Guest guest Posted April 21, 2003 Report Share Posted April 21, 2003 <Onniko: If you are talking to "they're" then you are right about being condescending, but I see Tanya as not a "they're, but someone who needs some strokes of love. Realization is all about loving?>Ramana, I know you are one of the most loving beings on the planet, but it's still condescending to someone to be all sugary sweet when they ask for spicy food. It's a holier than thou stance at best. --- I agree by her response that Tanya appeared to ask for spicy food and some hardtack, but there is always dessert to lap up. Maybe there is no "I" and "thou" with me. I just see heart in everyone including Peterson.<Onniko I already idolize you and would lick your lotus feet. What else do you want me to do? See, that is called picking someone up after knocking them down to size.>That's gross! You don't get pedicures or wash them? Then you're right its gross.< I hope you have a sense of humor, because if you don't I will have just made another enemy.>I love you no matter what. Now that feels real Gooooooooooooooood. What kind of love are you talking about. Unconditional? > It's really not so horrendous to have enemies on the Net. At least they dont get in your hair every morning, like having a bad relationship. How's yours, enlightened?> That's true. I don't think I have any enemies, though, except maybe a guy I evicted for not paying his rent. Yes, my relationship is enlightened. It's gone on so long that I don't give it a thought, haha! Its all in the charts. Some come it with enemies from previous lives and it can or cannot be mitigated. Sleep well, Love, Ramana Maharshi In Realization , "RAMANA MAHARSHI" <unbound@h...> wrote:> > > > <Generally after you show someone their asshole you say some nice > things to them so that what you told them will have a beneficial > effect on their psyches. It's making a good anchor out of the pull > ups. Or maybe you did not want any positive results?>> > Oh no, Mark, I would never do that. It would be condescending to > them to need to add something nice. I know they're strong and won't > be damaged by what I say. > Onniko: If you are talking to "they're" then you are right about being condescending, but I see Tanya as not a "they're, but someone who needs some strokes of love. Realization is all about loving? If you continue on the same tack I will ask Judi to loan you one of her whips or do you already have a collection. hehehe You see that I have gone back on email because I like to come in colors, you dont?. ROFL> > <Hey onniko if you did that to me I would then see if I reacted or > > not. If not It would be quite strengthening to my already vaunted > > EGO. ROFLMAO.>> > Sorry, Ramana, but i don't contrive to do anything for any reason. I > just react to whatever comes into view. I can't imagine deliberately > saying anything to you to try and make you mad.> > Onniko I already idolize you and would lick your lotus feet. What else do you want me to do? See, that is called picking someone up after knocking them down to size. I hope you have a sense of humor, because if you dont I will have just made another enemy. It's really not so horrendous to have enemies on the Net. At least they dont get in your hair every morning, like having a bad relationship. How's yours, enlightened? I cleverly worked in Realization so that Rob will think that is what we have been talking about. LOL.> > Ramana Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 22, 2003 Report Share Posted April 22, 2003 Realization , " RAMANA MAHARSHI " <unbound@h...> wrote: > <Onniko: If you are talking to " they're " then you are right about > being condescending, but I see Tanya as not a " they're, but someone > who needs some strokes of love. Realization is all about loving?> > > Ramana, I know you are one of the most loving beings on the planet, > but it's still condescending to someone to be all sugary sweet when > they ask for spicy food. It's a holier than thou stance at best. --- > > I agree by her response that Tanya appeared to ask for spicy food and some hardtack, Tanya's request is my command: so scuuz me to but' in! [Judi relax we all have a butt you too; so don't get excited] I want to share with Tanya my guru's Sandeep's aka the Laughing Guru's recepie for before & after: " Some Goan sea-food, downed by some chilled Chablis, chased by burning Remy Martin, while smoking some Cohibas, in the company of a hunk or a nubility, or both, depending on your preference, stamina and appetite. First the chilled Chablis, burning Remy Martin, glowing Cohiba and enflamed nubility,.......were chilled Chablis, burning Remy Martin, glowing Cohiba and enflamed nubility. Then they were an illusion, to be lost interest in. Then they were chilled Chablis, burning Remy Martin, glowing Cohiba and enflamed nubility. " but there is always dessert to lap up. Maybe there is no " I " and " thou " with me. I just see heart in everyone including Tanya me and her Judi K > <Onniko I already idolize you and would lick your lotus feet. What > else do you want me to do? See, that is called picking someone up > after knocking them down to size.> > > That's gross! > > You don't get pedicures or wash them? Then you're right its gross. > > < I hope you have a sense of humor, because if you don't I will have > just made another enemy.