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

Re: [Meditation Society of America] Re: namaste

Expand Messages
  • Bruce Morgen
    On Sat, 28 Jun 2003 00:09:06 -0000 G ... You have consistently denied that there is an ego that responds when GangaK is
    Message 1 of 53 , Jun 28, 2003
      On Sat, 28 Jun 2003 00:09:06 -0000 "G" <crystalkundalini@...>
      writes:
      > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, Bruce
      > Morgen <editor@j...> wrote:
      >
      > >>
      > > Notice Sri Ramana does not
      > > deny that there are
      > > bubbles.
      >
      > g: so and neither have i .....
      >
      You have consistently denied
      that there is an ego that
      responds when GangaK is
      addressed. That ego
      obviously exists for long
      enough for the name to be
      recognized and associated
      with a body that types a
      reply. Such a passing
      occurrence of ego is like
      the bubbles -- it is not an
      ongoing entity but rather a
      transient phenomenon. In
      the case of identification,
      there is the illusion that
      it is ongoing and actual,
      which gives rise to the
      common misperception that
      we are the body-mind.
      >
      > > Here he correctly maintains
      > > the one cannot put an end
      > > to identification via logic
      > > and intellect -- "it is
      > > impossible" indeed!
      >
      > G: yes so why the ongoing debates and word issues.....
      > it is only found when one goes beyond mind and when the mind
      > and it's illusions die ...... if the mind again arises
      > so does the identity ......

      For the realized that is of
      no particular consequence
      -- the transient occurence
      of ego and the temporary
      assignment of identity are
      seen for what they are,
      passing phenomena that are
      of practical value for the
      organism navigating maya!
      >
      > > What he does neither states
      > > nor denies is the fact that
      > > ego will reiterate in the
      > > aftermoment of the very
      > > realization he point to!
      >
      > G: no that is not true ...... he says quite correctly
      > The ego is merely a ghost with no form of it's own but feeding
      > on any form it holds, which when sought for takes to flight. Since
      > with the rise of the ego, all else rises and with its subsidence all
      >
      > else subsides, to *destroy* the ego through *self-enquiry* is
      > alone true renunciation....

      One cannot "destroy" that
      which has "no form of its
      own," what is "destroyed"
      is the typical role of ego
      in human consciousness:
      that of a perceptual lens
      through which all else is
      received/interpreted! As
      Bobby pointed out, all
      that's required is to
      notice ego's phenomenal
      nature as it arises -- on
      this direct and immediate
      noticing it falls away
      without resistance!

      > the Self-concious Being of
      > "I"-less-ness is the That which is one's true State realized by
      > *destroying* the ego through Self Enquiry.......

      Any sense of "I"-ness is
      ego -- pure being includes
      no such "I"dentification
      and simply "is."
      >
      > G: i think this is pretty explicit ..... the ego or
      > identifications as
      > body, mind, emotion go upon realization having always been
      > simply ropes and never the fearful snake that one has battled ....

      I agree, aside from our
      obviously divergent
      definitions of the word
      "ego."
      >
      > one does not awaken only to return to the illusion of the >
      dream.....

      I agree, but in the sense
      I use the word the
      reiteration of an "ego"
      thought pattern can be
      immediately seen for what
      it is, thereby precluding
      "the illusion."

      > unless one simply has a taste and glimpse and has
      > not done the work to still the mind and it's
      > manifestations.......

      Ego shot noted! :-)
      >
      > the Vivekcudamani also says one must destroy the roots so
      > the mind and identity do not once again take root and grow......
      >
      > these are not simply my words but indeed quite common
      > place understandings within all advaitic texts .......
      >
      No offense, G-ji, but your
      constant resort to old
      books and Famous Dead
      Guys[tm] holds no interest
      here. I continue to
      welcome and honor your
      first-hand testimony on
      these matters.

      Much love -- Bruce

      __________________________________________________
      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!
    • texasbg2000
      ... Hi Dan: Always good to hear from you. If you decide to run for prez I will vote for you. Love Bobby G.
      Message 53 of 53 , Jul 15, 2003
        >
        > You're welcome, and glad for the chuckle, Bobby.
        >
        > And yes, we must always keep in mind the
        > unrembemberable.
        >
        > Love,
        > Dan

        Hi Dan:

        Always good to hear from you. If you decide to run for prez I will
        vote for you.

        Love
        Bobby G.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.