.
          • Bruce Morgen
            Nicely put, sir. If one must be smug, it s only polite to be quick about it. I salute you! :-P
            Message 5 of 12 , Apr 9, 2005
              Nicely put, sir. If one
              must be smug, it's only
              polite to be quick about
              it. I salute you! :-P

              jasonjamesmorgan wrote:

              >Hello,
              >
              >Ouch, gee, I guess I have it wrong. LOL
              >
              >Om Tat Sat
              >Namaste
              >Om Namah Shivaya
              >Jason James Morgan
              >
              >
              >--- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "jodyrrr"
              ><jodyrrr@y...> wrote:
              >
              >
              >>--- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, jasonjamesmorgan
              >><no_reply@y...> wrote:
              >>
              >>
              >>>Hello,
              >>>
              >>>These are fighting words. LOL
              >>>
              >>>Prove it. Your words are so rediculious, I almost did not
              >>>
              >>>
              >reply.
              >
              >
              >>>Thanks for the laugh. Your ignorance of the master, is none but
              >>>
              >>>
              >your
              >
              >
              >>>own fault. Appoligize to yourself.
              >>>
              >>>
              >>>Namaste
              >>>Om Namah Shivaya
              >>>Jason James Morgan
              >>>
              >>>
              >>Read the website bozo:
              >>
              >>http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~kalischi
              >>
              >>Practically the entirety of the American Academy of
              >>Religious Studies is behind this view of Ramakrishna,
              >>as are famous Bengali poet Sunil Gangopadhyay as well
              >>as the famous Bengali author Sudhir Kakar.
              >>
              >>You are one of the unfortunate many whose heads are
              >>so clogged up with hagiography that you'll probably
              >>never get a chance to see who you really are.
              >>
              >>Good luck with yourself. Your type needs it more
              >>than any other in the spiritual game.
              >>
              >>--jody.
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >>>--- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "jodyrrr"
              >>><jodyrrr@y...> wrote:
              >>>
              >>>
              >>>>--- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com,
              >>>>
              >>>>
              >jasonjamesmorgan
              >
              >
              >>>><no_reply@y...> wrote:
              >>>>[snip]
              >>>>
              >>>>
              >>>>
              >>>>>Sri Ramakrishna was married for certain reasons. He never
              >>>>>
              >>>>>
              >had
              >
              >
              >>>sex. He
              >>>
              >>>
              >>>>>demonstrated the true householder life by example. Have
              >>>>>
              >>>>>
              >kids,
              >
              >
              >>>not sex
              >>>
              >>>
              >>>>>type thing. How could he get it on with his mother?
              >>>>>
              >>>>>
              >>>>Ramakrishna never had sex with his wife because he was
              >>>>for the most part a homosexual.
              >>>>
              >>>>While he embraced Kali as Mother, he rejected Her as Lover.
              >>>>In fact, he abhorred Her as Lover, and all women who were
              >>>>sexually active and potential competition for the affections
              >>>>of his young boy disciples.
              >>>>
              >>>>http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~kalischi
              >>>>
              >>>>After he died, his wife took up residence with a lesbian.
              >>>>
              >>>>--jody.
              >>>>
            • jodyrrr
              From the Kathamrita: The Master is talking to M about Purna— Sri Ramakrishna— What I m telling you—this is not for every soul to hear—I want to kiss
              Message 6 of 12 , Apr 10, 2005
                From the Kathamrita:

                The Master is talking to M about Purna—
                Sri Ramakrishna—"What I'm telling you—this is not for
                every soul to hear—I want to kiss and embrace man as
                woman."
                (KA 4.271)

                Another passage, Ramakrishna describes a vision:

                "Everywhere there was a fog of bliss!—From within it a
                boy of thirteen arose and showed his face! He had the
                form of Purna! We were both naked!—then the two of us
                ran around the field and played joyfully!"
                (KA 4.259)

                Yet another passage, Ramakrisha speaking:

                "In that state I couldn't help but worship the little
                penises of boys with sandalpaste and flowers."
                (KA 4.232)

                That's from M's Kathamrita, translated directly from
                the Bengali. It's not in Nikhilananda's English
                translation, "The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna."
                Nikhilananda left those parts out.

                Jason, the fact that you aren't even aware of the
                substantial research being done on Ramakrishna's
                sexuality by the religious studies community reveals
                how much you DON'T know about Ramakrishna.