> > > I love you no matter what. > > Now that feels real Gooooooooooooooood. > What kind of love are you talking about. Unconditional? > > > It's really not so horrendous to have enemies on the Net. At least > they dont get in your hair every morning, like having a bad > relationship. How's yours, enlightened?> > > That's true. I don't think I have any enemies, though, except maybe > a guy I evicted for not paying his rent. Yes, my relationship is > enlightened. It's gone on so long that I don't give it a thought, > haha! > > Its all in the charts. Some come it with enemies from previous lives and it can or cannot be mitigated. > > Sleep well, > Love, > Ramana Maharshi > > > > In Realization , " RAMANA MAHARSHI " <unbound@h...> > wrote: > > > > > > > > <Generally after you show someone their asshole you say some > nice > > things to them so that what you told them will have a beneficial > > effect on their psyches. It's making a good anchor out of the > pull > > ups. Or maybe you did not want any positive results?> > > > > Oh no, Mark, I would never do that. It would be condescending to > > them to need to add something nice. I know they're strong and > won't > > be damaged by what I say. > > Onniko: If you are talking to " they're " then you are right about > being condescending, but I see Tanya as not a " they're, but someone > who needs some strokes of love. Realization is all about loving? If > you continue on the same tack I will ask Judi to loan you one of her > whips or do you already have a collection. hehehe You see that I > have gone back on email because I like to come in colors, you dont?. > ROFL > > > > <Hey onniko if you did that to me I would then see if I reacted > or > > > not. If not It would be quite strengthening to my already > vaunted > > > EGO. ROFLMAO.> > > > > Sorry, Ramana, but i don't contrive to do anything for any > reason. I > > just react to whatever comes into view. I can't imagine > deliberately > > saying anything to you to try and make you mad. > > > > Onniko I already idolize you and would lick your lotus feet. > What else do you want me to do? See, that is called picking someone > up after knocking them down to size. I hope you have a sense of > humor, because if you dont I will have just made another enemy. It's > really not so horrendous to have enemies on the Net. At least they > dont get in your hair every morning, like having a bad relationship. > How's yours, enlightened? I cleverly worked in Realization so that > Rob will think that is what we have been talking about. LOL. > > > > Ramana Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 22, 2003 Report Share Posted April 22, 2003 Realization , " mark_twain11 " <unbound@h...> wrote: > Dear Tanya: > Did you mean Ramana aka Alton instead of karta? > This was my post to you not karta's > I know it's late there so its ok. Sorry I don't really keep track of all the akas, just tend to lump people together as " those that don't get it " My bad, Tanya x. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 22, 2003 Report Share Posted April 22, 2003 Hi Rob " Rob Sacks " <editor@r...> wrote: > > dear Rob! what Judi seen you CAN > > NOT see. You have to DO your own > > frickin' vichara > > Rob: I agree. Of course she can't > give me herexperience. Nonetheless > it's interesting and > possibly even useful to hear about it. That is true > > K: and how do you see Judi TODAY? > in action? that is her *state* of > BEING > Rob: She says her state (if I can use that word) has been > continuous for seven years. I believe her. If it has > lasted for seven years, then it's probably permanent. she said so? you must be kidding, right? ! > > You don't like her behavior, but that has nothing > to do with waking up or understanding. > > I don't share your preconceptions about how an > awakened person should act. it is not only how she acts; it is her devious slick way of wording things, her harmful rhetoric I don't like, and belive me a real *realized* being would never would resort to use lies to make a point > Rob: She talks about things that are hard to put into > words. In an effort to make herself clear to people > who are not trying hard to understand, she sometimes > says things in different ways. Everybody does this, > even Ramana Maharshi. Ramana never told anyone: until they belived it, that " do NO sadhana, or any yoga " etc > > R: I haven't noticed any substantial inconsistency in > anything she has said. > > Okay, I'm brainwashed. I believe Judi had > a permanent awakening and in fact she didn't. > > So what? > > Nothing is going to happen as a result of this belief. It doesn't matter. OK, because you have been around the block and YOU can sort out her lies from the encouragements, but a newby CAN NOT > > > Dan is the last standing by her; > > the rest of intelligent ones fled > > already [he is good friend to have] > > Standing by her? yes, but I think Dan does not like her homophobic and other traits > Are we in some kind of > fight? Is there a war here between Judi's > side and Karta's side? What is this war about? > What are we fighting over? If Karta " wins " , what is the prize? there is no war LOL, I point to the faults in her message, it might save some one to belive in her stupid advices AND