Guest guest Posted April 6, 2002 Report Share Posted April 6, 2002 , "vioricail" <viorica@z...> wrote: > > A stone could be a better guru than an impure mind; > > Arthur Osborne had one of the rare discriminating > minds inclined to truth and perfect correctedness; > > his article is strictly referring to two minds - > both impure from the standpoint of the scriptures : > one set as a guru and the other as a disciple. > his warnings are true and worth considering ; It depends on the karma of the disciple. It may be (and has been so in many cases) that it is appropriate for the disciple to endure the influence of a nasty guru. Growth is catalyzed by pain and suffering more often than by joy. To expect your spiritual life to be all sweetness and light is to forego any real transformation. While it may be more pleasant to have a sweet guru whose words drip with joy, some of us may be in need of a teardown, and this may be best accomplished by an encounter with a no good, predatory taker of a guru, at least until the demolition is complete. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 6, 2002 Report Share Posted April 6, 2002 , "vioricail" <viorica@z...> wrote: > > A stone could be a better guru than an impure mind; > > Arthur Osborne had one of the rare discriminating > minds inclined to truth and perfect correctedness; FYI: There is no such thing as "perfect correctedness." Every single individual on the quest for understanding is an utterly unique case. As such, there are any number of ways that we can come to spiritual understanding. What is correct for one person is a horrific mistake for another, and visa versa. While there may be general guidelines that many can be confident in sticking to, these do not apply to everyone. Those who stick to their heart's suggestions despite what the guidelines suggest are much more likely to arrive at the understanding they seek than those who follow the script by rote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 6, 2002 Report Share Posted April 6, 2002 dear Jody , it is never in my intention to initiate disputes on any list with any of the quotes I am posting ; so whenever this happens I am sorry ; as a reason to dispute I wouldn't post a single word in my life; but sometimes it happens so please accept my apologizes; about Arthur Osborne - Sri Ramana Maharshi's devotees know well who Arthur Osborne was, know well about his name,character,correctedness,writings, devotion to Ramana and right understanding and presentation of his steachings ; Arthur Osborne is above any dispute . and about disputes : Disputes , worldly associations and quarrels should be avoided. Not even spiritual disputations should be indulged in, whether good or bad. - Devikalottara 77 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 6, 2002 Report Share Posted April 6, 2002 , "vioricail" <viorica@z...> wrote: > dear Jody , > > it is never in my intention to initiate disputes on any list with > any of the quotes I am posting ; > so whenever this happens I am sorry ; as a reason to dispute > I wouldn't post a single word in my life; > but sometimes it happens so please accept my apologizes; Please, there's nothing for you to apologize about. I'm sorry you're sorry, but I've got to speak up when I encounter anything that reeks of "correctedness" with regards to spiritual views. > about Arthur Osborne - > Sri Ramana Maharshi's devotees know well who Arthur Osborne was, > know well about his name,character,correctedness,writings, > devotion to Ramana and right understanding and presentation > of his steachings ; Arthur Osborne is above any dispute . > > and about disputes : > > Disputes , worldly associations and quarrels should > be avoided. Not even spiritual disputations should be > indulged in, whether good or bad. > > - Devikalottara 77 Regardless of your recitation or Mr. Osborne's "correctedness", the fact is that there is no such thing as being correct regarding spiritual life. That is, every path is unique, and while many people may fall into the same category and set of guidelines, many also fall outside the purview of the so-called "correct" views. In fact, because they sought their own heart's counsel as opposed to that of FamousDeadGuys™, they arrived at the understanding which so many rule followers never will, precisely because the rules have become their cage instead of their salvation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 6, 2002 Report Share Posted April 6, 2002 , "vioricail" <viorica@z...