Guest guest Posted April 14, 2003 Report Share Posted April 14, 2003 Wow .. Im hearing music .. "Always look on the bright side .. of life" de dum de dum dedum dedum - Judi Rhodes Realization Tuesday, April 15, 2003 2:16 PM Re: deb's ghost / Judi - deb Realization Monday, April 14, 2003 9:59 PM deb's ghost / Judi Aha .. now we are getting to the root of it .. You have finally asked something of us, now we are into the realm of expectations. And in understanding ourselves, we are then able to understand .. and accept ... you? Is this how it works Judi? ******* Is it any wonder with nasty people like you that the world is in the state it's in? Go away. And I mean it. Go away. Judi ..........INFORMATION ABOUT THIS LIST..........Email addresses: Post message: Realization Un: Realization- Our web address: http://www.realization.orgBy sending a message to this list, you are givingpermission to have it reproduced as a letter onhttp://www.realization.org................................................ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 14, 2003 Report Share Posted April 14, 2003 Realization , "Judi Rhodes" <judirhodes@z...> wrote:> > Oh you rode the express train. Here it was 30 + years to ripen > and fall.> This is the problem when it is said there was nothing or is > nothing to do. People believe that they can just sit and *get it* > overnight. > Doesn't happen that way, not even for Sri Ramana Maharishi. > No overnight wonders or instantly enlightened moments which > may be taken for Realization. > > > ****** Actually it was about a year and a half for me, after I committed. It was Gurjieff's teaching that gave me the tools to actually work with. > > A certain amount of preparation, yes, maturity in relation to the whole business. And the desire has to be there, which I find is what most people lack in the first place. The desire to actually go beyond themselves isn't there. As an entertainment perhaps, but not really. It's not really what people want. People are just looking to be comfortable, to pleasure themselves. And that kind of mediocrity doesn't cut it. > > But as far as how long it actually takes, I would say that for a mature person who is prepared, shouldn't take more than a couple years of intense work. Any longer than that, I would say something's amiss somewhere and needs to be looked at.> > JudiThen in that case your train must have got stuck on a hill. The train dismantled in about 6 months time once the realconfrontation and dismantling began in earnest . There was here a spontaneous questioning that took place. Deeper and deeper until simply shreds remained. Then nothing was there. A few months of adjusting to a Zen way of empty seeing took time to settle in. Now it is all quite a normal everyday life but attempting to look back - nothing remains of the illusive persona that was. May it rest in Peace wherever it disolved into the ethers. It shall never return for it never was . ***** Yeah, I don't even think about it anymore. It's been 7 years now, I guess the honeymoon's over. :-) Judi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 15, 2003 Report Share Posted April 15, 2003 Realization , " Rob Sacks " <editor@r...> wrote: > Dear Manjusrilotus, > > What is it like when the " the real confrontation and > dismantling [begins] in earnest " ? Is it like you suddenly > take seriously the fact that you're sitting there all day > doing this endless stuff, and suddenly you say, good > grief, what am I doing? > > I'm guessing that it's pointless to try to imagine it but > I'd like to get my fingernails into the beginning of it. > > Rob Well there are a couple of things that begin. First there can be a direct seeing that everything in life that was creating a perceivable bondage, was accepted dwelled on and ruminated about endlessly. Oh the pain of it all. A natural deep looking shows that it was the persona alone that clung to these sufferings. Why me? That perceivable event which created the sufferings passed long ago . So why were they so firmly entrenched? Praying didn't end it . Affirmations didn't help it. Psychological analysis didn't stop it . No outside endeavor helped to relieve or end the suffering mind. When mind suffers All suffers. I took stock of the fact it was myself and my self alone that held the endless bondages in place. So I confronted it - to the deepest levels and tore them apart until they could no longer stand . That started the direction of the deeper questioning that was to arise of breaking apart the persona itself. Here a spontaneous questioning of what is this persona consisting of began. Am I this name ? What is the mind ? Is it who I am . What are emotions ? etc. It wasn't any simple one line phrase such as who am I over and over again like a relentless mantra? It was more like a tearing apart of every avenue one limb at a time. Finally only shreds remained then one final death thrall took what remained. It isn't as much of a contrived practice as rather a movement at the core level that induces one to start the backwards trek of letting go - rather than gathering and collecting. Being so sick of