AGAIN: to be reminded to dismantle the ego: to do vichara is a good thing, I hope she will never stop doing that, but her MO [modus operandum] MUST be up graded, as it is now FAULTY peace, Karta > > Love, > > Rob > > - > " satkartar7 " <mi_nok> > <Realization > > Sunday, April 20, 2003 1:17 PM > Re: the ghost of One / Rob > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 22, 2003 Report Share Posted April 22, 2003 Dear Karta, > she said so? you must be kidding, > right? ! Laugh if you will, dear lady, but I'm serious. I find Judi's statements to be consistent and credible. You keep saying she lies and speaks in a " mutated " way, but I haven't noticed any examples of this. (I assume by " mutated " you mean contradictory.) > it is not only how she acts; it is her > devious slick way of wording things, > her harmful rhetoric I don't like, > and belive me a real *realized* being > would never would resort to use lies > to make a point If realized beings never use deceit, then Ramana Maharshi wasn't Self-realized. He used deceit on a large scale. For years he instructed Annamalai Swami to lie about the orders Sri Ramana gave him in order to cause friction and fighting between Annamalai Swami and Sri Ramana's brother. This bizarre story is told in considerable detail in David Godman's book " Living By The Words Of Bhagavan. " Jnanis are not walking bottles of sugar syrup. > Ramana never told anyone: until they > belived it, that " do NO sadhana, or > any yoga " etc Judi doesn't say that either. She told me to practice vichara and gave me extraordinarily eloquent instructions for doing so. Maybe her advice isn't as far apart from Ramana Maharshi's as you think it is. Maybe you don't really understand what she is saying. > OK, because you have been around > the block and YOU can sort out her > lies from the encouragements, but a > newby CAN NOT. If I had not had the single glimpse two years ago that I frequently mention here, I would have absolutely no idea what Judi is talking about. Her remarks would be completely incomprehensible to me. I assume that she is incomprehensible to newbies. I don't imagine that they pay any attention to her. In fact, I think she probably drives newbies away with her sense of humor (which is how I interpret her insulting remarks). So the newbies are safe. I really don't see any problem. She only seems to be a problem for people who (a) have been at this stuff long enough to have fixed ideas about it, (b) but don't understand what Judi is saying. But people with fixed ideas are safe from her influence. So what's the problem? Peace and peace and peace! Rob - " satkartar7 " <mi_nok <Realization > Tuesday, April 22, 2003 8:58 AM Re: the ghost of One / Rob > Hi Rob > > " Rob Sacks " <editor@r...> wrote: > > > dear Rob! what Judi seen you CAN > > > NOT see. You have to DO your own > > > frickin' vichara > > > > Rob: I agree. Of course she can't > > give me herexperience. Nonetheless > > it's interesting and > > possibly even useful to hear about it. > > > That is true > > > > > K: and how do you see Judi TODAY? > > in action? that is her *state* of > > BEING > > > Rob: She says her state (if I can use that word) has been > > continuous for seven years. I believe her. If it has > > lasted for seven years, then it's probably permanent. > > > she said so? you must be kidding, > right? ! > > > > > You don't like her behavior, but that has nothing > > to do with waking up or understanding. > > > > I don't share your preconceptions about how an > > awakened person should act. > > > it is not only how she acts; it is her > devious slick way of wording things, > her harmful rhetoric I don't like, > and belive me a real *realized* being > would never would resort to use lies > to make a point > > > Rob: She talks about things that are hard to put into > > words. In an effort to make herself clear to people > > who are not trying hard to understand, she sometimes > > says things in different ways. Everybody does this, > > even Ramana Maharshi. > > > Ramana never told anyone: until they > belived it, that " do NO sadhana, or > any yoga " etc > > > > > > R: I haven't noticed any substantial inconsistency in > > anything she has said. > > > > Okay, I'm brainwashed. I believe Judi had > > a permanent awakening and in fact she didn't. > > > > So what? > > > > Nothing is going to happen as a result of this belief. It doesn't matter. > > > OK, because you have been around > the block and YOU can sort out her > lies from the encouragements, but a > newby CAN NOT > > > > > > > Dan is the last standing by her; > > > the rest of intelligent ones fled > > > already [he is good friend to have] > > > > Standing by her? > > > yes, but I think Dan does not like > her homophobic and other traits > > > > > Are we in some kind of > > fight? Is there a war here between Judi's > > side and Karta's side? What is this war about? > > What are we fighting over? If Karta " wins " , what is the prize? > > > there is no war LOL, I point to the > faults in her message, it might save > some one to belive in her stupid > advices > > AND AGAIN: to be reminded to > dismantle the ego: to do vichara is > a good thing, I hope she will never > stop doing that, but her MO [modus operandum] MUST be up graded, as it > is now FAULTY > > peace, Karta > > > > Love, > > > > Rob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 22, 2003 Report Share Posted April 22, 2003 hello, " Rob Sacks " <editor@r...