Guest guest Posted April 22, 2003 Report Share Posted April 22, 2003 Dear Alton, > Firstly, I want to congratulate you for allowing a free > group with what you call "personal attacks" ... What choice was there? It was either that or ban half the active members. > ...which is a little too dysphemistic... Fancy word! > This seems to be the only spiritual group that I have > been on that is not sugar coated with bhakti baloney. Bhakti is amazingly wonderful baloney. Baloney so beautiful that it makes you cry tears of joy for hours. Nothing touches it. > Rob: Usually when [Ramana Maharshi] said stuff like > that, he was making the point that "Bhagavan" wasn't > in the body of the man addressed as Ramana Maharshi. > There's no deceit in this. > Man of Numerous Names and Colors: No deceit maybe > but surely his imagination. He was selling his trip, probably > with some degree of sincerity, but what he says about the > Realized ones having no EGO does not compute. Call me an idiot, laugh at me, but I believe his ego was permanently extinguished. Of course I don't know for sure. And neither do you. But I've read all the eyewitness memoirs that are available in English by people who lived at his ashram and observed him regularly, and there was something very extraordinary about that guy. > He just had that ability and power to stay in samadhi for > longer times then the rest of the motley crew of gurus He didn't go into distinct samadhis very much, especially in later years. He was mostly in a permanent state that he called "sahaja samadhi" in which he appeared to interact in a perfectly normal way with other people and objects. > I believe the spiritual authority, Bruce Morgan agreed that > the Realized ones have use of their ego's but are generally > detached from it. I'm not so sure that this is a good description of Sri Ramana's state. > Rob: When he points to "himself" and says, "No swami > here," he's CONFIRMING that there's no ego. > Man of Numerous Names and Colors: Who was it that > did that confirming? Another ghost like dead Judi's ghost? There wasn't any "one" in Sri Ramana's experience who did things. Actions were seen to happen. Alton has a ghost and Rob has a ghost. I don't believe Judi or Sri Ramana have ghosts. Why is this so hard for you to believe? Your feeling of "I" is just a bunch of thoughts. What's so remarkable about your brain not bothering to generate those thoughts? > It's like having an orgasm. If one has a powerful mind and > body and no hang-ups then the orgasm with be like a > geyser. The ordinary person's will be like a water spout. > The same with that samadhi ability. You can get a flash > of it, but not what Ramana had unless you have that > incredibly powerful mind and body like Ramana > demonstrated. You imagine that realization is an altered state of consciousness. Every plausible realizer says that it is not an altered state of consciousness. Is it possible that they are telling the truth? > The Gurus say that the EGO is not real, because if you > try to find it you wont. Well, I say it is a program in the > mind... That's a pretty good metaphor, I think. > ...That Ego program comes with an option, with training to > detach from that EGO. We write a new program of > mindfulness and blow away the constrictions of that EGO. No, we can't do that. Any deliberate voluntary action IS the ego. Trying to blow away the ego with deliberate voluntary action is like trying to wash paint off a wall with a paint brush dipped in paint. It just can't be done. > Go for it Rob and end your interminable suffering. Stop > wasting so much time on the groups and do some intense > practice. The same goes for Alton aka. This isn't a waste of time. I'm practicing Jnana Yoga by talking to Dan and Judi. > Lets face it, this trip is all about POWER. testosterone > Judi seems to have it to some extent, like Koresh and Jones > did, but not to the extent that Ramana did. I think Judi's right. You need to splash some cold water on yourself. > Rob, maybe someday soon the universe will grant you > that power and then the sheep will follow you to Valhalla. > But don't count on me as your chela. My strong Uranus > wont tolerate surrender, thank goddess.. Bah, you'll realize before I do. You've got a better diet. ..Aloha, Robbie Bob - RAMANA MAHARSHI Realization Tuesday, April 22, 2003 2:56 PM Re: Ramana used deceit also Dear Rob: firstly, I want to congratulate you for allowing a free group with what you call "personal attacks" which is a little too dysphemistic, and I call "personal encounters" by not of the third kind; although sometimes it appears that way. This seems to be the only spiritual group that I have been on that is not sugar coated with bhakti baloney. Dear Alton, > Also, when asked "where is the Swami" Ramana > said, "Swami is not here". Later he said that he did > not want to say he was the Swami. Usually when he said stuff like that, he was making the point that "Bhagavan" wasn't in the body of the man addressed as Ramana Maharshi. There's no deceit in this. No deceit maybe but surely his imagination. He was selling his trip, probably with some degree of sincerity, but what he says about the Realized ones having no EGO does not compute. Ramana said he thinks when asked questions, or when reading, but not at other times. So you can think and answer questions without that ego? The ego is the interface to communicate with the world. When he is in Samadhi his ego is declutched or at rest. He just had that ability and power to stay in samadhi for longer times then the rest of the motley crew of gurus I believe the spiritual authority, Bruce Morgan agreed that the Realized ones have use of their ego's but are generally detached from it. Rob: When he points to "himself" and says, "No swami here," he's CONFIRMING that there's no ego. Who was it that did that confirming? Another ghost like dead Judi's ghost? It's like having an orgasm. If one has a powerful mind and body and no hang-ups then the orgasm with be like a geyser. The ordinary person's will be like a water spout. The same with that samadhi ability. You can get a flash of it, but not what Ramana had unless you have that incredibly powerful mind and body like Ramana demonstrated. The Gurus say that the EGO is not real, because if you try to find it you wont. Well, I say it is a program in the mind and you can find it if you understand the code that contains it. That Ego program comes with an option, with training to detach from that EGO. We write a new program of mindfulness and blow away the constrictions of that EGO. Go for it Rob and end your interminable suffering. Stop wasting so much time on the groups and do some intense practice. The same goes for Alton aka. Lets face it, this trip is all about POWER. testosterone Judi seems to have it to some extent, like Koresh and Jones did, but not to the extent that Ramana did. Rob, maybe someday soon the universe will grant you that power and then the sheep will follow you to Valhalla. But don't count on me as your chela. My strong Uranus wont tolerate surrender, thank goddess.. The teaching are incredibly valuable is you are able to take what you can use and run, like Ram Dass' guru told him when he asked if he could have other teachers. It's more fun to not agree to disagree. With all the love that Saddam grants me. Hey aint the Self in Saddam too? Ramana Maharshi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 22, 2003 Report Share Posted April 22, 2003 > Firstly, I want to congratulate you for allowing a free > group with what you call "personal attacks" ... What choice was there? It was either that or ban half the active members. ##You finally realized that all of us don't have any choices I > This seems to be the only spiritual group that I have > been on that is not sugar coated with bhakti baloney. Bhakti is amazingly wonderful baloney. Baloney so beautiful that it makes you cry tears of joy for hours. Nothing touches it. ## How was your relationship with your dad? Many of those who glom on to the Bhakti baloney have had bad relationships with father and when they release some of the pent up familial love they become lachrymose. Another big word. Ha Ha. If that is not the reason for the tears then I may posit another rationale. > Rob: Usually when [Ramana Maharshi] said