the problems that you are willing to face and jump into what amounts to and feels exactly like extinction. Everyone thinks they want it until the first feelings of annihilation begin to appear, and it will. Along the way you might lose patches of time. Moments of no thought arise. They begin to extend into vaster and vaster time . ( at first you might think I have a brain tumor or alzheimers) The connection with name will go. The dis-connection with body may happen wherein consiousness might feel unattached and the body like working a puppet from the exterior. Subtle and not so subtle shifts of consciousness take place. Of course this is different depending on the individual journey to where you began, where there was no you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 15, 2003 Report Share Posted April 15, 2003 Realization , " Judi Rhodes " <judirhodes@z...> wrote: > > > > Realization , " Judi Rhodes " > <judirhodes@z...> wrote: > > > > Oh you rode the express train. Here it was 30 + years to ripen > > and fall. > > This is the problem when it is said there was nothing or is > > nothing to do. People believe that they can just sit and *get it* > > overnight. > > Doesn't happen that way, not even for Sri Ramana Maharishi. > > No overnight wonders or instantly enlightened moments which > > may be taken for Realization. > > > > > > ****** Actually it was about a year and a half for me, after I > committed. It was Gurjieff's teaching that gave me the tools to > actually work with. > > > > A certain amount of preparation, yes, maturity in relation to the > whole business. And the desire has to be there, which I find is > what most people lack in the first place. The desire to actually go > beyond themselves isn't there. As an entertainment perhaps, but > not really. It's not really what people want. People are just looking > to be comfortable, to pleasure themselves. And that kind of > mediocrity doesn't cut it. > > > > But as far as how long it actually takes, I would say that for a > mature person who is prepared, shouldn't take more than a > couple years of intense work. Any longer than that, I would say > something's amiss somewhere and needs to be looked at. > > > > Judi > > Then in that case your train must have got stuck on a hill. > The train dismantled in about 6 months time once the real > confrontation and dismantling began in earnest . There was > here a spontaneous questioning that took place. Deeper and > deeper until simply shreds remained. Then nothing was there. > A few months of adjusting to a Zen way of empty seeing took > time to settle in. Now it is all quite a normal everyday life but > attempting to look back - nothing remains of the illusive persona > that was. May it rest in Peace wherever it disolved into the > ethers. It shall never return for it never was . > > ***** Yeah, I don't even think about it anymore. It's been 7 years now, I guess the honeymoon's over. :-) > > Judi What is there to think about ? It is as it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 15, 2003 Report Share Posted April 15, 2003 " manjusrilotus " <manjusrilotus> wrote: " Judi Rhodes " > > > ****** Actually it was about a year and a half for me, after I > > committed. It was Gurjieff's teaching that gave me the tools to > > actually work with. > > > > > > A certain amount of preparation, yes, maturity in relation to > the > > whole business. And the desire has to be there, which I find > is > > what most people lack in the first place. The desire to actually > go > > beyond themselves isn't there. As an entertainment perhaps, > but > > not really. It's not really what people want. People are just > looking > > to be comfortable, to pleasure themselves. And that kind of > > mediocrity doesn't cut it. > > > > > > But as far as how long it actually takes, I would say that for a > > mature person who is prepared, shouldn't take more than a > > couple years of intense work. Any longer than that, I would > say > > something's amiss somewhere and needs to be looked at. > > > > > > Judi > > > > Then in that case your train must have got stuck on a hill. > > The train dismantled in about 6 months time once the real > > confrontation and dismantling began in earnest . There was > > here a spontaneous questioning that took place. Deeper > and > > deeper until simply shreds remained. Then nothing was > there. > > A few months of adjusting to a Zen way of empty seeing took > > time to settle in. Now it is all quite a normal everyday life but > > attempting to look back - nothing remains of the illusive > persona > > that was. May it rest in Peace wherever it disolved into the > > ethers. It shall never return for it never was . > > > > ***** Yeah, I don't even think about it anymore. It's been 7 > years now, I guess the honeymoon's over. :-) > > > > Judi > > > What is there to think about ? It is as it is. that is a very good advice Manju-sri-lotus Judi thinks, that this persona on the Internet all time with anger, is not her own ego-creation. I agree that self-introspection, as she calls it dismantling takes a long time, but more often one goes back to