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

[Meditation Society of America] Re: TRANSMISSION

Expand Messages
  • jasonjamesmorgan
    Hello, hello, Put two glasses of water side by side, and the temperatures even out. This is called resonance. If you want to defute transmition, go to the
    Message 1 of 22 , May 2 2:41 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      Hello, hello,

      Put two glasses of water side by side, and the temperatures even
      out. This is called resonance. If you want to defute transmition,
      go to the local university, and prove the world wrong.

      In the satsang, the guru is a glass of hot water, but he is stable at
      that temperature, sahaja. The disciples are glasses of water at
      vering degrees of temperature. They disciples will slowly be
      resonated to the temperature of the guru.

      Without using allegory, this is what happens.

      1.The gurus kundulini is at a high frequency, which causes the
      disciples frequency to rise. Hence so many kryas after satsang.

      2. The gurus mind is still, this slowly stops the minds of other.
      This is called teaching in the silence ie dakshinamurti. In the
      silence of the mind, the awareness is realized.

      3. The combined states of the disciples will alter the effect from
      the guru. In one on one satsang the effect is more powerfull and
      faster. In group it takes longer and is not as powerfull. It has to
      do with the gurus state, and if he takes matter into his own hands
      and forces the states of the people.

      Number 3 is like puting a hot glass of water beside several cold
      glasses. Provided the temp of the hot glass is stable, it will take
      longer to heat 3 glasses than 1.

      The gurus role is this. He has more experience and more knowledge
      than the average person. Like a doctor, the guru is doing this full
      time. You do not have to be a renuciate to be realized. In the
      gurus experience and knowledge, he sees the easiest path for the
      student, and thus if the student surrendors to the will of the guru,
      his liberation will happen sooner.

      Apong awakeing the mometum or parabdha of the student is what it was
      before. A householder will be a householder. A renunciate a
      renunciate.

      This is what Ramakrishna taught and realized. That is why he
      censored his teachings to some. There were a few books that he only
      let Vivikananda read, even over his other chosen disciples.

      So no more bad talk about gurus. Alot of gurus are money seeking,
      authoritarians. But not all. powers or siddhis are real, but
      I appluad your stance of disbelief, and condem your inability to
      realize them. You should take them as a working hipothesis untill
      such time as you prove them to yourself.

      A renunciate was a renunciate before his realization, and he will be
      one after.

      In the west, the traditional guru is not respected. That is because
      everyone believes in equal rights etc. Half truth, half truths my
      friends. Look around, is everyone equal? No of course not. However
      our true selfs are equal, our true natures. Half truths.

      In the tradition system the student goes to the master and argues
      till he is blue in the face. If the master can demostrate to the
      student his prowess, the student can then surrendor. The devotee
      knows that the experience of the guru and knowledge, is what is best
      for him. He know that guru is love manifest, and will lead the
      disciple up the easiest path. The disciple need not read the vedas
      to realize, need not go on pilgramiges to realize. But he might, and
      if that will help the devotee, that is where he is sent.

      So, argue and keep argueing untill you meet someone who blows you
      away. It is not nessecary to have a traditional guru, as the
      tradition is available at a few clicks of the mouse, but for those
      who will find one. Keep an open mind.

      And remember that gurus are running out their parabdha. And their
      parabdha might not be congruent with yours. Does that make him a
      fraud? of course not. Osho can kiss ass, but for others they would
      gladly kiss his. And why I dont listen to him, is that group
      masterbation, hippie , cars and riches arent my parabdha. But
      their are alot of rich dudes out their who had "fun" and this is
      their parabdha when they start their search. So even my annoying
      little friend osho has his role.

      Anyways, I got to go. Be back in a few days.
      Namaste
      Om Namah Shivaya
      Jason James Morgan



      --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "jodyrrr"
      <jodyrrr@y...> wrote:
      > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "Sandeep"
      > <sandeep1960@y...> wrote:
      > >
      > > ----- Original Message -----
      > > From: subhash naik
      > > To: meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com
      > > Sent: Saturday, April 30, 2005 11:27 AM
      > > Subject: Re: [Meditation Society of America] Re: TRANSMISSION
      > >
      > >
      > > >
      > > As per my Master --Prejudice is the greatest
      > > evil,rather the liest poision for spiritual
      > > life.
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Tell your Master that to notice prejudice is the biggest
      prejudice.
      >
      > And also tell him that lying about his abilities
      > makes him nothing more than a criminal.
    • jodyrrr
      ... The Self is of nothing in this world. The laws of physics do not apply, facile similes notwithstanding. Everyone is the Self. Nobody is more the Self,
      Message 2 of 22 , May 2 11:28 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, jasonjamesmorgan
        <no_reply@y...> wrote:
        > Hello, hello,
        >
        > Put two glasses of water side by side, and the temperatures even
        > out. This is called resonance. If you want to defute transmition,
        > go to the local university, and prove the world wrong.

        The Self is of nothing in this world. The laws of
        physics do not apply, facile similes notwithstanding.

        Everyone is the Self. Nobody is "more" the Self,
        despite what superstitious folk want to believe
        about their gurus.

        The guru isn't there to zap you with shakti. That's
        a myth some gurus use to make themselves popular.

