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

[Meditation Society of America] Re: The utility of spiritual experiences

Expand Messages
  • jodyrrr
    ... Actually Bruceji. I have no problems with either G s or Jeff s authenticity. It s the methods I have problems with, as well as my noticing of some
    Message 1 of 5 , May 29 10:00 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Morgen <editor@j...>
      wrote:
      >
      > On Thu, 29 May 2003 15:50:18 -0000 "freyjartist" <freyjartist@a...>
      > writes:
      > > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Belyea"
      > > <jeff@s...> wrote:
      > > > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "jodyrrr" <
      > > > jodyrrr@y...> wrote:
      > [snip]
      > >
      > > I'm with Rodney. "Can't we all just get along?"
      > >
      > > That doesn't mean there can be no disagreements.
      > >
      > > It just means getting out beyond ideas
      > > of pro-guru and anti-guru, and all other ideas
      > > that create separation, into the field
      > > of no concepts.
      > >
      > Well, in "the field of no
      > concepts," there's nothing
      > to write about -- language
      > is by nature conceptual,
      > at it's very best it can
      > serve to point beyond
      > concepts. At *their* very
      > best, both J-jis manage to
      > do that, but often their
      > pointings are buried in
      > what amount to social
      > concerns about each
      > other's favored m.o. --
      > even to the point of
      > publicly doubting each
      > other's authenticity.

      Actually Bruceji. I have no problems with either
      G's or Jeff's authenticity. It's the methods I have
      problems with, as well as my noticing of some
      unobserved ego.

      I also have some difficulty understanding why they would
      care what I thought of them at all. Oh wait! Could it be
      that unobserved ego reacting? ;)

      > When all is said and done,
      > Freyja, peace cannot be
      > declared and/or mandated
      > -- it flows like an
      > endless river and is
      > either seen as such or not
      > in any given moment. So,
      > the answer to Rodney's
      > question is "yes," but
      > it's one of possibility
      > and therefore entirely
      > conceptual!
      >
      > __________________________________________________
      > http://come.to/realization
      > http://www.atman.net/realization
      > http://www.users.uniserve.com/~samuel/brucemrg.htm
      > http://www.users.uniserve.com/~samuel/brucsong.htm
      >
      >
      > [snip]
      >
      > ________________________________________________________________
      > The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
      > Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
      > Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!
    • freyjartist
      ... Yes, seems so. ... Of course. I agree Bruce. There is no beginning and no end to any of it. I keep traveling around the bend There was no beginning,
      Message 2 of 5 , May 29 10:12 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Morgen
        <editor@j...> wrote:
        >
        > On Thu, 29 May 2003 15:50:18 -0000 "freyjartist" <freyjartist@a...>
        > writes:
        > > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Belyea"
        > > <jeff@s...> wrote:
        > > > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "jodyrrr" <
        > > > jodyrrr@y...> wrote:
        > [snip]
        > >
        > > I'm with Rodney. "Can't we all just get along?"
        > >
        > > That doesn't mean there can be no disagreements.
        > >
        > > It just means getting out beyond ideas
        > > of pro-guru and anti-guru, and all other ideas
        > > that create separation, into the field
        > > of no concepts.
        > >
        > Well, in "the field of no
        > concepts," there's nothing
        > to write about -- language
        > is by nature conceptual,
        > at it's very best it can
        > serve to point beyond
        > concepts. At *their* very
        > best, both J-jis manage to
        > do that, but often their
        > pointings are buried in
        > what amount to social
        > concerns about each
        > other's favored m.o. --
        > even to the point of
        > publicly doubting each
        > other's authenticity.
        >

        Yes, seems so.

        > When all is said and done,
        > Freyja, peace cannot be
        > declared and/or mandated
        > -- it flows like an
        > endless river and is
        > either seen as such or not
        > in any given moment. So,
        > the answer to Rodney's
        > question is "yes," but
        > it's one of possibility
        > and therefore entirely
        > conceptual!
        >

        Of course. I agree Bruce.
        There is no beginning
        and no end to any of it.

        "I keep traveling around the bend
        There was no beginning, there is no end
        It wasn't born and never dies
        There are no edges, there is no sides
        Oh yeah, you just don't win
        It's so far out, the way out is in
        Bow to God and call him Sir,
        but if you don't know where you're
        going
        Any road will take you there."

