.....but i'm not the only one.......

May 23, 2008

hi Phil,You should read Guru Gita. It will explain you everything. I thought since you do not like the concept of meditation, you will ignore this post.Anyway, it is not necessary that a person after realisation should establish an ashram.Swami Vivekananda said"a yogi can sit in a cave in the himalayas, thousands of kilometers away from the mankind, create a spiritual thought, this thought influence the whole mankind, and the mankind is not even aware of who has created the thought."traditional scriptures say that it is not necessary that after realisation one should send his life for upliftment of the masses and society. even if he does so it's ok.after completing the graduation, it is left upto you to read the books or you can quit them, as you already have the degree.Also if you have this service as your goal you

cannot achieve realisation.We always try to see action in inaction.. can we imagine a toughtless state, not even in a dream. "a wise man sees action in the inaction (of wordly minded men) and inaction in the action (of a realised saint) - Astavakra Gita.Same thing is also explained in Bhagawat Gita.When nothing exist than SELF, than who will teach whom.and if God orders a saint to come to a lower plane of the benefit of the society, then who can stop him. All powerful God is with him.AUMSujal--- On Thu, 22/5/08, souldreamone <souldreamone wrote:souldreamone <souldreamoneRe: Re: .....but i'm not the only one.......Nisargadatta Date: Thursday,

22 May, 2008, 11:28 AM ***Who is it who gains complete control over the mind? Would this be the imaginary thought person in the mind? Who is it who Realizes the Self with effort? The one whos effort blocks the Realization of Self? Once the individual has accomplished all of this, how could such a powerful identity ever be lost? Seems like such a powerful person should at least go on to write books or be a guru in an ashram or sumthin. In a message dated 22/05/2008 1:37:00 AM Pacific Daylight Time, sujal_u

writes:Hello Marc,If you have "Dhyeya Shiddhi" i.e. you have complete comtrol of your mind and your mind is always pointed to only one thing i.e. SELF than only you do not need any books nor the Guru i.e. External Guru. When a person has reached this state of mind (by meditation or comtemplation or etc whatever you term it) than the Guru lets him free and the Disciple does not need to stay in the Ashram "under the care of a Guru". For such a student the purpose of Books on Non-duality and the Presence of a Physical Guru is over. So in the himalayan tradition, a Disciple having this Dhyeya Siddhi now achieve his Goal (of SELF Realisation) without external support. Inspiration

comes from within and mind looses it's identity and merges into the SELF (tapas). Repeated Realisation of the SELF (with an effort) leads to the distrution of Desires (mind) and the ego. It leads to Sahaj Samadhi (Sahaj = Spontaneous) . The disciple knew who he was, but could not stay in his SELF because he was still attached with the body and mind. By sitting in Meditation and repeated experiences of Samadhi, the state of Samadhi is prolonged from seconds to minutes to hours. A day comes when he sees the world as the SELF, in the waking state, after the meditation is over. Finally the effort ceases, and now he does not need to force his body to sit in meditation any more. He stays in the SELF. He is the SELF.But if you have not reached the matured state of "dhyeye siddhi" then you should continue to read books and physical presence of a Guru always helps.Your comments-reading books on nonduality.. ..for most of people...... don' t change anything in their life......for those those people who read books but does not try to live the life the book emphasises. AUMSujal --- On Thu, 22/5/08, dennis_travis33 <dennis_travis33@ .de> wrote:dennis_travis33 <dennis_travis33@ .de> Re: .....but i'm not the only one.......NisargadattaThursday, 22 May, 2008, 12:07 AMNisargadatta, "toombaru2006" <lastrain@.. .> wrote:>> > > John Wheeler> > "... imagine you are dreaming. You find a book in the dream, a book that describes your true > nature as something beyond the dream.> > But the book itself is in the dream, and the act of reading is in the dream, and the Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch

"Cooking with Tyler Florence" on AOL Food.