                I have no doubt your mind will spin these passages
                to innocent play between a guru and his devotee.
                But doesn't Michael Jackson claim his "play" was
                innocent as well?

                --jody.

                --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, jasonjamesmorgan
                <no_reply@y...> wrote:
                >
                > Hello,
                >
                > Hmmm. Alright, let do this Jody. These dudes also thought his
                > bhavamukta was a nerological disorder. They had their position
                > brought apon them with politics and feigned authority. I would die
                > for my master. To say he was attracted to men, is just as rediculous
                > as to say he was attracted women.
                >
                > You have my attention Jody. jasonjamesmorgan@d... if you want
                > to do this privately.
                >
                > By the way, you did not prove it. Have you read "sri ramakrishna and
                > his divine play".
                >
                > Sri Ramakrishna is Jasons life study, living scripture and avatar.
                > Swami Vivikananda is my lion. We are lions among house cats.
                >
                > I thought you were just trying to erk me. If you are serious, we
                > will play.
                >
                > Om Mani Padme Hum
                > Om Tat Sat
                > Namaste
                > Om Namah Shivaya
                > Jason James Morgan
                >
                >
                >
                > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "jodyrrr"
                > <jodyrrr@y...> wrote:
                > >
                > > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, jasonjamesmorgan
                > > <no_reply@y...> wrote:
                > > >
                > > > Hello,
                > > >
                > > > These are fighting words. LOL
                > > >
                > > > Prove it. Your words are so rediculious, I almost did not
                > reply.
                > > > Thanks for the laugh. Your ignorance of the master, is none but
                > your
                > > > own fault. Appoligize to yourself.
                > > >
                > > >
                > > > Namaste
                > > > Om Namah Shivaya
                > > > Jason James Morgan
                > >
                > > Read the website bozo:
                > >
                > > http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~kalischi
                > >
                > > Practically the entirety of the American Academy of
                > > Religious Studies is behind this view of Ramakrishna,
                > > as are famous Bengali poet Sunil Gangopadhyay as well
                > > as the famous Bengali author Sudhir Kakar.
                > >
                > > You are one of the unfortunate many whose heads are
                > > so clogged up with hagiography that you'll probably
                > > never get a chance to see who you really are.
                > >
                > > Good luck with yourself. Your type needs it more
                > > than any other in the spiritual game.
                > >
                > > --jody.
                > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "jodyrrr"
                > > > <jodyrrr@y...> wrote:
                > > > >
                > > > > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com,
                > jasonjamesmorgan
                > > > > <no_reply@y...> wrote:
                > > > > [snip]
                > > > >
                > > > > > Sri Ramakrishna was married for certain reasons. He never
                > had
                > > > sex. He
                > > > > > demonstrated the true householder life by example. Have
                > kids,
                > > > not sex
                > > > > > type thing. How could he get it on with his mother?
                > > > >
                > > > > Ramakrishna never had sex with his wife because he was
                > > > > for the most part a homosexual.
                > > > >
                > > > > While he embraced Kali as Mother, he rejected Her as Lover.
                > > > > In fact, he abhorred Her as Lover, and all women who were
                > > > > sexually active and potential competition for the affections
                > > > > of his young boy disciples.
                > > > >
                > > > > http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~kalischi
                > > > >
                > > > > After he died, his wife took up residence with a lesbian.
                > > > >
                > > > > --jody.
              • jasonjamesmorgan
                Hello, Now you compare him to Micheal Jackson. He also dressed like a women. A sadhana that is meant to equalize the ego, and get rid of desire. He also
                Message 7 of 12 , Apr 11, 2005
                  Hello,

                  Now you compare him to Micheal Jackson.

                  He also dressed like a women. A sadhana that is meant to equalize
                  the ego, and get rid of desire.
                  He also became devoted to hamuman, jumped around like a monkey, and
                  his tail bone extended.
                  He also practiced tantric disciplines, tasting human flesh, sex, wine
                  drinking from human skulls etc.
                  He practiced all sadhanas, mastered them, and saw the holy mother in
                  everyone. So that he could teach out of experience, and not books.

                  He saw the holy mother in women and men. He was declared an avatar
                  by these learned religious polititions.

                  And how do they research him and his sexuality a century later?