stuff like > that, he was making the point that "Bhagavan" wasn't > in the body of the man addressed as Ramana Maharshi. > There's no deceit in this. ## Yes he was possessed and in this country he would have been treated. I'll chance it when it happens to me. Do you also believe that hares have horns? > Man of Numerous Names and Colors: No deceit maybe > but surely his imagination. He was selling his trip, probably > with some degree of sincerity, but what he says about the > Realized ones having no EGO does not compute. Call me an idiot, laugh at me, but I believe his ego was permanently extinguished. Of course I don't know for sure. And neither do you. But I've read all the eyewitness memoirs that are available in English by people who lived at his ashram and observed him regularly, and there was something very extraordinary about that guy. ## If you want a following or if you don't want a following, you must have certitude and pretend like the others do here that you know what you are talking about. Of course there was something extraordinary about Ramana. Not many in this world have an eidetic memory, could transmit through the power of the mind great peace and bond with a cow. > He just had that ability and power to stay in samadhi for > longer times then the rest of the motley crew of gurus He didn't go into distinct samadhis very much, especially in later years. He was mostly in a permanent state that he called "sahaja samadhi" in which he appeared to interact in a perfectly normal way with other people and objects. ## Yes because of the continued training that went on automatically he reached that powerful state of being. Continue training and it will happen to you also, but as Nisargadatta says, you must be earnest. Don't try changing your name to Ernest because it wont work that way. > I believe the spiritual authority, Bruce Morgan agreed that > the Realized ones have use of their ego's but are generally > detached from it. I'm not so sure that this is a good description of Sri Ramana's state. ## See above where you are advised to be sure. LOL > Rob: When he points to "himself" and says, "No swami > here," he's CONFIRMING that there's no ego. > Man of Numerous Names and Colors: Who was it that > did that confirming? Another ghost like dead Judi's ghost? There wasn't any "one" in Sri Ramana's experience who did things. Actions were seen to happen. Alton has a ghost and Rob has a ghost. I don't believe Judi or Sri Ramana have ghosts. Why is this so hard for you to believe? Your feeling of "I" is just a bunch of thoughts. What's so remarkable about your brain not bothering to generate those thoughts? ## Look dear Rob: I love the teachings of subjects and objects and how to not get caught up in them, but I stand on my former post of that those high states are just detachments. > It's like having an orgasm. If one has a powerful mind and > body and no hang-ups then the orgasm with be like a > geyser. The ordinary person's will be like a water spout. > The same with that samadhi ability. You can get a flash > of it, but not what Ramana had unless you have that > incredibly powerful mind and body like Ramana > demonstrated. You imagine that realization is an altered state of consciousness. Every plausible realizer says that it is not an altered state of consciousness. Is it possible that they are telling the truth? ## Its possible, but since none of them seem to be willing to answer any questions or submit to MRI's and other technology, I will have to wait to be sure until it happens to me. If they did answer any questions then they would be accused of having an EGO and they would loose credibility. So it is another catch 22 situation. > The Gurus say that the EGO is not real, because if you > try to find it you wont. Well, I say it is a program in the > mind... That's a pretty good metaphor, I think. > ...That Ego program comes with an option, with training to > detach from that EGO. We write a new program of > mindfulness and blow away the constrictions of that EGO. No, we can't do that. Any deliberate voluntary action IS the ego. ## I rest my case Trying to blow away the ego with deliberate voluntary action is like trying to wash paint off a wall with a paint brush dipped in paint. It just can't be done. ## Time will tell > Go for it Rob and end your interminable suffering. Stop > wasting so much time on the groups and do some intense > practice. The same goes for Alton aka. This isn't a waste of time. I'm practicing Jnana Yoga by talking to Dan and Judi. ## How so? > Lets face it, this trip is all about POWER. testosterone > Judi seems to have it to some extent, like Koresh and Jones > did, but not to the extent that Ramana did. I think Judi's right. You need to splash some cold water on yourself. > Rob, maybe someday soon the universe will grant you > that power and then the sheep will follow you to Valhalla. > But don't count on me as your chela. My strong Uranus > wont tolerate surrender, thank goddess.. Bah, you'll realize before I do. You've got a better diet. ## There is no such thing as Realization as you posit it. There is only the power of detachment and experience of altered states. Love, Sono Tutti, I am All .. - RAMANA MAHARSHI Realization Tuesday, April 22, 2003 2:56 PM Re: Ramana used deceit also Dear Rob: firstly, I want to congratulate you for allowing a free group with what you call "personal attacks" which is a little too dysphemistic, and I call "personal encounters" by not of the third kind; although sometimes it appears that way. This seems to be the only spiritual group that I have been on that is not sugar coated with bhakti baloney. Dear Alton, > Also, when asked "where is the Swami" Ramana > said, "Swami is not here". Later he said that he did > not want to say he was the Swami. Usually when he said stuff like that, he was making the point that "Bhagavan" wasn't in the body of the man addressed as Ramana Maharshi. There's no deceit in this. No deceit maybe but surely his imagination. He was selling his trip, probably with some degree of sincerity, but what he says about the Realized ones having no EGO does not compute. Ramana said he thinks when asked questions, or when reading, but not at other times. So you can think and answer questions without that ego? The ego is the interface to communicate with the world. When he is in Samadhi his ego is declutched or at rest. He just had that ability and power to stay in samadhi for longer times then the rest of the motley crew of gurus I believe the spiritual authority, Bruce Morgan agreed that the Realized ones have use of their ego's but are generally detached from it. Rob: When he points to "himself" and says, "No swami here," he's CONFIRMING that there's no ego. Who was it that did that confirming? Another ghost like dead Judi's ghost? It's like having an orgasm. If one has a powerful mind and body and no hang-ups then the orgasm with be like a geyser. The ordinary person's will be like a water spout. The same with that samadhi ability. You can get a flash of it, but not what Ramana had unless you have that incredibly powerful mind and body like Ramana demonstrated. The Gurus say that the EGO is not real, because if you try to find it you wont. Well, I say it is a program in the mind and you can find it if you understand the code that contains it. That Ego program comes with an option, with training to detach from that EGO. We write a new program of mindfulness and blow away the constrictions of that EGO. Go for it Rob and end your interminable suffering. Stop wasting so much time on the groups and do some intense practice. The same goes for Alton aka. Lets face it, this trip is all about POWER. testosterone Judi seems to have it to some extent, like Koresh and Jones did, but not to the extent that Ramana did. Rob, maybe someday soon the universe will grant you that power and then the sheep will follow you to Valhalla. But don't count on me as your chela. My strong Uranus wont tolerate surrender, thank goddess.. The teaching are incredibly valuable is you are able to take what you can use and run, like Ram Dass' guru told him when he asked if he could have other teachers. It's more fun to not agree to disagree. With all the love that Saddam grants me. Hey aint the Self in Saddam too? Ramana Maharshi .......