Guest guest Posted April 19, 2003 Report Share Posted April 19, 2003 Hi Dan, > > I'm glad you found the Samadhi slang fest on Meditation entertaining. > I wonder if you remember how it all started. > > As I remember it, Ganga posted some Ramana quotes on samadhi > and silence and the difference between sleep and samadhi and whatever. > Somehow the Ramana quote drew Jody to remark that Ganga in the act > of speaking was showing herself not to be in silence. Judi then joined in, > asking Jody why he was wasting his time with that stupid woman. It took > off from there. A lot of good fun. Especially since, to my mind, Ganga > seemed well able to return tit for tat in this pile on. > > But I was wondering, since you mention that the meditators who say > everything is beautiful show their thin skin when they are criticised, > what you think of the agressive vituperations of the insight people who > roam the lists throwing mud pies. > > My guess: They want to make sure no one thinks they're mixed up in > any of this callow love-your-fellow-man stuff. > > Harvey No, it's not like that, from where I sit, Harvey. If all the bullshit has no place to stick, why would you encourage it? But thanks for the play by play. You're like the nondual lists Howard Couselle. Do you wear a toupee? One who has seen through the game, isn't going to play into it in the expected way. And Ganga exposes herself over and over, for those who have ears to hear it. To call it all good fun is to miss that it's discimination of " what's real " from " what ain't " ... And Bob is fun, too, watching that agenda to promote an activity he calls meditation even if it requires ignoring insight ... -- Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 19, 2003 Report Share Posted April 19, 2003 - " dan330033 " <dan330033 <Realization > Saturday, April 19, 2003 2:11 AM Re: deb's ghost / Harvey > Hi Dan, > > > > I'm glad you found the Samadhi slang fest on Meditation > entertaining. > > I wonder if you remember how it all started. > > > > As I remember it, Ganga posted some Ramana quotes on samadhi > > and silence and the difference between sleep and samadhi and > whatever. > > Somehow the Ramana quote drew Jody to remark that Ganga in the act > > of speaking was showing herself not to be in silence. Judi then > joined in, > > asking Jody why he was wasting his time with that stupid woman. It > took > > off from there. A lot of good fun. Especially since, to my mind, > Ganga > > seemed well able to return tit for tat in this pile on. > > > > But I was wondering, since you mention that the meditators who say > > everything is beautiful show their thin skin when they are > criticised, > > what you think of the agressive vituperations of the insight people > who > > roam the lists throwing mud pies. > > > > My guess: They want to make sure no one thinks they're mixed up in > > any of this callow love-your-fellow-man stuff. > > > > Harvey ---------- --- > > No, it's not like that, from where I sit, Harvey. Fine. I'm happy to get your viewpoint. > > If all the bullshit has no place to stick, > why would you encourage it? I thought I was objecting to it and you encouraging it. Didn't you say to Judi how much you enjoyed her exchange with Ganga? > > But thanks for the play by play. > > You're like the nondual lists Howard Couselle. > > Do you wear a toupee? Yes I do. I didn't know it was so obvious. > > One who has seen through the game, isn't > going to play into it in the expected > way. Insuting those with contrary views in not what I would expect. But it is becoming tiresomely predictable by now. > > And Ganga exposes herself over and over, > for those who have ears to hear it. Ganga appears to be the only one on these insight lists with any experience from which to make sense of Ramana's talk of finding the Self in the right side of the heart. I was hoping you might weigh in on this subject which is completely beyond my comprehension. It might be easy to say Ramana is confused in finding the Self in the body when it is the other way around. What is baffling, though, is to figure out Ramana's point. > > To call it all good fun is to miss that > it's discimination > of " what's real " from " what ain't " ... What I see is not discrimination in action but nasty playground scrabbling. One woman calling another every name she can think of. If you don't take it as fun, it seems pretty pointless, even sad. > > And Bob is fun, too, watching that agenda to promote > an activity he calls > meditation even if it requires ignoring > insight ... I don't know Bob yet. But, as moderator, he has an unenviable job, referring all these hard feelings. Happy Easter, Dan. Harvey > > -- Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 19, 2003 Report Share Posted April 19, 2003 Realization , " Harvey Schneider " <haarvi1@n...