> wrote: I assume by " mutated " you mean contradictory NO, I mean mutated > If realized beings never use deceit, then Ramana > Maharshi wasn't Self-realized. He used deceit on > a large scale. For years he instructed Annamalai > Swami to lie about the orders Sri Ramana gave him in > order to cause friction and fighting between > Annamalai Swami and Sri Ramana's brother. This > bizarre story is told in considerable detail in David > Godman's book " Living By The Words Of > Bhagavan. " so you are saying that a goal sanctifies the action? I don't think so, there must be an ethical way > Karta: Ramana never told anyone: until > they believed it, that " do NO sadhana, > or any yoga " etc > > R: Judi doesn't say that either. HELLO! Rob: She told me to practice vichara and gave me extraordinarily eloquent instructions for doing so. OK than, you are on the right track; I like her correspondence to here also, it is educational > Rob: I think she > probably drives newbies away with her sense of humor (which is how I interpret her insulting remarks). > So the newbies are safe. I really don't see any problem. No! I seen many mindlessly excepting her brainwashing rhetoric. On the top if this without really " getting it " what she is talking about. this is do to her lack of communication skills. > So what's the problem? I see improvement <grin> there will be NO problem until I see one again and then; if you don't mind I'll comment on it: 1.every yoga or meditator is after 'a high' and they are wrong 2. meditators are just masturbating themselves 3. vigilance means 'doing' 4. who practices any sadhana is wanting to be saved, or is after an experience PEACE indeed, Karta > > Peace and peace and peace! > > Rob > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 22, 2003 Report Share Posted April 22, 2003 <Maybe there is no " I " and " thou " with me. I just see heart in everyone including Peterson> You see delicate hearts. I see strong hearts that know ego stroking is as much mind play as is ego bashing. Their own heart supports the whole with all the neurishment it needs if they allow it instead of putting their attention on their imaginary virtures. <You don't get pedicures or wash them? Then you're right its gross.> I was talking about your yucky tongue. My feet are perfect in every way. <Now that feels real Gooooooooooooooood. > What kind of love are you talking about. Unconditional?> It just means say what you really want to say because your genuine value as the whole of what you are is more than any temporary and foolish reaction I might have to it which has no value at all. Enemies from former lives? Haha! You sleep well, too, Ramana. Have a good dream, always. Realization , " RAMANA MAHARSHI " <unbound@h...> wrote: > <Onniko: If you are talking to " they're " then you are right about > being condescending, but I see Tanya as not a " they're, but someone > who needs some strokes of love. Realization is all about loving?> > > Ramana, I know you are one of the most loving beings on the planet, > but it's still condescending to someone to be all sugary sweet when > they ask for spicy food. It's a holier than thou stance at best. -- - > > I agree by her response that Tanya appeared to ask for spicy food and some hardtack, but there is always dessert to lap up. Maybe there is no " I " and " thou " with me. I just see heart in everyone including Peterson. > > > <Onniko I already idolize you and would lick your lotus feet. What > else do you want me to do? See, that is called picking someone up > after knocking them down to size.> > > That's gross! > > You don't get pedicures or wash them? Then you're right its gross. > > < I hope you have a sense of humor, because if you don't I will have > just made another enemy.> > > I love you no matter what. > > Now that feels real Gooooooooooooooood. > What kind of love are you talking about. Unconditional? > > > It's really not so horrendous to have enemies on the Net. At least > they dont get in your hair every morning, like having a bad > relationship. How's yours, enlightened?> > > That's true. I don't think I have any enemies, though, except maybe > a guy I evicted for not paying his rent. Yes, my relationship is > enlightened. It's gone on so long that I don't give it a thought, > haha! > > Now that feels real Gooooooooooooooood. > What kind of love are you talking about. Unconditional? > > Sleep well, > Love, > Ramana Maharshi > > > > In Realization , " RAMANA MAHARSHI " <unbound@h...> > wrote: > > > > > > > > <Generally after you show someone their asshole you say some > nice > > things to them so that what you told them will have a beneficial > > effect on their psyches. It's making a good anchor out of the > pull > > ups. Or maybe you did not want any positive results?