        What a 'dispeller of darkness' does is illuminate
        the thoughts of his/her devotees by pointing out
        the Self in their awareness. It's not something
        you catch vibrationally, it's something that's
        suddenly apparent when it wasn't before. The guru
        can make the connection for you, but you've got to
        see it alone, completely outside any mythological
        beliefs anyone has about gurus.
      • Reynold Wingate
        Jiddu Krishnamoorthy used to dissuade those who wanted to become disciples. He believed the spiritual path o each individual is different. A guru can only give
        Message 3 of 22 , May 3 3:49 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          Jiddu Krishnamoorthy used to dissuade those who wanted
          to become disciples. He believed the spiritual path o
          each individual is different. A guru can only give
          general tips to grow spiritually based on his own
          personal experience. It may not necessarily work for
          his disciples.

          I believe a guru is not an absolute necessity for
          spiritual growth. If you have the desire deep in you,
          you will stumble into the truth some day.

          --- jodyrrr <jodyrrr@...> wrote:

          ---------------------------------
          --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com,
          jasonjamesmorgan
          <no_reply@y...> wrote:
          > Hello, hello,
          >
          > Put two glasses of water side by side, and the
          temperatures even
          > out. This is called resonance. If you want to
          defute transmition,
          > go to the local university, and prove the world
          wrong.

          The Self is of nothing in this world. The laws of
          physics do not apply, facile similes notwithstanding.

          Everyone is the Self. Nobody is "more" the Self,
          despite what superstitious folk want to believe
          about their gurus.

          The guru isn't there to zap you with shakti. That's
          a myth some gurus use to make themselves popular.

          What a 'dispeller of darkness' does is illuminate
          the thoughts of his/her devotees by pointing out
          the Self in their awareness. It's not something
          you catch vibrationally, it's something that's
          suddenly apparent when it wasn't before. The guru
          can make the connection for you, but you've got to
          see it alone, completely outside any mythological
          beliefs anyone has about gurus.





          ---------------------------------
          Yahoo! Groups Links

          To visit your group on the web, go to:
          http://groups.yahoo.com/group/meditationsocietyofamerica/

          To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
          meditationsocietyofamerica-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

          Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
          Terms of Service.


          __________________________________________________
          Do You Yahoo!?
          Download the latest ringtones, games, and more!
          http://sg.mobile.yahoo.com
        • Bruce Morgen
          ... Well, he tried to do it -- unfortunately, after he died he became the nexus of YAPBC (Yet Another Posthumous Bhakti Cult). ... That s a fact, no belief is
          Message 4 of 22 , May 3 8:39 AM
          • 0 Attachment
            Reynold Wingate wrote:

            >Jiddu Krishnamoorthy used to dissuade those who wanted
            >to become disciples.
            >
            Well, he tried to do it --
            unfortunately, after he
            died he became the nexus
            of YAPBC (Yet Another
            Posthumous Bhakti Cult).

            >He believed the spiritual path o
            >each individual is different.
            >
            That's a fact, no belief
            is required.

            >A guru can only give
            >general tips to grow spiritually based on his own
            >personal experience.
            >
            Yes, just as pointing at
            the moon isn't that same
            as being able to grab it
            and hand it over. ;-)

            >It may not necessarily work for
            >his disciples.
            >
            >
            Clearly, otherwise such
            "disciples" would themselves
            uniformly be realized.
            There's obviously no
            universal recipe for that.

            >I believe a guru is not an absolute necessity for
            >spiritual growth. If you have the desire deep in you,
            >you will stumble into the truth some day.
            >
            >
            As Jodyji himself has put it,
            the only actual prerequisite
            is sincerity. This brings
            energy and determination --
            but also an awareness that
            "the desire deep within you"
            may in fact be nothing more
            or other than garden variety
            ambition, abeit clothed in
            "spear-chill" raiment!

            Can we be both sincere and
            indefatigable in our enquiry
            without hope of status and
            attainment? Isn't that the
            subtly elusive "purity" that
            is so often spoken of among
            seekers, the surrendered
            attitude expressed by "Not
            my will, but thine" and the
            very essence of both honest
            enquiry and authentic
            meditation?


            >--- jodyrrr <jodyrrr@...> wrote:
            >
            >---------------------------------
            >--- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com,
            >jasonjamesmorgan
            ><no_reply@y...> wrote:
            >
            >
            >>Hello, hello,
            >>
            >>Put two glasses of water side by side, and the
            >>
            >>
            >temperatures even
            >
            >
            >>out. This is called resonance. If you want to
            >>
            >>
            >defute transmition,
            >
            >
            >>go to the local university, and prove the world
            >>
            >>
            >wrong.
            >
            >The Self is of nothing in this world. The laws of
            >physics do not apply, facile similes notwithstanding.
            >
            >Everyone is the Self. Nobody is "more" the Self,
            >despite what superstitious folk want to believe
            >about their gurus.
            >
            >The guru isn't there to zap you with shakti. That's
            >a myth some gurus use to make themselves popular.
            >
            >What a 'dispeller of darkness' does is illuminate
            >the thoughts of his/her devotees by pointing out
            >the Self in their awareness. It's not something
            >you catch vibrationally, it's something that's
            >suddenly apparent when it wasn't before. The guru
            >can make the connection for you, but you've got to
            >see it alone, completely outside any mythological
            >beliefs anyone has about gurus.
            >
            >
          • jodyrrr
            ... Absolutely. One s sincerity can carry them as far if not farther than any mommy or daddy surrogate one is sucked up to. While it s definitely helpful and
            Message 5 of 22 , May 3 8:40 AM
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, Reynold Wingate
              <reystar99@y...> wrote:
              > Jiddu Krishnamoorthy used to dissuade those who wanted
              > to become disciples. He believed the spiritual path o
              > each individual is different. A guru can only give
              > general tips to grow spiritually based on his own
              > personal experience. It may not necessarily work for
              > his disciples.
              >
              > I believe a guru is not an absolute necessity for
              > spiritual growth. If you have the desire deep in you,
              > you will stumble into the truth some day.