> wrote: > > - > " dan330033 " <dan330033> > <Realization > > Saturday, April 19, 2003 2:11 AM > Re: deb's ghost / Harvey > > > > Hi Dan, > > > > > > I'm glad you found the Samadhi slang fest on Meditation > > entertaining. > > > I wonder if you remember how it all started. > > > > > > As I remember it, Ganga posted some Ramana quotes on samadhi > > > and silence and the difference between sleep and samadhi and > > whatever. > > > Somehow the Ramana quote drew Jody to remark that Ganga in the act > > > of speaking was showing herself not to be in silence. Judi then > > joined in, > > > asking Jody why he was wasting his time with that stupid woman. It > > took > > > off from there. A lot of good fun. Especially since, to my mind, > > Ganga > > > seemed well able to return tit for tat in this pile on. > > > > > > But I was wondering, since you mention that the meditators who say > > > everything is beautiful show their thin skin when they are > > criticised, > > > what you think of the agressive vituperations of the insight people > > who > > > roam the lists throwing mud pies. > > > > > > My guess: They want to make sure no one thinks they're mixed up in > > > any of this callow love-your-fellow-man stuff. > > > > > > Harvey > > ---------- > --- > > > > No, it's not like that, from where I sit, Harvey. > > Fine. I'm happy to get your viewpoint. > > > > > If all the bullshit has no place to stick, > > why would you encourage it? > > I thought I was objecting to it and you encouraging it. > Didn't you say to Judi how much you enjoyed her > exchange with Ganga? > > > > > But thanks for the play by play. > > > > You're like the nondual lists Howard Couselle. > > > > Do you wear a toupee? > > Yes I do. I didn't know it was so obvious. > > > > > One who has seen through the game, isn't > > going to play into it in the expected > > way. > > Insuting those with contrary views in not what I would expect. > But it is becoming tiresomely predictable by now. > > > > > And Ganga exposes herself over and over, > > for those who have ears to hear it. > > Ganga appears to be the only one on these insight lists with > any experience from which to make sense of Ramana's > talk of finding the Self in the right side of the heart. I was > hoping you might weigh in on this subject which is completely > beyond my comprehension. It might be easy to say Ramana > is confused in finding the Self in the body when it is the other > way around. What is baffling, though, is to figure out Ramana's > point. > > > > > To call it all good fun is to miss that > > it's discimination > > of " what's real " from " what ain't " ... > > What I see is not discrimination in action but nasty playground > scrabbling. One woman calling another every name she can > think of. If you don't take it as fun, it seems pretty pointless, > even sad. > > > > And Bob is fun, too, watching that agenda to promote > > an activity he calls > > meditation even if it requires ignoring > > insight ... > > I don't know Bob yet. But, as moderator, he has an unenviable > job, referring all these hard feelings. > > Happy Easter, Dan. > Harvey > > > > -- Dan What brave individuals to *use* bob's list to promote their agendas and then to speak down about him behind his back. Now isn't that just so ethical. Why don't you say it in the open to his face? Perhaps then he would get this wake up call . Or why don't you say it to Ganga in the open ? I see you both are quite brave behind her back. That shows fools and cowards - like the classic bully routine of being brave with your gang . My question is this ? What exactly is the Motivation behind Dan's need to attempt to invalidate everyone? Anyone that says something he has to find some way to negate it. If he can't respond in any type of reasonable way then he totally ignores what is said and puts : translation with some nonsense garbage that has absolutely Nothing to do with what was being said. What is Judi's *Motovation* in going after certain people ? Karta for one has been the object of her maliciousness for sometime. Karta has said repeatedly " leave me alone " , does Judi leave her be? No by a long shot. Karta isn't one of her students so just what is Judi's motive other than just plain nasty intentions. Nasty intentions show a very very in place 'me'. It looks to be when Judy's 'me' or her position is threatened then she goes into full attack mode. Ok I am really simply curious as to What in the world is motivating these people. It appears that some finally respond in their knock-down drag out bull simply to give them a taste of their own medicine. I have seen her latch onto someone and then simply put the knife to them in every chance she gets. Like a dog with a bone once she doesn't let go and lord help anyone that would attempt to intervene. So once again what is Behind it ? Enquiring minds want to know. Really honesty would be very refreshing at this point. I sincerely doubt that it is all in fun as she claims or if you can't laugh at yourself then you have a personal problem as she recently said here as well. I see nothing that she is doing as " poking fun " it looks more like a personal vendetta. That is the epitome of having a 'me " . There is a difference in dialog and debate versus mud slinging and attempts to use inuendo and personal slurs and street gang tactics. And make no mistake this is how it appears that they have a nice little street gang mentality going on. I sincerely hope that this evaluation is wrong and that they do have some type of sincere motivation somewhere. Whatever it 'is " please share it with us. I am sure that I am not the only that wonders just what is making you both tick . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 19, 2003 Report Share Posted April 19, 2003 > > No, it's not like that, from where I sit, Harvey. > > Fine. I'm happy to get your viewpoint. Thanks for sharing your happiness. > > If all the bullshit has no place to stick, > > why would you encourage it? > > I thought I was objecting to it and you encouraging it. And thanks for sharing your thought about what was happening. > Didn't you say to Judi how much you enjoyed her > exchange with Ganga? Yup. Judi's not a bullshitter. > > But thanks for the play by play. > > > > You're like the nondual lists Howard Couselle. > > > > Do you wear a toupee? > > Yes I do. I didn't know it was so obvious. Only to the discerning, my friend. And, to the minoxidil sales reps. > > One who has seen through the game, isn't > > going to play into it in the expected > > way. > > Insuting those with contrary views in not what I would expect. > But it is becoming tiresomely predictable by now. You are focused on whether or not someone is insulted. But there is another aspect which has to do with " immediate knowing. " With immediate knowing, there is no promotion, no activity to get people to do, no pathway to get people to walk -- and it's clear when a stance is taken and defended. That's all -- the stuff about who is insulting who is a minor distraction, which typically catches those for whom niceties and politesse are the focus. > > And Ganga exposes herself over and over, > > for those who have ears to hear it. > > Ganga appears to be the only one on these insight lists with > any experience from which to make sense of Ramana's > talk of finding the Self in the right side of the heart. Yes, inquiring minds want to know. Just like they want to know who Michael Jackson's plastic surgeon is. Different forms of gossip -- one spiritual and the other material. > I was > hoping you might weigh in on this subject which is completely > beyond my comprehension. I like gossip as much as the next guy. Ramana's teaching is essentially involves a reidentification of the self into/as the Self archetype. Because an archetype being made central to a teaching requires an anchor, the body-mind is needed to provide this -- although that body-mind will be treated as unimportant, inconsequential, and so on. One will then invent ideas about how energy must travel within this bodymind in a certain way for certain things of import to happen, typically involving a realignment of the self into the archetype (there are others, for example, the Great Mother archetype, or the Male/Female union archetype). So, one then gets teachings about internal energy movements. Why Ramana chose the right side of the heart would be a guess -- but perhaps it was to differentiate himself as a teacher -- to call attention to the fact that his approach was different than others who described the internal energy movement as centered in movements up and down the spine to the crown chakra, for example. > It might be easy to say Ramana > is confused in finding the Self in the body when it is the other > way around. Well, in terms of archetypal identification, it has to be both, simultaneously. Each anchors in the other. What's interesting though, is how different systems describe the energy movements and anchorings differently -- which is a clue that an imaginative process is involved. Which is a clue that archetypal identifications are to be dissolved, they aren't permanent, and aren't the final resting place for *knowing/being* -- which has no resting place. > What is baffling, though, is to figure out Ramana's > point. Yes, inquiring minds want to know. Until there is no assumption of an inquiring mind. But don't worry, gossiping still happens. Where would we be without gossip? LOL! > > To call it all good fun is to miss that > > it's discimination > > of " what's real " from " what ain't " ... > > What I see is not discrimination in action but nasty playground > scrabbling. Yes, there sometimes is that thrown into the mix, agreed. Like, " I think you're stupid, so here let me throw some sand in your face. " I guess it goes to show, " everything I needed to know to understand nondual dialogues, I learned in kindergarten. " > One