the old, or new egos, in her case it is a mixture, where the new one [the reverend highwater] thinks that she is a prophet and in reality is a mutated deluded being and the old bitter angry, foul mouthed woman, she must have been before her waking up is in charge again also To be reminded to do vichara is a good thing, but the way Judi jumps in to conversations is mostly un- conscious and un-ethical and that is the point I wanted make she dragged me in to the rest of the e-mails. Love, Karta Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 15, 2003 Report Share Posted April 15, 2003 > > ***** Yeah, I don't even think about it anymore. It's been 7 years now, I guess the honeymoon's over. :-)> > JudiWhat is there to think about ? It is as it is. ******** Afterwards, for a time, for me, there was this rush of information, I've described it sort of like Helen Keller after she learned how to "sign", she would run around ecstatically "signing" everything. That's what I'm talking about. Judi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 15, 2003 Report Share Posted April 15, 2003 > Judi thinks, that this persona on > the Internet all time with anger, > is not her own ego-creation. > Love, Karta What makes you say that Judi is angry? Sure, you may decide to be angry after reading words she has written but that is your anger, not hers. How can you know what someone else thinks? Are you not projecting your own self onto her? When I see Judi's words I do not see anger, I cannot feel anger there - including the 'spit in your face' and all the rest of it. It appears to me that people look at Judi and think something like - " well if I said 'that' then I would be feeling 'this' " and assume that they understand her. However this is a complete failure to understand anything- all they are really seeing is themselves. Karta, have you ever said anything original in your life? Tanya x. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 15, 2003 Report Share Posted April 15, 2003 - Judi Rhodes Realization Tuesday, April 15, 2003 12:01 AM Re: Re: deb's ghost / Judi Oh you rode the express train. Here it was 30 + years to ripen and fall.This is the problem when it is said there was nothing or is nothing to do. People believe that they can just sit and *get it* overnight. Doesn't happen that way, not even for Sri Ramana Maharishi. No overnight wonders or instantly enlightened moments which may be taken for Realization. ****** Actually it was about a year and a half for me, after I committed. It was Gurjieff's teaching that gave me the tools to actually work with. A certain amount of preparation, yes, maturity in relation to the whole business. And the desire has to be there, which I find is what most people lack in the first place. The desire to actually go beyond themselves isn't there. As an entertainment perhaps, but not really. It's not really what people want. People are just looking to be comfortable, to pleasure themselves. And that kind of mediocrity doesn't cut it. But as far as how long it actually takes, I would say that for a mature person who is prepared, shouldn't take more than a couple years of intense work. Any longer than that, I would say something's amiss somewhere and needs to be looked at. Judi Hi Judy, I am very much appreciating this extended discussion of enlightenment and understanding. My sense is that we have to be thankful to the sincerity of Rob's search for bringing out this treasure trove of wonderful gems. I sometimes get the impression that your teaching is similar to the Balsekar- Liquorman take on Nisargadatta's teachings. But then I hear things you say things which seem very different from their presentation. I still have to go over and try to digest Dan's comments taking issue with the Liquorman ideas I referred to in a recent argumentative post I submitted. In your post here, I am struck by the emphasis you put on the place of desire and determined effort to finally undo the knot of the self. You say that if the project to arrive at realisation is pursued correctly, it should take no more than 2 years of intense application. This seems to contrast with the Balsekar- Liquorman idea that all effort to get this understanding is counterproductive. In my reading they say that the understanding which is realisation just happens or doesn't happen and their is nothing we can do to hurry it up. They also say that the precusor to the nonevent of enlightenment is often as not the sense of "I don't care." Can you please comment on the similarities and differences in your approach and theirs. Harvey ..........INFORMATION ABOUT THIS LIST..........Email addresses: Post message: Realization Un: Realization- Our web address: http://www.realization.orgBy sending a message to this list, you are givingpermission to have it reproduced as a letter onhttp://www.realization.org................................................ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 15, 2003 Report Share Posted April 15, 2003 Realization , " Tanya Davis " <tanyarowan@h...