              Absolutely. One's sincerity can carry them as
              far if not farther than any mommy or daddy surrogate
              one is sucked up to.

              While it's definitely helpful and a blessing to have a
              real guru instead of one of these nonsense transmitters,
              the inner guru takes precedent every time.
            • Greg Goode
              Hey Bruceji, That s a cool one, YAPBC. I just might use it, with full attribution, of course! --Greg
              Message 6 of 22 , May 3 8:49 AM
              • 0 Attachment

                Hey Bruceji,

                 

                That’s a cool one, YAPBC.

                I just might use it, with full

                attribution, of course!

                 

                --Greg

              • jasonjamesmorgan
                ... Well, well, Your a bit father off than I originally thought. I see you are still doing your sadhana to the end of savikalpa samadhi. For if you were
                Message 7 of 22 , May 3 6:11 PM
                • 0 Attachment
                  >
                  > The Self is of nothing in this world. The laws of
                  > physics do not apply, facile similes notwithstanding.
                  >
                  > Everyone is the Self. Nobody is "more" the Self,
                  > despite what superstitious folk want to believe
                  > about their gurus.
                  >
                  > The guru isn't there to zap you with shakti. That's
                  > a myth some gurus use to make themselves popular.
                  >
                  > What a 'dispeller of darkness' does is illuminate
                  > the thoughts of his/her devotees by pointing out
                  > the Self in their awareness. It's not something
                  > you catch vibrationally, it's something that's
                  > suddenly apparent when it wasn't before. The guru
                  > can make the connection for you, but you've got to
                  > see it alone, completely outside any mythological
                  > beliefs anyone has about gurus.

                  Well, well,

                  Your a bit father off than I originally thought. I see you are still
                  doing your sadhana to the end of savikalpa samadhi. For if you were
                  realized, you would know that duality is obvious and apparent and
                  GOD. You have not realized, as you denie one side of the coin.

                  A person can send prana to wherever, whenever they choose.

                  So sad, so close, but to stubborn in his sadhana to drop the concept
                  of no concepts.

                  I grow bored of this. Maybe I will be back next year. My compassion
                  might bring forth a thought or two for you. Ta Ta.

                  Namaste
                  Om Namah Shivaya
                • Reynold Wingate
                  Can you please rephrase the last two paragraphs? I have read somewhere that when high-sounding words are abundant in writing, that s a sign the writer is not
                  Message 8 of 22 , May 3 8:49 PM
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Can you please rephrase the last two paragraphs? I
                    have read somewhere that when high-sounding words are
                    abundant in writing, that's a sign the writer is not
                    very sure of what he is talking about. Good writing on
                    spirituality should be simple and easy to understand.
                    I am lost in the last two paragraphs you wrote. Sorry!

                    Reynold
                    --- Bruce Morgen <editor@...> wrote:

                    ---------------------------------
                    Reynold Wingate wrote:

                    >Jiddu Krishnamoorthy used to dissuade those who
                    wanted
                    >to become disciples.
                    >
                    Well, he tried to do it --
                    unfortunately, after he
                    died he became the nexus
                    of YAPBC (Yet Another
                    Posthumous Bhakti Cult).

                    >He believed the spiritual path o
                    >each individual is different.
                    >
                    That's a fact, no belief
                    is required.

                    >A guru can only give
                    >general tips to grow spiritually based on his own
                    >personal experience.
                    >
                    Yes, just as pointing at
                    the moon isn't that same
                    as being able to grab it
                    and hand it over. ;-)

                    >It may not necessarily work for
                    >his disciples.
                    >
                    >
                    Clearly, otherwise such
                    "disciples" would themselves
                    uniformly be realized.
                    There's obviously no
                    universal recipe for that.

                    >I believe a guru is not an absolute necessity for
                    >spiritual growth. If you have the desire deep in you,
                    >you will stumble into the truth some day.
                    >
                    >
                    As Jodyji himself has put it,
                    the only actual prerequisite
                    is sincerity. This brings
                    energy and determination --
                    but also an awareness that
                    "the desire deep within you"
                    may in fact be nothing more
                    or other than garden variety
                    ambition, abeit clothed in
                    "spear-chill" raiment!

                    Can we be both sincere and
                    indefatigable in our enquiry
                    without hope of status and
                    attainment? Isn't that the
                    subtly elusive "purity" that
                    is so often spoken of among
                    seekers, the surrendered
                    attitude expressed by "Not
                    my will, but thine" and the
                    very essence of both honest
                    enquiry and authentic
                    meditation?