Unlimited freedom, unlimited storage. Get it now

May 23, 2008

I got the point of the story. It's a rather crude and obvious story about purity with regard to the temptations of the world, is it not? I don't believe it requires any in-depth discussion. As I said, the story does not speak to Ramanakrishna, but only to the storyteller, since I do not believe the story to be true, and so nobody has been disrespected (except perhaps the ignorant storyteller), but I do not respect names and stories and traditions, only Truth, and I don't humble myself to any but Truth as best I can perceive it. Is this wrong of me? There is no issue with purity or shunning money or material things or anything else you want to make it. You're not paying attention to what's being said.

Again, the point that was missed is that money is not inherently bad, and to be repelled by it implies judgment rather than purity. That's all.

In a message dated 5/22/2008 10:56:00 PM Pacific Daylight Time, sujal_u writes:

Phil,Sri Ramakrishna was not a sanyasin (monk). But still he had givenup everything. Monks drop things from within and outside (as they setup a reference for lay disciples and devotees), while a saint living in society can only drop things from his mind (within). You need to read his life story and than comment it.You always try to catch the words and drop the essence. Could you tell honestly what did you conclude from this incident from Sri Ramakrishna's life. If you will try to see it positively than maybe it can help you. You do not need to reply to me.It seems that you cannot respect anybody. You tell Adi Shankaracharya and swami Vivekananda and now Sri Ramakrishna and his devotee (mahendranath Gupta) as 'somebody'. Had shankaracharya not been there, we could not have any saints and scriptures. Doctrines nearly extinguished. He is responsible to re-establish them. Seriously, Phil, tunnelled vision does not help to excel in spirituality. One becomes broadminded, free from rigidity, superstitions, and becomes soft from within as he/she excels in spirituality, whaever path he may follow - dual or non dual.AUMSujal--- On Thu, 22/5/08, souldreamone <souldreamone wrote:

souldreamone <souldreamoneRe: Re: .....but i'm not the only one.......Nisargadatta Date: Thursday, 22 May, 2008, 11:56 AM

***So currency is inherently evil and gives off bad vibes to the "pure", or is it what one does with it that is 'pure' or 'unpure'? To react spontaneously to something that is neither good nor bad in and of itself, is the judgment that challenges that claim to purity. However, the story does not ring true, and so only speaks to the ignorance of the storteller. (Whoever originally wrote the story)

In a message dated 22/05/2008 5:02:56 AM Pacific Daylight Time, sujal_u writes:

Hi Marc,**....Ramakrishna who didn't even want to touch money...**Sri Ramakrishna could not touch the money. One day Naren (Swami Vivekananda) tested him (as Sri Ramakrishna used to say that you can always test your Guru). So he one day hide a coin below Sri Ramakrishna' s Bed stayed silent in the room. When Sri Ramakrishna arrived and sat on the bed, he got a strong burning sensation ... like some strong current passing through him. He could not bare this pain and spontaneously sprung up from his bed. Devotees and disciples were in shock and no body knew what happened. Later on they chekced the bed and found a coin. This proved and convinced Naren that Sri Ramakrishna was so pure that he could not touch money. Later on when Sri Ramakrishna came to know that Naren was behind this incident, he was pleased and agreed with Naren. AUMSujal --- On Thu, 22/5/08, dennis_travis33 <dennis_travis33@ .de> wrote:

dennis_travis33 <dennis_travis33@ .de> Re: .....but i'm not the only one.......NisargadattaThursday, 22 May, 2008, 3:35 AM

Hello Marc,I definately agree with you. The moment a person becomes self (ego) centered, SELF Realisation is no more his goal. Than how can the books / people talking about SELF Realisation help and motivate or influence him. Where there is ego there is no surrendrance and no faith.Scriptural knowledge is not the actual knowledge, but mere information.Complete surrenderance

Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch "Cooking with Tyler Florence" on AOL Food.