> wrote: > Yes , there is such a thing as perfect correctedness. > Ramana Maharshi was one of them. > > 'man made perfect is one with Brahman .' > from one of the translations of Bhagavad Gita. You are welcome to believe the hagiography that the great saints get wrapped up in. I would rather allow my heroes their scuffs as well as their luster, as it brings us all much closer to who they actually were. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 7, 2002 Report Share Posted April 7, 2002 , "vioricail" <viorica@z...> wrote: > > dear Jody , > > > Please, there's nothing for you to apologize about. I'm sorry > > you're sorry, but I've got to speak up when I encounter anything > > that reeks of "correctedness" with regards to spiritual views. > > there is no contradiction between correctedness and spiritual > views ; then what is there you don't like ? I guess I'm not understanding the meaning of the term "correctedness." I assumed it to mean "the correct way" or "the correct view." While there is only one "view" to the jnanis, there are many ways this view gets expressed as it filters through all the different personalities. Additionally, the various jnanis came to be such by varied and numerous ways, all of which could be regarded as the correct way for them, but none of which would be the correct way for us all. > > Regardless of your recitation or Mr. Osborne's "correctedness", > > the fact is that there is no such thing as being correct regarding > > spiritual life. > > Is it the 'correctedness' that bothers you ? Yes, that and his statement that bad gurus aren't helpful. Many people have benefited (in a backhanded sort of way) from being exposed to bad gurus. > That is, every path is unique, and while many > > people may fall into the same category and set of guidelines, > > many also fall outside the purview of the so-called "correct" > > views. In fact, because they sought their own heart's counsel > > as opposed to that of FamousDeadGuys™, they arrived at the > > understanding which so many rule followers never will, precisely > > because the rules have become their cage instead of their > > salvation. > > if there are individuals who fell victims to rules > and became imprisoned by them that doesn't meen it is the rule . Correct, sometimes the "rules" work quite nicely for some folk. > Besides I made no association between correctedness and a set of > guidelines; correctedness is a state of mind , of the discriminating > mind cutting through what is and rejecting the false. Ok, the problem lies with my misapprehension of the meaning of the term. > And the 'FamousDeadGuys' who are they ? > If you take them to be the body , they are dead. > But they kept saying they were not the body. > And they are not the body. > So who is dead ? The personality that once existed and was written about can be said to be dead. If you contend that Ramana was not a body then you must admit the words attributed to him weren't his. If that's the case, why would you pay them any mind? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 7, 2002 Report Share Posted April 7, 2002 , "vioricail" <viorica@z...> wrote: > dear Jody , > first - I would make a distinction in talking > between saints and sages. Ramana is a sage ; > that in his case all the sainty qualities can be added > to the person he was, that is what made him perfect > as an individual in life also. I don't make that distinction. However, I'd like to understand what the differences are if you wouldn't mind explaining them. > > You are welcome to believe the hagiography that the > > great saints get wrapped up in. I would rather > > allow my heroes their scuffs as well as their luster, > > as it brings us all much closer to who they actually were. > > > besides , saints didn't get wrapped up in anything , > just life unfolding in a specific way. > People's mind - analysing them and setting them as model > and building rules and institutions around them got wrapped up. Correct. It's the story of the saint or sage that changes as a result of the process of hagiography. However, this story becomes what we know of the historical person, and in most if not all cases, the story can have glaring omissions and glosses, making it from somewhat to severely inaccurate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 7, 2002 Report Share Posted April 7, 2002 , "jodyrrr" <jodyrrr> wrote: > , "vioricail" <viorica@z...