woman calling another every name she can > think of. If you don't take it as fun, it seems pretty pointless, > even sad. Yes, sometimes that part of it goes over the top. I see it as Judi's way of saying, " let's cut through the bullshit -- this is cheap, vulgar, self-promotion, and this is all the response it deserves. " But it's over the top Capricorn stuff, that we Cancers rarely engage in -- being at the opposite end of the Zodiac and generally enjoying calmness rather than all-out war <s> > > And Bob is fun, too, watching that agenda to promote > > an activity he calls > > meditation even if it requires ignoring > > insight ... > > I don't know Bob yet. But, as moderator, he has an unenviable > job, referring all these hard feelings. Well, a moderator can handle those things in different ways. Which I guess is the fun of being a moderator, getting to be the validator and invalidator. > Happy Easter, Dan. Thanks Harvey. And happy Passover, too. From one celebrating neither, Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 19, 2003 Report Share Posted April 19, 2003 What brave individuals to *use* bob's list to promote their agendas and then to speak down about him behind his back. Now isn't that just so ethical. Why don't you say it in the open to his face? Perhaps then he would get this wake up call . ********** Not true, several of us point it out to him all the time, but he refuses. He even called me on the phone and I told him the same thing. He has his "gig". There's nothing the "matter" with it, but it doesn't "lead to" understanding. That's what he refuses to see. Or why don't you say it to Ganga in the open ? I see you both are quite brave behind her back. That shows fools and cowards - like the classic bully routine of being brave with your gang . ********* Wrong again, several of us have called her on it openly, over and over again. In one ear, picks up speed and out the other. Same with her, she has her "gig". Which doesn't *lead* anywhere. Like Sandeep put it, the reason there are phony gurus is so the phony seekers will have a place to go. :-) My question is this ? What exactly is the Motivation behind Dan's need to attempt to invalidate everyone? Anyone that says something he has to find some way to negate it. If he can't respond in any type of reasonable way then he totally ignores what is said and puts : translation with some nonsense garbage that has absolutely Nothing to do with what was being said. ********* As my dear friend James puts it, "Pompeisty everywhere is in need of a good pummeling." :-) Does that ring a bell for you? :-) WELL, DOES IT? :-) What is Judi's *Motovation* in going after certain people ? Karta for one has been the object of her maliciousness for sometime.Karta has said repeatedly "leave me alone" , does Judi leave her be? No by a long shot. Karta isn't one of her students so just what is Judi's motive other than just plain nasty intentions. Nasty intentions show a very very in place 'me'. It looks to be when Judy's 'me' or her position is threatened then she goes into full attack mode. Ok I am really simply curious as to What in the world is motivating these people. ********** I'm afraid you have that backwards my friend. She's like a pitbull on my leg, but withtout any teeth. :-) She's obsessed with me. I should be flattered the way she talks about me all the time. I have no business with Karta, I have no interest in Karta. Karta, if you'll see, is just out looking for male attention and she uses me towards those ends. It's very adolescent, and if you've ever been a jealous teenager, you can see her game quite clearly. Judi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 19, 2003 Report Share Posted April 19, 2003 Yes, sometimes that part of it goes over the top.I see it as Judi's way of saying, "let's cut through the bullshit -- this is cheap, vulgar, self-promotion, and this is all the response it deserves."But it's over the top Capricorn stuff, that we Cancers rarely engage in -- being at the opposite end of the Zodiac and generally enjoying calmness rather than all-out war <s> *********** You want to hear a good one, someone did my astrological chart and "noted" the fact that Mars, the "warrior" is located in Capricorn, which is it's *exalted* position, and also to make matters worse, :-), it's conjunct the Sun which gives it extra *poop*. :-) But, on the bright side, :-), it's in the 11th house which is the house of "friends, hopes and wishes." Judi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 19, 2003 Report Share Posted April 19, 2003 Realization , " dan330033 " <dan330033> wrote: > > > No, it's not like that, from where I sit, Harvey. > > > > Fine. I'm happy to get your viewpoint. > > Thanks for sharing your happiness. > > > > If all the bullshit has no place to stick, > > > why would you encourage it? > > > > I thought I was objecting to it and you encouraging