Guest guest Posted December 19, 2001 Report Share Posted December 19, 2001 I have a strong feeling that the greatest disservice that can ever be done for those who came before us and tried to pave the way toward freedom, is to take their words and place them in cement. Those were lives who had released the past and knew that the only reason for not having freedom was from living within the past. I imagine that if they were here now, they would say to burn every book ever written and take with us, instead, only the essence of what they wrote...They knew that all of what they found and were trying to say can never be placed in words. Norma Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 19, 2001 Report Share Posted December 19, 2001 Dear Norma, You wrote: >>>I have a strong feeling that the greatest disservice that can ever be done for those who came before us and tried to pave the way toward freedom, is to take their words and place them in cement.<<< You are so right... As you know I am a visionary... a pretty good one... really pretty good.... I have done a lot of work to make my clairvoyancy as clear as possible...(so many pitfalls) I even recovered quite a bit of clear-sentience, as now very often, most of my senses are involved in the 'epiphanies'. I am in direct contact with many from "those who came before us" and sometimes I per-ceive very strong directives, some asking me to help put some of their written pronouncements in a new light. The most important thing is, that I get their messages pre-verbally, without cultural or language barriers in between, no translation is needed.... The most frequent directions I get are to repeat their sayings in current terms and to help undo translation deformations: Most important ppl who contact me on this are: Akademos Yah (weh) Ea Enki Enlil Adam Gautama Shakyamuni Jesus (of course) Plato Bodhisattva Avalokiteshvara Plato Edgar Cayce Hildegard of Bingen >>> Those were lives who had released the past and knew that the only reason for not having freedom was from living within the past.<<< Absolutely and all their message are about that... Let me just lift out Edgar Cayce's (which will surely raise some eyebrows) "We do not choose our own parents." "We have no personal past lives, it does not work that way." "We are not here to work out "some difficulty" from a, so to say, previous life." "We do not create our own reality in the sense that it includes negativity and suffering." "Parallel universes, yes... Parallel lives, yes... " >>> I imagine that if they were here now, they would say to burn every book ever written and take with us, instead, only the essence of what they wrote...<<< You say, "...if they were here now..." All these beings find that time and space do not work the way we so "consensically hold on to" >>>They knew that all of what they found and were trying to say can never be placed in words.<<< You are right, they even knew that when they were talking, but you see, we try anyway.... and it is allowed... it is fun, especially when there is play in it, when we sing most of what we say... Love you, Norma, Wim Norma /join All paths go somewhere. No path goes nowhere. Paths, places, sights, perceptions, and indeed all experiences arise from and exist in and subside back into the Space of Awareness. Like waves rising are not different than the ocean, all things arising from Awareness are of the nature of Awareness. Awareness does not come and go but is always Present. It is Home. Home is where the Heart Is. Jnanis know the Heart to be the Finality of Eternal Being. A true devotee relishes in the Truth of Self-Knowledge, spontaneously arising from within into It Self. Welcome all to a. Your use of is subject to --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.306 / Virus Database: 166 - Release 12/4/2001 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.306 / Virus Database: 166 - Release 12/4/2001 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 19, 2001 Report Share Posted December 19, 2001 Hi Norma -- Yes. Neither Jesus nor Gautama wrote their words to leave to posterity. Reality is "radical unicity" beyond trust, beyond the trust based on separation, where there is someone trusting someone else, or something else. This unicity doesn't require words or concepts to be "carried forward" in order to "maximize use" ... Words are spoken in situational contexts, which pass, and each moment is sufficient unto itself. -- Dan > > I have a strong feeling that the greatest disservice that can ever be done > for those who came before us and tried to pave the way toward freedom, is to > take their words and place them in cement. Those were lives who had released > the past and knew that the only reason for not having freedom was from living > within the past. I imagine that if they were here now, they would say to > burn every book ever written and take with us, instead, only the essence of > what they wrote...They knew that all of what they found and were trying to > say can never be placed in words. > > Norma Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 19, 2001 Report Share Posted December 19, 2001 , "Wim Borsboom" <wim@a...> wrote: [snip] > As you know I am a visionary... You are not a visionary. You are pure being absolute. You sit silent in eternity, everpresent and all pervading. There is nothing you are attached to as you are only associated with yourself. All the phenomena that are appear to be experiencing have absolutely nothing to do with you. [snip] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 19, 2001 Report Share Posted December 19, 2001 Hi Dan and Norma, Dan answered Norma: >>>Yes. Neither Jesus nor Gautama wrote their words to leave to posterity.<<< As most sages did... (Moses too), Jesus did scribble in the sand though... Or... was that one of those territory games? (:-) Remember he loved to play with children( :-) Territory games that you can play with a jack knife in hard packed sandy soil...We called in Dutch 'landverovertje"... I just discovered a few days ago, that a certain hopscotch game was a sacred game, a 'temple' game played on the "Kermis" ground in front of the church in the days of yore. (A German name for hopscotch is 'Temple hupfen') ... They (?) drew the squares up to seven and at the top was written (scratched) home or heaven. (There are some variations.) heaven 7 5 6 3 2 4 1 People from the old countries may remember some variations...(all with specific meaning). Remember, the chakras have a similar configuration. (I have written about that before..., before I discovered the connection with hopscotch... It is so neat to be clairvoyant, I see these thing happening with the sages involved..., the one about Akademos is the neatest... but I won't give that away yet) crown is one (pineal gland) brow is two (two lobes of the pituitary gland, with a 90 degree twist) throat is one (thyroid) heart is two (two lungs, two sides to the heart, liver and pancreas as a pair) solar plexus is one (vestige of umbilical chord....there is a big story in that) sacral is two (two gonads, testicles or ovaries) root is one (anal gland in the rectum opening, the one that is still active with dogs and cats) I also found the system behind the number of lobes or petals of the chakras... (this so uncanny and so neat) All that was scribbled...in the sand at one point. (I usually use poster board or a white board in my talks.) I also found the system behind the western Alphabet. (They(?) botched it up as they remembered the Aryan format wrongly, I remember the fumbling of those guys.) Also found the link with Sanskrit Devanagari script as it was written on dried palm fronds. Also