        ~George Harrison
        "Any Road" from the CD "Brainwashed"
        >


        Freyja
        __________________________________________________
        > http://come.to/realization
        > http://www.atman.net/realization
        > http://www.users.uniserve.com/~samuel/brucemrg.htm
        > http://www.users.uniserve.com/~samuel/brucsong.htm
        >
        >
        > [snip]
        >
        > ________________________________________________________________
        > The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
        > Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
        > Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!
      • jodyrrr
        ... [snip] ... It s how the tradition is applied that presents problems to me, not the tradition itself. ... Good point. We can t take our gurus with their
        Message 3 of 5 , May 29 10:33 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Morgen <editor@j...>
          wrote:
          >
          > On Thu, 29 May 2003 17:00:57 -0000 "jodyrrr" <jodyrrr@y...> writes:

          [snip]

          > > Actually Bruceji. I have no problems with either
          > > G's or Jeff's authenticity. It's the methods I have
          > > problems with,
          >
          > I don't know that I have
          > a particular problem with
          > the traditional m.o. so
          > much as an obligation to
          > occasionally remind folks
          > of the inherent pitfalls
          > of the traditional guru-
          > chela dyad, which I agree
          > are quite prevalent in
          > what you call "spiritual
          > culture. Of course
          > Jeffji has similar
          > concerns about pitfalls
          > in the more anarchistic
          > m.o. some of us favor --
          > and the wheel keeps
          > spinning! :-)

          It's how the tradition is applied that
          presents problems to me, not the
          tradition itself.

          > > as well as my noticing of some
          > > unobserved ego.
          >
          > Yes, I see that too --
          > although I find it hard to
          > be quite so sure that it's
          > really "unobserved" so much
          > as briefly observed and
          > then dismissed for what are
          > seen as valid practical
          > reasons.

          Good point. We can't take our gurus
          with their egos too, can we.

          > > I also have some difficulty understanding why they would > care what I
          > thought of them at all. Oh wait! Could it
          > > be that unobserved ego reacting? ;)
          >
          > Yes, it *could* be, but it
          > also might be out of honest
          > concern that some folks for
          > whom the more traditional
          > approach is appropriate
          > might turn away from (what
          > is for them) rightful work,
          > even if all such work is
          > inherently non-causal with
          > respect to realization and
          > often loaded down with
          > superfluous significance.

          Again, good point. By putting both
          views within view, the reader can
          decide for themselves which is the
          best approach for them.

          > > > When all is said and done,
          > > > Freyja, peace cannot be
          > > > declared and/or mandated
          > > > -- it flows like an
          > > > endless river and is
          > > > either seen as such or not
          > > > in any given moment. So,
          > > > the answer to Rodney's
          > > > question is "yes," but
          > > > it's one of possibility
          > > > and therefore entirely
          > > > conceptual!
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > [snip]
          > > >
          > > >
          > __________________________________________________
          > http://come.to/realization
          > http://www.atman.net/realization
          > http://www.users.uniserve.com/~samuel/brucemrg.htm
          > http://www.users.uniserve.com/~samuel/brucsong.htm
          >
          > ________________________________________________________________
          > The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
          > Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
          > Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!
        • Bruce Morgen
          On Thu, 29 May 2003 15:50:18 -0000 freyjartist ... [snip] ... Well, in the field of no concepts, there s nothing to write about --
          Message 4 of 5 , May 29 4:24 PM
          • 0 Attachment
            On Thu, 29 May 2003 15:50:18 -0000 "freyjartist" <freyjartist@...>
            writes:
            > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Belyea"
            > <jeff@s...> wrote:
            > > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "jodyrrr" <
            > > jodyrrr@y...> wrote:
            [snip]
            >
            > I'm with Rodney. "Can't we all just get along?"
            >
            > That doesn't mean there can be no disagreements.
            >
            > It just means getting out beyond ideas
            > of pro-guru and anti-guru, and all other ideas
            > that create separation, into the field
            > of no concepts.
            >
            Well, in "the field of no
            concepts," there's nothing
            to write about -- language
            is by nature conceptual,
            at it's very best it can
            serve to point beyond
            concepts. At *their* very
            best, both J-jis manage to
            do that, but often their
            pointings are buried in
            what amount to social
            concerns about each
            other's favored m.o. --
            even to the point of
            publicly doubting each
            other's authenticity.