it. > > And thanks for sharing your thought about what was > happening. > > > Didn't you say to Judi how much you enjoyed her > > exchange with Ganga? > > Yup. Judi's not a bullshitter. You have got to be kidding ? All she does is apparently throw bull shit all over the place in handfuls. > > > But thanks for the play by play. > > > > > > You're like the nondual lists Howard Couselle. > > > > > > Do you wear a toupee? > > > > Yes I do. I didn't know it was so obvious. > > Only to the discerning, my friend. > > And, to the minoxidil sales reps. > > > > One who has seen through the game, isn't > > > going to play into it in the expected > > > way. > > > > Insuting those with contrary views in not what I would expect. > > But it is becoming tiresomely predictable by now. > > You are focused on whether or not someone is insulted. > > But there is another aspect which has to do with > " immediate knowing. " With immediate knowing, > there is no promotion, no activity to get people > to do, no pathway to get people to walk -- > and it's clear when a stance is taken and defende> > That's all -- the stuff about who is insulting who > is a minor distraction, which typically catches > those for whom niceties and politesse are the focus. > Immediate knowing is not the only way. Herein lies this big piece of crap being espoused. Nan Yar - Neti Neti are ways and means. They are paths to get to this so-called immediate knowing. And these continued attempts to slash and trash anyone that says that meditation may be a way to enter or that Self Enquiry may be a way simply indicates that this makes the ones that claim to have gotten immediate knowing, very special indeed. No one else can arrive there unless they just simply fall into this immediate knowing. Many Many Many Gurus in fact have given many methods ways means and paths . Why ? Because it works. This is in fact the epitomy of self aggrandizement that there is no way - no means - other than simply being graced with it . This smacks of I have gotten it you have not and there is nothing to get. Judi has stated her way was by Confronting herself. That is indeed a path, a way, a means. The fact that she continues to brow beat everyone simply shows that she believes it to be a ways and a means. Dan on the other hand seems to be promoting just intellectually getting it because there is nothing to get. > > > And Ganga exposes herself over and over, > > > for those who have ears to hear it. > > > > Ganga appears to be the only one on these insight lists with > > any experience from which to make sense of Ramana's > > talk of finding the Self in the right side of the heart. > > Yes, inquiring minds want to know. > > Just like they want to know who Michael Jackson's > plastic surgeon is. Different forms of gossip -- > one spiritual and the other material. I don't equate Self Realization with Gossip. Why is it that Dan and Judi seem to have such an adverse reaction to Anything that smacks of a spiritual venue ? Even according to Dan now Sri Ramana was simply engaged in Gossip? Talk about egotistical. Sri Ramana didsn't speak of Arch Types he spoke of going to the Source of where things were rising from. He didn't speak of a path of Merging with some Arch Type. Clearly this once again shows that he is speaking from a point of having no cognition about What Ramana or the other Gurus were saying or giving. > > > I was > > hoping you might weigh in on this subject which is completely > > beyond my comprehension. > > I like gossip as much as the next guy. Ramana's teaching > is essentially involves a reidentification of the self > into/as the Self archetype. Because an archetype being > made central to a teaching requires an anchor, the body-mind > is needed to provide this -- although that body-mind will > be treated as unimportant, inconsequential, and so on. > One will then invent ideas about how energy must travel > within this bodymind in a certain way for certain things > of import to happen, typically involving a realignment of > the self into the archetype (there are others, for example, > the Great Mother archetype, or > the Male/Female union archetype). So, one then gets teachings > about internal energy movements. > Why Ramana chose the right side of the heart would be a guess -- > but perhaps it was to differentiate himself as a teacher -- > to call attention to the fact that his approach was different > than others who described the internal energy movement as > centered in movements up and down the spine to the crown Dan to this I must at this time say unequivocally that these last few paragraphs are the biggest load of pig slop that you have put forward to date. Ramana didn't teach psychology 101 . Ramana wasn't integrating anything with other. Ramana was giving ways and means to disintegrate the self deception and " I " cognition. It had Nothing to do with integrating with Arch Types. > > It might be easy