found out why in the west we usually write from left to right and in the east they write from top to bottom and from right to left... It is all so simple. I went at some point in my life through a period of amnesia, had to do quite a bit of work to get some semblance of memory back...It is mostly back except for some language lacunas... I guess, I'm now making up for some memory loss by remembering the past (any past) very graphically... I cannot totally control yet what I want to remember from the past... but I am getting better... Also found out exactly what ABACADABRA means Also also also. Love, from the bottomless source, Wim PS This is so neat guys, these old masters used to actually draw in the sand... I sometimes still do that when I take clients for a walk... Don Juan had quite an elaborate scheme in the sand (to do with the tonal and nagual) --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.306 / Virus Database: 166 - Release 12/4/2001 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 19, 2001 Report Share Posted December 19, 2001 To say what one is not seems fair. To say what one is, is impossible... words are utterly ineffectual. The great sages would say only "you are not what you think. Find out what you are." In other words, Wim is not what you think he is either ;-). Namaste, Tim / Omkara , "jodyrrr" <jodyrrr@h...> wrote: > , "Wim Borsboom" <wim@a...> wrote: > > [snip] > > > As you know I am a visionary... > > You are not a visionary. You are pure being absolute. You sit > silent in eternity, everpresent and all pervading. There is > nothing you are attached to as you are only associated with > yourself. All the phenomena that are appear to be experiencing > have absolutely nothing to do with you. > > [snip] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 19, 2001 Report Share Posted December 19, 2001 Dear Jodi, Jodi, you reacted to my > As you know I am a visionary... I have no thoughts about myself. The simplest thing I can tell you is that I am Wim, here and now... (hic et nunc et per omnia saecula saeculorum) --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.306 / Virus Database: 166 - Release 12/4/2001 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 19, 2001 Report Share Posted December 19, 2001 , "fewtch" <coresite@h...> wrote: > > To say what one is not seems fair. To say what one is, is > impossible... words are utterly ineffectual. > > The great sages would say only "you are not what you think. Find out > what you are." > > In other words, Wim is not what you think he is either ;-). > > Namaste, > > Tim / Omkara Wim is as exactly as I said he is, as are you, I, and everyone else, notwithstanding the ineffectualness of language. There is no harm in pointing to the ineffable as long as we understand that it is just a pointing. That's all we have on these lists anyway. Thinking only enters into it when the decision to express arises. The fact is that we are all the Self. Jnana yoga is about the coming to this understanding, wholly and completely. Any and all musings about levels, planes, supposed psychic abilities or visions have about as much to do with jnana as the circus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 19, 2001 Report Share Posted December 19, 2001 , "Wim Borsboom" <wim@a...> wrote: > Dear Jodi, > > Jodi, you reacted to my > > As you know I am a visionary... > > I have no thoughts about myself. > The simplest thing I can tell you is that I am > > Wim, here and now... > (hic et nunc et per omnia saecula saeculorum) Here's a few of your thoughts about you: > I am a visionary > I have done a lot of work > I even recovered > my senses are involved > I am in direct contact > I per-ceive > I get their messages Not to say any of these are not true per se, just that none of these is who you really are. All of these expressions lie completely within the realm of maya. But to be honest, your expressions of being in contact with the "otherworld" have left me with some doubts about your mental clarity. Take this as you will as it comes from someone with absolutely no visionary or psychic ability outside of the usual "I was thinking about you too" sort of thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 19, 2001 Report Share Posted December 19, 2001 Yeah yeah... i still get those Vedanta Society catalogs too. Gimme a Gita & a Veda with a large slice of pizza, please :-). Cheers, Tim , "jodyrrr" <jodyrrr@h...> wrote: > Wim is as exactly as I said he is, as are you, I, and everyone > else, notwithstanding the ineffectualness of language. > > There is no harm in pointing to the ineffable as long as we > understand that it is just a pointing. That's all we have on > these lists anyway. > > Thinking only enters into it when the decision to express > arises. The fact is that we are all the Self. Jnana yoga > is about the coming to this understanding, wholly and completely. > Any and all musings about levels, planes, supposed psychic > abilities or visions have about as much to do with jnana as > the circus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 19, 2001 Report Share Posted December 19, 2001 , "fewtch" <coresite@h...> wrote: > > Yeah yeah... i still get those Vedanta Society catalogs too. Gimme a > Gita & a Veda with a large slice of pizza, please :-). > > Cheers, > > Tim When in doubt, dismiss. [snip] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 19, 2001 Report Share Posted December 19, 2001 , "Wim Borsboom" <wim@a...> wrote: > I have no thoughts about myself. Can there be such a thing as slander for one with no thoughts about oneself? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 19, 2001 Report Share Posted December 19, 2001 David, Wim wrote: >>>> I have no thoughts about myself.<<< David answered: >>>Can there be such a thing as slander for one with no thoughts about oneself?<<< You are right, David, there cannot be such a thing..., that is why I did not accept it! The slander was only hurled towards me, and as I saw it coming, I could return it. Slander hurts the slanderer only... It comes from very old hurt that remains unresolved as long as the hurt person attempts to pass the hurt on to others by... you guessed it... Love you, David I am and remain Wim --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.306 / Virus Database: 166 - Release 12/4/2001 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 20, 2001 Report Share Posted December 20, 2001 , "david bozzi" <david.bozzi@n...> wrote: > , "Wim Borsboom" <wim@a...> wrote: > > > I have no thoughts about myself. > > Can there be such a thing as slander > for one with no thoughts about oneself? Methinks you have a point David. >From Message 24030: As you may or may not recall, on Nov 15 2001, Mark Valentine alias White Wolfe, posted an email, in the postscript of which he made some grave derogatory remarks about my integrity as a human being. There's nothing wrong with self concern, but self denial is another matter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 20, 2001 Report Share Posted December 20, 2001 Dear Jodi, How well do you know yourself, that you can know anything about anybody else with some certainty? You wrote: >>>But to be honest, your expressions of being in contact with the "otherworld" have left me with some doubts about your mental clarity. Take this as you will as it comes from someone with absolutely no visionary or psychic ability outside of the usual "I was thinking about you too" sort of thing.<<< See this in light of something you yourself wrote to someone else a while ago: >>>And when one doesn't have an experiential clue as to what they are talking about, speculative babble like this is the result.