> wrote: > > > Judi thinks, that this persona on > > the Internet all time with anger, > > is not her own ego-creation. > > Love, Karta > > What makes you say that Judi is angry? > Sure, you may decide to be angry after reading words she has written > but that is your anger, not hers. > > How can you know what someone else thinks? > > Are you not projecting your own self onto her? > > When I see Judi's words I do not see anger, I cannot feel anger > there - including the 'spit in your face' and all the rest of it. > ******* Yes, it's not anger on my part, but rather disgust. These guys don't make me angry, they disgust me. Like a roach, I don't get angry at roaches, :-), they disgust me. Anyone who would angry at a roach should have their head examined. :-) Judi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 15, 2003 Report Share Posted April 15, 2003 Realization , " Harvey Schneider " <haarvi1@n...> wrote: > > > I sometimes get the impression that your teaching is similar to the Balsekar- > Liquorman take on Nisargadatta's teachings. But then I hear things you say > things which seem very different from their presentation. I still have to go over > and try to digest Dan's comments taking issue with the Liquorman ideas I > referred to in a recent argumentative post I submitted. > > In your post here, I am struck by the emphasis you put on the place of desire > and determined effort to finally undo the knot of the self. You say that if the > project to arrive at realisation is pursued correctly, it should take no more than > 2 years of intense application. This seems to contrast with the Balsekar- > Liquorman idea that all effort to get this understanding is counterproductive. In > my reading they say that the understanding which is realisation just happens > or doesn't happen and their is nothing we can do to hurry it up. They also say > that the precusor to the nonevent of enlightenment is often as not the sense of > " I don't care. " > > Can you please comment on the similarities and differences in your approach > and theirs. > > Harvey ******* Yes, when they say that " effort " ,(seeking in other words) is counter-productive, that is right. Effort meaning in this case " no effort " , which is the undermining, the under-standing of the seeking, of " effort " itself. Like I continually say, it's one of those, " what the heck am I doing? " deals. Which has nothing to do with " getting " something or " going " somewhere. Do you see what I mean? It's not about getting " payoff " . It's the opposite of that. So, it becomes a matter of getting yourself going in the right direction, which is backwards. And the test is, as long as you're going in the direction of looking for any kind of a payoff, you're going in the wrong direciton. Judi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 15, 2003 Report Share Posted April 15, 2003 Realization , " Judi Rhodes " <judirhodes@z...> wrote: > > ********** And I did it for years, I know of what I speak, I > had experiences of oneness up the kazoo, I was what you would > call *advanced*. But let me tell you, after all those years of > wonderful blisfful, extraoardinary experiences, I was totally > surprised and knocked completely on my ass when the real > thing came along. Totally blew me away to see the folly of it all of > it all. So for you guys that meditate and are into blissful > experience, fine, but it has nothing whatsoever to do with > understanding, by ANY stretch of the imagination. > Understanding undermines ALL experience, no matter how > subtle or sublime. > > > > Judi > > > Oneness isn't even the start. Oneness may come through a > psychological union or a feeling mode . Yes it can feel so > wonderful and many take it to be the *real* thing. That oneness > is not even close. It smacks of bliss and love but it has nothing > to do with the death of persona or self.. > > ******* Yes, exactly, that's what I'm saying. " Feelings " are secondary and besides the point. > And some expereinces do come with a certain amount of understanding, but alas, no " experience " is the understanding I'm talking about. It's such a non-event one could easily miss it. :-) > > Judi It is in the missing of it, that this is found. It is in the missing of me, that this is. -- Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 15, 2003 Report Share Posted April 15, 2003 >>Holy moly. These are the words of the Guru. I feel sorry for the people on this list who don't see what is present here. This is like the old stories about enlightened sages who nobody recognizes because they look like crazy people or whatever. You read these old stories and you pat yourself on the back because you know that if YOU had been there back in 1300 in Tibet, YOU would have been wise enough to know that the weird guy down the street who throws shit at everybody is really an enlightened sage. But you see, when it happens to you in 2003, you don't recognize it. > consciously dismantled CONSCIOUSLY DISMANTLED. I heard you, Judi-ji. At your feet (no irony here, not the least bit) Rob Forget it, Rob. That's not going to get you anywhere. And *this* has nothing whatsoever to do with conscious dismantling. Conscious dismantling is an exercise