to say Ramana > > is confused in finding the Self in the body when it is the other > > way around. > > Well, in terms of archetypal identification, it has to be > both, simultaneously. Each anchors in the other. Once again must say Ramana never focused on the physicality . What is meant by keeping the focus in that point is not understood. It is to keep an awareness of internal and also within Heart rather than simply sterile intellect. You may get some insight with reading No Mind No Self. > What's interesting though, is how different systems describe > the energy movements and anchorings differently -- which > is a clue that an imaginative process is involved. > Which is a clue that archetypal identifications are to > be dissolved, they aren't permanent, and aren't the final > resting place for *knowing/being* -- which has no resting > place. > > > What is baffling, though, is to figure out Ramana's > > point. > > Yes, inquiring minds want to know. > > Until there is no assumption of an inquiring mind. > > But don't worry, gossiping still happens. > > Where would we be without gossip? LOL! Probably in Peace and Quiet. Probably Whole within the Self. > > > To call it all good fun is to miss that > > > it's discimination > > > of " what's real " from " what ain't " ... > > > > What I see is not discrimination in action but nasty playground > > scrabbling. > > Yes, there sometimes is that thrown into the mix, agreed. > > Like, " I think you're stupid, so here let me throw some > sand in your face. " > > I guess it goes to show, " everything I needed to know to > understand nondual dialogues, I learned in kindergarten. " > > > One woman calling another every name she can > > think of. If you don't take it as fun, it seems pretty pointless, > > even sad. > > Yes, sometimes that part of it goes over the top. > > I see it as Judi's way of saying, " let's cut through > the bullshit -- this is cheap, vulgar, self-promotion, > and this is all the response it deserves. " Really it looks more like a need on Judi's part to defend her own position by tearing away at anything that smacks of something different. Cheap , vulgar, bullshit is what she slings Not what she cuts through . Repeated beating everyone else is once again the big self-promotion of Judy and her End of the Rope Ranch philosophy. So what you say she cuts through is not what is being cut through but in fact what is being quite highly Promoted on her end. > But it's over the top Capricorn stuff, that we Cancers > rarely engage in -- being at the opposite end of > the Zodiac and generally enjoying calmness rather > than all-out war <s> > > > > And Bob is fun, too, watching that agenda to promote > > > an activity he calls > > > meditation even if it requires ignoring > > > insight ... > > > > I don't know Bob yet. But, as moderator, he has an unenviable > > job, referring all these hard feelings. > > Well, a moderator can handle those things in different ways. > > Which I guess is the fun of being a moderator, getting > to be the validator and invalidator. Now this is truly funny. The biggest invalidator on these lists appears to be, drum roll and the envelope please. Yes here it is Dan B. on behalf of the universe herein we would like to present you with the golden invalidator award may you hold it in high esteem close to your well secured indentity. Knowing full well your supreme position and status of foremost advaita authority , the peons ( that don't exist nor ever have existed) salute you the great poobah of invalidation. > > > Happy Easter, Dan. > > Thanks Harvey. And happy Passover, too. > > From one celebrating neither, > Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 20, 2003 Report Share Posted April 20, 2003 Realization , " Judi Rhodes " <judirhodes@z...> wrote: > > > Yes, sometimes that part of it goes over the top. > > I see it as Judi's way of saying, " let's cut through > the bullshit -- this is cheap, vulgar, self-promotion, > and this is all the response it deserves. " > > But it's over the top Capricorn stuff, that we Cancers > rarely engage in -- being at the opposite end of > the Zodiac and generally enjoying calmness rather > than all-out war <s> > > > *********** You want to hear a good one, someone did my astrological chart and " noted " the fact that Mars, the " warrior " is located in Capricorn, which is it's *exalted* position, and also to make matters worse, :-), it's conjunct the Sun which gives it extra *poop*. :-) > > But, on the bright side, :-), it's in the 11th house which is the house of " friends, hopes and wishes. " > > Judi Cool! I have so much stuff in Cancer in my chart, that I'm truly water-logged. Thank God for my Leo moon for a little balance to the picture. Yup, you don't mess around with Mars or Pluto -- they'll get you every time -- kind of like Slim in that Jim Croce song. -- Dan 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.