                  I am quite aware of the critisisms of the Master.

                  Your claims are rediculous. Please send me your source info. I
                  always go to the source. Ramana not Godman, Ramakrishna not hindu
                  councils. Jesus, not the church. etc.
                  These councils shall get our attention.

                  I salute you for bringning this malevolence to my attention.

                  Namaste
                  Om Namah Shivaya
                  Jason James Morgan



                  --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "jodyrrr"
                  <jodyrrr@y...> wrote:
                  >
                  > From the Kathamrita:
                  >
                  > The Master is talking to M about Purna—
                  > Sri Ramakrishna—"What I'm telling you—this is not for
                  > every soul to hear—I want to kiss and embrace man as
                  > woman."
                  > (KA 4.271)
                  >
                  > Another passage, Ramakrishna describes a vision:
                  >
                  > "Everywhere there was a fog of bliss!—From within it a
                  > boy of thirteen arose and showed his face! He had the
                  > form of Purna! We were both naked!—then the two of us
                  > ran around the field and played joyfully!"
                  > (KA 4.259)
                  >
                  > Yet another passage, Ramakrisha speaking:
                  >
                  > "In that state I couldn't help but worship the little
                  > penises of boys with sandalpaste and flowers."
                  > (KA 4.232)
                  >
                  > That's from M's Kathamrita, translated directly from
                  > the Bengali. It's not in Nikhilananda's English
                  > translation, "The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna."
                  > Nikhilananda left those parts out.
                  >
                  > Jason, the fact that you aren't even aware of the
                  > substantial research being done on Ramakrishna's
                  > sexuality by the religious studies community reveals
                  > how much you DON'T know about Ramakrishna.
                  >
                  > I have no doubt your mind will spin these passages
                  > to innocent play between a guru and his devotee.
                  > But doesn't Michael Jackson claim his "play" was
                  > innocent as well?
                  >
                  > --jody.
                  >
                  > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, jasonjamesmorgan
                  > <no_reply@y...> wrote:
                  > >
                  > > Hello,
                  > >
                  > > Hmmm. Alright, let do this Jody. These dudes also thought his
                  > > bhavamukta was a nerological disorder. They had their position
                  > > brought apon them with politics and feigned authority. I would
                  die
                  > > for my master. To say he was attracted to men, is just as
                  rediculous
                  > > as to say he was attracted women.
                  > >
                  > > You have my attention Jody. jasonjamesmorgan@d... if you want
                  > > to do this privately.
                  > >
                  > > By the way, you did not prove it. Have you read "sri ramakrishna
                  and
                  > > his divine play".
                  > >
                  > > Sri Ramakrishna is Jasons life study, living scripture and
                  avatar.
                  > > Swami Vivikananda is my lion. We are lions among house cats.
                  > >
                  > > I thought you were just trying to erk me. If you are serious, we
                  > > will play.
                  > >
                  > > Om Mani Padme Hum
                  > > Om Tat Sat
                  > > Namaste
                  > > Om Namah Shivaya
                  > > Jason James Morgan
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "jodyrrr"
                  > > <jodyrrr@y...> wrote:
                  > > >
                  > > > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com,
                  jasonjamesmorgan
                  > > > <no_reply@y...> wrote:
                  > > > >
                  > > > > Hello,
                  > > > >
                  > > > > These are fighting words. LOL
                  > > > >
                  > > > > Prove it. Your words are so rediculious, I almost did not
                  > > reply.
                  > > > > Thanks for the laugh. Your ignorance of the master, is none
                  but
                  > > your
                  > > > > own fault. Appoligize to yourself.
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > > Namaste
                  > > > > Om Namah Shivaya
                  > > > > Jason James Morgan
                  > > >
                  > > > Read the website bozo:
                  > > >
                  > > > http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~kalischi
                  > > >
                  > > > Practically the entirety of the American Academy of
                  > > > Religious Studies is behind this view of Ramakrishna,
                  > > > as are famous Bengali poet Sunil Gangopadhyay as well
                  > > > as the famous Bengali author Sudhir Kakar.
                  > > >
                  > > > You are one of the unfortunate many whose heads are
                  > > > so clogged up with hagiography that you'll probably
                  > > > never get a chance to see who you really are.
                  > > >
                  > > > Good luck with yourself. Your type needs it more
                  > > > than any other in the spiritual game.
                  > > >
                  > > > --jody.
                  > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "jodyrrr"
                  > > > > <jodyrrr@y...> wrote:
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com,
                  > > jasonjamesmorgan
                  > > > > > <no_reply@y...> wrote:
                  > > > > > [snip]
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > > Sri Ramakrishna was married for certain reasons. He
                  never
                  > > had
                  > > > > sex. He
                  > > > > > > demonstrated the true householder life by example. Have
                  > > kids,
                  > > > > not sex
                  > > > > > > type thing. How could he get it on with his mother?
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > Ramakrishna never had sex with his wife because he was
                  > > > > > for the most part a homosexual.
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > While he embraced Kali as Mother, he rejected Her as Lover.
                  > > > > > In fact, he abhorred Her as Lover, and all women who were
                  > > > > > sexually active and potential competition for the affections
                  > > > > > of his young boy disciples.
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~kalischi
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > After he died, his wife took up residence with a lesbian.
                  > > > > >
                  > > > > > --jody.
                • jodyrrr
                  ... Well, in a way he is comparable, at least with regards to his sexual preferences. That s as far as that comparison holds though. ... That s all
                  Message 8 of 12 , Apr 11, 2005
                    --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, jasonjamesmorgan
                    <no_reply@y...> wrote:
                    >
                    > Hello,
                    >
                    > Now you compare him to Micheal Jackson.