May 23, 2008

Phil,Sri Ramakrishna was not a sanyasin (monk). But still he had givenup everything. Monks drop things from within and outside (as they setup a reference for lay disciples and devotees), while a saint living in society can only drop things from his mind (within). You need to read his life story and than comment it.You always try to catch the words and drop the essence. Could you tell honestly what did you conclude from this incident from Sri Ramakrishna's life. If you will try to see it positively than maybe it can help you. You do not need to reply to me.It seems that you cannot respect anybody. You tell Adi Shankaracharya and swami Vivekananda and now Sri Ramakrishna and his devotee (mahendranath Gupta) as 'somebody'. Had shankaracharya not been there, we could not have any saints and scriptures. Doctrines nearly extinguished.

He is responsible to re-establish them. Seriously, Phil, tunnelled vision does not help to excel in spirituality. One becomes broadminded, free from rigidity, superstitions, and becomes soft from within as he/she excels in spirituality, whaever path he may follow - dual or non dual.AUMSujal--- On Thu, 22/5/08, souldreamone <souldreamone wrote:souldreamone <souldreamoneRe: Re: .....but i'm not the only one.......Nisargadatta Date: Thursday, 22 May, 2008, 11:56 AM ***So currency is inherently evil and gives off bad vibes to the "pure", or is it what one does with it that is 'pure' or 'unpure'? To react spontaneously to something that is neither good nor bad in and of itself, is the judgment that challenges that claim to purity. However, the story does not ring true, and so only speaks to the ignorance of the storteller. (Whoever originally wrote the story) In a message dated 22/05/2008 5:02:56 AM Pacific Daylight Time, sujal_u writes:Hi Marc,**....Ramakrishna who didn't even want to touch money...**Sri Ramakrishna could not touch the money. One day Naren (Swami Vivekananda) tested him (as Sri Ramakrishna used to say that you can always test your Guru). So he one day hide a coin below Sri Ramakrishna' s Bed stayed silent in the room. When Sri Ramakrishna arrived and sat on the bed, he got a strong burning sensation ... like some strong current passing through him. He could not bare this pain and spontaneously sprung up from his bed. Devotees and disciples were in shock and no body knew what happened. Later on they chekced the bed and found a coin. This proved and convinced Naren that Sri Ramakrishna was so pure that he could not touch money. Later on when Sri Ramakrishna came to know that Naren was behind this incident, he was pleased and agreed with

Naren. AUMSujal --- On Thu, 22/5/08, dennis_travis33 <dennis_travis33@ .de> wrote:dennis_travis33 <dennis_travis33@ .de> Re: .....but i'm not the only one.......NisargadattaThursday, 22 May, 2008, 3:35 AMHello Marc,I definately agree with you. The moment a person becomes self (ego) centered, SELF Realisation is no more his goal. Than how can the books / people talking about SELF Realisation help and motivate or influence him. Where there is ego there is no surrendrance and no

faith.Scriptural knowledge is not the actual knowledge, but mere information.Complete surrenderance of sgo to the SELF is the real bhakti (devotion) - Sri Ramana Maharshi.I also like the quote below:He who has FAITH has everythingHe who lacks FAITH, lacks everythingIt is the FAITH in the name of the LORD that works wondersFAITH is LIFE, DOUBT is DEATH- Sri Ramakrishna ParamhansaAUMSujalHello Sujal,yes.....no doubt about your words....rare to read such words in here.......rare to read the name of Ramakrishna in here.........Ramakrishna who didn't even want to touch money.....and who seemed to have had always some doubt about ego-minded people......who expressed/showed/ communicated endless

faith Marc Bollywood, fun, friendship, sports and more. You name it, we have it. Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch "Cooking with Tyler Florence" on AOL Food.

Best Jokes, Best Friends, Best Food. Get all this and more on Best of .

May 23, 2008

Well, it's my philosophy to not attempt control, resistance or struggle, since I see these qualities as contradictory to the goal, which is effortlessness, acceptance, surrender of the self. If it is not already apparent that this is not directly accomplished through any doing, it is also my experience that this is so. And so the question arises, how is surrender brought about if one cannot choose to surrender? It comes about through a deep realization of the futility of the struggle. Once this is seen, the mind quite naturally ceases to engage in that particular activity because it clearly will not accomplish the goal for which mind strives.