                    >--- jodyrrr <jodyrrr@...> wrote:
                    >
                    >---------------------------------
                    >--- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com,
                    >jasonjamesmorgan
                    ><no_reply@y...> wrote:
                    >
                    >
                    >>Hello, hello,
                    >>
                    >>Put two glasses of water side by side, and the
                    >>
                    >>
                    >temperatures even
                    >
                    >
                    >>out. This is called resonance. If you want to
                    >>
                    >>
                    >defute transmition,
                    >
                    >
                    >>go to the local university, and prove the world
                    >>
                    >>
                    >wrong.
                    >
                    >The Self is of nothing in this world. The laws of
                    >physics do not apply, facile similes notwithstanding.
                    >
                    >Everyone is the Self. Nobody is "more" the Self,
                    >despite what superstitious folk want to believe
                    >about their gurus.
                    >
                    >The guru isn't there to zap you with shakti. That's
                    >a myth some gurus use to make themselves popular.
                    >
                    >What a 'dispeller of darkness' does is illuminate
                    >the thoughts of his/her devotees by pointing out
                    >the Self in their awareness. It's not something
                    >you catch vibrationally, it's something that's
                    >suddenly apparent when it wasn't before. The guru
                    >can make the connection for you, but you've got to
                    >see it alone, completely outside any mythological
                    >beliefs anyone has about gurus.
                    >
                    >



                    ---------------------------------
                    Yahoo! Groups Links

                    To visit your group on the web, go to:
                    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/meditationsocietyofamerica/

                    To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                    meditationsocietyofamerica-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                    Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
                    Terms of Service.


                    __________________________________________________
                    Do You Yahoo!?
                    Download the latest ringtones, games, and more!
                    http://sg.mobile.yahoo.com
                  • Bruce Morgen
                    ... I could, but with all due respect, I ll decline that request at his time. ... An absurd contention imo, especially given that there is no consensus on what
                    Message 9 of 22 , May 4 7:16 AM
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Reynold Wingate wrote:

                      >Can you please rephrase the last two paragraphs?
                      >
                      I could, but with all due
                      respect, I'll decline that
                      request at his time.

                      >I
                      >have read somewhere that when high-sounding words are
                      >abundant in writing, that's a sign the writer is not
                      >very sure of what he is talking about.
                      >
                      An absurd contention imo,
                      especially given that
                      there is no consensus on
                      what "high-sounding"
                      means.

                      >Good writing on
                      >spirituality should be simple and easy to understand.
                      >
                      >
                      Well, that certainly puts
                      a good deal of what the
                      ancients wrote out of the
                      running, doesn't it?

                      >I am lost in the last two paragraphs you wrote. Sorry!
                      >
                      >
                      Me too -- but there it is.
                      Are you sure you're not
                      being a bit lazy in your
                      approach? I can see only
                      one or two words in those
                      paragraphs that are all
                      that uncommon, and the
                      sentences parse pretty
                      easily. The gists of both
                      are quite simple and I'd be
                      glad to discuss whatever
                      specifics are eluding you.

                      Thank you for your interest!