that can lead to a certain satisfaction for someone who believes he or she has a conscious mind. When the conscious and unconscious mind is dismantled, the only one left is the one that has never not been. The timeless one who dismantled and reconstructed you with no effort, and no process. So your process could continue, without taking place. And it has nothing to do with you, or with someone else, whose feet you like to smell. It's not about you, and it's not about them, except, perchance, if you and them is what is. Smiles, Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 15, 2003 Report Share Posted April 15, 2003 Another slant on the same thing: One of my hobbyhorses is " If a psychic/mystic/guru is making a money profit off thier teaching/offerings, they are a fraud. " All the real psychic/mystic/gurus I have even known had very little material possessions. Seen there is an inverse ratio between material plane rewards and depth of sprituality. Gelf - " judirhodes " <judirhodes <Realization > Tuesday, April 15, 2003 11:04 AM Re: deb's ghost / Judi > Realization , " Harvey Schneider " > <haarvi1@n...> wrote: > > > > > > I sometimes get the impression that your teaching is similar to > the Balsekar- > > Liquorman take on Nisargadatta's teachings. But then I hear > things you say > > things which seem very different from their presentation. I > still have to go over > > and try to digest Dan's comments taking issue with the Liquorman > ideas I > > referred to in a recent argumentative post I submitted. > > > > In your post here, I am struck by the emphasis you put on the > place of desire > > and determined effort to finally undo the knot of the self. You > say that if the > > project to arrive at realisation is pursued correctly, it should > take no more than > > 2 years of intense application. This seems to contrast with the > Balsekar- > > Liquorman idea that all effort to get this understanding is > counterproductive. In > > my reading they say that the understanding which is realisation > just happens > > or doesn't happen and their is nothing we can do to hurry it up. > They also say > > that the precusor to the nonevent of enlightenment is often as > not the sense of > > " I don't care. " > > > > Can you please comment on the similarities and differences in > your approach > > and theirs. > > > > Harvey > > ******* Yes, when they say that " effort " ,(seeking in other words) is > counter-productive, that is right. Effort meaning in this case " no > effort " , which is the undermining, the under-standing of the seeking, > of " effort " itself. Like I continually say, it's one of those, " what > the heck am I doing? " deals. Which has nothing to do with " getting " > something or " going " somewhere. Do you see what I mean? It's not > about getting " payoff " . It's the opposite of that. So, it becomes a > matter of getting yourself going in the right direction, which is > backwards. And the test is, as long as you're going in the direction > of looking for any kind of a payoff, you're going in the wrong > direciton. > > Judi > > > > > ..........INFORMATION ABOUT THIS LIST.......... > > Email addresses: > Post message: Realization > Un: Realization- > Our web address: http://www.realization.org > > By sending a message to this list, you are giving > permission to have it reproduced as a letter on > http://www.realization.org > ................................................ > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 15, 2003 Report Share Posted April 15, 2003 Realization , " satkartar5 " <mi_nok> wrote: > > What is there to think about ? It is as it is. > > > > that is a very good advice > Manju-sri-lotus > > Judi thinks, that this persona on > the Internet all time with anger, > is not her own ego-creation. > > I agree that self-introspection, > as she calls it dismantling takes > a long time, but more often one > goes back to the old, or new egos, > in her case it is a mixture, where > the new one [the reverend highwater] > thinks that she is a prophet and in > reality is a mutated deluded being > and the old bitter angry, foul > mouthed woman, she must have been > before her waking up is in charge > again also > > To be reminded to do vichara is > a good thing, but the way Judi jumps > in to conversations is mostly un- > conscious and un-ethical and that > is the point I wanted make she > dragged me in to the rest of the > e-mails. > > Love, Karta Die and realize phenomena is simply empty in nature, and be not drug anywhere. Where can emptiness be pulled to? Only a persona and identity may be pulled . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 15, 2003 Report Share Posted April 15, 2003 Realization , " Judi Rhodes " <judirhodes@z...> wrote: > > > > ***** Yeah, I don't even think about it anymore. It's been 7 > years now, I guess the honeymoon's over. :-) > > > > Judi > > > What is there to think about ? It is as it is. > > ******** Afterwards, for a time, for me, there was this rush of information, I've described it sort of like Helen Keller after she learned how to " sign " , she would run around ecstatically " signing " everything. That's what I'm talking about. > > Judi Yes that is usual, but it settles. Then there is nothing that rises nor falls. It simply remains in IS or one could say am-ness. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 15, 2003 Report Share Posted April 15, 2003 Realization , " judirhodes " <judirhodes@z...> wrote: > Realization , " Harvey Schneider " > <haarvi1@n...> wrote: > > > > > > I sometimes get the impression that your teaching is similar to > the Balsekar- > > Liquorman take on Nisargadatta's teachings. But then I hear > things you say > > things which seem very different from their presentation. I > still have to go over > > and try to digest Dan's comments taking issue with the Liquorman > ideas I > > referred to in a recent argumentative post I submitted. > > > > In your post here, I am struck by the emphasis you put on the > place of desire > > and determined effort to finally undo the knot of the self. You > say that if the > > project to arrive at realisation is pursued correctly, it should > take no more than > > 2 years of intense application. This seems to contrast with the > Balsekar- > > Liquorman idea that all effort to get this understanding is > counterproductive. In > > my reading they say that the understanding which is realisation > just happens > > or doesn't happen and their is nothing we can do to hurry it up. > They also say > > that the precusor to the nonevent of enlightenment is often as > not the sense of > > " I don't care. " > > > > Can you please comment on the similarities and differences in > your approach > > and theirs. > > > > Harvey > > ******* Yes, when they say that " effort " ,(seeking in other words) is > counter-productive, that is right. Effort meaning in this case " no > effort " , which is the undermining, the under-standing of the seeking, > of " effort " itself. Like I continually say, it's one of those, " what > the heck am I doing? " deals. Which has nothing to do with " getting " > something or " going " somewhere. Do you see what I mean? It's not > about getting " payoff " . It's the opposite of that. So, it becomes a > matter of getting yourself going in the right direction, which is > backwards. And the test is, as long as you're going in the direction > of looking for any kind of a payoff, you're going in the wrong > direciton. > > Judi When questioning and confronting arose in this case it was not to arrive anywhere. It wasn't entered into with an idea to get Enlightened . It simply was a spontaneous pulling to tear away the self deceipt . Seeing that what was driving it all was a mental identification with events in past history etc. What remains might be called enlightenment since there is no illusion of seeking or constructing or deconstructing. No external or internal desires to chase. No persona to uphold. Nothing to cling to, nor aversions to be pushed away. There was no agenda in place. What remains is the spaciousness of Being or am-ness or Is . No center need be maintained. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 15, 2003 Report Share Posted April 15, 2003 Realization , " dan330033 " <dan330033> wrote: > > ******* Yes, exactly, that's what I'm saying. " Feelings " are > secondary and besides the point. > > And some expereinces do come with a certain amount of > understanding, but alas, no " experience " is the understanding I'm > talking about. It's such a non-event one could easily miss it. :-) > > > > Judi > > It is in the missing of it, that this is found. > > It is in the missing of me, that this is. > > -- Dan The me that is sought is not missed. The looking for a, not me, is not it. Once it falls away there is nothing to be missed and nothing to be found. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 15, 2003 Report Share Posted April 15, 2003 Realization , " Carol Philo " <cphilo@k...> wrote: > Another slant on the same thing: One of my hobbyhorses is " If a > psychic/mystic/guru is making a money profit off thier teaching/offerings, > they are a fraud. " > All the real psychic/mystic/gurus I have even known had very little material > possessions. Seen there is an inverse ratio between material plane rewards > and depth of sprituality. > Gelf Money, money, money, money. It's not the money that's the problem, it's the love of money, the judgment of status according to money that is the delusion. -- Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 15, 2003 Report Share Posted April 15, 2003 Realization , " manjusrilotus " <manjusrilotus> wrote: > Realization , " dan330033 " > <dan330033> wrote: > > > > ******* Yes, exactly, that's what I'm saying. " Feelings " are > > secondary and besides the point. > > > And some expereinces do come with a certain amount of > > understanding, but alas, no " experience " is the understanding > I'm > > talking about. It's such a non-event one could easily miss it. :-) > > > > > > Judi > > > > It is in the missing of it, that this is found. > > > > It is in the missing of me, that this is. > > > > -- Dan > > The me that is sought is not missed. The looking for a, not me, > is not it. Once it falls away