As one example nearly everyone can identify with, when it is clearly seen that trying to accomplish ultimate happiness within the dualistic illusion is quite impossible, then the effort to do so naturally subsides. The same pattern occurs through revealing unconscious ego patterns, recognizing the illusory nature of control and cause/effect, the self destructiveness of ego drama, the stifling result of attachments, mentation, dwelling on memories and so on. Each time clarity occurs around such issues, ego is weakened and mind releases more tension. This has always been my process, and it has been very fruitful. Essentially, all that is needed is to pay attention, and this is a function of the Awareness that You are rather than the egoic energy that you take yourself to be. The focus is ultimately effortless and is not a doing at all. Rather, it is an undoing.

In a message dated 5/23/2008 2:31:29 AM Pacific Daylight Time, sujal_u writes:

Hello Phil,how do you apply it practically?Sujal--- On Fri, 23/5/08, souldreamone <souldreamone wrote:

souldreamone <souldreamoneRe: Re: .....but i'm not the only one.......Nisargadatta Date: Friday, 23 May, 2008, 2:20 AM

Well, my comments were not about the merits of meditation. I have no issue with that as such, only the particular practices that were mentioned. I also have no issue with the value of the Awakening event to humanity, nor whether the 'Awakened' one engages or secludes himself. (I was being a bit sarcastic with the 'powerful person' comment in an attempt to point out there is no powerful person.)

My issue is a more fundamental one, that has to do with the accepted idea that there ultimately is no person. Given this, what person is it who controls the mind, and who's mind is it if it is not the mind of the person trying to control it? Not only do we have one imaginary person, now it has become two; a controller and a controlled. Who is it who expends effort to Realize, and is it not effort of the imaginary individual that actually blocks the Realization of a Truth that is not hiding, but is rather hidden by this personal effort to sustain the volition of this imagined individual?

In a message dated 5/22/2008 10:40:49 PM Pacific Daylight Time, sujal_u writes:

hi Phil,You should read Guru Gita. It will explain you everything. I thought since you do not like the concept of meditation, you will ignore this post.Anyway, it is not necessary that a person after realisation should establish an ashram.Swami Vivekananda said"a yogi can sit in a cave in the himalayas, thousands of kilometers away from the mankind, create a spiritual thought, this thought influence the whole mankind, and the mankind is not even aware of who has created the thought."traditional scriptures say that it is not necessary that after realisation one should send his life for upliftment of the masses and society. even if he does so it's ok.after completing the graduation, it is left upto you to read the books or you can quit them, as you already have the degree.Also if you have this service as your goal you cannot achieve realisation.We always try to see action in inaction.. can we imagine a toughtless state, not even in a dream.

Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch "Cooking with Tyler Florence" on AOL Food.

May 23, 2008

Hello Phil,how do you apply it practically?Sujal--- On Fri, 23/5/08, souldreamone <souldreamone wrote:souldreamone <souldreamoneRe: Re: .....but i'm not the only one.......Nisargadatta Date: Friday, 23 May, 2008, 2:20 AM Well, my comments were not about the merits of meditation. I have no issue with that as such, only the particular practices that were mentioned. I also have no issue with the value of the Awakening event to humanity, nor whether the 'Awakened' one engages or secludes himself. (I was being a bit sarcastic with the 'powerful person' comment in an attempt to point out there is no powerful person.)Â My issue is a more fundamental one, that has to do with the accepted idea that there ultimately is no person. Given this, what person is it who controls the mind, and who's mind is it if it is not the mind of the person trying to control it? Not only do we have one imaginary person, now it has become two; a controller and a controlled. Who is it who expends effort to Realize, and is it not effort of the imaginary