            When all is said and done,
            Freyja, peace cannot be
            declared and/or mandated
            -- it flows like an
            endless river and is
            either seen as such or not
            in any given moment. So,
            the answer to Rodney's
            question is "yes," but
            it's one of possibility
            and therefore entirely
            conceptual!

            __________________________________________________
            http://come.to/realization
            http://www.atman.net/realization
            http://www.users.uniserve.com/~samuel/brucemrg.htm
            http://www.users.uniserve.com/~samuel/brucsong.htm


            [snip]

            ________________________________________________________________
            The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
            Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
            Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!
          • Bruce Morgen
            ... I don t know that I have a particular problem with the traditional m.o. so much as an obligation to occasionally remind folks of the inherent pitfalls of
            Message 5 of 5 , May 29 5:21 PM
            • 0 Attachment
              On Thu, 29 May 2003 17:00:57 -0000 "jodyrrr" <jodyrrr@...> writes:
              > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Morgen
              > <editor@j...>
              > wrote:
              > >
              > > On Thu, 29 May 2003 15:50:18 -0000 "freyjartist"
              > <freyjartist@a...>
              > > writes:
              > > > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Belyea"
              >
              > > > <jeff@s...> wrote:
              > > > > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "jodyrrr"
              > <
              > > > > jodyrrr@y...> wrote:
              > > [snip]
              > > >
              > > > I'm with Rodney. "Can't we all just get along?"
              > > >
              > > > That doesn't mean there can be no disagreements.
              > > >
              > > > It just means getting out beyond ideas
              > > > of pro-guru and anti-guru, and all other ideas
              > > > that create separation, into the field
              > > > of no concepts.
              > > >
              > > Well, in "the field of no
              > > concepts," there's nothing
              > > to write about -- language
              > > is by nature conceptual,
              > > at it's very best it can
              > > serve to point beyond
              > > concepts. At *their* very
              > > best, both J-jis manage to
              > > do that, but often their
              > > pointings are buried in
              > > what amount to social
              > > concerns about each
              > > other's favored m.o. --
              > > even to the point of
              > > publicly doubting each
              > > other's authenticity.
              >
              > Actually Bruceji. I have no problems with either
              > G's or Jeff's authenticity. It's the methods I have
              > problems with,

              I don't know that I have
              a particular problem with
              the traditional m.o. so
              much as an obligation to
              occasionally remind folks
              of the inherent pitfalls
              of the traditional guru-
              chela dyad, which I agree
              are quite prevalent in
              what you call "spiritual
              culture. Of course
              Jeffji has similar
              concerns about pitfalls
              in the more anarchistic
              m.o. some of us favor --
              and the wheel keeps
              spinning! :-)

              > as well as my noticing of some
              > unobserved ego.

              Yes, I see that too --
              although I find it hard to
              be quite so sure that it's
              really "unobserved" so much
              as briefly observed and
              then dismissed for what are
              seen as valid practical
              reasons.
              >
              > I also have some difficulty understanding why they would > care what I
              thought of them at all. Oh wait! Could it
              > be that unobserved ego reacting? ;)

              Yes, it *could* be, but it
              also might be out of honest
              concern that some folks for
              whom the more traditional
              approach is appropriate
              might turn away from (what
              is for them) rightful work,
              even if all such work is
              inherently non-causal with
              respect to realization and
              often loaded down with
              superfluous significance.
              >
              > > When all is said and done,
              > > Freyja, peace cannot be
              > > declared and/or mandated
              > > -- it flows like an
              > > endless river and is
              > > either seen as such or not
              > > in any given moment. So,
              > > the answer to Rodney's
              > > question is "yes," but
              > > it's one of possibility
              > > and therefore entirely
              > > conceptual!
              > >
              > >
              > > [snip]
              > >
              > >
              __________________________________________________
              http://come.to/realization
              http://www.atman.net/realization
              http://www.users.uniserve.com/~samuel/brucemrg.htm
              http://www.users.uniserve.com/~samuel/brucsong.htm

              ________________________________________________________________
              The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
              Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
              Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.