> wrote: > > Who is meant being your guru depends on the karma of the disciple, yes, but if you think the sweetness and light of the guru means also only sweetness and light on the spiritual path, this is wrong. The problems which the disciple meet are in him - not in the guru - but the light of the guru brings them to daylight. I think the quote of Osborne is not one of his masterpeaces and one need not agree in all (I also don't in full) - but nevertheless I think the disciple should use his full capacity of mind and heart to have a close look whom he follows. The big rest is grace. Gabriele > It depends on the karma of the disciple. It may be (and > has been so in many cases) that it is appropriate for the > disciple to endure the influence of a nasty guru. Growth > is catalyzed by pain and suffering more often than by joy. > > To expect your spiritual life to be all sweetness and light > is to forego any real transformation. While it may be more > pleasant to have a sweet guru whose words drip with joy, > some of us may be in need of a teardown, and this may be > best accomplished by an encounter with a no good, predatory > taker of a guru, at least until the demolition is complete. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 7, 2002 Report Share Posted April 7, 2002 , "gabriele_ebert" <g.ebert@g...> wrote: > , "jodyrrr" <jodyrrr> wrote: > > , "vioricail" <viorica@z...> wrote: > > > > Who is meant being your guru depends on the karma of the disciple, > yes, but if you think the sweetness and light of the guru means also > only sweetness and light on the spiritual path, this is wrong. The > problems which the disciple meet are in him - not in the guru - but > the light of the guru brings them to daylight. > > I think the quote of Osborne is not one of his masterpeaces and one > need not agree in all (I also don't in full) - but nevertheless I > think the disciple should use his full capacity of mind and heart to > have a close look whom he follows. The big rest is grace. > > Gabriele Absolutely. It would be a mistake to pick a rotten guru, and karma certainly has everything to do with which guru we end up with. The point I wanted to make is that life is as much our guru as any single person, and quite often life's lessons are not easy. Pain and suffering is a much better catalyst for personal growth than joy and bliss. While it would be psychotic to chase after pain and suffering instead of joy and bliss, pain is almost always the better teacher. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 7, 2002 Report Share Posted April 7, 2002 Joy and pain belong to the mind. The guru in his essence is beyond joy and pain. > Absolutely. It would be a mistake to pick a rotten guru, > and karma certainly has everything to do with which guru we > end up with. The point I wanted to make is that life is > as much our guru as any single person, and quite often > life's lessons are not easy. Pain and suffering is a much > better catalyst for personal growth than joy and bliss. > While it would be psychotic to chase after pain and suffering > instead of joy and bliss, pain is almost always the better > teacher. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 7, 2002 Report Share Posted April 7, 2002 As are we all, Gabriele, for there is only one "essence." "The guru" can only point toward that fact, it is for us to directly see it and thereby be it. For some, that "guru" is a famous and charismatic human, for others it's the aggregate of "life's lessons," painful as they may be, that precedes the grace of realization. With that grace, all such distinctions vanish. On Sun, 07 Apr 2002 21:27:54 -0000 "gabriele_ebert" <g.ebert writes: > Joy and pain belong to the mind. The guru in his essence is beyond > joy and pain. > > > Absolutely. It would be a mistake to pick a rotten guru, > > and karma certainly has everything to do with which guru we > > end up with. The point I wanted to make is that life is > > as much our guru as any single person, and quite often > > life's lessons are not easy. Pain and suffering is a much > > better catalyst for personal growth than joy and bliss. > > While it would be psychotic to chase after pain and suffering > > instead of joy and bliss, pain is almost always the better > > teacher. > 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 April 7, 2002 Report Share Posted April 7, 2002 , "gabriele_ebert" <g.ebert@g...