<<< >>>... in contact with "otherworld"...<<< I would never use the term "other world." as I cannot, as 'I am here now'. These are YOUR words, your expression of an inability (as yet) to know 'all this here' ; your showing off an (as yet) inability to know the extent of 'this here and now' in all its glorious manifestations. (Manifestations... originally, the first sage who used the word "maya" never meant it to have the pejorative meaning that it took on later for people who have difficulty accepting whatever arises in and from this here now.) I would never use the term "other world." as I cannot, as 'I am here now'. I never was not here and now. Whatever I talk about arises here presently... That you have in your own words "no experiential clue" is your prerogative, Jodi, but you could just as well have an experiential clue... Another thing you wrote to someone else: >>>Your statement belies a very common assumption made by those who have yet to experience realization, which is, that once realization has occurred, we will have no association with anything resembling a personality. This is a false assumption, and carrying it poses a danger to the sadhaka (as does *every* assumption about realization.) The fact is that the jnani retains a ***personality***, and is still very much the same person s/he was before realization, except for the fact that there exists the clear, experiential knowledge that s/he is Brahman and not the personality. <<< Jivanmuktis or Jnanis always refers to themselves as "beings"... not personalities... not persons. We are 'playing beings', our playing = our being, immediate and un-mediated direct experiential being. "I know that this I am" Brahman! In Hindu lore the "Child Brahman" represents that. Krishna at play. Divine Lila. The Dance. The Lalita Pose. An 'unadulterated' child in direct contact with reality. Not needing "self reflective, self-conscious recoil" about it... Personalities are pseudo entities *AT* play, but a mere theatre play, therefore the word 'persona' or 'mask'... A playing child has no mask... neither do I. Another quote from your posts to someone else: >>>The jnani continues to exist within Maya. A jnani lives in full recognition of the fact that if s/he jumps off the bridge, the body will get hit by a car and perish, even while the jnani knows with certainty that s/he will continue ***after the body dies***.<<< You are so right about Maya, but why coming up with a catastrophic example about Maya? Maya is fun, this is Sat (existence) Chit (direct un-mediated knowing) Ananda (an 'oblivious' bliss). See that you understand it... do not argue this... this is key... And by the way, whoever "dies" does not experience death the way an onlooker observes whatever seems to happen in his / her eyes to the being who "dies"... one stays here and now... How do I know... Well I am still here, am I not? But in the eyes of seven people I have "died" as many times. One last quote from yourself: >>> You are not a visionary. You are pure being absolute. You sit silent in eternity, everpresent and all pervading. There is nothing you are attached to as you are only associated with yourself. All the phenomena that are appear to be experiencing have absolutely nothing to do with you.<<< Now see this in the light of what you also wrote: >>> A jnani knows that s/he exists as an individual, at least from the regard of other individuals, and s/he understands their existence in the context of name and form...<<< >>> When Ramakrishna came to realization, he was still Ramakrishna and knew himself as Ramakrishna as well as understanding himself as Brahman. <<< Yes, I AM and YOU ARE (as we praise) pure being absolute... in eternity, everpresent and all pervading. And we arise in that and from and as that being Wim, being Jodi. Now I just happen to see that clearly, hear that clearly, feel that clearly, smell that clearly and taste that clearly... ah the ambrosia, amrita, soma (you know the meaning of these words)... and I know it full well... All in all indeed, also being a "visionary." And so are you, a fully sentient being who's unconditional and free prerogative it is (or not) to recover as much or more clarity as I enjoy... Why then do you suffer your own begrudging and berating, while I claim the franchise of moksha, jivanmukta...and wish it you as well... You want to play with me, Jodi? Love you, Jodi, Wim. PS Keep reading Jodi, as there is an end to this Jodi, you reacted to my > As you know I am a visionary... > I have no thoughts about myself. > The simplest thing I can tell you is that I am > Wim, here and now... > (hic et nunc et per omnia saecula saeculorum) with: >>> Here's a few of your thoughts about you: I am a visionary I have done a lot of work I even recovered my senses are involved I am in direct contact I per-ceive I get their messages <<< And you added: >>> Not to say any of these are not true per se, just that none of these is who you really are. All of these expressions lie completely within the realm of maya.<<< Yes, Jodi and that is just that wonderful miracle... see if you can mean it that way... work at it Jodi... recover again. --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.306 / Virus Database: 166 - Release 12/4/2001 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 20, 2001 Report Share Posted December 20, 2001 , "david bozzi" <david.bozzi@n...> wrote: > Can there be such a thing as slander > for one with no thoughts about oneself? Interesting question. This would be like trying to slander "empty space" ... Would "empty space" take offense at words uttered in empty space? Another metaphor has been used: sand. Can sand be slandered? "I am like the sands of the Ganges, I accept all who walk upon me, rich or poor, old or young, wise or ignorant." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 20, 2001 Report Share Posted December 20, 2001 , "Wim Borsboom" <wim@a...> wrote: > Dear Jodi, > > How well do you know yourself, that you can know anything about anybody else > with some certainty? There's one thing I know about my self for certain. I'm speculating about you based on my assessment of what you are writing. The readers are free to take it or leave it. [snip] > I would never use the term "other world." as I cannot, as 'I am here now'. > These are YOUR words, your expression of an inability (as yet) to know 'all > this here' ; your showing off an (as yet) inability to know the extent of > 'this here and now' in all its glorious manifestations. (Manifestations... > originally, the first sage who used the word "maya" never meant it to have > the pejorative meaning that it took on later for people who have difficulty > accepting whatever arises in and from this here now.) > I would never use the term "other world." as I cannot, as 'I am here now'. > I never was not here and now. > Whatever I talk about arises here presently... And I'm speculating that it is all mental garbage. > That you have in your own words "no experiential clue" is your prerogative, > Jodi, but you could just as well have an experiential clue... Not being in your life experience makes this impossible. All I have is an assessment of what you are writing. [snip] > And you added: > > >>> Not to say any of these are not true per se, just that none of these is > who you really are. All of these expressions lie completely within the realm > of maya.