                    Well, in a way he is comparable, at least with
                    regards to his sexual preferences. That's as far
                    as that comparison holds though.

                    > He also dressed like a women. A sadhana that is meant to equalize
                    > the ego, and get rid of desire.

                    That's all hagiographic spin. He dressed as a woman
                    because he enjoyed it. It had nothing to do with sadhana,
                    and everything to do with expressing the bliss of being
                    ravished by Krishna

                    > He also became devoted to hamuman, jumped around like a monkey, and
                    > his tail bone extended.

                    Tail bone extended? Hagiographic nonsense.

                    > He also practiced tantric disciplines, tasting human flesh, sex, wine
                    > drinking from human skulls etc.
                    > He practiced all sadhanas, mastered them, and saw the holy mother in
                    > everyone. So that he could teach out of experience, and not books.

                    More hagiospin. He did those things because he
                    was compelled to, not because he thought he should
                    or needed to.

                    > He saw the holy mother in women and men. He was declared an avatar
                    > by these learned religious polititions.

                    So what? They were sucking up to his positive media profile.
                    Jumping on the bandwagon of the day.

                    > And how do they research him and his sexuality a century later?

                    By reading the original Bengali texts outside of the
                    bowdlerizations of Nikhilananda and Saradananda.

                    > I am quite aware of the critisisms of the Master.

                    They aren't criticisms if you aren't hagiopoisoned.

                    > Your claims are rediculous. Please send me your source info. I
                    > always go to the source. Ramana not Godman, Ramakrishna not hindu
                    > councils. Jesus, not the church. etc.
                    > These councils shall get our attention.

                    You have the source material. Now all you have to
                    do is learn Bengali, or accept the translations used
                    by Kripal in Kali's Child.

                    > I salute you for bringning this malevolence to my attention.
                    >
                    > Namaste
                    > Om Namah Shivaya
                    > Jason James Morgan

                    I feel sorry for the fact that you lack the resources
                    to see outside of your fairy-tale rendering of Ramakrishna.

                    --jody.

                    Note: The references are included in the text below.

