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

Re: [Meditation Society of America] Re: THE SAGE'S VIEW

Expand Messages
  • Athanor
    Jeff, how old are you? mirela ... From: Jeff Belyea To: meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, January 02, 2003 12:39
    Message 1 of 8 , Jan 1, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      Jeff,
      how old are you?
      mirela
      ----- Original Message -----
      From: Jeff Belyea <jeff@...>
      To: meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Thursday, January 02, 2003 12:39 AM
      Subject: [Meditation Society of America] Re: THE SAGE'S VIEW


      Sweet friend, Judi -

      Can you possibly keep your
      slasher tongue in its holster
      long enough to read more
      than one sentence? Your
      self-contradiction is
      showing all over the place.
      You say it's not joy, but you call
      it pure joy. It's not experience
      but you call it a new
      perceptual condition.
      New is necessarily experiential,
      perception is experiential -
      understanding is experiential.
      Semantic hair-splitting
      just to be an antagonist
      is your tiresome game.

      And speaking of place, this
      really isn't the place for this,
      but I'm tired of stepping
      in your smelly bullshit
      everywhere I go...and I want
      a shoot out, Rocky.

      Go ahead and run back to the ranch.
      I'll be on your trail. I don't
      like your style, but I grew
      up with people who walked it
      and talked it, and I'm willing
      and able to stand my ground
      against your bluster, buster.

      I guess you don't have enough
      to rant about at the ranch.
      You got an extra bunk?.
      You didn't run me off, you
      invited me back "anytime".
      Still a standing invitation?
      You'll have your boys there.

      I left because your juvenile boys
      grew ridiculously boring.
      They didn't scare me off, my
      side was hurting from laughing
      at their naivety, pompous parroting,
      and pitiful pandering to you.
      You talk about others wanting fawning
      disciples. What do you have at
      the ranch? They got nothing.
      Less than Snarlo's Guru Raters,
      even.

      And get real, you jumped around
      like a tenderfoot with someone
      shooting at her feet when my
      inquiries got too hot.

      You, I challenge to duel...
      Hot-Air filled Cream puffs
      at 50 paces. That's about
      all you got other than
      a bundt pan.

      Still reading?...

      On July 21, 1975 at about
      9:30am my life changed, a
      door opened. It was not a flash,
      not a la la la moment, it was a
      permanent shift of identity,
      a new awareness of a reality
      that I had been separated
      from - a separate reality -
      until known, a new overriding
      current running through my every
      conscious moment from that
      moment on. And it was and is
      blissful, peaceful beyond
      understanding, and full of joy.
      Still is.Doesn't mean I don't have
      a bold and bad-ass ego, or
      that I run from a scrap.

      Not all sages are milquetoasts,
      the best of them have been
      known to fashion a whip and
      crack a few heads.

      Whatever I choose to call
      my awakening experience
      cannot be negated by your
      constant carping. Its wasted.
      The person who entered
      the meditation center,
      after 24 years of seeking,
      never left. He ceased to exit.
      (Sound familiar?)

      So you don't subscribe to
      the Boddisattva vow? I do.
      I took it. I honor it.

      Your shots at my ego
      are in vain. I grin
      and bear it, because I don't
      miss the wry smile behind
      all your seeming ferocity.

      But for the sake of
      those who are here
      for inquiry...

      Can't you ever just shut
      the fuck up, and let someone
      speak without whacking them on
      the head with your tight-ass,
      self-righteous, know-it-all
      table of the Judi commandments?

      Your need to straighten
      out all the error you
      see in everyone else
      might have something to
      do with the ego you
      consistently see
      all around you.

      Rude enough to win
      you over?

      Your blissed out bawdy friend,

      Jeff

      PS: My apologies to the gentle folks here
      for this evening's R-Rated entertainment.
      Somewhere there's a lesson here.I'm going
      to go see what's cookin' at the ranch.



      Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
      ADVERTISEMENT




      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.



      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Athanor
      Understanding is experiential! How do you understand than, Judi? i guess that everyone has experiences... at least everyone alive .. :-) and judi, if the ego
      Message 2 of 8 , Jan 1, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        Understanding is experiential! How do you understand than, Judi? i guess that everyone has experiences... at least everyone alive .. :-) and judi, if the ego is not the ground, than what is it? what are you standing on?
        what's wrong with Sarlo?
        mirela

        > understanding is experiential.

        ****** Wrong again! Understanding is non-experiential.
        Ever heard the term "non-duality"? Well there you have it.