<<< > > Yes, Jodi and that is just that wonderful miracle... see if you can mean it > that way... work at it Jodi... recover again. You've put up a bunch of self referential babble extolling your siddhis and the information that arises from them. I'm of the opinion that most if not all of that is mental static that has little use outside of confirming the existence of siddhis to yourself, and perhaps to us. I for one do not believe it. Everything you've written could be internally generated, fueled by some sort of manic episode. I could be completely wrong about you. I've been wrong here plenty of times before. However, until you start telling me my social security number and my mother's maiden name, I'm not convinced. Why do I care? I'm not sure. It's a reaction that I allow to occur. But based on my understanding of jnana (which has some experiential foundation), and my opinion about these things; psychic abilities, talking to dead people, astral flying, and all the rest of it is a complete waste of time as it has nothing to do with who we really are. That is, all that stuff merely extends identification with ourselves as individuals. While that identification can remain for the jnani, the practice of jnana yoga encourages only one thing, and that is complete identification with the Self, completely outside of anyone talking to dead people and bragging about it, or someone trying to protect their reputation from others' opinions about them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 20, 2001 Report Share Posted December 20, 2001 > That is, all that stuff merely extends identification with ourselves > as individuals. While that identification can remain for the jnani, > the practice of jnana yoga encourages only one thing, and that is > complete identification with the Self, completely outside of anyone > talking to dead people and bragging about it, or someone trying to > protect their reputation from others' opinions about them. Wanted to say a few words, For those who celebrate Christmas or are caugth in it, I wish you a wonderfull Christmas. For the others may your wish of the moment come true. For the others I already spoke to much, Enjoy, Antoine Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 21, 2001 Report Share Posted December 21, 2001 Well well, my dear Jody, You wrote: >>>There's one thing I know about my self for certain. I'm speculating about you based on my assessment of what you are writing. <<< Speculation is your prerogative, if it does you any good, keep at it... But speculation gives you only speculative clarity...It will not lead to direct non-mediated knowing or Chit. >>> And I'm speculating that it is all mental garbage.<<< If your speculation gives you this clarity, go right ahead. But then, what am I to you that you spend time on me, even if it is only for the sake of speculation? If I am something to you, may I suggest that you take advantage (positively meant) of me. I tell you, there is no risk involved, it does not cost you a penny, I do not try to sell you snake oil. Through what I write, I talk about everyone's unalienable birthright to freedom or the guaranteed prospect of regaining their franchise. The way I write about it, is through recounting personal history of remarkable stuff. I'm the witness of it, and if you are willing to read it, you may through recognition and corroboration, witness the same in yourself. If it is garbage to you, why are you staring at it, just put me on the curb. Is it so strange to write about oneself, is that so new? Even Theresa of Avila wrote her own biography. >>> Not being in your life experience makes this impossible. All I have is an assessment of what you are writing.<<< It is more an assessment of yourself, Jody, on how well you can trust someone else, yours is really not an assessment of my writing... Your way of responding to many list members is pretty predictable, it does not matter who you respond to, it is very much of the same, most of it in the same vein. Just go over your posts and consider them someone else's, what kind of picture of Jody is it showing? It does not matter to me, but I would love you to be clear about YOURSELF. But so far you have hardly ever said anything about yourself. Oh yes, you talk about the grander persona in a wonderful paragraph or two, but who is Jody, Jody? I am sure you pick your nose, I'd like to know about that... It does not matter to me?... Actually you do matter to me, you help me write my better stuff... Anyway, as far as my writing goes, I stand myself, I stand by myself, I stand up for myself. As far as my writing goes, I have no need for anybody to verify it... Truth is unconditional, it does not depend on whether someone believes or not... I have never allowed myself to be assessed, also, it was never needed... That became clear to me very early in life. (Remember, the German overseer of that hospital in which I was assessed and deemed to die, well that assessment was wrong... >>> You've put up a bunch of self referential babble extolling your siddhis and the information that arises from them. <<< Unless you TALK ABOUT someone else, (whom you really cannot know as well as yourself) you can really only express your self. And even when you talk about someone else, your assessments often only seeks to assert and verify your own judgements. Jody, tell me, what is the use then, really? Except maybe for the satisfaction of a possible compulsion to 'assess' ad infinitum and never come to 'communication' or 'communion'... Unless you talk ABOUT someone else, whom, as you yourself assert, you cannot know, "Not being in your life experience makes this impossible" one can only really say something about oneself. At least there IS 'life experience' and whether that experience is doubted by others or not, does not really matter. NOT THAT IT IS NEEDED to talk about myself, but hey Jody, people have been doing it from the moment the word "I" was voiced. Whether I speak or not... I have been silent for many years... I am equally glorious, it makes no difference... It is the feedback that tells me to keep writing the way I do... You, Jody, can do with it what you want... In fact, you are doing nothing with it... except for assessing it... Assessing food, does not make you get the fruition and nutrition from it. The only thing required with communication is not having any doubt, or at least overcoming doubt, that is self doubt and doubt in the other... Is that per chance your issue? >>>I'm of the opinion that most if not all of that is mental static that has little use outside of confirming the existence of siddhis to yourself, and perhaps to us.<<< Remember in your posts to Tony you wondered so often, whether what he was writing about was based on personal experience, now you are confronted with someone with personal experience and lo and behold you display a similar doubt... So what you think you say about me is about you, Jody... >>> I for one do not believe it.<<< So put me on the curb, do not even attempt to sniff the, what you call, garbage... <<< everything you've written could be internally generated, fueled by some sort of manic episode. I could be completely wrong about you. I've been wrong here plenty of times before.<<< And why should I try to convince you of your right or wrongness, there is one thing that I am really sure of and that is that I am .. and for the rest, I have learned to trust others, YOU TOO, who also say or will at some point say, that they are without a doubt, who they are.. Or... could it be that the doubt you have about me is a mere reflection of your own self doubt, which is really no more than a reflective replay of someone else's doubt in your right to exist in unconditional freedom. >>> However, until you start telling me my social security number and my mother's maiden name, I'm not convinced.