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 23, 2003 Report Share Posted April 23, 2003 > ##You finally realized that all of us don't have > any choices. If there are no choices, then why do I keep making the wrong one? > ## How was your relationship with your dad? How can I summarize it briefly? Good and bad. > Many of those who glom on to the Bhakti baloney > have had bad relationships with father and when > they release some of the pent up familial love they > become lachrymose. I think the tears came from the conviction that everything is God, that everything is good and in its rightful place. It's an enormously wonderful thing to be certain of. When you say "glom on to", are you imagining that somebody decides to seek this experience and tries to get it? It wasn't like that. It was completely involuntary. This was brought on by yoga, I think, in the same way that Kundalini is brought on by yoga. You wouldn't imagine that somebody feels electricity in his spine because of a childhood relationship, would you? . > If you want a following or if you don't want a following, > you must have certitude and pretend like the others > do here that you know what you are talking about. I'm certain about certain things, like the way the Bhakti experiences felt. What's the point of pretending about other things? > Its possible, but since none of > them seem to be willing to answer any > questions... They don't? I've got a 600 page book here on my desk that consists entirely of Ramana Maharshi answering questions. All these people do is answer questions. > There is no such thing as Realization > as you posit it. There is only the power of > detachment and experience of altered states. At the beginning of your letter, you told me there are no choices. Now at the end, you are telling me there is only power to choose what your mind does. Contradiction? Something to think about -- There are choices but there is no chooser. There is no chooser because there is no way that a part of your mind can choose what the other part of your mind will do. Therefore there is no power of the kind you seek. That's why you can't ever develop it. The thing can't be done. Just a thought. Uncertainly, Rob - SONO TUTTI Realization Wednesday, April 23, 2003 12:01 AM Re: Ramana used deceit also / Alton > Firstly, I want to congratulate you for allowing a free > group with what you call "personal attacks" ... What choice was there? It was either that or ban half the active members. ##You finally realized that all of us don't have any choices I > This seems to be the only spiritual group that I have > been on that is not sugar coated with bhakti baloney. Bhakti is amazingly wonderful baloney. Baloney so beautiful that it makes you cry tears of joy for hours. Nothing touches it. ## How was your relationship with your dad? Many of those who glom on to the Bhakti baloney have had bad relationships with father and when they release some of the pent up familial love they become lachrymose. Another big word. Ha Ha. If that is not the reason for the tears then I may posit another rationale. > Rob: Usually when [Ramana Maharshi] said stuff like > that, he was making the point that "Bhagavan" wasn't > in the body of the man addressed as Ramana Maharshi. > There's no deceit in this. ## Yes he was possessed and in this country he would have been treated. I'll chance it when it happens to me. Do you also believe that hares have horns? > Man of Numerous Names and Colors: No deceit maybe > but surely his imagination. He was selling his trip, probably > with some degree of sincerity, but what he says about the > Realized ones having no EGO does not compute. Call me an idiot, laugh at me, but I believe his ego was permanently extinguished. Of course I don't know for sure. And neither do you. But I've read all the eyewitness memoirs that are available in English by people who lived at his ashram and observed him regularly, and there was something very extraordinary about that guy. ## If you want a following or if you don't want a following, you must have certitude and pretend like the others do here that you know what you are talking about. Of course there was something extraordinary about Ramana. Not many in this world have an eidetic memory, could transmit through the power of the mind great peace and bond with a cow. > He just had that ability and power to stay in samadhi for > longer times then the rest of the motley crew of gurus He didn't go into distinct samadhis very much, especially in later years. He was mostly in a permanent state that he called "sahaja samadhi" in which he appeared to interact in a perfectly normal way with other people and objects. ## Yes because of the continued training that went on automatically he reached that powerful state of being. Continue training and it will happen to you also, but as Nisargadatta says, you must be earnest. Don't try changing your name to Ernest because it wont work that way. > I believe the spiritual authority, Bruce Morgan agreed that > the Realized ones have use of their ego's but are generally > detached from it. I'm not so sure that this is a good description of Sri Ramana's state. ## See above where you are advised to be sure. LOL > Rob: When he points to "himself" and says, "No swami > here," he's CONFIRMING that there's no ego. > Man of Numerous Names and Colors: Who was it that > did that confirming? Another ghost like dead Judi's ghost? There wasn't any "one" in Sri Ramana's experience who did things. Actions were seen to happen. Alton has a ghost and Rob has a ghost. I don't believe Judi or Sri Ramana have ghosts. Why is this so hard for you to believe? Your feeling of "I" is just a bunch of thoughts. What's so remarkable about your brain not bothering to generate those thoughts? ## Look dear Rob: I love the teachings of subjects and objects and how to not get caught up in them, but I stand on my former post of that those high states are just detachments. > It's like having an orgasm. If one has a powerful mind and > body and no hang-ups then the orgasm with be like a > geyser. The ordinary person's will be like a water spout. > The same with that samadhi ability. You can get a flash > of it, but not what Ramana had unless you have that > incredibly powerful mind and body like Ramana > demonstrated. You imagine that realization is an altered state of consciousness. Every plausible realizer says that it is not an altered state of consciousness. Is it possible that they are telling the truth? ## Its possible, but since none of them seem to be willing to answer any questions or submit to MRI's and other technology, I will have to wait to be sure until it happens to me. If they did answer any questions then they would be accused of having an EGO and they would loose credibility. So it is another catch 22 situation. > The Gurus say that the EGO is not real, because if you > try to find it you wont. Well, I say it is a program in the > mind... That's a pretty good metaphor, I think. > ...That Ego program comes with an option, with training to > detach from that EGO. We write a new program of > mindfulness and blow away the constrictions of that EGO. No, we can't do that. Any deliberate voluntary action IS the ego. ## I rest my case Trying to blow away the ego with deliberate voluntary action is like trying to wash paint off a wall with a paint brush dipped in paint. It just can't be done. ## Time will tell > Go for it Rob and end your interminable suffering. Stop > wasting so much time on the groups and do some intense > practice. The same goes for Alton aka. This isn't a waste of time. I'm practicing Jnana Yoga by talking to Dan and Judi. ## How so? > Lets face it, this trip is all about POWER. testosterone > Judi seems to have it to some extent, like Koresh and Jones > did, but not to the extent that Ramana did. I think Judi's right. You need to splash some cold water on yourself. > Rob, maybe someday soon the universe will grant you > that power and then the sheep will follow you to Valhalla. > But don't count on me as your chela. My strong Uranus > wont tolerate surrender, thank goddess.. Bah, you'll realize before I do. You've got a better diet. ## There is no such thing as Realization as you posit it. There is only the power of detachment and experience of altered