individual that actually blocks the Realization of a Truth that is not hiding, but is rather hidden by this personal effort to sustain the volition of this imagined individual?Â Â Â Â Â Â In a message dated 5/22/2008 10:40:49 PM Pacific Daylight Time, sujal_u writes:hi Phil,You should read Guru Gita. It will explain you everything. I thought since you do not like the concept of meditation, you will ignore this post.Anyway, it is not necessary that a person after realisation should establish an ashram.Swami Vivekananda said"a yogi can sit in a cave in the himalayas, thousands of kilometers away from the mankind, create a

spiritual thought, this thought influence the whole mankind, and the mankind is not even aware of who has created the thought."traditional scriptures say that it is not necessary that after realisation one should send his life for upliftment of the masses and society. even if he does so it's ok.after completing the graduation, it is left upto you to read the books or you can quit them, as you already have the degree.Also if you have this service as your goal you cannot achieve realisation.We always try to see action in inaction.. can we imagine a toughtless state, not even in a dream. "a wise man sees action in the inaction (of wordly minded men) and inaction in the action (of a realised saint) - Astavakra Gita.Same thing is also explained in Bhagawat Gita.When nothing exist than SELF, than who will teach whom.and if God orders a saint to come to a lower plane of the benefit of the society, then who can stop him. All powerful God is with him.AUMSujal--- On Thu, 22/5/08, souldreamone@ AOL.com <souldreamone@ AOL.com> wrote:souldreamone@ AOL.com <souldreamone@ AOL.com>Re: Re: .....but i'm not the only one.......NisargadattaThursday, 22 May, 2008, 11:28 AM***Who is it who gains complete control over the mind? Would this be the imaginary thought person inÂ the mind? Who is

it who Realizes the Self with effort? The one whos effort blocks the Realization of Self? Once the individual has accomplished all of this, how could such a powerful identity ever be lost? Seems like such a powerful person should at least go on to write books or be a guru in an ashram or sumthin.Â Â Â In a message dated 22/05/2008 1:37:00 AM Pacific Daylight Time, sujal_u writes:Hello Marc,If you have "Dhyeya Shiddhi" i.e. you have complete comtrol of your mind and your mind is always pointed to only one thing i.e. SELF than only you do not need any books nor the Guru i.e. External Guru. When a person has reached this state of mind (by meditation or comtemplationÂ or etc whatever you term it) than the Guru lets him free and the Disciple does not need to stay in the Ashram "under the care of a Guru". For such a student the purpose of Books on Non-duality and the Presence of a Physical GuruÂ is over. So in the himalayan tradition, aÂ DiscipleÂ havingÂ this Dhyeya SiddhiÂ now achieveÂ his Goal (of SELF Realisation) without external support. Inspiration comes fromÂ within and mind looses it's identity and mergesÂ into the SELF (tapas). Repeated RealisationÂ ofÂ the SELF (with an effort) leads to the distrutionÂ of Desires (mind) and the ego. It leads to Sahaj Samadhi (Sahaj = Spontaneous) . The disciple

knew who he was, but could not stay in his SELF because he was still attached with the body and mind. By sittingÂ in MeditationÂ and repeated experiencesÂ of Samadhi, the stateÂ of Samadhi is prolonged from seconds to minutes to hours.Â Â A day comes when he sees the worldÂ as the SELF,Â inÂ the waking state, after the meditation is over. Finally the effort ceases,Â andÂ now he doesÂ not need to force his body to sitÂ in meditationÂ any more. He staysÂ in the SELF. HeÂ is the SELF.But if you have not reached the matured state of "dhyeye siddhi" then you should continue to read books and physical presence of a Guru always helps.Your comments-reading books on nonduality.. ..for most of people...... don' t change anything in their life......for those those people who read books but does not try to live the life the book emphasises. AUMSujalÂ Â Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch "Cooking with Tyler Florence" on AOL Food.

Explore your hobbies and interests. Click here to begin.