                    >
                    > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "jodyrrr"
                    > <jodyrrr@y...> wrote:
                    > >
                    > > From the Kathamrita:
                    > >
                    > > The Master is talking to M about Purna—
                    > > Sri Ramakrishna—"What I'm telling you—this is not for
                    > > every soul to hear—I want to kiss and embrace man as
                    > > woman."
                    > > (KA 4.271)
                    > >
                    > > Another passage, Ramakrishna describes a vision:
                    > >
                    > > "Everywhere there was a fog of bliss!—From within it a
                    > > boy of thirteen arose and showed his face! He had the
                    > > form of Purna! We were both naked!—then the two of us
                    > > ran around the field and played joyfully!"
                    > > (KA 4.259)
                    > >
                    > > Yet another passage, Ramakrisha speaking:
                    > >
                    > > "In that state I couldn't help but worship the little
                    > > penises of boys with sandalpaste and flowers."
                    > > (KA 4.232)
                    > >
                    > > That's from M's Kathamrita, translated directly from
                    > > the Bengali. It's not in Nikhilananda's English
                    > > translation, "The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna."
                    > > Nikhilananda left those parts out.
                    > >
                    > > Jason, the fact that you aren't even aware of the
                    > > substantial research being done on Ramakrishna's
                    > > sexuality by the religious studies community reveals
                    > > how much you DON'T know about Ramakrishna.
                    > >
                    > > I have no doubt your mind will spin these passages
                    > > to innocent play between a guru and his devotee.
                    > > But doesn't Michael Jackson claim his "play" was
                    > > innocent as well?
                    > >
                    > > --jody.
                    > >
                    > > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, jasonjamesmorgan
                    > > <no_reply@y...> wrote:
                    > > >
                    > > > Hello,
                    > > >
                    > > > Hmmm. Alright, let do this Jody. These dudes also thought his
                    > > > bhavamukta was a nerological disorder. They had their position
                    > > > brought apon them with politics and feigned authority. I would
                    > die
                    > > > for my master. To say he was attracted to men, is just as
                    > rediculous
                    > > > as to say he was attracted women.
                    > > >
                    > > > You have my attention Jody. jasonjamesmorgan@d... if you want
                    > > > to do this privately.
                    > > >
                    > > > By the way, you did not prove it. Have you read "sri ramakrishna
                    > and
                    > > > his divine play".
                    > > >
                    > > > Sri Ramakrishna is Jasons life study, living scripture and
                    > avatar.
                    > > > Swami Vivikananda is my lion. We are lions among house cats.
                    > > >
                    > > > I thought you were just trying to erk me. If you are serious, we
                    > > > will play.
                    > > >
                    > > > Om Mani Padme Hum
                    > > > Om Tat Sat
                    > > > Namaste
                    > > > Om Namah Shivaya
                    > > > Jason James Morgan
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "jodyrrr"
                    > > > <jodyrrr@y...> wrote:
                    > > > >
                    > > > > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com,
                    > jasonjamesmorgan
                    > > > > <no_reply@y...> wrote:
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > Hello,
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > These are fighting words. LOL
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > Prove it. Your words are so rediculious, I almost did not
                    > > > reply.
                    > > > > > Thanks for the laugh. Your ignorance of the master, is none
                    > but
                    > > > your
                    > > > > > own fault. Appoligize to yourself.
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > Namaste
                    > > > > > Om Namah Shivaya
                    > > > > > Jason James Morgan
                    > > > >
                    > > > > Read the website bozo:
                    > > > >
                    > > > > http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~kalischi
                    > > > >
                    > > > > Practically the entirety of the American Academy of
                    > > > > Religious Studies is behind this view of Ramakrishna,
                    > > > > as are famous Bengali poet Sunil Gangopadhyay as well
                    > > > > as the famous Bengali author Sudhir Kakar.
                    > > > >
                    > > > > You are one of the unfortunate many whose heads are
                    > > > > so clogged up with hagiography that you'll probably
                    > > > > never get a chance to see who you really are.
                    > > > >
                    > > > > Good luck with yourself. Your type needs it more
                    > > > > than any other in the spiritual game.
                    > > > >
                    > > > > --jody.
                    > > > >
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > >
                    > > > > > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "jodyrrr"
                    > > > > > <jodyrrr@y...> wrote:
                    > > > > > >
                    > > > > > > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com,
                    > > > jasonjamesmorgan
                    > > > > > > <no_reply@y...> wrote:
                    > > > > > > [snip]
                    > > > > > >
                    > > > > > > > Sri Ramakrishna was married for certain reasons. He
                    > never
                    > > > had
                    > > > > > sex. He
                    > > > > > > > demonstrated the true householder life by example. Have
                    > > > kids,
                    > > > > > not sex
                    > > > > > > > type thing. How could he get it on with his mother?
                    > > > > > >
                    > > > > > > Ramakrishna never had sex with his wife because he was
                    > > > > > > for the most part a homosexual.
                    > > > > > >
                    > > > > > > While he embraced Kali as Mother, he rejected Her as Lover.
                    > > > > > > In fact, he abhorred Her as Lover, and all women who were
                    > > > > > > sexually active and potential competition for the affections
                    > > > > > > of his young boy disciples.
                    > > > > > >
                    > > > > > > http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~kalischi
                    > > > > > >
                    > > > > > > After he died, his wife took up residence with a lesbian.
                    > > > > > >
                    > > > > > > --jody.
                  • Bruce Morgen
                    Translation: How dare you (let alone the dozens of credible people on record as agreeing with you) tamper with my personal harbored hagiographic image of the
                    Message 9 of 12 , Apr 11, 2005
                      Translation: "How dare you
                      (let alone the dozens of
                      credible people on record
                      as agreeing with you)
                      tamper with my personal
                      harbored hagiographic image
                      of the Famous Dead Guy[tm]
                      -- your purport is
                      ridiculous and malevolent,
                      therefore dismissable."