states. Love, Sono Tutti, I am All .. - RAMANA MAHARSHI Realization Tuesday, April 22, 2003 2:56 PM Re: Ramana used deceit also Dear Rob: firstly, I want to congratulate you for allowing a free group with what you call "personal attacks" which is a little too dysphemistic, and I call "personal encounters" by not of the third kind; although sometimes it appears that way. This seems to be the only spiritual group that I have been on that is not sugar coated with bhakti baloney. Dear Alton, > Also, when asked "where is the Swami" Ramana > said, "Swami is not here". Later he said that he did > not want to say he was the Swami. Usually when he said stuff like that, he was making the point that "Bhagavan" wasn't in the body of the man addressed as Ramana Maharshi. There's no deceit in this. No deceit maybe but surely his imagination. He was selling his trip, probably with some degree of sincerity, but what he says about the Realized ones having no EGO does not compute. Ramana said he thinks when asked questions, or when reading, but not at other times. So you can think and answer questions without that ego? The ego is the interface to communicate with the world. When he is in Samadhi his ego is declutched or at rest. He just had that ability and power to stay in samadhi for longer times then the rest of the motley crew of gurus I believe the spiritual authority, Bruce Morgan agreed that the Realized ones have use of their ego's but are generally detached from it. Rob: When he points to "himself" and says, "No swami here," he's CONFIRMING that there's no ego. Who was it that did that confirming? Another ghost like dead Judi's ghost? It's like having an orgasm. If one has a powerful mind and body and no hang-ups then the orgasm with be like a geyser. The ordinary person's will be like a water spout. The same with that samadhi ability. You can get a flash of it, but not what Ramana had unless you have that incredibly powerful mind and body like Ramana demonstrated. The Gurus say that the EGO is not real, because if you try to find it you wont. Well, I say it is a program in the mind and you can find it if you understand the code that contains it. That Ego program comes with an option, with training to detach from that EGO. We write a new program of mindfulness and blow away the constrictions of that EGO. Go for it Rob and end your interminable suffering. Stop wasting so much time on the groups and do some intense practice. The same goes for Alton aka. Lets face it, this trip is all about POWER. testosterone Judi seems to have it to some extent, like Koresh and Jones did, but not to the extent that Ramana did. Rob, maybe someday soon the universe will grant you that power and then the sheep will follow you to Valhalla. But don't count on me as your chela. My strong Uranus wont tolerate surrender, thank goddess.. The teaching are incredibly valuable is you are able to take what you can use and run, like Ram Dass' guru told him when he asked if he could have other teachers. It's more fun to not agree to disagree. With all the love that Saddam grants me. Hey aint the Self in Saddam too? Ramana Maharshi ....................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 23, 2003 Report Share Posted April 23, 2003 Sono Tutti is in green this time around > ##You finally realized that all of us don't have > any choices. If there are no choices, then why do I keep making the wrong one? Because the wrong one is the right one for your evolution. You need pain to get you where you are going, which is no place. Nisargadatta talks about that in "I Am That". When you have so much pain and suffering thrown at you, you may become Self aware. >> Many of those who glom on to the Bhakti baloney > have had bad relationships with father and when > they release some of the pent up familial love they > become lachrymose. I think the tears came from the conviction that everything is God, that everything is good and in its rightful place. It's an enormously wonderful thing to be certain of. I validate what anyone else is doing on their sadhana. Unlike steroid Judi I believe that there are many paths to the Goddess' head. It's just that so many Gurus have betrayed their followers that I cant see myself being a Bhakti. I do believe that we are all human, even those so called Realized ones, and if you investigated any of them you would find a heap of contradictions and occasionally crimes. When you say "glom on to", are you imagining that somebody decides to seek this experience and tries to get it? It wasn't like that. It was completely involuntary. This was brought on by yoga, I think, in the same way that Kundalini is brought on by yoga. You wouldn't imagine that somebody feels electricity in his spine because of a childhood relationship, would you? . Yes every event stored in the mind can either facilitate or prevent That happening. It's not all a crap shoot, but follows mostly unknown laws of psychology, phenomenology and spirituality. > If you want a following or if you don't want a following, > you must have certitude and pretend like the others > do here that you know what you are talking about. I'm certain about certain things, like the way the Bhakti experiences felt. What's the point of pretending about other things? That is the problem with the Bhaktis in my not so humble opinion, that they don't tell the truth, but pretend to be prissy pure. They say one thing to you in personal emails and then another diametrically opposite thing to the public. Then they tell you not to say tell anyone. LOL. It you spit in a Bhaktis face they might say it rained, but underneath they are raging. As you can see, our Judi is no Bhakti, but I love her because she is right up front in your face with her candor. > Its possible, but since none of > them seem to be willing to answer any > questions... They don't? I've got a 600 page book here on my desk that consists entirely of Ramana Maharshi answering questions. About his own condition? Many of his answers he got out of books and are not from his personal experience. Did someone tell me he said that the bliss of the Self is 1000 times greater than the sexual experience. Since you seem to know almost everything Ramana said, I ask you if that is true? If it is, how can he know without experiencing the glorious sex act? All these people do is answer questions. > There is no such thing as Realization > as you posit it. There is only the power of > detachment and experience of altered states. At the beginning of your letter, you told me there are no choices. Yes, we are a heap of contradictions and it depends on what level we are relating to in the moment. You may want to eat a pure healthful diet, but somehow you never get around to doing it. I dialogue on two main levels. One is the identification with the roles we are playing and the other is the witnessing of the roles we are playing. I may use both or switch from one to another depending on what kind of help I am offering. Now at the end, you are telling me there is only power to choose what your mind does. I just said we are playing roles in this life Drama. Sometimes we identify with those roles and believe it and sometimes we see it as histrionics. Contradiction? Something to think about -- There are choices but there is no chooser. There is no chooser because there is no way that a part of your mind can choose what the other part of your mind will do. Therefore there is no power of the kind you seek. That's why you can't ever develop it. The thing can't be done. Just a thought. Uncertainly, You're right if you say we should detach from pain and enjoy the pleasures of the world. Shall we master that trick? Or didn't you say that but are doing it anyway? hehehe Sono Tutti Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 24, 2003 Report Share Posted April 24, 2003 Hi Alton, Hi Rob see me red faced: > That is the problem with the Bhaktis in my not > so humble opinion, that they don't tell the truth, > but pretend to be prissy pure. Not me. I pretend to be irresistible to women. Sono Tutti does not have to pretend. hehehe The peacocks are now strutting their feathers. LOL. > Did someone tell me he said that the bliss of the > Self is 1000 times greater than the sexual experience. > Since you seem to know almost everything