<<< Why should I tell you those things, you could easily find that out for yourself. Are you talking a dog and pony show? What is the use of telling you things you already know... You would just say that I bore you, which you are actually saying right now anyway. :-))) >>> psychic abilities, talking to dead people, astral flying, and all the rest of it<<< I never use those words, and about dead people... they do not exist, one cannot talk to them... and about astral flying I have never done that... Bi-location though...yes! >>> is a complete waste of time as it has nothing to do with who we really are.<<< So true... Do you have a problem with "who we really are" Love you, Jody, Wim. PS. By the way, do you recall that you invited me over to visit you, when I happen to come your way... you did actually... >>>Hey Wim. I live in Southern California in Laguna Beach. We have a nice Kali Temple down the road and hold daily and new moon pujas that are well attended. If your travel brings you this way please try to stop by and visit.<<< --jody. PS. You wrote: >>>There's one thing I know about my self for certain. I'm speculating about you based on my assessment of what you are writing. <<< Why should I play that important a role in what you know about yourself for certain? That is a very strange statement Jody... --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.306 / Virus Database: 166 - Release 12/4/2001 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 21, 2001 Report Share Posted December 21, 2001 , "Wim Borsboom" <wim@a...> wrote: > Well well, my dear Jody, > > You wrote: > >>>There's one thing I know about my self for certain. I'm speculating about > you based on my assessment of what you are writing. <<< > > Speculation is your prerogative, if it does you any good, keep at it... > But speculation gives you only speculative clarity...It will not lead to > direct non-mediated knowing or Chit. It's true that jnana is not the result of speculation. That's not why I'm speculating. I'm speculating as to why you would babble on about your "abilities." The conclusion I come to is that you've come to be identified with the one who has those powers. Nothing wrong with that per se, but it does indicate that perhaps you haven't quite understood who you really are, imo. Even if you do know who you really are, I as an individual am against the idea that siddhis have anything to do with jnana, or that one can expect siddhis as the result of jnana. > >>> And I'm speculating that it is all mental garbage.<<< > > If your speculation gives you this clarity, go right ahead. No, it just provides a model as to why you've gone on about your supposed powers. The problem I have with this is that powers have nothing to do with jnana, but everything to do with the occlusion of it. > But then, what am I to you that you spend time on me, even if it is only for > the sake of speculation? If I am something to you, may I suggest that you > take advantage (positively meant) of me. I tell you, there is no risk > involved, it does not cost you a penny, I do not try to sell you snake oil. > Through what I write, I talk about everyone's unalienable birthright to > freedom or the guaranteed prospect of regaining their franchise. The way I > write about it, is through recounting personal history of remarkable stuff. > I'm the witness of it, and if you are willing to read it, you may through > recognition and corroboration, witness the same in yourself. > If it is garbage to you, why are you staring at it, just put me on the curb. > Is it so strange to write about oneself, is that so new? Even Theresa of > Avila wrote her own biography. My problem is the association of jnana with siddhis. People come to expect "remarkable stuff" with their realization as the result the myths that are projected into spiritual culture. My problem with you is that you are presently doing this projection on the list. While realization is a remarkable blessing, one of the most remarkable things about it is the utter lack of remarkability it brings to a life. That is, we come to see that we are nothing, and as remarkable as that is, it is purely unremarkable itself. But you are free to say whatever you like. Blather on till the cows come home about what the Buddha is telling you. I think you're fooling yourself with it, and it has nothing to do with jnana. > >>> Not being in your life experience makes this impossible. All I have is > an assessment of what you are writing.<<< > > It is more an assessment of yourself, Jody, on how well you can trust > someone else, yours is really not an assessment of my writing... > > Your way of responding to many list members is pretty predictable, it does > not matter who you respond to, it is very much of the same, most of it in > the same vein. Just go over your posts and consider them someone else's, > what kind of picture of Jody is it showing? I'm well aware of the picture of Jody that results. If I was trying to present a picture of myself I might be worried about it, but the fact is that I'm just trying to provide clarity as I've come to know it. The reason I'm in the same vein most of the time is because I encounter the same ignorance most of the time. > It does not matter to me, but I would love you to be clear about YOURSELF. > But so far you have hardly ever said anything about yourself. Oh yes, you > talk about the grander persona in a wonderful paragraph or two, but who is > Jody, Jody? I am sure you pick your nose, I'd like to know about that... > It does not matter to me?... Actually you do matter to me, you help me write > my better stuff... I'm just another opinion in pixels. There's no reason to present anything other than that. This mind encounters what it deems ignorance, and then it reacts to such. That's about all there is to me online. [snip] > Jody, tell me, what is the use then, really? Except maybe for the > satisfaction of a possible compulsion to 'assess' ad infinitum and never > come to 'communication' or 'communion'... The use is to present the idea that siddhis have nothing to do with jnana, and in fact get in the way of jnana. I'll go on about this ad nauseam. [snip] > NOT THAT IT IS NEEDED to talk about myself, but hey Jody, people have been > doing it from the moment the word "I" was voiced. I'd speculate that there is a need, and you use this list to fulfill it. It provides the hook for your identity as a siddha. > Whether I speak or not... I have been silent for many years... I am equally > glorious, it makes no difference... You go Wim! > It is the feedback that tells me to keep writing the way I do... > You, Jody, can do with it what you want... > In fact, you are doing nothing with it... except for assessing it... > Assessing food, does not make you get the fruition and nutrition from it. You've not put up anything I'd consider palatable. Despite the overwhelming quantity, I've yet to encounter any quality. > The only thing required with communication is not having any doubt, or at > least overcoming doubt, that is self doubt and doubt in the other... Is that > per chance your issue? What I doubt is the authenticity of your supposed siddhis. > >>>I'm of the opinion that most if not all of that is mental static that has > little use outside of confirming the existence of siddhis to yourself, and > perhaps to us.<<< > > Remember in your posts to Tony you wondered so often, whether what he was > writing about was based on personal experience, now you are confronted with > someone with personal experience and lo and behold you display a similar > doubt... Tony had his interpretations of what he read, and you have your glorious powers. Neither indicates jnana. > So what you think you say about me is about you, Jody... Psychobabbling noted. Even if this were true, it doesn't preclude my assessment of you from being true as well. > >>> I for one do not believe it.