Guest guest Posted June 7, 2002 Report Share Posted June 7, 2002 Dear Dan, Zenbob and Jody, So you won't even surrender wholeheartedly to a sweet little old lady like Amma? What a pity. :-) love eric Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 7, 2002 Report Share Posted June 7, 2002 Hi Eric, Amma is the re-presentation of Love and is as human/non-human as you or me. I feel that it is not about surrendering to another human being that has been idolized/idealized. I feel that the surrender and wholehearted acceptance is Love. It is not a surrender 'to' nor an accecpting 'of' something - it is 'what is' when there is no one and nothing other than One. One who resonates/represents Love is like a burning log. When another log is close to the one that is burning there is a 'Transmission of the Flame' and 'separation' is consumed in the eternal flame of Love - Love. Love, James , ErcAshfrd@a... wrote: > Dear Dan, Zenbob and Jody, > > So you won't even surrender wholeheartedly to a sweet little old lady like > Amma? > > What a pity. :-) > > love > > eric Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 7, 2002 Report Share Posted June 7, 2002 , ErcAshfrd@a... wrote: > Dear Dan, Zenbob and Jody, > > So you won't even surrender wholeheartedly to a sweet little old lady like > Amma? > > What a pity. :-) > > love > > eric Dear Eric, Actually, I already surrendered wholeheartedly to the little old lady from Pasadena. You know, the one who left everyone breathless and chanting, "Go Granny, go granny, go granny, go!" She breezed in and out of my life in a flash, and she took everything. Sorry, Amma. :-) Love, Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 7, 2002 Report Share Posted June 7, 2002 Good points, James. Yet I don't see love, beginningless love that is, as being re-presented. Only an image is capable of representation. And an image requires a mind/body to be there, to retain and respond to the image. The retention, image, response, and the mind are the same activity -- and that activity has a beginning and end, and an identity ... Now, if you stand next to a representation of love, what are you standing next to, when you move away from that representation? What if you are locked in a mental hospital in upstate New York, or a penitentary in Mississipi? What are you standing next to? Love, Dan > Hi Eric, > > Amma is the re-presentation of Love and is as human/non-human as > you or me. > > I feel that it is not about surrendering to another human being > that has been idolized/idealized. > > I feel that the surrender and wholehearted acceptance is Love. It > is not a surrender 'to' nor an accecpting 'of' something - it is 'what > is' when there is no one and nothing other than One. > > One who resonates/represents Love is like a burning log. When > another log is close to the one that is burning there is a > 'Transmission of the Flame' and 'separation' is consumed in the > eternal flame of Love - Love. > > > Love, > James > > > > , ErcAshfrd@a... wrote: > > Dear Dan, Zenbob and Jody, > > > > So you won't even surrender wholeheartedly to a sweet little old > lady like > > Amma? > > > > What a pity. :-) > > > > love > > > > eric Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 7, 2002 Report Share Posted June 7, 2002 Thanks Dan, Yes only an image can is capable of re-presentation. Just as the word Love is a representation of that which it points to. In this light I feel that 'Love Love' points to '______'. Love, James , "dan330033" <dan330033> wrote: > Good points, James. > > Yet I don't see love, > beginningless love that is, > as being re-presented. > > Only an image is > capable of representation. > > And an image requires a mind/body > to be there, to retain > and respond to the image. > > The retention, image, response, and > the mind are the same activity -- > and that activity has a beginning > and end, and an identity ... > > Now, if you stand next to a representation > of love, what are you standing next to, > when you move away from that representation? > > What if you are locked in a mental hospital > in upstate New York, or a penitentary > in Mississipi? What are you standing > next to? > > Love, > Dan > > > Hi Eric, > > > > Amma is the re-presentation of Love and is as human/non-human > as > > you or me. > > > > I feel that it is not about surrendering to another human being > > that has been idolized/idealized. > > > > I feel that the surrender and wholehearted acceptance is Love. > It > > is not a surrender 'to' nor an accecpting 'of' something - it > is 'what > > is' when there is no one and nothing other than One. > > > > One who resonates/represents Love is like a burning log. When > > another log is close to the one that is burning there is a > > 'Transmission of the Flame' and 'separation' is consumed in the > > eternal flame of Love - Love. > > > > > > Love, > > James > > > > > > > > , ErcAshfrd@a... wrote: > > > Dear Dan, Zenbob and Jody, > > > > > > So you won't even surrender wholeheartedly to a sweet little old > > lady like > > > Amma? > > > > > > What a pity. :-) > > > > > > love > > > > > > eric Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 7, 2002 Report Share Posted June 7, 2002 , "dan330033" <dan330033> wrote: > , ErcAshfrd@a... wrote: > > Dear Dan, Zenbob and Jody, > > > > So you won't even surrender wholeheartedly to a sweet little old > lady like > > Amma? > > > > What a pity. :-) > > > > love > > > > eric > > Dear Eric, > > Actually, I already surrendered > wholeheartedly to the little old lady > from Pasadena. You know, the > one who left everyone breathless > and chanting, "Go Granny, go > granny, go granny, go!" > She breezed in and > out of my life in a flash, and > she took everything. > > Sorry, Amma. > > :-) > > Love, > Dan Yeah. I, on the other hand, have been the property of Sri Ma Kali Dakshineswari since 1984. However, She threw me into Her mouth one day, chewed me up into a gruel and spit me out. It is this gruel that communicates with you all on this list. looking like dried up puke--jody. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 7, 2002 Report Share Posted June 7, 2002 , "nisarga111" <nisarga@c...> wrote: >One who resonates/represents Love is like a burning log. When another log is close to the one that is burning there is a 'Transmission of the Flame' and 'separation' is consumed in the eternal flame of Love - Love. ....Thank you! LoveAlways, b Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 7, 2002 Report Share Posted June 7, 2002 , "dan330033" <dan330033> wrote: (to james) Yet I don't see love, beginningless love that is, as being re-presented. .....everybody can only view from the place where they are identified - - if they are anchored in the "egoic", they only see from that point of view. if they are anchored in the witness, they only see from that vantage point, and so on. in fact, any point of view can be subjected to the inquiry, although the more "advanced" are invariably more "smug", since they do not suffer as much as the egoic, and thus have little motivation to question their position, which may be quite comfy and blissful, but nevertheless does not equal true freedom and liberation. LoveAlways, b Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 7, 2002 Report Share Posted June 7, 2002 Namaste James -- > Yes only an image can is capable of re-presentation. > Just as the word Love is a representation of that which it points > to. > > In this light I feel that 'Love Love' points to '______'. Yes, words fail. Words and all that words assume (perceptions, times, beings, places) fall short. Can only fall short. " ....... " Indeed! Love, Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 7, 2002 Report Share Posted June 7, 2002 , "hrtbeat7" <hrtbeat7> wrote: > , "dan330033" <dan330033> wrote: > > (to james) > Yet I don't see love, > beginningless love that is, > as being re-presented. > > > > > ....everybody can only view from the place where they are identified - > - if they are anchored in the "egoic", they only see from that point > of view. if they are anchored in the witness, they only see from that > vantage point, and so on. in fact, any point of view can be subjected > to the inquiry, although the more "advanced" are invariably > more "smug", since they do not suffer as much as the egoic, and thus > have little motivation to question their position, which may be quite > comfy and blissful, but nevertheless does not equal true freedom and > liberation. > > LoveAlways, > > b I think you missed what I said. To "re-present" means to show again, which can only involve a concept, that which is defined and repeated. What is represented has beginning and end, beginninglessness is not represented, yet is all that is. When you speak of these "everybody"'s and say "they" are anchored in various ways -- identification has already occurred in the view taken of "them." When you talk about "smugness" this can only be as it appears to you. Dissolution of this "me"-center here "liberates" the universe which is constellated as that "me." Allways, d. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 7, 2002 Report Share Posted June 7, 2002 , "dan330033" <dan330033> wrote: To "re-present" means to show again, which can only involve a concept, that which is defined and repeated. .....What Is perpetually reveals Itself in form to perception. Interpretation upon perception adds the story, or concept. What is represented has beginning and end, beginninglessness is not represented, yet is all that is. ......"all that is" appears in perception to arise and dissolve within a context, that which does not change, arise, or dissolve. When you speak of these "everybody"'s and say "they" are anchored in various ways -- identification has already occurred in the view taken of "them." When you talk about "smugness" this can only be as it appears to you. .....this is the inherent duality of language, and yet this forum would be rather uninteresting without the verbal investigation possible with words, and the sharing of views. all views are by nature forms of interpretation, and yet interpretation itself is essentially empty, and free of identity, unless a subject doing the interpretation is imagined and clung to. regardless, it is still essentially empty. for example, i may call myself bob, and call my Beloved Mazie, but this is just a kind of game being played by Love for the sheer delight of recognizing Itself in forms of multiplicity. Dissolution of this "me"-center here "liberates" the universe which is constellated as that "me." ......what never existed cannot dissolve, and what was never bound cannot be liberated, except in the imagination conditioned by interpretation. LoveAlways, b 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.