> > > > > Oh no, Mark, I would never do that. It would be condescending to > > them to need to add something nice. I know they're strong and > won't > > be damaged by what I say. > > Onniko: If you are talking to " they're " then you are right about > being condescending, but I see Tanya as not a " they're, but someone > who needs some strokes of love. Realization is all about loving? If > you continue on the same tack I will ask Judi to loan you one of her > whips or do you already have a collection. hehehe You see that I > have gone back on email because I like to come in colors, you dont?. > ROFL > > > > <Hey onniko if you did that to me I would then see if I reacted > or > > > not. If not It would be quite strengthening to my already > vaunted > > > EGO. ROFLMAO.> > > > > Sorry, Ramana, but i don't contrive to do anything for any > reason. I > > just react to whatever comes into view. I can't imagine > deliberately > > saying anything to you to try and make you mad. > > > > Onniko I already idolize you and would lick your lotus feet. > What else do you want me to do? See, that is called picking someone > up after knocking them down to size. I hope you have a sense of > humor, because if you dont I will have just made another enemy. It's > really not so horrendous to have enemies on the Net. At least they > dont get in your hair every morning, like having a bad relationship. > How's yours, enlightened? I cleverly worked in Realization so that > Rob will think that is what we have been talking about. LOL. > > > > Ramana Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 22, 2003 Report Share Posted April 22, 2003 Dear Karta, > NO, I mean mutated. Maybe we have a language problem here. " Mutated " means " changed. " When you say Judi's remarks are " mutated, " you are saying that Judi's remarks are changed. I don't understand what you mean by this. > HELLO! Howdy. > so you are saying that a goal > sanctifies the action? No, I'm saying that Ramana Maharshi was deceitful at times. This was a counter-example to your assertion that realized beings are never deceitful. I was pointing out to you that you are wrong about that. By the way, I revere Ramana Maharshi. I am a devotee of his. I sometimes cry when I think of him. My observation here is not disrespectful. It is simply an acknowledgement of the facts. As Shakespeare said, the facts are always weirder than anything you can imagine. (My paraphrase.) For a jnani, sanctification isn't possible. Everything is already divine to the extent that anything can be divine. > OK than, you are on the right track... What a relief. > I like her correspondence to > here also, it is educational.... That's nice. > No! I seen many mindlessly excepting > her brainwashing rhetoric. On the top > if this without really " getting it " > what she is talking about. this is do > to her lack of communication skills. Maybe she should take communications lessons from you.. > I see improvement <grin> there will > be NO problem until I see one again > and then; if you don't mind I'll > comment on it: Of course, feel free to comment at any time. > 1.every yoga or meditator is after > 'a high' and they are wrong I would say that this is true of many but not all people who meditate and practice yoga. > 2. meditators are just masturbating themselves I would say this is true of 99.999 percent of people who meditate, in the following sense: most meditation is just a ritualized daydreaming session that conforms to the usual subject/object experience. For example, when people try to make their minds quiet, they imagine a little " I " in their heads who they imagine to be listening to an imaginary state of quiet.. > 3. vigilance means 'doing' It doesn't *mean* doing but it's a kind of doing. > 4. who practices any sadhana is wanting > to be saved, or is after an experience A practitioner of a sadhana is NECESSARILY manufacturing experiences. That's what the sadhana is. There's no choice. You don't see this until there is an involuntary breakthrough and you realize what the alternative is. But the alternative is not a practice. It's not a doing. The sadhana, if successful, somehow leads you to the point where that happens. Best wishes, Rob - " satkartar7 " <mi_nok <Realization > Tuesday, April 22, 2003 11:28 AM Re: the ghost of One / Rob > hello, > > " Rob Sacks " <editor@r...> wrote: > > I assume > by " mutated " you mean contradictory > > NO, I mean mutated > > > If realized beings never use deceit, then Ramana > > Maharshi wasn't Self-realized. He used deceit on > > a large scale. For years he instructed Annamalai > > Swami to lie about the orders Sri Ramana gave him in > > order to cause friction and fighting between > > Annamalai Swami and Sri Ramana's brother. This > > bizarre story is told in considerable detail in David > > Godman's book " Living By The Words Of > > Bhagavan. " > > > so you are saying that a goal > sanctifies the action? > > I don't think so, there must be an > ethical way > > > > Karta: Ramana never told anyone: until > > they believed it, that " do NO sadhana, > > or any yoga " etc > > > > > R: Judi doesn't say that either. > > > HELLO! > > > Rob: She told me to practice > vichara and gave me extraordinarily > eloquent instructions for doing so. > > > OK than, you are on the right track; > I like her correspondence to > here also, it is educational > > > > Rob: I think she > > probably drives newbies away with her sense of humor (which is how I interpret her insulting remarks). > > > So the newbies are safe. I really don't see any problem. > > > > No! I seen many mindlessly excepting > her brainwashing rhetoric. On the top > if this without really " getting it " > what she