Ramana > said, I ask you if that is true? I don't know that much about what Ramana said but for whatever it's worth, I can't remember seeing any statement by him that's remotely like that. It doesn't sound like him. The guy who brought Nisardadatta and was a Ramana devotee told us. I just confirmed it with my spouse. He is listed on the Ramana site, but I wont ask him because he no longer lives in Hawaii. However, I do know of one quotation where he speaks about his ejaculations. Yes, really. Here it is: .. One night in the year 1934 some one asked Bhagavan: . "Do you have dreams?". Bhagavan: "Doesn't one dream in sleep?". Questioner: "Did you ever have seminal discharges during .. sleep, or in dreams." Everyone present felt disgusted at the .. question, but Bhagavan without the slightest sign of .. annoyance, calmly replied: "Yes. What of that? It may .. happen even if one eats hot foods. How does it matter? .. You are thinking I am this body. Hence the wrong .. understanding that if one loses the essential fluid of the .. body, one shall fall from brahmacharya and tapas. It .. occurs to me that I am living simultaneously in twenty .. different worlds with diverse bodies. How can I worry over .. such losses or biological changes in all these body parts. .. The essence is not the body and its various metamorphosis .. but Atma Gnana Nishta, the abidance in Self-Knowledge. .. We are the Ever-Changeless. .. (From The Maharshi, May/June 93, Vol 3 No 3) Rob: If you posted this on Miles' Ramana group he would loose many Indian members, I'll bet. ----- I am an advocate of onanism. Oh no not another big word again today. I will save you the time of looking it up. I mean the first and third definition. One entry found for onanism. Main Entry: onan·ism Pronunciation: 'O-n & -"ni-z & mFunction: nounEtymology: probably from New Latin onanismus, from Onan, son of Judah (Gen 38:9)circa 17411 : MASTURBATION2 : COITUS INTERRUPTUS3 : SELF-GRATIFICATION- onan·is·tic /"O-n & -'nis-tik/ adjective You get some history in this post too. hehehe Why Did God Slay Onan (Genesis 38:3-10)? The story of Onan, son of Judah, occurs in Genesis 38:3-10: "So [shua, the wife of Judah] conceived and bore a son, and [Judah] called his name Er. She conceived again and bore a son, and she called his name Onan. . . . Then Judah took a wife for Er his firstborn, and her name was Tamar. But Er, Judah's firstborn, was wicked in the sight of the LORD; and the LORD killed him. And Judah said to Onan, "Go in to your brother's wife and marry her, and raise up an heir to your brother." But Onan knew that the heir would not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in to his brother's wife, that he emitted on the ground, lest he should give an heir to his brother. And the thing which he did displeased the LORD; therefore He killed him also." God slew Onan because the man contemptuously refused to fulfill his familial responsibility under the Old Covenant. This particular practice is called levirate marriage, in which a dead man's closest unmarried male relation (usually a younger brother, as in this case) married the widow to produce an heir for the dead man. This duty is spelled out in Deuteronomy 25:5-10 to preserve tribal inheritance rights (verse 6). Another, happier circumstance of levirate marriage is recorded in the book of Ruth, an event that eventually produced Israel's greatest king, David (Ruth 4:17). Of course, this ancient national statute is no longer applicable today. Catholic doctrine uses Onan's story to prohibit the use of birth control. However, this is specious reasoning, based on an ancient and flawed notion that sexual relations between a man and his wife are only for the purpose of producing children. God's anger against Onan had everything to do with his failure to fulfill his covenantal obligation, and nothing to do with his method of birth control. Scripture does not directly contemplate the use of birth control, and thus it is a matter of personal preference within what God has revealed as proper Christian living. We can be guided by the principles of personal responsibility—stewardship of one's resources to provide for children (I Timothy 5:8)—and love toward one's mate (Ephesians 5:22-33). Why wait until you underpants are soaking wet. It also is great to defuse anger. Also,I would have asked Ramana if he also had sexual dreams. Then the Indian bhaktis would either kill me or stone me. That is what some baits do you know. Remember what Nisargadatta said: "If I gave my teachings on the streets of Bombay they would stone me" Rob you are the greatest allowing such freedom here. Believe me know other group moderator that I know would. Love, Sono Tutti Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 24, 2003 Report Share Posted April 24, 2003 Dear Rob: firstly, I want to thank you for giving me pull-ups to insist that I reform my disruptive ways. Dear Alton, > If you posted this on Miles' Ramana group he would > lose many Indian members, I'll bet. There's no doubt that if you want to find something to say that will make people angry, you can find something. Most adults don't find this terribly interesting. What "this" specifically are you referring to? By the way, that quote comes from a book written by an Indian that was published by Indians and reprinted in a newsletter co-edited by an Indian. All of them were devotees of Ramana Maharshi. And it was reviewed for accuracy twice by Ramana Maharshi himself, who was Indian. > I am an advocate of onanism. You mean you're an advocate of refusing to make your dead brother's widow pregnant, so you won't have to split your inheritance with your nephew? That's what Onan actually does in the story. Thanks for that info. My wife understood that, but I did not. > Also, I would have asked Ramana if he also had > sexual dreams. What I would be curious to know is whether he was capable of having fantasies while awake. I suspect that he wasn't. This might make it impossible to masturbate. Did Ramana have dreams? A jnani is supposed to be awake while sleeping? Nisargadatta said he had dreams, so I presume that when he was about to fall to sleep he had fantasies. About it being impossible to masterbate without fantasies; it is purely a mechanic thing and when stimulated climax happens. Now without the fantasies one might not want to do it, but many do it for health reasons. My eastern astrological reading is that If I dont have it, it will cause health debilitating problems. If I remember correctly, U.G said that he may be attracted to a woman, but because the image disappears each moment, it is not possible. In "No Mind -- I Am The Self," Saradamma says that because her "mind" has been permanently destroyed, she is incapable of thinking about things unless some external event brings them to her attention. Boy, I sure would like to be in that state or what ever you want to call it. For example, she says that between the times that she visits her sister, she never thinks of her sister. (I'm reading between the lines here a bit but you can judge her comments for herself. They are on page 199.) > Rob you are the greatest allowing such freedom > here. Believe me know other group moderator that I > know would. I'm like everybody else. If you try hard enough, eventually you'll find something to say that will piss me off. What's the point? But quotations from the Bible don't piss me off. Good, I will some time in the future study the bible. Right now I am not pleased with that God that kills. What gives her the license to do such horrendous things. > Then the Indian bhaktis would either kill me or stone me. > That is what some baits do you know. We owe all of this to India and Indians. I revere India. I pay homage to India. Om namo bhagavate sri ramanaya. Rob You are a true devotee of Ramana, I just worship his words. Mahalo, sono tutti, I am everyone - SONO TUTTI Realization Thursday, April 24, 2003 1:53 AM Re: Ramana used deceit also / Alton Hi Alton, Hi Rob see me red faced: > That is the problem with the Bhaktis in my not > so humble opinion, that they don't tell the truth, > but pretend to be prissy pure. Not me. I pretend to be irresistible to women. Sono Tutti does not have to pretend. hehehe The peacocks are now strutting their feathers. LOL. > Did someone tell me