> wrote: > Joy and pain belong to the mind. The guru in his essence is beyond > joy and pain. As are we all. However, there appears to be a correllation between mental transformation and spiritual understanding, and pain will bring about real mental transformation much quicker and more extensively than joy. > > Absolutely. It would be a mistake to pick a rotten guru, > > and karma certainly has everything to do with which guru we > > end up with. The point I wanted to make is that life is > > as much our guru as any single person, and quite often > > life's lessons are not easy. Pain and suffering is a much > > better catalyst for personal growth than joy and bliss. > > While it would be psychotic to chase after pain and suffering > > instead of joy and bliss, pain is almost always the better > > teacher. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 7, 2002 Report Share Posted April 7, 2002 , "vioricail" <viorica@z...> wrote: [snip] > just wondering whether you could find a more agreabable > way to express your opinions ... ? > > > vicki. I can think of many more disagreeable ways to express these opinions Vicki. I think Viorica is doing a great job expressing her disagreement without being too disagreeable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 7, 2002 Report Share Posted April 7, 2002 On Sun, 07 Apr 2002 22:17:12 -0000 "jodyrrr" <jodyrrr writes: > , "vioricail" <viorica@z...> wrote: > > [snip] > > > just wondering whether you could find a more agreabable > > way to express your opinions ... ? > > > > > > vicki. > > I can think of many more disagreeable ways to express these > opinions Vicki. I think Viorica is doing a great job > expressing her disagreement without being too disagreeable. > And so is Gabriele, which is who I believe Jodyji is citing for "expressing her disagreement without being too disagreeable." 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 April 7, 2002 Report Share Posted April 7, 2002 On 4/7/02 at 10:24 PM vioricail wrote: ºdear Gabriele , º º let alone your disagreement with those quotes º I chose to post ... it is not about me .who cares ? º º but Mouni Sadhu ? and Arthur Osborne ? º Two well known Ramana's devotees who brought such contributions to º us all ? º º I admit that this kind of attitude from another devotee º saddens me. Hi Vicki, Why would perceiving judgment be a reason for saddening? Whether a judgment is made consciously or unconsciously doesn't matter: a hard wired one like a like for sweet food or a learned one like the like for a bitter drug like coffee is but a difference in degree, not in essence. Undoubtedly volumes of quotes can be produced on the issue of "by judging no matter what, you only judge yourself", as there is nobody else ;-) A simple example: Mind-bodies conditioned to define their judgement "ethical" arguably are worst of: for instance, it is impossible to be an ethical vegetarian and a cat-lover as cats will suffer on whatever meatless diet, and they will suffer too on a diet of kibble only (which also can contain material gathered at roadkill and animal refuges): forcing pets into cannibalism, which could be called unethical. Jan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 8, 2002 Report Share Posted April 8, 2002 Dear Vioricail, (is that the right spelling, dear?) REALLY?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?! Yikes, I think the disputes are often the thing that teaches the most. (or is it "the things that teach the most"?) Anyway, I sense that Yoga and Buddhism, the two schools that resonate most strongly with me both suggest NOT taking anything on faith, but testing all ideas that come along. Does not Ramana Maharshi suggest that we ask "Who Am I?" There are so many ways to do this IMO, but surely it must be an active engagement with truth, not a passive belief in someone else's influence. Yes, yes, at some point it is grace that happens, but isn't the path to grace one of sincere inquiry? (and doesn't inquiry require testing of thoughts to see if they are "true"? Love, Mark ps well, anyway, whether you intend it or not, the quote is the catalyst for the dispute, which is the catalyst for the independent thinking that I seem to need to do. (Hey, is High Dee around? She might enjoy quoting me here...) , "vioricail" <viorica@z...