May 23, 2008

Phil,Purity of mind is a must for spiritual development. Money, does not mean money alone. It includes all worldly things to which the human mind clings. The attachment has to be removed and not the object. (now please dont argue that why Ramakrishna did not touched money) Again, judgement comes when we think, analyze and then conclude, not when there is spontaneous action. The issue indicates purity of Sri Ramakrishna's mind. In this issue, there is no importance given to worldly objects.Devotion is a platform on which non-duality rests. Even non-dual approach needs devotion.Regarding the 'ignorant storyteller':"For those who do not believe, no proof is possiblethose who believe, no proof is needed.""but

I do not respect names and stories and traditions, only Truth, and I don't humble myself to any but Truth as best I can perceive it. Is this wrong of me?"Â how did you came to know the truth. when did you became aware of the word 'god' or 'SELF'. if you heard it from the saint or from the book then you need to have faith in them to believe in them. If you do not have faith in the realised saints and do not respect them, then doubt remains in the mind.Without faith and trust, nothing happens. If you think you are right, then go accordingly. i am no one to interfere in your personal life.Sujal--- On Fri, 23/5/08, souldreamone <souldreamone wrote:souldreamone <souldreamoneRe: Re:

......but i'm not the only one.......Nisargadatta Date: Friday, 23 May, 2008, 2:53 AM Â I got the point of the story. It's a rather crude and obvious story about purity with regard to the temptations of the world, is it not? I don't believe it requires any in-depth discussion. As I said, the story does not speak to Ramanakrishna, but only to the storyteller, since I do not believe the story to be true, and so nobody has been disrespected (except perhaps the ignorant storyteller) , but I do not respect names and stories and traditions, only Truth, and I don't humble myself to any but Truth as best I can perceive it. Is this wrong of me? There is no issue with purity or shunning money or material things or anything else you want to make it. You're not paying attention to what's being said.Â Again, the point that was missed is that money is not inherently bad, and to be repelled by it implies judgment rather than purity. That's all.Â Â In a message dated 5/22/2008 10:56:00 PM Pacific Daylight Time, sujal_u writes:Phil,Sri Ramakrishna was not a sanyasin (monk). But still he had givenup everything. Monks drop things from within and outside (as they setup a reference for lay disciples and devotees), while a saint living in society can

only drop things from his mind (within). You need to read his life story and than comment it.You always try to catch the words and drop the essence. Could you tell honestly what did you conclude from this incident from Sri Ramakrishna' s life. If you will try to see it positively than maybe it can help you. You do not need to reply to me.It seems that you cannot respect anybody. You tell Adi Shankaracharya and swami Vivekananda and now Sri Ramakrishna and his devotee (mahendranath Gupta) as 'somebody'. Had shankaracharya not been there, we could not have any saints and scriptures.. DoctrinesÂ nearly extinguished. HeÂ isÂ responsibleÂ toÂ re-establish them. Seriously, Phil, tunnelled vision does not help to excel in spirituality. One becomes broadminded, free from rigidity, superstitions, and becomes soft

from within as he/she excels in spirituality, whaever path he may follow - dual or non dual.AUMSujal--- On Thu, 22/5/08, souldreamone@ AOL.com <souldreamone@ AOL.com> wrote:souldreamone@ AOL.com <souldreamone@ AOL.com>Re: Re: .....but i'm not the only one.......NisargadattaThursday, 22 May, 2008, 11:56 AM***So currency is inherently evil and gives off bad vibes to the "pure", or is it what one does with it that is 'pure' or 'unpure'? To react spontaneously to something that is neither

good nor bad in and of itself, is the judgment that challenges that claim to purity. However, the story does not ring true, and so only speaks toÂ the ignorance of the storteller. (Whoever originally wrote the story)Â Â Â In a message dated 22/05/2008 5:02:56 AM Pacific Daylight Time, sujal_u writes:Hi Marc,**....Ramakrishna who didn't even want to touch money...**Sri Ramakrishna could not touch the money. One day Naren (Swami Vivekananda) tested him (as Sri Ramakrishna used toÂ say thatÂ youÂ can alwaysÂ test your Guru). So heÂ oneÂ day hide a coin below Sri Ramakrishna' s Bed