he said that the bliss of the > Self is 1000 times greater than the sexual experience. > Since you seem to know almost everything Ramana > said, I ask you if that is true? I don't know that much about what Ramana said but for whatever it's worth, I can't remember seeing any statement by him that's remotely like that. It doesn't sound like him. The guy who brought Nisardadatta and was a Ramana devotee told us. I just confirmed it with my spouse. He is listed on the Ramana site, but I wont ask him because he no longer lives in Hawaii. However, I do know of one quotation where he speaks about his ejaculations. Yes, really. Here it is: .. One night in the year 1934 some one asked Bhagavan: . "Do you have dreams?". Bhagavan: "Doesn't one dream in sleep?". Questioner: "Did you ever have seminal discharges during .. sleep, or in dreams." Everyone present felt disgusted at the .. question, but Bhagavan without the slightest sign of .. annoyance, calmly replied: "Yes. What of that? It may .. happen even if one eats hot foods. How does it matter? .. You are thinking I am this body. Hence the wrong .. understanding that if one loses the essential fluid of the .. body, one shall fall from brahmacharya and tapas. It .. occurs to me that I am living simultaneously in twenty .. different worlds with diverse bodies. How can I worry over .. such losses or biological changes in all these body parts. .. The essence is not the body and its various metamorphosis .. but Atma Gnana Nishta, the abidance in Self-Knowledge. .. We are the Ever-Changeless. .. (From The Maharshi, May/June 93, Vol 3 No 3) Rob: If you posted this on Miles' Ramana group he would loose many Indian members, I'll bet. ----- I am an advocate of onanism. Oh no not another big word again today. I will save you the time of looking it up. I mean the first and third definition. One entry found for onanism. Main Entry: onan·ism Pronunciation: 'O-n & -"ni-z & mFunction: nounEtymology: probably from New Latin onanismus, from Onan, son of Judah (Gen 38:9)circa 17411 : MASTURBATION2 : COITUS INTERRUPTUS3 : SELF-GRATIFICATION- onan·is·tic /"O-n & -'nis-tik/ adjective You get some history in this post too. hehehe Why Did God Slay Onan (Genesis 38:3-10)? The story of Onan, son of Judah, occurs in Genesis 38:3-10: "So [shua, the wife of Judah] conceived and bore a son, and [Judah] called his name Er. She conceived again and bore a son, and she called his name Onan. . . . Then Judah took a wife for Er his firstborn, and her name was Tamar. But Er, Judah's firstborn, was wicked in the sight of the LORD; and the LORD killed him. And Judah said to Onan, "Go in to your brother's wife and marry her, and raise up an heir to your brother." But Onan knew that the heir would not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in to his brother's wife, that he emitted on the ground, lest he should give an heir to his brother. And the thing which he did displeased the LORD; therefore He killed him also." God slew Onan because the man contemptuously refused to fulfill his familial responsibility under the Old Covenant. This particular practice is called levirate marriage, in which a dead man's closest unmarried male relation (usually a younger brother, as in this case) married the widow to produce an heir for the dead man. This duty is spelled out in Deuteronomy 25:5-10 to preserve tribal inheritance rights (verse 6). Another, happier circumstance of levirate marriage is recorded in the book of Ruth, an event that eventually produced Israel's greatest king, David (Ruth 4:17). Of course, this ancient national statute is no longer applicable today. Catholic doctrine uses Onan's story to prohibit the use of birth control. However, this is specious reasoning, based on an ancient and flawed notion that sexual relations between a man and his wife are only for the purpose of producing children. God's anger against Onan had everything to do with his failure to fulfill his covenantal obligation, and nothing to do with his method of birth control. Scripture does not directly contemplate the use of birth control, and thus it is a matter of personal preference within what God has revealed as proper Christian living. We can be guided by the principles of personal responsibility—stewardship of one's resources to provide for children (I Timothy 5:8)—and love toward one's mate (Ephesians 5:22-33). Why wait until you underpants are soaking wet. It also is great to defuse anger. Also,I would have asked Ramana if he also had sexual dreams. Then the Indian bhaktis would either kill me or stone me. That is what some baits do you know. Remember what Nisargadatta said: "If I gave my teachings on the streets of Bombay they would stone me" Rob you are the greatest allowing such freedom here. Believe me know other group moderator that I know would. Love, Sono Tutti ..........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 24, 2003 Report Share Posted April 24, 2003 Hi Rob and Alton, I have heard Nome say of this (the Bliss of the Self) that whatever the sages have said, that it is understatement. Not two, Richard Realization , " SONO TUTTI " <unbound@h...> wrote: > > Did someone tell me he said that the bliss of the > > Self is 1000 times greater than the sexual experience. > > Since you seem to know almost everything Ramana > > said, I ask you if that is true? > > I don't know that much about what Ramana said but > for whatever it's worth, I can't remember seeing any > statement by him that's remotely like that. It doesn't > sound like him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 25, 2003 Report Share Posted April 25, 2003 Hi Richard, Nice to see you here. Welcome. Not counting, Rob - " Richard Clarke " <rclarke <Realization > Thursday, April 24, 2003 4:19 PM Re: Ramana used deceit also / Alton > Hi Rob and Alton, > > I have heard Nome say of this (the Bliss of the Self) that whatever > the sages have said, that it is understatement. > > Not two, > Richard > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 26, 2003 Report Share Posted April 26, 2003 Hi Alton, > That is the problem with the Bhaktis in my not > so humble opinion, that they don't tell the truth, > but pretend to be prissy pure. Not me. I pretend to be irresistible to women. > Did someone tell me he said that the bliss of the > Self is 1000 times greater than the sexual experience. > Since you seem to know almost everything Ramana > said, I ask you if that is true? I don't know that much about what Ramana said but for whatever it's worth, I can't remember seeing any statement by him that's remotely like that. It doesn't sound like him. However, I do know of one quotation where he speaks about his ejaculations. Yes, really. Here it is: .. One night in the year 1934 some one asked Bhagavan: . "Do you have dreams?". Bhagavan: "Doesn't one dream in sleep?". Questioner: "Did you ever have seminal discharges during .. sleep, or in dreams." Everyone present felt disgusted at the .. question, but Bhagavan without the slightest sign of .. annoyance, calmly replied: "Yes. What of that? It may .. happen even if one eats hot foods. How does it matter? .. You are thinking Iam this body. Hence the wrong .. understanding that if one loses the essential fluid of the .. body, one shall fall from brahmacharya and tapas. It .. occurs to me that I am living simultaneously in twenty .. different worlds with diverse bodies. How can I worry over .. such losses or biological changes in all these body parts. .. The essence is not the body and its various metamorphosis .. but Atma Gnana Nishta, the abidance in Self-Knowledge. .. We are the Ever-Changeless. .. (From The Maharshi, May/June 93, Vol 3 No 3) Aloha, Rob - SONO TUTTI Realization Wednesday, April 23, 2003 4:51 PM Re: Ramana used deceit also / Alton Sono Tutti is in green this time around > ##You finally realized that all of us don't have > any choices. If there are no choices, then why do I keep making the wrong one? Because the wrong one is the right one for your evolution. You need pain to get you where you are going, which is no place. Nisargadatta talks about that in "I Am That". When you have so much pain and suffering thrown at you, you may become Self aware. >> Many of those who glom on to the Bhakti baloney > have had bad relationships with father and when > they