> wrote: > dear Jody , > > it is never in my intention to initiate disputes on any list with > any of the quotes I am posting ; > so whenever this happens I am sorry ; as a reason to dispute > I wouldn't post a single word in my life; > but sometimes it happens so please accept my apologizes; > > about Arthur Osborne - > Sri Ramana Maharshi's devotees know well who Arthur Osborne was, > know well about his name,character,correctedness,writings, > devotion to Ramana and right understanding and presentation > of his steachings ; Arthur Osborne is above any dispute . > > and about disputes : > > Disputes , worldly associations and quarrels should > be avoided. Not even spiritual disputations should be > indulged in, whether good or bad. > > - Devikalottara 77 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 8, 2002 Report Share Posted April 8, 2002 Dear Vicki, I am sorry that my "judgements" and opinions causes such trubble for you. But it is not true that no devotee has made "judgements" in any book agains another: read Chadwick's Reminiscences and what he said about Paul Brunton! Really hard stuff! Chadwick has a lot of critizism about behaviours etc. of devotees. Besides being one of Ramana's formous devotees as Osborne and Muni does not mean being free from errors. Only the fact that something is a quote of someone doesn't make it perfect. I like reading Osborne and Muni very much. They have given us a lot and one can learn a lot from them. But they are no "holy cows" and if I read something which I don't agree why not express it? This has nothing to do with the pure teaching of Ramana. Ramana's teaching is beyond everything and one has to follow it in the heart. One need not discuss. Vicki, I like your sharings very much. I am neither critizing you nor Osborne or Muni. It is only that this was really not one of Osborne's masterpieces and the same with Muni Sadhu. What can I do? I recognize it as such - should I then be silent? With Love Gabriele > > why ? > for a very simple reason; > posting Ramana and his devotees mixed with people's judgements > and criticism - ? that wouldn't be it , would it ? > I mean all this loses its value. > It is not for ego's sake. > That is why I find the existence of the Ramana Maharshi > oriented teaching lists a very good thing. > > I am not debates-oriented at all , it is not criticism towards me > or any judgement that is the matter. > The matter is why mix Ramana's teachings > and his very closed devotees who left treasures for us behind > with criticism or judgements ? > > In none of Ramana's devotees books that I've read by now > I ever met any word of judgement against another devotee. > Had I met such judgements ... what could I say ? > Let others make them if they wish to , we can stay out of them. > > vicki > > > > , "ecirada" <janb@a...> wrote: > > On 4/7/02 at 10:24 PM vioricail wrote: > > > > ºdear Gabriele , > > º > > º let alone your disagreement with those quotes > > º I chose to post ... it is not about me .who cares ? > > º > > º but Mouni Sadhu ? and Arthur Osborne ? > > º Two well known Ramana's devotees who brought such contributions > to > > º us all ? > > º > > º I admit that this kind of attitude from another devotee > > º saddens me. > > > > Hi Vicki, > > > > Why would perceiving judgment be a reason for saddening? > > Whether a judgment is made consciously or unconsciously > > doesn't matter: a hard wired one like a like for sweet food > > or a learned one like the like for a bitter drug like coffee is but > > a difference in degree, not in essence. > > > > Undoubtedly volumes of quotes can be produced on the issue > > of "by judging no matter what, you only judge yourself", as > > there is nobody else ;-) > > > > A simple example: > > > > Mind-bodies conditioned to define their judgement "ethical" > > arguably are worst of: for instance, it is impossible to > > be an ethical vegetarian and a cat-lover as cats will suffer > > on whatever meatless diet, and they will suffer too on a diet > > of kibble only (which also can contain material gathered at > > roadkill and animal refuges): forcing pets into cannibalism, > > which could be called unethical. > > > > Jan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 8, 2002 Report Share Posted April 8, 2002 To see it like that is too simple, Vicki! True every opinion belongs to the mind and Gabriele's mind is still very vivid and active and also creative - must say. The criticism is not meant to Osborne nor Muni. This Ego only says: not all what is written by them is not always of the same quality. You can't let aside any opinions and judgements as long as the mind exists. It belongs to the mind and to life. What you write is also nothing else as your opinion. We have to play that mind game until it finds it end. Gabriele -- In , "vioricail" <viorica@z...> wrote: > > dear Gabriele, > > your judgements causes me no trouble; > > but whether 'famous' or not - > a devotee bringing criticism to another - > remains an unfortunate event ; one's ego unfolding ; > > and we come back to Arthur Osborne's warnings about > the unrealized guide ; indeed very true; > > besides , any judgement or criticism we bring, > any complaining we make - doesn't speak about the object > of complaining - but about us, it turns back to us > pointing to our own faults and failings ; > > so I welconme the dialog , > > vicki. > > > > > , "gabriele_ebert" <g.ebert@g...