                      jasonjamesmorgan wrote:

                      >Hello,
                      >
                      >Now you compare him to Micheal Jackson.
                      >
                      >He also dressed like a women. A sadhana that is meant to equalize
                      >the ego, and get rid of desire.
                      >He also became devoted to hamuman, jumped around like a monkey, and
                      >his tail bone extended.
                      >He also practiced tantric disciplines, tasting human flesh, sex, wine
                      >drinking from human skulls etc.
                      >He practiced all sadhanas, mastered them, and saw the holy mother in
                      >everyone. So that he could teach out of experience, and not books.
                      >
                      >He saw the holy mother in women and men. He was declared an avatar
                      >by these learned religious polititions.
                      >
                      >And how do they research him and his sexuality a century later?
                      >
                      >I am quite aware of the critisisms of the Master.
                      >
                      >Your claims are rediculous. Please send me your source info. I
                      >always go to the source. Ramana not Godman, Ramakrishna not hindu
                      >councils. Jesus, not the church. etc.
                      >These councils shall get our attention.
                      >
                      >I salute you for bringning this malevolence to my attention.
                      >
                      >Namaste
                      >Om Namah Shivaya
                      >Jason James Morgan
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >--- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "jodyrrr"
                      ><jodyrrr@y...> wrote:
                      >
                      >
                      >>From the Kathamrita:
                      >>
                      >>The Master is talking to M about Purna—
                      >>Sri Ramakrishna—"What I'm telling you—this is not for
                      >>every soul to hear—I want to kiss and embrace man as
                      >>woman."
                      >>(KA 4.271)
                      >>
                      >>Another passage, Ramakrishna describes a vision:
                      >>
                      >>"Everywhere there was a fog of bliss!—From within it a
                      >>boy of thirteen arose and showed his face! He had the
                      >>form of Purna! We were both naked!—then the two of us
                      >>ran around the field and played joyfully!"
                      >>(KA 4.259)
                      >>
                      >>Yet another passage, Ramakrisha speaking:
                      >>
                      >>"In that state I couldn't help but worship the little
                      >>penises of boys with sandalpaste and flowers."
                      >>(KA 4.232)
                      >>
                      >>That's from M's Kathamrita, translated directly from
                      >>the Bengali. It's not in Nikhilananda's English
                      >>translation, "The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna."
                      >>Nikhilananda left those parts out.
                      >>
                      >>Jason, the fact that you aren't even aware of the
                      >>substantial research being done on Ramakrishna's
                      >>sexuality by the religious studies community reveals
                      >>how much you DON'T know about Ramakrishna.
                      >>
                      >>I have no doubt your mind will spin these passages
                      >>to innocent play between a guru and his devotee.
                      >>But doesn't Michael Jackson claim his "play" was
                      >>innocent as well?
                      >>
                      >>--jody.
                      >>
                      >>--- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, jasonjamesmorgan
                      >><no_reply@y...> wrote:
                      >>
                      >>
                      >>>Hello,
                      >>>
                      >>>Hmmm. Alright, let do this Jody. These dudes also thought his
                      >>>bhavamukta was a nerological disorder. They had their position
                      >>>brought apon them with politics and feigned authority. I would
                      >>>
                      >>>
                      >die
                      >
                      >
                      >>>for my master. To say he was attracted to men, is just as
                      >>>
                      >>>
                      >rediculous
                      >
                      >
                      >>>as to say he was attracted women.
                      >>>
                      >>>You have my attention Jody. jasonjamesmorgan@d... if you want
                      >>>to do this privately.
                      >>>
                      >>>By the way, you did not prove it. Have you read "sri ramakrishna
                      >>>
                      >>>
                      >and
                      >
                      >
                      >>>his divine play".
                      >>>
                      >>>Sri Ramakrishna is Jasons life study, living scripture and