                      >Reynold
                      >--- Bruce Morgen <editor@...> wrote:
                      >
                      >---------------------------------
                      >Reynold Wingate wrote:
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >>Jiddu Krishnamoorthy used to dissuade those who
                      >>
                      >>
                      >wanted
                      >
                      >
                      >>to become disciples.
                      >>
                      >>
                      >>
                      >Well, he tried to do it --
                      >unfortunately, after he
                      >died he became the nexus
                      >of YAPBC (Yet Another
                      >Posthumous Bhakti Cult).
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >>He believed the spiritual path o
                      >>each individual is different.
                      >>
                      >>
                      >>
                      >That's a fact, no belief
                      >is required.
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >>A guru can only give
                      >>general tips to grow spiritually based on his own
                      >>personal experience.
                      >>
                      >>
                      >>
                      >Yes, just as pointing at
                      >the moon isn't that same
                      >as being able to grab it
                      >and hand it over. ;-)
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >>It may not necessarily work for
                      >>his disciples.
                      >>
                      >>
                      >>
                      >>
                      >Clearly, otherwise such
                      >"disciples" would themselves
                      >uniformly be realized.
                      >There's obviously no
                      >universal recipe for that.
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >>I believe a guru is not an absolute necessity for
                      >>spiritual growth. If you have the desire deep in you,
                      >>you will stumble into the truth some day.
                      >>
                      >>
                      >>
                      >>
                      >As Jodyji himself has put it,
                      >the only actual prerequisite
                      >is sincerity. This brings
                      >energy and determination --
                      >but also an awareness that
                      >"the desire deep within you"
                      >may in fact be nothing more
                      >or other than garden variety
                      >ambition, abeit clothed in
                      >"spear-chill" raiment!
                      >
                      >Can we be both sincere and
                      >indefatigable in our enquiry
                      >without hope of status and
                      >attainment? Isn't that the
                      >subtly elusive "purity" that
                      >is so often spoken of among
                      >seekers, the surrendered
                      >attitude expressed by "Not
                      >my will, but thine" and the
                      >very essence of both honest
                      >enquiry and authentic
                      >meditation?
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >>--- jodyrrr <jodyrrr@...> wrote:
                      >>
                      >>---------------------------------
                      >>--- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com,
                      >>jasonjamesmorgan
                      >><no_reply@y...> wrote:
                      >>
                      >>
                      >>
                      >>
                      >>>Hello, hello,
                      >>>
                      >>>Put two glasses of water side by side, and the
                      >>>
                      >>>
                      >>>
                      >>>
                      >>temperatures even
                      >>
                      >>
                      >>
                      >>
                      >>>out. This is called resonance. If you want to
                      >>>
                      >>>
                      >>>
                      >>>
                      >>defute transmition,
                      >>
                      >>
                      >>
                      >>
                      >>>go to the local university, and prove the world
                      >>>
                      >>>
                      >>>
                      >>>
                      >>wrong.
                      >>
                      >>The Self is of nothing in this world. The laws of
                      >>physics do not apply, facile similes notwithstanding.
                      >>
                      >>Everyone is the Self. Nobody is "more" the Self,
                      >>despite what superstitious folk want to believe
                      >>about their gurus.
                      >>
                      >>The guru isn't there to zap you with shakti. That's
                      >>a myth some gurus use to make themselves popular.
                      >>
                      >>What a 'dispeller of darkness' does is illuminate
                      >>the thoughts of his/her devotees by pointing out
                      >>the Self in their awareness. It's not something
                      >>you catch vibrationally, it's something that's
                      >>suddenly apparent when it wasn't before. The guru
                      >>can make the connection for you, but you've got to
                      >>see it alone, completely outside any mythological
                      >>beliefs anyone has about gurus.
                      >>
                      >>
                      >>
                    • jodyrrr
                      ... But the obviousness of duality does not include the reality of the magical nonsense which exists in spiritual culture, the nonsense you are taking for
                      Message 10 of 22 , May 4 8:57 AM
                      • 0 Attachment
                        --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, jasonjamesmorgan
                        <no_reply@y...> wrote:
                        >
                        > >
                        > > The Self is of nothing in this world. The laws of
                        > > physics do not apply, facile similes notwithstanding.
                        > >
                        > > Everyone is the Self. Nobody is "more" the Self,
                        > > despite what superstitious folk want to believe
                        > > about their gurus.
                        > >
                        > > The guru isn't there to zap you with shakti. That's
                        > > a myth some gurus use to make themselves popular.
                        > >
                        > > What a 'dispeller of darkness' does is illuminate
                        > > the thoughts of his/her devotees by pointing out
                        > > the Self in their awareness. It's not something
                        > > you catch vibrationally, it's something that's
                        > > suddenly apparent when it wasn't before. The guru
                        > > can make the connection for you, but you've got to
                        > > see it alone, completely outside any mythological
                        > > beliefs anyone has about gurus.
                        >
                        > Well, well,
                        >
                        > Your a bit father off than I originally thought. I see you are still
                        > doing your sadhana to the end of savikalpa samadhi. For if you were
                        > realized, you would know that duality is obvious and apparent and
                        > GOD. You have not realized, as you denie one side of the coin.

                        But the obviousness of duality does not include the reality
                        of the magical nonsense which exists in spiritual culture,
                        the nonsense you are taking for fact. The nonsense which
                        chokes the life out of realization like algae in a pond.

                        > A person can send prana to wherever, whenever they choose.

                        Sure, as a intellectual conceit or in a dream.

                        > So sad, so close, but to stubborn in his sadhana to drop the concept
                        > of no concepts.

                        The same is said of you, unable to see the truth that sits
                        on the end of your nose.

                        > I grow bored of this. Maybe I will be back next year. My compassion
                        > might bring forth a thought or two for you. Ta Ta.
                        >
                        > Namaste
                        > Om Namah Shivaya

                        How generous. Don't let the door hit you in
                        the ass.
                      • Jeff Belyea
                        ... Yes, we can. When the enquiry comes from a place of despair, degradation, shame and guilt, and the hope is for release from their grip, neither purity nor
                        Message 11 of 22 , May 5 11:55 AM
                        • 0 Attachment
                          > Can we be both sincere and
                          > indefatigable in our enquiry
                          > without hope of status and
                          > attainment?

                          Yes, we can. When the enquiry
                          comes from a place of despair,
                          degradation, shame and guilt,
                          and the hope is for release
                          from their grip, neither purity
                          nor status nor attainment are
                          the foci - unless you are
                          going to quibble that attainment
                          of peace of mind is to be
                          counted among "attainments".
                          It is gift. The fact that
                          IT grants purity does not
                          count, either. The POM and
                          purity are totally Jackerjacks'
                          surprises. (Just a little
                          anticipatory fencing
                          before the touche).

                          The awakening in this context
                          is a startling and unexpected
                          helping of jimmies, a cherry
                          on top, a...lot of sweetness,
                          and frequently gives birth to
                          a Bhakti Yogi - a gratitude
                          attitude for the double scoop.

                          The fact that reports of
                          this unique solution are
                          often couched in spiritual
                          terms may be the result of
                          a family tradition or a
                          cultural prime coat.