> wrote: > > Dear Vicki, > > I am sorry that my "judgements" and opinions causes such trubble > for > > you. But it is not true that no devotee has made "judgements" in > any > > book agains another: read Chadwick's Reminiscences and what he said > > about Paul Brunton! Really hard stuff! Chadwick has a lot of > > critizism about behaviours etc. of devotees. > > Besides being one of Ramana's formous devotees as Osborne and Muni > > does not mean being free from errors. Only the fact that something > is > > a quote of someone doesn't make it perfect. I like reading Osborne > > and Muni very much. They have given us a lot and one can learn a > lot > > from them. But they are no "holy cows" and if I read something > which > > I don't agree why not express it? > > This has nothing to do with the pure teaching of Ramana. Ramana's > > teaching is beyond everything and one has to follow it in the > heart. > > One need not discuss. > > Vicki, I like your sharings very much. I am neither critizing you > nor > > Osborne or Muni. It is only that this was really not one of > Osborne's > > masterpieces and the same with Muni Sadhu. What can I do? I > recognize > > it as such - should I then be silent? > > With Love > > Gabriele > > > > > > > > > > why ? > > > for a very simple reason; > > > posting Ramana and his devotees mixed with people's judgements > > > and criticism - ? that wouldn't be it , would it ? > > > I mean all this loses its value. > > > It is not for ego's sake. > > > That is why I find the existence of the Ramana Maharshi > > > oriented teaching lists a very good thing. > > > > > > I am not debates-oriented at all , it is not criticism towards me > > > or any judgement that is the matter. > > > The matter is why mix Ramana's teachings > > > and his very closed devotees who left treasures for us behind > > > with criticism or judgements ? > > > > > > In none of Ramana's devotees books that I've read by now > > > I ever met any word of judgement against another devotee. > > > Had I met such judgements ... what could I say ? > > > Let others make them if they wish to , we can stay out of them. > > > > > > vicki > > > > > > > > > > > > , "ecirada" <janb@a...> wrote: > > > > On 4/7/02 at 10:24 PM vioricail wrote: > > > > > > > > ºdear Gabriele , > > > > º > > > > º let alone your disagreement with those quotes > > > > º I chose to post ... it is not about me .who cares ? > > > > º > > > > º but Mouni Sadhu ? and Arthur Osborne ? > > > > º Two well known Ramana's devotees who brought such > contributions > > > to > > > > º us all ? > > > > º > > > > º I admit that this kind of attitude from another devotee > > > > º saddens me. > > > > > > > > Hi Vicki, > > > > > > > > Why would perceiving judgment be a reason for saddening? > > > > Whether a judgment is made consciously or unconsciously > > > > doesn't matter: a hard wired one like a like for sweet food > > > > or a learned one like the like for a bitter drug like coffee is > > but > > > > a difference in degree, not in essence. > > > > > > > > Undoubtedly volumes of quotes can be produced on the issue > > > > of "by judging no matter what, you only judge yourself", as > > > > there is nobody else ;-) > > > > > > > > A simple example: > > > > > > > > Mind-bodies conditioned to define their judgement "ethical" > > > > arguably are worst of: for instance, it is impossible to > > > > be an ethical vegetarian and a cat-lover as cats will suffer > > > > on whatever meatless diet, and they will suffer too on a diet > > > > of kibble only (which also can contain material gathered at > > > > roadkill and animal refuges): forcing pets into cannibalism, > > > > which could be called unethical. > > > > > > > > Jan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 8, 2002 Report Share Posted April 8, 2002 On 4/8/02 at 3:40 AM vioricail wrote: ºdear Jan, º ºwhy ? ºfor a very simple reason; ºposting Ramana and his devotees mixed with people's judgements ºand criticism - ? that wouldn't be it , would it ? ºI mean all this loses its value. ºIt is not for ego's sake. ºThat is why I find the existence of the Ramana Maharshi ºoriented teaching lists a very good thing. Sadness and happiness pertain to the mind - mere ripples of the ocean. For one value there is an opposite one and who is to