is talking about. this is do > to her lack of communication skills. > > > > So what's the problem? > > > > I see improvement <grin> there will > be NO problem until I see one again > and then; if you don't mind I'll > comment on it: > > 1.every yoga or meditator is after > 'a high' and they are wrong > > 2. meditators are just masturbating themselves > > 3. vigilance means 'doing' > > 4. who practices any sadhana is wanting > to be saved, or is after an experience > > PEACE indeed, Karta > > > > > Peace and peace and peace! > > > > Rob > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 22, 2003 Report Share Posted April 22, 2003 Realization , " satkartar7 " <mi_nok> wrote: > hello, > No! I seen many mindlessly excepting > her brainwashing rhetoric. On the top > if this without really " getting it " > what she is talking about. this is do > to her lack of communication skills. So what are you: - the saviour of the mindless? - protector of all poor wandering souls who may accidentally stumble on Judi's harsh words? - arbiter of what is and is not suitable material to be given to a newcomer? - defender of all against the truth? Um.....get over yourself! Sweet Nothings, Tanya x PS - its 'Accepting' not 'Excepting' in this context. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 22, 2003 Report Share Posted April 22, 2003 ROFL haho Rob, I am back from sadhana <grin> usually it is Kundalini Yoga, or Thai Chi; boy I fell centered and clear I can recommend it I'll answer later..for now here is mutation: altered, restricted limited caused by brainwashing [or by a virus in an organism] Karta :-)))) I love your humor, but don't like Tanya's style who said that? ! on namo sri bhagavan ramanaya " Rob Sacks " <editor@r...> wrote: > Dear Karta, > > > NO, I mean mutated. > > Maybe we have a language problem here. " Mutated " > means " changed. " When you say Judi's remarks are > " mutated, " you are saying that Judi's remarks are > changed. I don't understand what you mean by this. > > > HELLO! > > Howdy. > > > so you are saying that a goal > > sanctifies the action? > > No, I'm saying that Ramana Maharshi was deceitful > at times. This was a counter-example to your > assertion that realized beings are never deceitful. I > was pointing out to you that you are wrong about that. > > By the way, I revere Ramana Maharshi. I am a > devotee of his. I sometimes cry when I think of him. > My observation here is not disrespectful. It is simply > an acknowledgement of the facts. As Shakespeare > said, the facts are always weirder than anything you > can imagine. (My paraphrase.) > > For a jnani, sanctification isn't possible. Everything > is already divine to the extent that anything can be > divine. > > > OK than, you are on the right track... > > What a relief. > > > I like her correspondence to > > here also, it is educational.... > > That's nice. > > > No! I seen many mindlessly excepting > > her brainwashing rhetoric. On the top > > if this without really " getting it " > > what she is talking about. this is do > > to her lack of communication skills. > > Maybe she should take communications lessons > from you.. > > > I see improvement <grin> there will > > be NO problem until I see one again > > and then; if you don't mind I'll > > comment on it: > > Of course, feel free to comment at any time. > > > 1.every yoga or meditator is after > > 'a high' and they are wrong > > I would say that this is true of many but not all > people who meditate and practice yoga. > > > 2. meditators are just masturbating themselves > > I would say this is true of 99.999 percent of people > who meditate, in the following sense: most > meditation is just a ritualized daydreaming session > that conforms to the usual subject/object > experience. For example, when people try to make > their minds quiet, they imagine a little " I " in their > heads who they imagine to be listening to an imaginary > state of quiet.. > > > 3. vigilance means 'doing' > > It doesn't *mean* doing but it's a kind of doing. > > > 4. who practices any sadhana is wanting > > to be saved, or is after an experience > > A practitioner of a sadhana is NECESSARILY > manufacturing experiences. That's what the sadhana > is. There's no choice. > > You don't see this until there is an involuntary > breakthrough and you realize what the alternative is. > But the alternative is not a practice. It's not a doing. > > The sadhana, if successful, somehow leads you to > the point where that happens. > > Best wishes, > > Rob > - > " satkartar7 " <mi_nok> > <Realization > > Tuesday, April 22, 2003 11:28 AM > Re: the ghost of One / Rob > > > > hello, > > > > " Rob Sacks " <editor@r...