                          Some will hear the reports
                          of spiritual enlightenment
                          as ego aggrandizement and
                          attempts to attain status
                          or imply some attainment
                          of a lofty estate. But the
                          Bhakti Yogi has no such
                          interests.

                          To those, like Jodi, for
                          whom it was more of an
                          "Oh, yeah, now I see it,"
                          and life goes on, there
                          are typically no jimmies,
                          no cherries, but a sweetness
                          nevertheless. Even Greg
                          uses the words "sweetness
                          and light" in his report.

                          (Sorry, Michael.)

                          Sweet as ever,

                          Jeff
                        • Greg Goode
                          ... ===These are good points. Sincerely and singlemindedly trying to end one s suffering is not the same as going for the status of having attained a goal.
                          Message 12 of 22 , May 5 12:14 PM
                          • 0 Attachment
                            --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Belyea"
                            <jeff@m...> wrote:
                            > > Can we be both sincere and
                            > > indefatigable in our enquiry
                            > > without hope of status and
                            > > attainment?
                            >
                            > Yes, we can. When the enquiry
                            > comes from a place of despair,
                            > degradation, shame and guilt,
                            > and the hope is for release
                            > from their grip, neither purity
                            > nor status nor attainment are
                            > the foci.

                            ...

                            > Even Greg uses the words "sweetness
                            > and light" in his report.

                            ===These are good points. Sincerely and singlemindedly trying to end
                            one's suffering is not the same as going for the status of having
                            attained a goal. When in the middle of great suffering, a person
                            would gladly trade all chances of lofty attainment for the relief
                            from suffering.

                            I remember one AIDS activist mentioning that he visited some AIDS
                            patients in the hospital. They said something that really made an
                            impression on him. They told him that sure, they remembered the
                            feverishly strong sexual compulsion they felt when they had sex all
                            those times - unprotected. There's a sort of divine madness that
                            takes over, seems like it will protect you. Now, they are
                            experiencing the aftermath. They all told the activist that they'd
                            gladly give away the sexual experiences they had, plus all hope of
                            *ever* having sex again, if they could only be free of the virus now.

                            In my case, I was intensely looking into the essence of my nature.
                            What made me ME? What makes anyone what they are, and not something
                            else? Where is my identity located? How is it carried? How is it
                            *my* identity? Although this was not a painful inquiry, it was a
                            constant one - yes, and it had a touch of sweet, light fascination.
                            I was really in the grips of it. My head was in the tiger's mouth.
                            I hadn't heard of any satsangs or spiritual groups doing this kind of
                            stuff. There was no association in my mind of a level, status or
                            endpoint to be reached. Because I had no acquaintances doing this
                            kind of thing, I really didn't have a socially constructed notion of
                            a kind of person to compare myself to, or "an after it is over." I
                            was doing it in kind of an open and unknowing way.

                            --Greg

                            P.S. Plus, meditation helped!
                          • jodyrrr
                            ... wrote: [snip] ... Actually, the seeing of it was accompanied by the simultaneous dissolving of the idea of me as Ramakrishna terms it.
                            Message 13 of 22 , May 5 1:13 PM
                            • 0 Attachment
                              --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Belyea"
                              <jeff@m...> wrote:

                              [snip]

                              > To those, like Jodi, for
                              > whom it was more of an
                              > "Oh, yeah, now I see it,"
                              > and life goes on, there
                              > are typically no jimmies,
                              > no cherries, but a sweetness
                              > nevertheless. Even Greg
                              > uses the words "sweetness
                              > and light" in his report.
                              >
                              > (Sorry, Michael.)
                              >
                              > Sweet as ever,
                              >
                              > Jeff

                              Actually, the "seeing" of "it" was accompanied
                              by the simultaneous dissolving of the "idea of
                              me" as Ramakrishna terms it. Watching that me
                              dissolve was almost a shock, but it happened so
                              quickly that there wasn't time for a reaction.

                              This isn't to say I don't have a sense of "me,"
                              just that its hold on identity was shattered, and
                              has remained so ever since.

                              I have to admit a sweetness as the result of this,
                              although I'm still the same firey asshole I was
                              before it all went down.

                              --jody.
                            • Greg Goode
                              ... ===Yeah, that s just it. Even aging, the deaths of parents, friends, terminal illnesses, my wife going to federal detention for an indeterminate period,
                              Message 14 of 22 , May 5 1:40 PM
                              • 0 Attachment
                                --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "jodyrrr"
                                <jodyrrr@y...> wrote:


                                > I have to admit a sweetness as the result of this,
                                > although I'm still the same firey asshole I was
                                > before it all went down.

                                ===Yeah, that's just it. Even aging, the deaths of parents, friends,
                                terminal illnesses, my wife going to federal detention for an
                                indeterminate period, not enough cash for her bail (no bail bonds
                                accepted for immigration stuff), $1200 phone bills, bleeding
                                rollerblading accidents, bike accidents, sprains -- all this isn't
                                separate from sweetness, space and light.

                                --Greg
                              • de la rouviere
                                Dear Jeff, May I come in here with some kind of observation. ... comes from a place of despair, degradation, shame and guilt, and the hope is for release from
                                Message 15 of 22 , May 6 7:12 AM
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Dear Jeff,
                                   
                                  May I come in here with some kind of observation.
                                   