there is nothing to be missed and > nothing to be found. It's not an experience. In the missing of any experience, it is found -- if you realize what it is not to have an experience, not to know self or world as something. The me that is missing, never was, so isn't missed. This is it, only nothing that you think you know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 15, 2003 Report Share Posted April 15, 2003 Realization , " dan330033 " <dan330033> wrote: > > The me that is sought is not missed. The looking for a, not me, is not it. Once it falls away there is nothing to be missed and nothing to be found. > > It's not an experience. In the missing of any experience, > it is found -- if you realize what it is not to have an experience, > not to know self or world as something. > > The me that is missing, never was, so isn't missed. > > This is it, only nothing that you think you know. Why to banter with words and semantics? To the dual mind one may only say that it comes in Experience. Although it is the antithesis of all experience. Thinking and Knowing are two separate things. Thinking is time and space within relative conceptual cognition and evaluation. Intuitive Known is not based in this linear dynamic. So Who is this *you* that is to realize what it is not to have an experience? Once again it is quite easy to play this word game. Let the words and the games end. Simply the vastness IS. Why to confine it to words and intellectual boxes of understanding? The boxes cannot contain it . This is limiting the Unlimited. This is attempting to confine and define the Unconfined and Undefinable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 15, 2003 Report Share Posted April 15, 2003 Dear Tanya, I am reading backwards. I didn't know I was Karta. I thought I was Ganga because Dan said so. Karta and Ganga are both perfectly nice people and it's ok if anyone might think I seem as they seem. Realization , " Tanya Davis " <tanyarowan@h...> wrote: > > > Judi thinks, that this persona on > > the Internet all time with anger, > > is not her own ego-creation. > > Love, Karta > > What makes you say that Judi is angry? > Sure, you may decide to be angry after reading words she has written > but that is your anger, not hers. > > How can you know what someone else thinks? > > Are you not projecting your own self onto her? > > When I see Judi's words I do not see anger, I cannot feel anger > there - including the 'spit in your face' and all the rest of it. > > It appears to me that people look at Judi and think something like - > " well if I said 'that' then I would be feeling 'this' " and assume > that they understand her. However this is a complete failure to > understand anything- all they are really seeing is themselves. > > Karta, have you ever said anything original in your life? > > Tanya x. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 15, 2003 Report Share Posted April 15, 2003 <onniko> wrote: > Dear Tanya, I am reading backwards. I didn't know I was Karta. I > thought I was Ganga because Dan said so. Karta and Ganga are both > perfectly nice people and it's ok if anyone might think I seem as > they seem. Hi Oniko, To many posts milking the *Self*-s <grin> I missed this one from Tanya, sorry -it is good see, that you are still around I am on wild-berry ice-cream diet at present, I hope the sugar will not take my enlightenment to some sugar- high level hehehe Love, Karta > > " Tanya Davis " <tanyarowan@h...> > > Judi thinks, that this persona on > the Internet all time with anger, > is not her own ego-creation. > Love, Karta > > What makes you say that Judi is angry? > Sure, you may decide to be angry after > reading words she has written > but that is your anger, not hers. > > How can you know what someone else thinks? > > Are you not projecting your own self onto her? > > When I see Judi's words I do not see anger, I cannot feel anger > there - including the 'spit in your face' and all the rest of it. > > It appears to me that people look at Judi and think something > like - > " well if I said 'that' then I would be feeling 'this' " and assume > that they understand her. However this is a complete failure to > understand anything- all they are really seeing is themselves. > > Karta, have you ever said anything original in your life? > > Tanya x. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 15, 2003 Report Share Posted April 15, 2003 <I am on wild-berry ice-cream diet at present, I hope the sugar will not take my enlightenment to some sugar- high level hehehe> It won't, the only enlightening ice cream is moose tracks ) It looks like shit but it has a heavenly taste. Realization , " satkartar5 " <mi_nok> wrote: > <onniko> wrote: > > Dear Tanya, I am reading backwards. I didn't know I was Karta. I > > thought I was Ganga because Dan said so. Karta and Ganga are both > > perfectly nice people and it's ok if anyone might think I seem as > > they seem. > > > Hi Oniko, > > To many posts milking the *Self*-s > > <grin> > > I missed this one from Tanya, sorry > > -it is good see, that you are still > around > > I am on wild-berry ice-cream diet > at present, I hope the sugar will not > take my enlightenment to some sugar- > high level hehehe > > Love, Karta > > > > > > " Tanya Davis " <tanyarowan@h...