        > Semantic hair-splitting
        > just to be an antagonist
        > is your tiresome game.
        >
        ******** It's not hair-splitting Jeff, it's just the way it is.
        You're splitting yourself off as the "haver" of experience.
        Into good and bad experience, which is true for you, but not for me,
        I see all experience for what it is. Therein lies the difference.


        > And speaking of place, this
        > really isn't the place for this,
        > but I'm tired of stepping
        > in your smelly bullshit
        > everywhere I go...and I want
        > a shoot out, Rocky.
        >
        > Go ahead and run back to the ranch.
        > I'll be on your trail. I don't
        > like your style, but I grew
        > up with people who walked it
        > and talked it, and I'm willing
        > and able to stand my ground
        > against your bluster, buster.
        >
        ****** Take another look, you have no "ground" to stand on.
        Or more to the point, your "ground" is your own ego.


        > I guess you don't have enough
        > to rant about at the ranch.
        > You got an extra bunk?.
        > You didn't run me off, you
        > invited me back "anytime".
        > Still a standing invitation?
        > You'll have your boys there.
        >
        > I left because your juvenile boys
        > grew ridiculously boring.

        ******** Yes, we're "boring" as hell. :-)


        > They didn't scare me off, my
        > side was hurting from laughing
        > at their naivety, pompous parroting,
        > and pitiful pandering to you.
        > You talk about others wanting fawning
        > disciples.

        ***** There's no such "fawning" going on.

        What do you have at
        > the ranch? They got nothing.

        ****** Well, you're right there. Got plenty of nothing. :-)

        > Less than Snarlo's Guru Raters,
        > even.
        >
        > And get real, you jumped around
        > like a tenderfoot with someone
        > shooting at her feet when my
        > inquiries got too hot.
        >
        ***** Not true, you just didn't like the answers you got.

        > You, I challenge to duel...
        > Hot-Air filled Cream puffs
        > at 50 paces. That's about
        > all you got other than
        > a bundt pan.
        >
        > Still reading?...
        >
        > On July 21, 1975 at about
        > 9:30am my life changed, a
        > door opened. It was not a flash,
        > not a la la la moment, it was a
        > permanent shift of identity,
        > a new awareness of a reality
        > that I had been separated
        > from - a separate reality -
        > until known, a new overriding
        > current running through my every
        > conscious moment from that
        > moment on. And it was and is
        > blissful, peaceful beyond
        > understanding, and full of joy.
        > Still is.Doesn't mean I don't have
        > a bold and bad-ass ego, or
        > that I run from a scrap.
        >
        > Not all sages are milquetoasts,
        > the best of them have been
        > known to fashion a whip and
        > crack a few heads.
        >
        > Whatever I choose to call
        > my awakening experience
        > cannot be negated by your
        > constant carping. Its wasted.
        > The person who entered
        > the meditation center,
        > after 24 years of seeking,
        > never left. He ceased to exit.
        > (Sound familiar?)
        >
        > So you don't subscribe to
        > the Boddisattva vow? I do.
        > I took it. I honor it.
        >
        ******* I chuckle. :-) LOL You are too funny Jeff!
        What the hell you honoring? LOL Don't be ridiculous.
        Give it a rest. :-)

        Judi



        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
        ADVERTISEMENT




        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.



        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Jeff Belyea <jeff@mindgoal.com>
        Mirela - How old would you be if you didn t know how old you were? Love, Jeff
        Message 3 of 8 , Jan 2, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          Mirela -

          How old would you
          be if you didn't
          know how old you
          were?

          Love,

          Jeff
        • Gregory Goode
          The understanding is not experiential - whatever experience you can think of - understanding is in back of it. If understanding *were* experiential (and I
          Message 4 of 8 , Jan 2, 2003
          • 0 Attachment
            The understanding is not experiential - whatever experience you can think of - understanding is "in back of it." If understanding *were* experiential (and I don't mean understanding how to fill out one's tax form), then it would be just another whiff that comes and goes.

            It's like when I learned that there's no Santa Claus. I can trace the event back to a certain point in chronological time (sneaking downstairs one Christmas eve and seeing my parents wrap the presents. They talked about they'd make the bike be from Santa...). But what was left was not a mental image constantly remembered and rehearsed ("There is no Santa, there is no Santa).

            No, it's more the dissolving of the notion that there *is* a Santa. Not having that notion is not an experience....

            So if you're looking for an experience, then get ready to look for the cessation of that experience too!