<<< > > So put me on the curb, do not even attempt to sniff the, what you call, > garbage... Well, as long as I see the connection made between jnana and siddhis, I'll probably be compelled to respond. > <<< everything you've written could be internally generated, fueled by some > sort of manic episode. I could be completely wrong about you. I've been > wrong here plenty of times before.<<< > > And why should I try to convince you of your right or wrongness, there is > one thing that I am really sure of and that is that I am .. and for the > rest, I have learned to trust others, YOU TOO, who also say or will at some > point say, that they are without a doubt, who they are.. You don't have to convince me of anything. In fact, if you really didn't have any thoughts of yourself, I'd expect you to ignore me. That would have suited me just fine. > Or... could it be that the doubt you have about me is a mere reflection of > your own self doubt, which is really no more than a reflective replay of > someone else's doubt in your right to exist in unconditional freedom. Psychobabble noted. > >>> However, until you start telling me my social security number and my > mother's maiden name, I'm not convinced.<<< > > Why should I tell you those things, you could easily find that out for > yourself. Are you talking a dog and pony show? > What is the use of telling you things you already know... You would just say > that I bore you, which you are actually saying right now anyway. > :-))) What I'm saying is that I suspect you've fooled yourself into believing that you have these powers when it's really just mental static. Unless you can provide a demonstration, that's the most likely explanation. The reason I say this is because none of the jnanis I know have powers like the ones you are describing. > >>> psychic abilities, talking to dead people, astral flying, and all the > rest of it<<< > I never use those words, and about dead people... they do not exist, one > cannot talk to them... and about astral flying I have never done that... > Bi-location though...yes! Perhaps. > >>> is a complete waste of time as it has nothing to do with who we really > are.<<< > So true... > Do you have a problem with "who we really are" Nope. My problem is with powers being extolled as the result of jnana or being associated with jnana. The origin of this is the hyperbole employed by devotees to describe their gurus. I think it's a load to garbage, and it does nothing to further anyone's spiritual aspirations, but it does go quite a ways in blocking them by fostering unrealistic expectations about realization. > Love you, Jody, Wim. > > PS. > By the way, do you recall that you invited me over to visit you, when I > happen to come your way... you did actually... > > >>>Hey Wim. > > I live in Southern California in Laguna Beach. We have a > nice Kali Temple down the road and hold daily and new > moon pujas that are well attended. If your travel brings > you this way please try to stop by and visit.<<< > > --jody. That was before you started writing about your glorious powers. To tell you the truth, I'm not so interested in meeting you now. I hope you're aren't disappointed, but our views don't seem to have much resonance anymore. However, you are welcome to visit Kali Mandir anytime you'd like. > PS. > You wrote: > >>>There's one thing I know about my self for certain. I'm speculating about > you based on my assessment of what you are writing. <<< > Why should I play that important a role in what you know about yourself for > certain? > That is a very strange statement Jody... That was awkward writing. What I meant to say was that I have no doubt about myself, but some doubt about you, based on my assessment of what you have written. This isn't to say that I'm never wrong, or to say that I couldn't be wrong about you. I may very well be wrong about you. However, based on what I've come to understand about jnana, your writing about your siddhis leads me to conclude that you've come to be identified with them. Believe it or not Wim, I love you too. However, I cannot respect your understanding as a result of your recent statements about your 'powers' and the experiences they supposedly bring to your life. But even if they were real, they would still have nothing to do with jnana. But, if you have no thoughts of yourself, this shouldn't matter at all to you. Hopefully it doesn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 21, 2001 Report Share Posted December 21, 2001 , "jodyrrr" <jodyrrr@h...> wrote: <the whole thing snipped> Funny, I never read anywhere Wim saying "Siddhis are an important part of Jnana Yoga." Unless that was "inferred." In fact, there are multiple yogas in the Vedantic tradition... Jnana, Bhakti, Karma, etc. Outside of strict Advaita Vedanta, there's Siddha Yoga and Tantra as well (not to mention a multitude of Buddhist, Jainist and other practices lumped under the umbrella of "Hinduism"). Seen here, these so-called yogas are not something practiced by anybody... they 'happen', like everything else happens. Nobody chooses a path, the path (if any) happens to occur in the course of everyday living, a particular path seen as "attractive" for some reason. Also seen here... Jnana doesn't need you to come to its defense, Jody. Does this bickering & "vain argumentation" really serve any purpose? Do you really believe you're going to convince Wim of anything, or is Wim going to convince you of anything? Cheers, Tim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 21, 2001 Report Share Posted December 21, 2001 Hi Tim -- When I read Jody, I enjoy his clarity in expressing his point of view, not taking it as a true statement about who someone else is, nor his coming to the defense of jnana yoga. He addresses the jnana and the Wim constructed in Jody's mind, as Wim addresses the Jody constructed in Wim's mind. So of course, as you say, neither is likely to convince the other to adopt the other's point of view. Which in itself might be construed as demonstration of "how things work in the realm of debate and influence via verbal expression." As for the reality which doesn't depend on, nor have, any separable "mind of Jody" or "mind of Wim" -- That is always ever-present, between-the-lines, and never dependent on one, rather than another, interpretation of word meanings. Enjoying the play as it appears to be, and the non-play as what is. Namaste, Dan , "fewtch" <coresite@h...> wrote: > , "jodyrrr" <jodyrrr@h...> wrote: > > <the whole thing snipped> > > Funny, I never read anywhere Wim saying "Siddhis are an important > part of Jnana Yoga." Unless that was "inferred." > > In fact, there are multiple yogas in the Vedantic tradition... Jnana, > Bhakti, Karma, etc. Outside of strict Advaita Vedanta, there's > Siddha Yoga and Tantra as well (not to mention a multitude of > Buddhist, Jainist and other practices lumped under the umbrella > of "Hinduism"). > > Seen here, these so-called yogas are not something practiced by > anybody... they 'happen', like everything else happens. Nobody > chooses a path, the path (if any) happens to occur in the course of > everyday living, a particular path seen as "attractive" for some > reason. > > Also seen here... Jnana doesn't need you to come to its defense, > Jody. Does this bickering & "vain argumentation" really serve any > purpose? Do you really believe you're going to convince Wim of > anything, or is Wim going to convince you of anything? > > Cheers, > > Tim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 21, 2001 Report Share Posted December 21, 2001 , "fewtch" <coresite@h...