release some of the pent up familial love they > become lachrymose. I think the tears came from the conviction that everything is God, that everything is good and in its rightful place. It's an enormously wonderful thing to be certain of. I validate what anyone else is doing on their sadhana. Unlike steroid Judi I believe that there are many paths to the Goddess' head. It's just that so many Gurus have betrayed their followers that I cant see myself being a Bhakti. I do believe that we are all human, even those so called Realized ones, and if you investigated any of them you would find a heap of contradictions and occasionally crimes. When you say "glom on to", are you imagining that somebody decides to seek this experience and tries to get it? It wasn't like that. It was completely involuntary. This was brought on by yoga, I think, in the same way that Kundalini is brought on by yoga. You wouldn't imagine that somebody feels electricity in his spine because of a childhood relationship, would you? . Yes every event stored in the mind can either facilitate or prevent That happening. It's not all a crap shoot, but follows mostly unknown laws of psychology, phenomenology and spirituality. > If you want a following or if you don't want a following, > you must have certitude and pretend like the others > do here that you know what you are talking about. I'm certain about certain things, like the way the Bhakti experiences felt. What's the point of pretending about other things? That is the problem with the Bhaktis in my not so humble opinion, that they don't tell the truth, but pretend to be prissy pure. They say one thing to you in personal emails and then another diametrically opposite thing to the public. Then they tell you not to say tell anyone. LOL. It you spit in a Bhaktis face they might say it rained, but underneath they are raging. As you can see, our Judi is no Bhakti, but I love her because she is right up front in your face with her candor. > Its possible, but since none of > them seem to be willing to answer any > questions... They don't? I've got a 600 page book here on my desk that consists entirely of Ramana Maharshi answering questions. About his own condition? Many of his answers he got out of books and are not from his personal experience. Did someone tell me he said that the bliss of the Self is 1000 times greater than the sexual experience. Since you seem to know almost everything Ramana said, I ask you if that is true? If it is, how can he know without experiencing the glorious sex act? All these people do is answer questions. > There is no such thing as Realization > as you posit it. There is only the power of > detachment and experience of altered states. At the beginning of your letter, you told me there are no choices. Yes, we are a heap of contradictions and it depends on what level we are relating to in the moment. You may want to eat a pure healthful diet, but somehow you never get around to doing it. I dialogue on two main levels. One is the identification with the roles we are playing and the other is the witnessing of the roles we are playing. I may use both or switch from one to another depending on what kind of help I am offering. Now at the end, you are telling me there is only power to choose what your mind does. I just said we are playing roles in this life Drama. Sometimes we identify with those roles and believe it and sometimes we see it as histrionics. Contradiction? Something to think about -- There are choices but there is no chooser. There is no chooser because there is no way that a part of your mind can choose what the other part of your mind will do. Therefore there is no power of the kind you seek. That's why you can't ever develop it. The thing can't be done. Just a thought. Uncertainly, You're right if you say we should detach from pain and enjoy the pleasures of the world. Shall we master that trick? Or didn't you say that but are doing it anyway? hehehe Sono Tutti Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 27, 2003 Report Share Posted April 27, 2003 Dear Alton, > If you posted this on Miles' Ramana group he would > lose many Indian members, I'll bet. There's no doubt that if you want to find something to say that will make people angry, you can find something. Most adults don't find this terribly interesting. By the way, that quote comes from a book written by an Indian that was published by Indians and reprinted in a newsletter co-edited by an Indian. All of them were devotees of Ramana Maharshi. And it was reviewed for accuracy twice by Ramana Maharshi himself, who was Indian. > I am an advocate of onanism. You mean you're an advocate of refusing to make your dead brother's widow pregnant, so you won't have to split your inheritance with your nephew? That's what Onan actually does in the story. > Also, I would have asked Ramana if he also had > sexual dreams. What I would be curious to know is whether he was capable of having fantasies while awake. I suspect that he wasn't. This might make it impossible to masturbate. In "No Mind -- I Am The Self," Saradamma says that because her "mind" has been permanently destroyed, she is incapable of thinking about things unless some external event brings them to her attention. For example, she says that between the times that she visits her sister, she never thinks of her sister. (I'm reading between the lines here a bit but you can judge her comments for herself. They are on page 199.) > Rob you are the greatest allowing such freedom > here. Believe me know other group moderator that I > know would. I'm like everybody else. If you try hard enough, eventually you'll find something to say that will piss me off. What's the point? But quotations from the Bible don't piss me off. > Then the Indian bhaktis would either kill me or stone me. > That is what some baits do you know. We owe all of this to India and Indians. I revere India. I pay homage to India. Om namo bhagavate sri ramanaya. Rob - SONO TUTTI Realization Thursday, April 24, 2003 1:53 AM Re: Ramana used deceit also / Alton Hi Alton, Hi Rob see me red faced: > That is the problem with the Bhaktis in my not > so humble opinion, that they don't tell the truth, > but pretend to be prissy pure. Not me. I pretend to be irresistible to women. Sono Tutti does not have to pretend. hehehe The peacocks are now strutting their feathers. LOL. > Did someone tell me he said that the bliss of the > Self is 1000 times greater than the sexual experience. > Since you seem to know almost everything Ramana > said, I ask you if that is true? I don't know that much about what Ramana said but for whatever it's worth, I can't remember seeing any statement by him that's remotely like that. It doesn't sound like him. The guy who brought Nisardadatta and was a Ramana devotee told us. I just confirmed it with my spouse. He is listed on the Ramana site, but I wont ask him because he no longer lives in Hawaii. However, I do know of one quotation where he speaks about his ejaculations. Yes, really. Here it is: .. One night in the year 1934 some one asked Bhagavan: . "Do you have dreams?". Bhagavan: "Doesn't one dream in sleep?". Questioner: "Did you ever have seminal discharges during .. sleep, or in dreams." Everyone present felt disgusted at the .. question, but Bhagavan without the slightest sign of .. annoyance, calmly replied: "Yes. What of that? It may .. happen even if one eats hot foods. How does it matter? .. You are thinking I am this body. Hence the wrong .. understanding that if one loses the essential fluid of the .. body, one shall fall from brahmacharya and tapas. It .. occurs to me that I am living simultaneously in twenty .. different worlds with diverse bodies. How can I worry over .. such losses or biological changes in all these body parts. .. The essence is not the body and its various metamorphosis .. but Atma Gnana Nishta, the abidance in Self-Knowledge. .. We are the Ever-Changeless. .. (From The Maharshi, May/June 93, Vol 3 No 3) Rob: If you posted this on Miles' Ramana group he would loose many Indian members, I'll bet. ----- I am an advocate of onanism. Oh no not another big word again today. I will save you the time of looking it up. I mean the first and third definition. One entry found for onanism. Main Entry: onan·ism Pronunciation: 