                                  You said:
                                   
                                   >>Yes, we can. When the enquiry
                                  comes from a place of despair,
                                  degradation, shame and guilt,
                                  and the hope is for release
                                  from their grip,>> snip..
                                   
                                  Could it also be that this kind of suffering-based enquiry could have two rather distinct motivations: 1) the suffering coming from the things you pointed out above, and 2) when this kind of gross suffering has worked itself gradually out of the system there remains the pure suffering of duality in its most delicate form yet to be transcended? 
                                   
                                  I guess what I am suggesting is that there is the totally untrimmed tree to start with and all that is evident are forms of emotional, psychological and mental disturbances.  These no doubt form the bulk of the conscious experience of separation at that level of disorganization.  However, there comes a time along the path of self-enquiry where these things no longer distract the practitioner so heavily from inner silence and some sense of freedom from conditioning and shadow emotional stuff.  This in itself brings a lightness of being, but there is still the residual state of duality present, which could easily again be drawn into mere reactivity and mental distortion.  Yet, at this stage, one is no longer driven by the gross suffering of personal historical stuff.  What is on the table is just the mere sense of duality.  It seems to me that only when this has been recognized as suffering and ways have been found to transcend this fundamental inclination towards mere separateness, can the freedom of which you may be speaking reveal itself.
                                   
                                  Or perhaps we may be talking about different experiences altogether?.  It is really difficult to apprehend the very many manifestations of freedom from where people nowadays speak.  So many claim freedom and enlightement.  I often find it difficult to fully appreciate where they are coming from. In the olden days, and as tradition has it, practioners in the Zen tradition actually often left their teachers, or were sent away to other teachers to have the different levels of their 'enlightenment' verified, disputed, worked on etc. lest the student fools h/herself into truly believing they are fully enlightened while perhaps the finer points might still be missing.  As yet, we have no such kind of 'peer review' in the west relative to our enlightening experiences. So we all seem just have our own relative light to stand or fall by.  This may of course create some serious confusion for many  - and a ready breeding ground for illusion?
                                   
                                  Have a good weekend,
                                  Moller de la Rouviere
                                   
                                   
                                • Jeff Belyea
                                  ... have two rather distinct motivations: 1) the suffering coming from the things you pointed out above, and 2) when this kind of gross suffering has worked
                                  Message 16 of 22 , May 6 8:11 AM
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "de la rouviere"
                                    <mollerdlr@t...> wrote:
                                    > Dear Jeff,
                                    >
                                    > May I come in here with some kind of observation.
                                    >
                                    > You said:
                                    >
                                    > >>Yes, we can. When the enquiry
                                    > comes from a place of despair,
                                    > degradation, shame and guilt,
                                    > and the hope is for release
                                    > from their grip,>> snip..
                                    >
                                    > Could it also be that this kind of suffering-based enquiry could
                                    have two rather distinct motivations: 1) the suffering coming from
                                    the things you pointed out above, and 2) when this kind of gross
                                    suffering has worked itself gradually out of the system there remains
                                    the pure suffering of duality in its most delicate form yet to be
                                    transcended?
                                    >
                                    > I guess what I am suggesting is that there is the totally untrimmed
                                    tree to start with and all that is evident are forms of emotional,
                                    psychological and mental disturbances. These no doubt form the bulk
                                    of the conscious experience of separation at that level of
                                    disorganization. However, there comes a time along the path of self-
                                    enquiry where these things no longer distract the practitioner so
                                    heavily from inner silence and some sense of freedom from
                                    conditioning and shadow emotional stuff. This in itself brings a
                                    lightness of being, but there is still the residual state of duality
                                    present, which could easily again be drawn into mere reactivity and
                                    mental distortion. Yet, at this stage, one is no longer driven by
                                    the gross suffering of personal historical stuff. What is on the
                                    table is just the mere sense of duality. It seems to me that only
                                    when this has been recognized as suffering and ways have been found
                                    to transcend this fundamental inclination towards mere separateness,
                                    can the freedom of which you may be speaking reveal itself.
                                    >
                                    > Or perhaps we may be talking about different experiences
                                    altogether?. It is really difficult to apprehend the very many
                                    manifestations of freedom from where people nowadays speak. So many
                                    claim freedom and enlightement. I often find it difficult to fully
                                    appreciate where they are coming from. In the olden days, and as
                                    tradition has it, practioners in the Zen tradition actually often
                                    left their teachers, or were sent away to other teachers to have the
                                    different levels of their 'enlightenment' verified, disputed, worked
                                    on etc. lest the student fools h/herself into truly believing they
                                    are fully enlightened while perhaps the finer points might still be
                                    missing. As yet, we have no such kind of 'peer review' in the west
                                    relative to our enlightening experiences. So we all seem just have
                                    our own relative light to stand or fall by. This may of course
                                    create some serious confusion for many - and a ready breeding ground
                                    for illusion?
                                    >
                                    > Have a good weekend,
                                    > Moller de la Rouviere
                                    > www.spiritualhumanism.co.za

                                    Thank you, Moller.