> wrote: [snip] > Also seen here... Jnana doesn't need you to come to its defense, > Jody. Does this bickering & "vain argumentation" really serve any > purpose? Do you really believe you're going to convince Wim of > anything, or is Wim going to convince you of anything? > > Cheers, > > Tim Nobody needs to be convinced of anything Tim. I felt compelled to respond to Wim's sharing of his belief in his powers. I have a belief as well, that powers have nothing to do with jnana. This is based on my understanding that realization is not always accompanied by powers, but is very often occluded by the belief that powers are the result of realization. As usual, I'm tilting at my own windmills. My understanding of realization is very different than the set of expectations I had about realization. Therefore, when I encounter the expectations I used to hold, out comes the sword in an attempt to cut them down. I battling the 'me' of former times in the hopes that I can prevent others from falling into the same circumstances of occlusion that hindered my understanding. Maybe these hopes go unrealized. Oh well. I'll still respond as I'm compelled to, until I get bored or kicked off the list. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 21, 2001 Report Share Posted December 21, 2001 On Fri, 21 Dec 2001 09:08:24 -0000 "fewtch" <coresite writes: > , "jodyrrr" <jodyrrr@h...> wrote: > > <the whole thing snipped> > > Funny, I never read anywhere Wim saying "Siddhis are an important > part of Jnana Yoga." Unless that was "inferred." > > In fact, there are multiple yogas in the Vedantic tradition... > Jnana, > Bhakti, Karma, etc. Outside of strict Advaita Vedanta, there's > Siddha Yoga and Tantra as well (not to mention a multitude of > Buddhist, Jainist and other practices lumped under the umbrella > of "Hinduism"). > > Seen here, these so-called yogas are not something practiced by > anybody... they 'happen', like everything else happens. Nobody > chooses a path, the path (if any) happens to occur in the course of > everyday living, a particular path seen as "attractive" for some > reason. > > Also seen here... Jnana doesn't need you to come to its defense, > Jody. Does this bickering & "vain argumentation" really serve any > purpose? Do you really believe you're going to convince Wim of > anything, or is Wim going to convince you of anything? > Jody's just doing as Jody does. Frankly, I admire him for actually wading through Wim's verbosity in order to reply to it! I don't see Jody as defending jnana as a formal practice so much as pointing out the utter irrelevance of what Wim posts at such great length. It's so easy to get caught up in what amount to "shiney objects," trivial amusements lent faux gravitas by implied association with serious endeavor, "spiritual" or otherwise. 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 ______________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 21, 2001 Report Share Posted December 21, 2001 Dear Jody, >>> It's true that jnana is not the result of speculation. That's not why I'm speculating. I'm speculating as to why you would babble on about your "abilities." <<< You don't have to speculate, just see if there is something in it for you, and if not... put it by the curb. But make up your mind... Speculators have a hard time making up their mind, that is why they are called 'speculators' )) They are afraid that, if they make up their mind, that they may lose a chance... That is why speculators hardly take a chance either...They only speculate if they should or should not take a chance. They are so cautious that they will, as long as they keep speculating, not be regain their freedom. When a speculator finally takes a chance...the speculation is over...and a new 'dynamic' sets in... >> The conclusion I come to is that you've come to be identified with the one who has those powers. Nothing wrong with that per se, but it does indicate that perhaps you haven't quite understood who you really are, imo.<<< You try to fit me into a Jnani or Siddha box, while I need no box at all. YOU haven't understood who I am, that is why it is YOUR opinion. Having an opinion will never lead to insight and clarity. There is no way that you will have insight into me as long as you don't want clear insight. For clear insight, you would have to take a stance, would you? So, put me by the wayside, or take me in, one for all, or all for nothing... I assure you that you don't run a risk either way. Now you are just in a state of protraction. Whatever I say, you will doubt and you will take yourself into a new cycle of speculation. Doubt is your compulsion, better get sick of it... till you stop doing it...till you don't want to afford it anymore... I hope that I can help you getting sick of your doubt, lack of trust, feeling that you could be duped. "Je houdt altijd een draai om de arm" or "een slag om de hand" which are Dutch sayings expressing habitual states of 'non-commitment'. Commit yourself Jody, and if that means that you have to discard me or take me in, that does not matter to me... Just get final clarity into "NOT what you want" as you don't know that... but get clarity into: what you are, what you have and what you take that you are that you have and that you take be, have and take fully, with both hands, embracing fully... Whether it includes me or not, it does not make a difference, either choice gets you into a new dynamic of freedom. So love me or leave me. (Oh, but do not replace me with someone else, another Tony or another Wim, that will just prolong the protraction.) So Jody, stop beating around the bush hoping that there is something worthwhile to catch, while you, at the same time, wonder that, what you might catch, might or might not dupe you. >>> Even if you do know who you really are, I as an individual am against the idea that siddhis have anything to do with jnana, or that one can expect siddhis as the result of jnana.<<< What do you know eh? Why don't you just ask me... Then make up your mind, once and for all, and you doubt will be over... >>> The problem I have with this is that powers have nothing to do with jnana, but everything to do with the occlusion of it.<<< Just ask me, Jody, apparently you cannot use yourself as a guide as you admit that you have a problem, I don't, I know the answer. >>>My problem is the association of jnana with siddhis.<<< Yep, that is your problem !!! Why keeping it. >>> People come to expect "remarkable stuff" with their realization as the result the myths that are projected into spiritual culture. <<< I expected nothing, that is exactly why it is so remarkable... And I tell you, I may be remarkable... but I am not mythical. >>> My problem with you is that you are presently doing this projection on the list. <<< Yes, you have a problem with me... I don't have a problem with me, I don't have a problem with you... Your staying or you going, it does not matter to me... I love you unconditionally...It is for you to restore the unconditionality. So you are saying that being a jnani is conditional upon being no siddha... or a siddha cannot be a jnani... or something like that... Ah Jody, conditionality, conditionality... >>> While realization is a remarkable blessing, one of the most remarkable things about it is the utter lack of remarkability it brings to a life. <<< Yes, that is why I play... >>> But you are free to say whatever you like. Blather on till the cows come home about what the Buddha is telling you. I think you're fooling yourself with it, and it has nothing to do with jnana.