            Love,

            --Greg

            At 07:38 AM 1/2/03 +0200, Athanor wrote:
            >Understanding is experiential! How do you understand than, Judi? i guess that everyone has experiences... at least everyone alive .. :-) and judi, if the ego is not the ground, than what is it? what are you standing on?
            >what's wrong with Sarlo?
            >mirela
            >
            > > understanding is experiential.
            >
            > ****** Wrong again! Understanding is non-experiential.
            > Ever heard the term "non-duality"? Well there you have it.
          • judirhodes <judirhodes@zianet.com>
            ... think of - understanding is in back of it. If understanding *were* experiential (and I don t mean understanding how to fill out one s tax form), then it
            Message 5 of 8 , Jan 2, 2003
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, Gregory Goode
              <goode@d...> wrote:
              > The understanding is not experiential - whatever experience you can
              think of - understanding is "in back of it." If understanding *were*
              experiential (and I don't mean understanding how to fill out one's
              tax form), then it would be just another whiff that comes and goes.
              >
              ********** Exactly, and people chase sprituality like it's a goddaman
              orgasm. Understanding transcends (in back of) the whole "chase"
              business itself. Orgasms come, orgasms go, spritual experiences
              come, spriitual experiences go - so much the worse for it! :-) Ha-ha!

              Judi



              > It's like when I learned that there's no Santa Claus. I can trace
              the event back to a certain point in chronological time (sneaking
              downstairs one Christmas eve and seeing my parents wrap the
              presents. They talked about they'd make the bike be from Santa...).
              But what was left was not a mental image constantly remembered and
              rehearsed ("There is no Santa, there is no Santa).
              >
              > No, it's more the dissolving of the notion that there *is* a
              Santa. Not having that notion is not an experience....
              >
              > So if you're looking for an experience, then get ready to look for
              the cessation of that experience too!
              >
              > Love,
              >
              > --Greg
              >
              > At 07:38 AM 1/2/03 +0200, Athanor wrote:
              > >Understanding is experiential! How do you understand than, Judi? i
              guess that everyone has experiences... at least everyone alive .. :-)
              and judi, if the ego is not the ground, than what is it? what are you
              standing on?
              > >what's wrong with Sarlo?
              > >mirela
              > >
              > > > understanding is experiential.
              > >
              > > ****** Wrong again! Understanding is non-experiential.
              > > Ever heard the term "non-duality"? Well there you have it.
            • texasbg2000 <Bigbobgraham@aol.com>
              Hi Greg: That is a great example, it cuts through the mud. However it seems to me the word understand can mean either an experience or not. If one means to
              Message 6 of 8 , Jan 2, 2003
              • 0 Attachment
                Hi Greg:

                That is a great example, it cuts through the mud. However it seems
                to me the word understand can mean either an experience or not.

                If one means to know something then that is not experience. Knowing
                is construed as consciousness in this sense which is pure and
                attributeless.

                If one means to have understanding dawn then it is. The dissolving
                of a fantasy could be considered as an event/experience or not
                depending on your understanding of the word.

                I think timeline has something to do with it. Take the distraction
                of sloth. It can keep me from meditating tonight. It can also be
                considered a personality trait that limits my life's goals. These
                two ways of looking at the same word while similar are still.
                different.

                Love
                Bobby G.


                --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, Gregory Goode
                <goode@d...> wrote:
                > The understanding is not experiential - whatever experience you can
                think of - understanding is "in back of it." If understanding *were*
                experiential (and I don't mean understanding how to fill out one's
                tax form), then it would be just another whiff that comes and goes.
                >
                > It's like when I learned that there's no Santa Claus. I can trace
                the event back to a certain point in chronological time (sneaking
                downstairs one Christmas eve and seeing my parents wrap the
                presents. They talked about they'd make the bike be from Santa...).
                But what was left was not a mental image constantly remembered and
                rehearsed ("There is no Santa, there is no Santa).
                >
                > No, it's more the dissolving of the notion that there *is* a
                Santa. Not having that notion is not an experience....
                >
                > So if you're looking for an experience, then get ready to look for
                the cessation of that experience too!
                >
                > Love,
                >
                > --Greg
                >
                > At 07:38 AM 1/2/03 +0200, Athanor wrote:
                > >Understanding is experiential! How do you understand than, Judi? i
                guess that everyone has experiences... at least everyone alive .. :-)
                and judi, if the ego is not the ground, than what is it? what are you
                standing on?
                > >what's wrong with Sarlo?
                > >mirela
                > >
                > > > understanding is experiential.
                > >
                > > ****** Wrong again! Understanding is non-experiential.
                > > Ever heard the term "non-duality"? Well there you have it.
              • Athanor
                dear Greg, when you realised that there is no Santa, it was an experiential understanding.. (you have watched your parents-experience) mirela ... From: Gregory
                Message 7 of 8 , Jan 2, 2003
                • 0 Attachment
                  dear Greg,
                  when you realised that there is no Santa, it was an experiential understanding.. (you have watched your parents-experience)
                  mirela
                  ----- Original Message -----
                  From: Gregory Goode
                  To: meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com ; meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com
                  Sent: Thursday, January 02, 2003 4:12 PM
                  Subject: Re: [Meditation Society of America] Re: THE SAGE'S VIEW