                                    Of course, we can only
                                    speak authentically
                                    from our own direct
                                    experience. And, yes,
                                    this is a difficult
                                    task - to communicate
                                    our personal experience
                                    clearly and completely.

                                    The gradual working out
                                    of the issues that were
                                    the root causes of
                                    suffering, either through
                                    the grace of time or
                                    with the help of a
                                    therapeutic approach
                                    is distinctly different
                                    from the experience of
                                    Enlightened Awakening, a
                                    "stepping into perfection"
                                    in which the startling
                                    realization of "all is well"
                                    presents itself, as if
                                    beyond anything the mind
                                    has previously thought
                                    or imagined.

                                    The latter mends the
                                    illusion of separation
                                    and sense of duality, and
                                    leaves a residual sweetness
                                    as an undercurrent of
                                    day-to-day consciousness
                                    (as Jody and Greg have
                                    noted in recent posts)
                                    that is above any and all
                                    circumstances of life
                                    events.

                                    So many models attempt
                                    to distinguish between
                                    the therapeutic recovery
                                    and the Enlightened, more
                                    dramatic resolution of
                                    suffering. And even these
                                    have subsets. The savikalpa
                                    and nirvikalpa, and then
                                    sahaj samadhi, come to
                                    mind.

                                    The easing of suffering
                                    through time erasure of
                                    the sting, the temporary
                                    Enlightenment of savikalpa
                                    samadhi, and the seemingly
                                    permanent shift of awareness
                                    and Awakening to the
                                    "Ture Self" of nirvikalpa
                                    samadhi are neat distinctions,
                                    but as you've written,
                                    can cause a lot of confusion
                                    and maybe even delusion.

                                    Additionally, those who
                                    feel compelled, or as
                                    Bruce Morgen writes, are
                                    "choicelessly obligated"
                                    to share the good news
                                    of Enlightenment, seem
                                    to innocenlty over-promise
                                    the availability of this
                                    New Wisdom, Understanding,
                                    Experiential Knowledge.

                                    The Big Guys of Gurudom,
                                    and the relatively unknown
                                    Awakened Teachers, seem
                                    to all offer a model or
                                    point to a path that they
                                    walked, with the expectation
                                    that a similar walk will
                                    produce a similar result.

                                    As Bruce and Jeff Brooks
                                    have written; if this
                                    were so, we would have
                                    millions instead of
                                    hundreds of Awakened
                                    Ones, Buddhas, Christs,
                                    Krisnas, on earth now.

                                    As for the much-hunted
                                    deluded gurus, it seems
                                    that this is a much-overblown
                                    hunt. It is unimaginable
                                    that anyone would step up
                                    to the role without the
                                    experiential knowledge -
                                    for some power trip or
                                    monetary reward. That
                                    hunt is left for others.

                                    Those who fire verbal
                                    bombast at any talk or
                                    writing of Enlightenment
                                    are the more discouraging
                                    and disparaging game in
                                    my crosshairs.

                                    Peace,

                                    Jeff
                                  • Jeff Belyea
                                    ... Hi Jody - Thanks. The dissolving of the idea of me is one of those subtle and difficult to describe aspects of Awakening that has the rational mind hear
                                    Message 17 of 22 , May 9 6:50 AM
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "jodyrrr"
                                      <jodyrrr@y...> wrote:
                                      > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Belyea"
                                      > <jeff@m...> wrote:
                                      >
                                      > [snip]
                                      >
                                      > > To those, like Jody, for
                                      > > whom it was more of an
                                      > > "Oh, yeah, now I see it,"
                                      > > and life goes on, there
                                      > > are typically no jimmies,
                                      > > no cherries, but a sweetness
                                      > > nevertheless. Even Greg
                                      > > uses the words "sweetness
                                      > > and light" in his report.
                                      > >
                                      > > (Sorry, Michael.)
                                      > >
                                      > > Sweet as ever,
                                      > >
                                      > > Jeff
                                      >
                                      > Actually, the "seeing" of "it" was accompanied
                                      > by the simultaneous dissolving of the "idea of
                                      > me" as Ramakrishna terms it. Watching that me
                                      > dissolve was almost a shock, but it happened so
                                      > quickly that there wasn't time for a reaction.
                                      >
                                      > This isn't to say I don't have a sense of "me,"
                                      > just that its hold on identity was shattered, and
                                      > has remained so ever since.
                                      >
                                      > I have to admit a sweetness as the result of this,
                                      > although I'm still the same firey asshole I was
                                      > before it all went down.
                                      >
                                      > --jody.


                                      Hi Jody -

                                      Thanks.

                                      The dissolving of the "idea
                                      of me" is one of those subtle
                                      and difficult to describe
                                      aspects of Awakening that
                                      has the rational mind hear
                                      a metal-pipe clang.

                                      That shift out of the personal
                                      sense of "ego" to just "being"
                                      brings the sweet relief from
                                      taking anything personally, and
                                      it not only allows for continuity
                                      of the fiery asshole persona...
                                      it transforms one predisposed
                                      to being a fiery asshole
                                      into a fearless fiery asshole;
                                      taming the lions of fear and
                                      doubt and replacing those with
                                      a hot and sweet pepper undercurrent.

                                      Love, as always,

                                      Jeff
                                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.