claim one "good" and another "bad"? º ºI am not debates-oriented at all , it is not criticism towards me ºor any judgement that is the matter. ºThe matter is why mix Ramana's teachings ºand his very closed devotees who left treasures for us behind ºwith criticism or judgements ? Perception pertains to mind, whether perception of treasures or of dung. And for both there is an application. º ºIn none of Ramana's devotees books that I've read by now ºI ever met any word of judgement against another devotee. ºHad I met such judgements ... what could I say ? ºLet others make them if they wish to , we can stay out of them. Take care, as books more often than not give a one-sided view: Who is quoted below? A yogi familiar with the law of Karma perhaps? --\ --------------- I go the way that Providence dictates with the assurance of a sleepwalker. --\ --------------- Jan º ºvicki Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 8, 2002 Report Share Posted April 8, 2002 OK! But believe there was no judgement about any devotee, only about some of their views - nothing more. I think about what I can do to express my "views" more agreeable to you (and others??) in future. But I must admit I was totally taken by surprise by your reactions. I did not expect anything of that kind. I try to see it with your eyes but have not yet fully succeeded. We use the same language but we speak about different things. Perhaps we mix up two things: the relative and the absolute - and that causes the confusion. Perhaps we speak from different "levels". We surely speak from different backgrounds. I am used to deal with any text like this - it doesn't matter who is the writer - this if normal for me, I have learned it to do. Sometimes it is useful, sometimes it is an obstacle. Perhaps you can see it from this side more objectively. This has nothing to do with lack of devotion and love. This has nothing to do with the fire that burns in the heart. Can you try to understand? Gabriele , "vioricail" <viorica@z...> wrote: > dear Jan,Jody,Gabriele,Bobby,& friends, > > thank you for the challangeful and interesting > dialog ; > > same love burns in my heart for Ramana as it burnt in > many of his devotees' heart , whoever and whenever they lived , > known or unknown, so called famous or anonymous. > > same love enslaved my heart , my mind , my soul,my will; > > same fire in the heart keeps me focused every second of my life > on Ramana ; so how can I judge my kinsmen,my brothers ? > > I end up this discussion here , > thank you, > v. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 8, 2002 Report Share Posted April 8, 2002 , "vioricail" <viorica@z...> wrote: > dear Jan,Jody,Gabriele,Bobby,& friends, > > thank you for the challangeful and interesting > dialog ; > > same love burns in my heart for Ramana as it burnt in > many of his devotees' heart , whoever and whenever they lived , > known or unknown, so called famous or anonymous. Same love burns in my heart and I am not a Ramana devotee. Same love burns in the folks you thank for growth-inspiring dialog. Love, David (generic flame) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 8, 2002 Report Share Posted April 8, 2002 Yes. The outer guru (whoever or whatever it may be) points towards THAT and the inner guru draws us in as he is the Self. , Bruce Morgen <editor@j...> wrote: > As are we all, Gabriele, for > there is only one "essence." > "The guru" can only point > toward that fact, it is for > us to directly see it and > thereby be it. For some, > that "guru" is a famous and > charismatic human, for > others it's the aggregate of > "life's lessons," painful as > they may be, that precedes > the grace of realization. > With that grace, all such > distinctions vanish. > > On Sun, 07 Apr 2002 21:27:54 -0000 "gabriele_ebert" <g.ebert@g...> > writes: > > Joy and pain belong to the mind. The guru in his essence is beyond > > joy and pain. > > > > > Absolutely. It would be a mistake to pick a rotten guru, > > > and karma certainly has everything to do with which guru we > > > end up with. The point I wanted to make is that life is > > > as much our guru as any single person, and quite often > > > life's lessons are not easy. Pain and suffering is a much > > > better catalyst for personal growth than joy and bliss. > > > While it would be psychotic to chase after pain and suffering > > > instead of joy and bliss, pain is almost always the better > > > teacher. > > > > > 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...
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.