> wrote: > > > > I assume > > by " mutated " you mean contradictory > > > > NO, I mean mutated > > > > > If realized beings never use deceit, then Ramana > > > Maharshi wasn't Self-realized. He used deceit on > > > a large scale. For years he instructed Annamalai > > > Swami to lie about the orders Sri Ramana gave him in > > > order to cause friction and fighting between > > > Annamalai Swami and Sri Ramana's brother. This > > > bizarre story is told in considerable detail in David > > > Godman's book " Living By The Words Of > > > Bhagavan. " > > > > > > so you are saying that a goal > > sanctifies the action? > > > > I don't think so, there must be an > > ethical way > > > > > > > Karta: Ramana never told anyone: until > > > they believed it, that " do NO sadhana, > > > or any yoga " etc > > > > > > > > R: Judi doesn't say that either. > > > > > > HELLO! > > > > > > Rob: She told me to practice > > vichara and gave me extraordinarily > > eloquent instructions for doing so. > > > > > > OK than, you are on the right track; > > I like her correspondence to > > here also, it is educational > > > > > > > Rob: I think she > > > probably drives newbies away with her sense of humor (which is how I interpret her insulting remarks). > > > > > So the newbies are safe. I really don't see any problem. > > > > > > > > No! I seen many mindlessly excepting > > her brainwashing rhetoric. On the top > > if this without really " getting it " > > what she is talking about. this is do > > to her lack of communication skills. > > > > > > > So what's the problem? > > > > > > > > I see improvement <grin> there will > > be NO problem until I see one again > > and then; if you don't mind I'll > > comment on it: > > > > 1.every yoga or meditator is after > > 'a high' and they are wrong > > > > 2. meditators are just masturbating themselves > > > > 3. vigilance means 'doing' > > > > 4. who practices any sadhana is wanting > > to be saved, or is after an experience > > > > PEACE indeed, Karta > > > > > > > > Peace and peace and peace! > > > > > > Rob > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 23, 2003 Report Share Posted April 23, 2003 Dear Karta, > > I am back from sadhana <grin> <blush> Did you use one of those, um, you know, marital aids, or did you do it the old- fashioned way? > I'll answer later..for now here > is mutation: altered, restricted > limited caused by brainwashing [or > by a virus in an organism] Oh come on, you didn't find that in a dictionary! " Caused by brainwashing. " LOL. Haha. Here's a real definition: .. 1. The act or process of being altered or changed. .. 2. An alteration or change, as in nature, form, or quality. .. 3. Genetics a. A change of the DNA sequence within .. a gene or chromosome of an organism resulting in the .. creation of a new character or trait not found in the .. parental type. b. The process by which such a change .. occurs in a chromosome, either through an alteration in the .. nucleotide sequence of the DNA coding for a gene or .. through a change in the physical arrangement of a .. chromosome. c. A mutant. 4. Linguistics The change .. that is caused in a sound by its assimilation to another .. sound, such as umlaut. > I love your humor, but don't like > Tanya's style Tanya's a puppy asking to be petted. She's adorable. How can you say no? Love, Rob - " satkartar7 " <mi_nok <Realization > Tuesday, April 22, 2003 3:14 PM Re: the ghost of One / Rob > > ROFL > > haho Rob, > > I am back from sadhana <grin> > usually it is Kundalini Yoga, > or Thai Chi; boy I fell centered and > clear I can recommend it > > I'll answer later..for now here > is mutation: altered, restricted > limited caused by brainwashing [or > by a virus in an organism] > > Karta :-)))) > > I love your humor, but don't like > Tanya's style > > who said that? ! > > on namo sri bhagavan ramanaya > > " Rob Sacks " <editor@r...> wrote: > > Dear Karta, > > > > > NO, I mean mutated. > > > > Maybe we have a language problem here. " Mutated " > > means " changed. " When you say Judi's remarks are > > " mutated, " you are saying that Judi's remarks are > > changed. I don't understand what you mean by this. > > > > > HELLO! > > > > Howdy. > > > > > so you are saying that a goal > > > sanctifies the action? > > > > No, I'm saying that Ramana Maharshi was deceitful > > at times. This was a counter-example to your > > assertion that realized beings are never deceitful. I > > was pointing out to you that you are wrong about that. > > > > By the way, I revere Ramana Maharshi. I am a > > devotee of his. I sometimes cry when I think of him. > > My observation here is not disrespectful. It is simply > > an acknowledgement of the facts. As Shakespeare > > said, the facts are always weirder than anything you > > can imagine. (My paraphrase.) > > > > For a jnani, sanctification isn't possible. Everything > > is already divine to the extent that anything can be > > divine. > > > > > OK than, you are on the right track... > > > > What a relief. > > > > > I like her correspondence to > > > here also, it is educational.... > > > > That's nice. > > > > > No! I seen many mindlessly excepting > > > her brainwashing rhetoric. On the top > > > if this without really " getting it " > > > what she is talking about. this is do > > > to her lack of communication skills. > > > > Maybe she should take communications lessons > > from you.. > > > > > I see improvement <grin> there will > > > be NO problem until I see one again > > > and then; if you don't mind I'll > > > comment on it: > > > > Of course, feel free to comment at any time. > > > > > 1.every yoga or meditator is after > > > 'a high' and they are wrong > > > > I would say that this is true of many but not all > > people who meditate and practice yoga. > > > > > 2. meditators are just masturbating themselves > > > > I would say this is true of 99.999 percent of people > > who meditate, in the following sense: most > > meditation is just