                  The understanding is not experiential - whatever experience you can think of - understanding is "in back of it." If understanding *were* experiential (and I don't mean understanding how to fill out one's tax form), then it would be just another whiff that comes and goes.

                  It's like when I learned that there's no Santa Claus. I can trace the event back to a certain point in chronological time (sneaking downstairs one Christmas eve and seeing my parents wrap the presents. They talked about they'd make the bike be from Santa...). But what was left was not a mental image constantly remembered and rehearsed ("There is no Santa, there is no Santa).

                  No, it's more the dissolving of the notion that there *is* a Santa. Not having that notion is not an experience....

                  So if you're looking for an experience, then get ready to look for the cessation of that experience too!

                  Love,

                  --Greg

                  At 07:38 AM 1/2/03 +0200, Athanor wrote:
                  >Understanding is experiential! How do you understand than, Judi? i guess that everyone has experiences... at least everyone alive .. :-) and judi, if the ego is not the ground, than what is it? what are you standing on?
                  >what's wrong with Sarlo?
                  >mirela
                  >
                  > > understanding is experiential.
                  >
                  > ****** Wrong again! Understanding is non-experiential.
                  > Ever heard the term "non-duality"? Well there you have it.


                  Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                  ADVERTISEMENT




                  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.



                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • Gregory Goode
                  Dear Mirela, You re right -- that moment *was* an experience. I saw my parents do the stuff they attributed to Santa Claus, and the jig was up. That bit of
                  Message 8 of 8 , Jan 2, 2003
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Dear Mirela,

                    You're right -- that moment *was* an experience. I saw my parents do the stuff they attributed to Santa Claus, and the jig was up. That bit of seeing on my part was a definite experience in time and place, and came to an end.

                    But that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about what was had dissolved. The belief in Santa Claus had dissolved. I didn't acquire a NEW belief to be rehearsed and practiced ("There is no Santa Claus"). Rather, it was the non-occurrence of the (mythical) experience of Santa Claus.

                    That's one reason that the nondual path is sometimes called the "Via Negativa." It's not additive, it's subtractive.

                    Love,

                    --Greg

                    At 07:09 PM 1/2/03 +0200, Athanor wrote:
                    >dear Greg,
                    >when you realised that there is no Santa, it was an experiential understanding.. (you have watched your parents-experience)
                    >mirela
                    > ----- Original Message -----
                    > From: Gregory Goode
                    > To: meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com ; meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com
                    > Sent: Thursday, January 02, 2003 4:12 PM
                    > Subject: Re: [Meditation Society of America] Re: THE SAGE'S VIEW
                    >
                    >
                    > The understanding is not experiential - whatever experience you can think of - understanding is "in back of it." If understanding *were* experiential (and I don't mean understanding how to fill out one's tax form), then it would be just another whiff that comes and goes.
                    >
                    > It's like when I learned that there's no Santa Claus. I can trace the event back to a certain point in chronological time (sneaking downstairs one Christmas eve and seeing my parents wrap the presents. They talked about they'd make the bike be from Santa...). But what was left was not a mental image constantly remembered and rehearsed ("There is no Santa, there is no Santa).
                    >
                    > No, it's more the dissolving of the notion that there *is* a Santa. Not having that notion is not an experience....
                    >
                    > So if you're looking for an experience, then get ready to look for the cessation of that experience too!
                    >
                    > Love,
                    >
                    > --Greg
                    >
                    > At 07:38 AM 1/2/03 +0200, Athanor wrote:
                    > >Understanding is experiential! How do you understand than, Judi? i guess that everyone has experiences... at least everyone alive .. :-) and judi, if the ego is not the ground, than what is it? what are you standing on?
                    > >what's wrong with Sarlo?
                    > >mirela
                    > >
                    > > > understanding is experiential.
                    > >
                    > > ****** Wrong again! Understanding is non-experiential.
                    > > Ever heard the term "non-duality"? Well there you have it.
                    >
                    >
                    > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                    > ADVERTISEMENT
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > 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.
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    >
                    >
                    >To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                    >meditationsocietyofamerica-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.