'O-n & -"ni-z & mFunction: nounEtymology: probably from New Latin onanismus, from Onan, son of Judah (Gen 38:9)circa 17411 : MASTURBATION2 : COITUS INTERRUPTUS3 : SELF-GRATIFICATION- onan·is·tic /"O-n & -'nis-tik/ adjective You get some history in this post too. hehehe Why Did God Slay Onan (Genesis 38:3-10)? The story of Onan, son of Judah, occurs in Genesis 38:3-10: "So [shua, the wife of Judah] conceived and bore a son, and [Judah] called his name Er. She conceived again and bore a son, and she called his name Onan. . . . Then Judah took a wife for Er his firstborn, and her name was Tamar. But Er, Judah's firstborn, was wicked in the sight of the LORD; and the LORD killed him. And Judah said to Onan, "Go in to your brother's wife and marry her, and raise up an heir to your brother." But Onan knew that the heir would not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in to his brother's wife, that he emitted on the ground, lest he should give an heir to his brother. And the thing which he did displeased the LORD; therefore He killed him also." God slew Onan because the man contemptuously refused to fulfill his familial responsibility under the Old Covenant. This particular practice is called levirate marriage, in which a dead man's closest unmarried male relation (usually a younger brother, as in this case) married the widow to produce an heir for the dead man. This duty is spelled out in Deuteronomy 25:5-10 to preserve tribal inheritance rights (verse 6). Another, happier circumstance of levirate marriage is recorded in the book of Ruth, an event that eventually produced Israel's greatest king, David (Ruth 4:17). Of course, this ancient national statute is no longer applicable today. Catholic doctrine uses Onan's story to prohibit the use of birth control. However, this is specious reasoning, based on an ancient and flawed notion that sexual relations between a man and his wife are only for the purpose of producing children. God's anger against Onan had everything to do with his failure to fulfill his covenantal obligation, and nothing to do with his method of birth control. Scripture does not directly contemplate the use of birth control, and thus it is a matter of personal preference within what God has revealed as proper Christian living. We can be guided by the principles of personal responsibility—stewardship of one's resources to provide for children (I Timothy 5:8)—and love toward one's mate (Ephesians 5:22-33). Why wait until you underpants are soaking wet. It also is great to defuse anger. Also,I would have asked Ramana if he also had sexual dreams. Then the Indian bhaktis would either kill me or stone me. That is what some baits do you know. Remember what Nisargadatta said: "If I gave my teachings on the streets of Bombay they would stone me" Rob you are the greatest allowing such freedom here. Believe me know other group moderator that I know would. Love, Sono Tutti Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted April 27, 2003 Report Share Posted April 27, 2003 Dear Alton, > Firstly, I want to thank you for giving me pull-ups > to insist that I reform my disruptive ways. Haha, I'm not sure I deserve the credit. > What "this" specifically are you referring to? "This" was the fact that it's almost always possible to find things that can be said that will piss other people off. My point was that most people take this for granted, and it's not terribly interesting to them. > Thanks for that info. My wife understood that, but I did > not. How's her knee? > About it being impossible to masterbate without fantasies; > it is purely a mechanic thing and when stimulated climax > happens. I'll take your word for it. > Did Ramana have dreams? Yeah. He says that right at the beginning of the passage I quoted yesterday, the one you said would antagonize people on the Ramana list. He says it more clearly here: .. Q. Does a jnani have dreams? .. .. A. Yes, he does dream, but he knows it to be a dream, .. in the same way as he knows the waking state to be a .. dream. You may call them dream no. 1 and no. 2. The .. jnani being established in the fourth state -- turiya, the .. supreme reality -- he detachedly witnesses the three .. other states, waking, dreaming, and dreamless sleep, .. as pictures superimposed on it. .. .. (From S. Cohen. Guru Ramana, pp. 101-102, quoted .. in Be As You Are, p. 37) > A jnani is supposed to be awake while sleeping? See last sentence of the quote above. > Right now I am not pleased with that God that kills. > What gives her the license to do such horrendous things. Some biologists think that death is the necessary price we pay for evolution. If living things didn't die, evolution would not have taken place, and we wouldn't be here. People like Ramana Maharshi say that you are not your body and you cannot die. Only your body can die. > You are a true devotee of Ramana, I just worship his > words. Maybe you're more of a devotee than you realize. Like Onniko told you yesterday, "You are what it is so you can't help but know." Same thing, sort of, isn't it? Mortally, Rob - SONO TUTTI Realization Thursday, April 24, 2003 2:18 PM Re: Ramana used deceit also / Alton Dear Rob: firstly, I want to thank you for giving me pull-ups to insist that I reform my disruptive ways. Dear Alton, > If you posted this on Miles' Ramana group he would > lose many Indian members, I'll bet. There's no doubt that if you want to find something to say that will make people angry, you can find something. Most adults don't find this terribly interesting. What "this" specifically are you referring to? By the way, that quote comes from a book written by an Indian that was published by Indians and reprinted in a newsletter co-edited by an Indian. All of them were devotees of Ramana Maharshi. And it was reviewed for accuracy twice by Ramana Maharshi himself, who was Indian. > I am an advocate of onanism. You mean you're an advocate of refusing to make your dead brother's widow pregnant, so you won't have to split your inheritance with your nephew? That's what Onan actually does in the story. Thanks for that info. My wife understood that, but I did not. > Also, I would have asked Ramana if he also had > sexual dreams. What I would be curious to know is whether he was capable of having fantasies while awake. I suspect that he wasn't. This might make it impossible to masturbate. Did Ramana have dreams? A jnani is supposed to be awake while sleeping? Nisargadatta said he had dreams, so I presume that when he was about to fall to sleep he had fantasies. About it being impossible to masterbate without fantasies; it is purely a mechanic thing and when stimulated climax happens. Now without the fantasies one might not want to do it, but many do it for health reasons. My eastern astrological reading is that If I dont have it, it will cause health debilitating problems. If I remember correctly, U.G said that he may be attracted to a woman, but because the image disappears each moment, it is not possible. In "No Mind -- I Am The Self," Saradamma says that because her "mind" has been permanently destroyed, she is incapable of thinking about things unless some external event brings them to her attention. Boy, I sure would like to be in that state or what ever you want to call it. For example, she says that between the times that she visits her sister, she never thinks of her sister. (I'm reading between the lines here a bit but you can judge her comments for herself. They are on page 199.) > Rob you are the greatest allowing such freedom > here. Believe me know other group moderator that I > know would. I'm like everybody else. If you try hard enough, eventually you'll find something to say that will piss me off. What's the point? But quotations from the Bible don't piss me off. Good, I will some time in the future study the bible. Right now I am not pleased with that God that kills. What gives her the license to do such horrendous things. > Then the Indian bhaktis would either kill me or stone me. > That is what some baits do you know. We owe all of this to India and Indians. I revere India. I pay homage to India. Om namo bhagavate sri ramanaya. Rob You are a true devotee of Ramana, I just worship his words. Mahalo, sono tutti, I am everyone 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.