<<< I am not professing to be a jnani nor a siddha, I just am Wim who loves whatever this is... >>> The reason I'm in the same vein most of the time is because I encounter the same ignorance most of the time.<<< Some psychobabble: When you have just bought a new VW beetle, you see a lot more VW beetles on the road, when you buy into ignorance you will see a lot of it as well. >>> I'm just another opinion in pixels. There's no reason to present anything other than that. This mind encounters what it deems ignorance, and then it reacts to such. That's about all there is to me online.<<< Like I said, you are seeing a lot of BMW's. >>> This mind encounters what it deems ignorance, and then it reacts to such <<< When and where did you pick up the idea that the ***mind*** deals with ignorance? The whole human being deals with information, which comes from conglomerates of energy patterns, that are collected as 'knowledge points' or data. Data that are supplied to the brain by means of parallel (identical but not the same) energy patterns through the senses via an intricate web of nerve structures and other support structures.. Although we are whole integral beings, 'dualism' has erroneously made us conceive a sharp distinction between mind and body. But there is the whole you, JODY, with integrated infra and supra structures to supports that.... That is you Jody, you who sits HERE, physically reading this and hopefully poking your nose or scratching your ears... The kind of mind you are talking about is symptomatic of a pathology, let me just simply call it the mind / body split, a sign of dualism . >>> This mind encounters what it deems ignorance, and then it reacts to such. That's about all there is to me online.<<< Ah, finally, you are now getting bored, that is good, you will start hating this ignorance so much that won't even look at it anymore... You know what, that is the beginning of Chit, a good sign... I wrote: >>> Jody, tell me, what is the use then, really?... <<< You wrote: >>>The use is to present the idea that siddhis have nothing to do with jnana, and in fact get in the way of jnana. I'll go on about this ad nauseam. <<< Are you by chance PRESCRIBING what anything is... Why not just looking and finding out, instead of fitting things into a mindless or mindful (take your pick) mould...? I have only described myself because I am everyday happily surprised... When I gave up my (as forced upon me by someone else) prescriptions and expectations on how to be, when I surrendered my inhibitions, the integral being unfolded... Why don't you do the same, then we can finally play... I wrote: >>> NOT THAT IT IS NEEDED to talk about myself, but hey Jody, people have been doing it from the moment the word "I" was voiced. <<< You wrote: >>> I'd speculate that there is a need, and you use this list to fulfill it. It provides the hook for your identity as a siddha.<<< I am Wim, that is all... I wrote: >>> You, Jody, can do with it what you want...In fact, you are doing nothing with it... except for assessing it... Assessing food, does not make you get the fruition and nutrition from it.<<< You wrote: >>> You've not put up anything I'd consider palatable. Despite the overwhelming quantity, I've yet to encounter any quality.<<< Put it by the curb then... I wrote: >>> The only thing required with communication is not having any doubt, or at least overcoming doubt, that is self doubt and doubt in the other... Is that per chance your issue?<<< You wrote: >>> What I doubt is the authenticity of your supposed siddhis.<<< You are calling me a liar..., you may as well use those words... Why don't you come over and take a look... but there is a price to pay... you will have to suspend your disbelief... >>> Tony had his interpretations of what he read, and you have your glorious powers. Neither indicates jnana.<<< I never said I have glorious powers, my life is glorious...in all its aspects... the whole shebang... I wrote: >>>> So what you think you say about me is about you, Jody...<<< You wrote: >>> Psychobabbling noted. Even if this were true, it doesn't preclude my assessment of you from being true as well. <<< It does indeed not preclude it, but I tell you that it is not true. You wrote: >>> I for one do not believe it.<<< I answered: >>> So put me on the curb, do not even attempt to sniff the, what you call, garbage...<<< You wrote: >>> Well, as long as I see the connection made between jnana and siddhis, I'll probably be compelled to respond.<<< Compelled yes, a compulsion from dualism, nothing more than that... I only account for what happens with me, I've never set out to state or to profess that I am a Siddha or a Jnani, a this or a that. I only am Wim, and I love living in all its glorious aspect, with that comes amrita (and you know what that means). >>> In fact, if you really didn't have any thoughts of yourself, I'd expect you to ignore me. That would have suited me just fine.<<< Why would I ignore you, I love you...Jody...and there's no thoughts in love... I wrote: >>> Or... could it be that the doubt you have about me is a mere reflection of your own self doubt, which is really no more than a reflective replay of someone else's doubt in your right to exist in unconditional freedom.<<< You wrote: >>> Psychobabble noted <<< But not taken seriously... >> The reason I say this is because none of the jnanis I know have powers like the ones you are describing. <<< I am Wim, not part of any lineage, I do not have to respond to a 'board of professionals', I do not have or need a 'certificate of authenticity', I do not need an OK.. In fact I need nothing as I am not wanting... I wrote: >>>> Bi-location though...yes!<<< You wrote: >>>Perhaps.<<< No, no, no Jodi, make up your mind... put me by the curb or take me in...unconditionally. >>> My problem is with powers being extolled as the result of jnana or being associated with jnana. <<< I have never said such, and I will not say such, as I do not have to... Your association of me with "Jnana OR Siddha" is totally yours... An integral being has no predilections... I wrote: >>> By the way, do you recall that you invited me over to visit you, when I happen to come your way... you did actually...<<< You wrote: >>>That was before you started writing about your glorious powers. To tell you the truth, I'm not so interested in meeting you now. I hope you're aren't disappointed, but our views don't seem to have much resonance anymore.<<< I had my "glorious powers" (your words) described on my website all along... >>> However, you are welcome to visit Kali Mandir anytime you'd like. <<< Of course..., I love temples... I feel at home in every one of them... >>> I may very well be wrong about you. <<< Make up your mind... it does not matter to me... >>> However, based on what I've come to understand about jnana, your writing about your siddhis leads me to conclude that you've come to be identified with them. <<< I never knew that there was something of a strife going on between Siddhas and Jnanis. Do I have to take sides? Oh Jody... >>> Believe it or not Wim, I love you too. <<< Of course I know that... >>> However, I cannot respect your understanding as a result of your recent statements about your 'powers' and the experiences they supposedly bring to your life. But even if they were real, they would still have nothing to do with jnana.<<< So what, what do I care! I just am...and I love that... >>> But, if you have no thoughts of yourself, this shouldn't matter at all to you. Hopefully it doesn't.<<< It does not, you can be sure of that... Love you, Jody, Wim. --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.306 / Virus Database: 166 - Release 12/4/2001 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.