                      >>>
                      >>>
                      >avatar.
                      >
                      >
                      >>>Swami Vivikananda is my lion. We are lions among house cats.
                      >>>
                      >>>I thought you were just trying to erk me. If you are serious, we
                      >>>will play.
                      >>>
                      >>>Om Mani Padme Hum
                      >>>Om Tat Sat
                      >>>Namaste
                      >>>Om Namah Shivaya
                      >>>Jason James Morgan
                      >>>
                      >>>
                      >>>
                      >>>--- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "jodyrrr"
                      >>><jodyrrr@y...> wrote:
                      >>>
                      >>>
                      >>>>--- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com,
                      >>>>
                      >>>>
                      >jasonjamesmorgan
                      >
                      >
                      >>>><no_reply@y...> wrote:
                      >>>>
                      >>>>
                      >>>>>Hello,
                      >>>>>
                      >>>>>These are fighting words. LOL
                      >>>>>
                      >>>>>Prove it. Your words are so rediculious, I almost did not
                      >>>>>
                      >>>>>
                      >>>reply.
                      >>>
                      >>>
                      >>>>>Thanks for the laugh. Your ignorance of the master, is none
                      >>>>>
                      >>>>>
                      >but
                      >
                      >
                      >>>your
                      >>>
                      >>>
                      >>>>>own fault. Appoligize to yourself.
                      >>>>>
                      >>>>>
                      >>>>>Namaste
                      >>>>>Om Namah Shivaya
                      >>>>>Jason James Morgan
                      >>>>>
                      >>>>>
                      >>>>Read the website bozo:
                      >>>>
                      >>>>http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~kalischi
                      >>>>
                      >>>>Practically the entirety of the American Academy of
                      >>>>Religious Studies is behind this view of Ramakrishna,
                      >>>>as are famous Bengali poet Sunil Gangopadhyay as well
                      >>>>as the famous Bengali author Sudhir Kakar.
                      >>>>
                      >>>>You are one of the unfortunate many whose heads are
                      >>>>so clogged up with hagiography that you'll probably
                      >>>>never get a chance to see who you really are.
                      >>>>
                      >>>>Good luck with yourself. Your type needs it more
                      >>>>than any other in the spiritual game.
                      >>>>
                      >>>>--jody.
                      >>>>
                      >>>>
                      >>>>
                      >>>>>--- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "jodyrrr"
                      >>>>><jodyrrr@y...> wrote:
                      >>>>>
                      >>>>>
                      >>>>>>--- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com,
                      >>>>>>
                      >>>>>>
                      >>>jasonjamesmorgan
                      >>>
                      >>>
                      >>>>>><no_reply@y...> wrote:
                      >>>>>>[snip]
                      >>>>>>
                      >>>>>>
                      >>>>>>
                      >>>>>>>Sri Ramakrishna was married for certain reasons. He
                      >>>>>>>
                      >>>>>>>
                      >never
                      >
                      >
                      >>>had
                      >>>
                      >>>
                      >>>>>sex. He
                      >>>>>
                      >>>>>
                      >>>>>>>demonstrated the true householder life by example. Have
                      >>>>>>>
                      >>>>>>>
                      >>>kids,
                      >>>
                      >>>
                      >>>>>not sex
                      >>>>>
                      >>>>>
                      >>>>>>>type thing. How could he get it on with his mother?
                      >>>>>>>
                      >>>>>>>
                      >>>>>>Ramakrishna never had sex with his wife because he was
                      >>>>>>for the most part a homosexual.
                      >>>>>>
                      >>>>>>While he embraced Kali as Mother, he rejected Her as Lover.
                      >>>>>>In fact, he abhorred Her as Lover, and all women who were
                      >>>>>>sexually active and potential competition for the affections
                      >>>>>>of his young boy disciples.
                      >>>>>>
                      >>>>>>http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~kalischi
                      >>>>>>
                      >>>>>>After he died, his wife took up residence with a lesbian.
                      >>>>>>
                      >>>>>>--jody.
                      >>>>>>
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.