a ritualized daydreaming session > > that conforms to the usual subject/object > > experience. For example, when people try to make > > their minds quiet, they imagine a little " I " in their > > heads who they imagine to be listening to an imaginary > > state of quiet.. > > > > > 3. vigilance means 'doing' > > > > It doesn't *mean* doing but it's a kind of doing. > > > > > 4. who practices any sadhana is wanting > > > to be saved, or is after an experience > > > > A practitioner of a sadhana is NECESSARILY > > manufacturing experiences. That's what the sadhana > > is. There's no choice. > > > > You don't see this until there is an involuntary > > breakthrough and you realize what the alternative is. > > But the alternative is not a practice. It's not a doing. > > > > The sadhana, if successful, somehow leads you to > > the point where that happens. > > > > Best wishes, > > > > Rob > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - > > " satkartar7 " <mi_nok> > > <Realization > > > Tuesday, April 22, 2003 11:28 AM > > Re: the ghost of One / Rob > > > > > > > hello, > > > > > > " Rob Sacks " <editor@r...> wrote: > > > > > > I assume > > > by " mutated " you mean contradictory > > > > > > NO, I mean mutated > > > > > > > If realized beings never use deceit, then Ramana > > > > Maharshi wasn't Self-realized. He used deceit on > > > > a large scale. For years he instructed Annamalai > > > > Swami to lie about the orders Sri Ramana gave him in > > > > order to cause friction and fighting between > > > > Annamalai Swami and Sri Ramana's brother. This > > > > bizarre story is told in considerable detail in David > > > > Godman's book " Living By The Words Of > > > > Bhagavan. " > > > > > > > > > so you are saying that a goal > > > sanctifies the action? > > > > > > I don't think so, there must be an > > > ethical way > > > > > > > > > > Karta: Ramana never told anyone: until > > > > they believed it, that " do NO sadhana, > > > > or any yoga " etc > > > > > > > > > > > R: Judi doesn't say that either. > > > > > > > > > HELLO! > > > > > > > > > Rob: She told me to practice > > > vichara and gave me extraordinarily > > > eloquent instructions for doing so. > > > > > > > > > OK than, you are on the right track; > > > I like her correspondence to > > > here also, it is educational > > > > > > > > > > Rob: I think she > > > > probably drives newbies away with her sense of humor (which is how I interpret her insulting remarks). > > > > > > > So the newbies are safe. I really don't see any problem. > > > > > > > > > > > > No! I seen many mindlessly excepting > > > her brainwashing rhetoric. On the top > > > if this without really " getting it " > > > what she is talking about. this is do > > > to her lack of communication skills. > > > > > > > > > > So what's the problem? > > > > > > > > > > > > I see improvement <grin> there will > > > be NO problem until I see one again > > > and then; if you don't mind I'll > > > comment on it: > > > > > > 1.every yoga or meditator is after > > > 'a high' and they are wrong > > > > > > 2. meditators are just masturbating themselves > > > > > > 3. vigilance means 'doing' > > > > > > 4. who practices any sadhana is wanting > > > to be saved, or is after an experience > > > > > > PEACE indeed, Karta > > > > > > > > > > > Peace and peace and peace! > > > > > > > > Rob > > > > > > > > ..........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 23, 2003 Report Share Posted April 23, 2003 good morning Rob and everyone. Are we gonna have a nice day? peace-love-awareness, Karta Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 23, 2003 Report Share Posted April 23, 2003 Oh yes, very nice, but very cold. It's dentist day for the little one which means he'll probably get a new toy to shoot me between the eyes with if he lets them floss. Realization , " satkartar7 " <mi_nok> wrote: > good morning Rob and everyone. > > Are we gonna have a nice day? > > peace-love-awareness, Karta Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 23, 2003 Report Share Posted April 23, 2003 Realization , " Rob Sacks " <editor@r...> wrote: > Tanya's a puppy asking to be petted. She's > adorable. How can you say no? GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!! I'll have you know Rob I am very fierce and scary and I know lots of people who are frightened of me so there! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 23, 2003 Report Share Posted April 23, 2003 > GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!! > > I'll have you know Rob I am very fierce and scary and I know lots of > people who are frightened of me so there! Yikes ... you're scaring me ... it's hard to reach the keyboard when I'm hiding under the desk .... - " Tanya Davis " <tanyarowan <Realization > Wednesday, April 23, 2003 12:41 PM Re: the ghost of One / Rob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 23, 2003 Report Share Posted April 23, 2003 Tanya Said:I'll have you know Rob I am very fierce and scary and I know lots of people who are frightened of me so there!Sono Tutti; I am everyone in Italian, Buts in. Tanya, you may be fierce in real live time, but online you are spineless, or you are evolved so that you can take a punch and not react. Which one is true. Love, ST 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.