> > > > > Judi thinks, that this persona on > > the Internet all time with anger, > > is not her own ego-creation. > > Love, Karta > > > > What makes you say that Judi is angry? > > Sure, you may decide to be angry after > > reading words she has written > > but that is your anger, not hers. > > > > How can you know what someone else thinks? > > > > Are you not projecting your own self onto her? > > > > When I see Judi's words I do not see anger, I cannot feel anger > > there - including the 'spit in your face' and all the rest of it. > > > > It appears to me that people look at Judi and think something > > like - > > " well if I said 'that' then I would be feeling 'this' " and assume > > that they understand her. However this is a complete failure to > > understand anything- all they are really seeing is themselves. > > > > Karta, have you ever said anything original in your life? > > > > Tanya x. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 15, 2003 Report Share Posted April 15, 2003 " Onniko " <onniko> wrote: > <I am on wild-berry ice-cream diet > at present, I hope the sugar will not > take my enlightenment to some sugar- > high level hehehe> > > It won't, the only enlightening ice cream is moose tracks ) > It looks like shit but it has a heavenly taste. > this reminds me; more chocolate anyone? Karta > > > Realization , " satkartar5 " <mi_nok> wrote: > > <onniko> wrote: > > > Dear Tanya, I am reading backwards. I didn't know I was Karta. I > > > thought I was Ganga because Dan said so. Karta and Ganga are > both > > > perfectly nice people and it's ok if anyone might think I seem > as > > > they seem. > > > > > > Hi Oniko, > > > > To many posts milking the *Self*-s > > > > <grin> > > > > I missed this one from Tanya, sorry > > > > -it is good see, that you are still > > around > > > > I am on wild-berry ice-cream diet > > at present, I hope the sugar will not > > take my enlightenment to some sugar- > > high level hehehe > > > > Love, Karta > > > > > > > > > > " Tanya Davis " <tanyarowan@h...> > > > > > > Judi thinks, that this persona on > > > the Internet all time with anger, > > > is not her own ego-creation. > > > Love, Karta > > > > > > What makes you say that Judi is angry? > > > Sure, you may decide to be angry after > > > reading words she has written > > > but that is your anger, not hers. > > > > > > How can you know what someone else thinks? > > > > > > Are you not projecting your own self onto her? > > > > > > When I see Judi's words I do not see anger, I cannot feel anger > > > there - including the 'spit in your face' and all the rest of > it. > > > > > > It appears to me that people look at Judi and think something > > > like - > > > " well if I said 'that' then I would be feeling 'this' " and > assume > > > that they understand her. However this is a complete failure to > > > understand anything- all they are really seeing is themselves. > > > > > > Karta, have you ever said anything original in your life? > > > > > > Tanya x. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 15, 2003 Report Share Posted April 15, 2003 Realization , " manjusrilotus " <manjusrilotus> wrote: > Realization , " dan330033 " > <dan330033> wrote: > > > > The me that is sought is not missed. The looking for a, not > me, is not it. Once it falls away there is nothing to be missed > and nothing to be found. > > > > It's not an experience. In the missing of any experience, > > it is found -- if you realize what it is not to have an experience, > > not to know self or world as something. > > > > The me that is missing, never was, so isn't missed. > > > > This is it, only nothing that you think you know. > > > Why to banter with words and semantics? It's not banter. > To the dual mind one > may only say that it comes in Experience. Although it is the > antithesis of all experience. It is beyond experience, but includes all possible experience. It can't be against experience, because then it would have to be taking a stance. > Thinking and Knowing are two separate things. Thinking is time > and space within relative conceptual cognition and evaluation. > Intuitive Known is not based in this linear dynamic. Thought doesn't interfere with what is beyond thought. There are no two things. > So Who is this *you* that is to realize what it is not to have an > experience? That's just a dumb question to keep in your head if you have nothing better to do with your time. > Once again it is quite easy to play this word game. > Let the words and the games end. There's no game, unless there is a game player. > Simply the vastness IS. Why to confine it to words and > intellectual boxes of understanding? How are you going to confine it? Come again? > The boxes cannot contain > it . This is limiting the Unlimited. If it could be limited, it wouldn't be Unlimited, silly. > This is attempting to confine and define the Unconfined and > Undefinable. Speak for yourself. 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.