Guest guest Posted May 25, 2005 Report Share Posted May 25, 2005 , "Anna Ruiz" <nli10u@c...> wrote: > > - > fuzzie_wuz > > Tuesday, May 24, 2005 8:43 AM > Re: letters and comments > > > , "Anna Ruiz" <nli10u@c...> wrote: > > > > - > > fuzzie_wuz > > > > Monday, May 23, 2005 10:08 AM > > Re: letters and comments ***SNIP*** > > > > The imaginary ego cannot "efface" itself nor can the imaginary ego > > "surrender" to another Higher Imaginary Ego (aka "Higher Power"). The > > imaginary ego is imaginary from the start. It's already non-existent; > > like Santa Claus and unicorns, etc. To say that the imaginary ego has > > to do something in order to realize it is imaginary is absurd. The > > imaginary ego cannot "realize" anything. Furthermore, the imaginary > > ego cannot be held responsible for actions which it is incapable of > > committing (again, because it is imaginary). > > > > There is no doer; no "you". It's the old rope/snake trick. > > > > > > > > fuzzie > > > > > > Fuzzie my dear, > > > > Perhap This is where you and I are n > > longer "joined at the hip", so to speak. > > No, I can not imagine it would be so. > > > > When the no-doer, no 'you' is Seen as the play of the One Seerer, > ie Seeing, the Seeing is the Doing.... > > > > With full vision of how, what, why, when and where. It is > Responsibility in action, arising moment-to-moment in the > right-here-ness of the right-now-ness in the absolute Presence of This, > > the I Am, again receding in/as Nothing. > > > > Filling, emptying, filling, emptying. > > > > It is the Love of the Universe for Itself. > > It is the Work of the Siddhas. > > It is the Bliss of nothing/everything. > > It is the You and I of We--This. > > > > a. > > > Dear Anna: > > Your posts are often filled with symbolism and metaphor (you would > make a good symbolist poet; Rimbaud and Baudelaire, come to mind). The > interpretations can be varied and multitudinous. I find no inherent > discrepancies between your post and my previous post. Perhaps > something has been overlooked... I don't know... > > > > fuzzie > > > Dear Fuzzie: > > Who is the doer? Who is the Seer? > Who is the One Seen? Who is Fuzzie in this equation? How is Fuzzie Being Seen? > > Who is Fuzzie in relationship with? What is the result of Fuzzie "relatiing"? > > Just some questions on the nature of "Fuzzie".... > > : ) > > Anna None of the above. It's all imaginary. There is only this; presence. The imaginary "fuzzie" and the imaginary "Anna" come to play in this dreamland where "things" appear and, then, disappear, like the characters on a movie screen. T'was ever thus. Have a nice dream. fuzzie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 25, 2005 Report Share Posted May 25, 2005 - fuzzie_wuz Wednesday, May 25, 2005 8:07 AM Re: letters and comments , "Anna Ruiz" <nli10u@c...> wrote:> > - > fuzzie_wuz > To: > Tuesday, May 24, 2005 8:43 AM> Re: letters and comments> > > , "Anna Ruiz" <nli10u@c...>wrote:> > > > - > > fuzzie_wuz > > > > Monday, May 23, 2005 10:08 AM> > [ - Ramana Guru] Re: letters and comments***SNIP***> > > > The imaginary ego cannot "efface" itself nor can the imaginary ego> > "surrender" to another Higher Imaginary Ego (aka "HigherPower"). The> > imaginary ego is imaginary from the start. It's alreadynon-existent;> > like Santa Claus and unicorns, etc. To say that the imaginaryego has> > to do something in order to realize it is imaginary is absurd. The> > imaginary ego cannot "realize" anything. Furthermore, theimaginary> > ego cannot be held responsible for actions which it isincapable of> > committing (again, because it is imaginary). > > > > There is no doer; no "you". It's the old rope/snake trick. > > > > > > > > fuzzie> > > > > > Fuzzie my dear,> > > > Perhap This is where you and I are n> > longer "joined at the hip", so to speak.> > No, I can not imagine it would be so.> > > > When the no-doer, no 'you' is Seen as the play of the One Seerer,> ie Seeing, the Seeing is the Doing....> > > > With full vision of how, what, why, when and where. It is> Responsibility in action, arising moment-to-moment in the> right-here-ness of the right-now-ness in the absolute Presence ofThis,> > the I Am, again receding in/as Nothing.> > > > Filling, emptying, filling, emptying. > > > > It is the Love of the Universe for Itself.> > It is the Work of the Siddhas.> > It is the Bliss of nothing/everything.> > It is the You and I of We--This.> > > > a.> > > Dear Anna: > > Your posts are often filled with symbolism and metaphor (you would> make a good symbolist poet; Rimbaud and Baudelaire, come to mind). The> interpretations can be varied and multitudinous. I find no inherent> discrepancies between your post and my previous post. Perhaps> something has been overlooked... I don't know...> > > > fuzzie> > > Dear Fuzzie:> > Who is the doer? Who is the Seer?> Who is the One Seen? Who is Fuzzie in this equation? How isFuzzie Being Seen?> > Who is Fuzzie in relationship with? What is the result of Fuzzie"relatiing"?> > Just some questions on the nature of "Fuzzie"....> > : )> > AnnaNone of the above. It's all imaginary. There is only this; presence. The imaginary"fuzzie" and the imaginary "Anna" come to play in this dreamland where"things" appear and, then, disappear, like the characters on a moviescreen. T'was ever thus. Have a nice dream. :)fuzzie Yeppers, fuzz, When my children were small and I was home, although I was not a stay-at-home mom, the neighborhood kids would knock on my door, (my children giggling behind them) "Can mommy come out and play?" I did every chance I could. Even if it was for a few minutes.. I took them to the park and picked berries, looking for critters; the airport was fun as we watched the submarines come in, we actually pretended they were boats and subs.) That was a taste of disappearing into the background character and letting All That I Am is That I am All come out to play ceaselessly as all that appears and subsequently disappears on/as this Projection called Being... Whereas when "Anna" was playing, much of it was nightmarish, and really really scarey, so scarey that it ate and drank much of my life-juices. Now even the nightmare is 'enjoyed', so to speak. Cause Here I Am in all my naked-maya-ness.)) a. /join "Love itself is the actual form of God."Sri RamanaIn "Letters from Sri Ramanasramam" by Suri Nagamma 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.