stayed silentÂ in the room. When Sri Ramakrishna arrived and satÂ on the bed, he got a strong burning sensation ... like some strong current passingÂ through him. He couldÂ notÂ bareÂ thisÂ pain and spontaneously sprung up from his bed. DevoteesÂ and disciplesÂ wereÂ in shockÂ andÂ no body knewÂ what happened. LaterÂ onÂ they chekcedÂ the bed and foundÂ a coin. This proved andÂ convinced NarenÂ that Sri Ramakrishna was so pureÂ that he couldÂ not touch money. Later on when Sri RamakrishnaÂ cameÂ toÂ know that NarenÂ was behindÂ thisÂ incident, heÂ wasÂ pleasedÂ and agreedÂ with Naren.Â AUMSujalÂ --- On Thu, 22/5/08, dennis_travis33

<dennis_travis33@ .de> wrote:dennis_travis33 <dennis_travis33@ .de> Re: .....but i'm not the only one.......NisargadattaThursday, 22 May, 2008, 3:35 AMHello Marc,I definately agree with you. The moment a person becomes self (ego) centered, SELF Realisation is no more his goal. Than how can the books / people talking about SELF Realisation help and motivate or influence him.. Where there is ego there is no surrendrance and no

faith.Scriptural knowledge is not the actual knowledge, but mere information.Complete surrenderance Â Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch "Cooking with Tyler Florence" on AOL Food.

Meet people who discuss and share your passions. Join them now.

May 23, 2008

Nisargadatta , sujal <sujal_u wrote:

>

> Phil,

>

> Purity of mind is a must for spiritual development. Money, does not

mean money alone. It includes all worldly things to which the human

mind clings. The attachment has to be removed and not the object.

(now please dont argue that why Ramakrishna did not touched money)

Again, judgement comes when we think, analyze and then conclude, not

when there is spontaneous action. The issue indicates purity of Sri

Ramakrishna's mind. In this issue, there is no importance given to

worldly objects.

>

> Devotion is a platform on which non-duality rests. Even non-dual

approach needs devotion.

>

> Regarding the 'ignorant storyteller':

>

> " For those who do not believe, no proof is possible

> those who believe, no proof is needed. "

>

> " but I do not respect names and stories and traditions, only

Truth, and I don't humble myself to any but Truth as best I can

perceive it. Is this wrong of me? " Â

>

> how did you came to know the truth. when did you became aware of

the word 'god' or 'SELF'. if you heard it from the saint or from the

book then you need to have faith in them to believe in them. If you

do not have faith in the realised saints and do not respect them,

then doubt remains in the mind.

>

> Without faith and trust, nothing happens.

>

> If you think you are right, then go accordingly. i am no one to

interfere in your personal life.

>

> Sujal

>

Sujal,

Reading your posts I must tell that since longer I haven't met a

person who is so stuck in spiritual tradition like you.

There is not the least amount of genuity left in all your posts. All

that mental spiritutal crap sitting in your head made you in a very

immature and chilish day-dreamer.

Become real, run naked through the streets, bump your head against a

tree, dig a hole into the earth and sit there for thre days, sleep on

an ants heap - but for heaven's sake stop the incredible spiritual

crap in your head.

Werner

May 23, 2008

Nisargadatta , " Werner Woehr " <wwoehr

wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , sujal <sujal_u@> wrote:

> >

> > Phil,

> >

> > Purity of mind is a must for spiritual development. Money, does

not

> mean money alone. It includes all worldly things to which the

human

> mind clings. The attachment has to be removed and not the object.

> (now please dont argue that why Ramakrishna did not touched money)

> Again, judgement comes when we think, analyze and then conclude,

not

> when there is spontaneous action. The issue indicates purity of

Sri

> Ramakrishna's mind. In this issue, there is no importance given to

> worldly objects.

> >

> > Devotion is a platform on which non-duality rests. Even non-dual

> approach needs devotion.

> >

> > Regarding the 'ignorant storyteller':

> >

> > " For those who do not believe, no proof is possible

> > those who believe, no proof is needed. "

> >

> > " but I do not respect names and stories and traditions, only

> Truth, and I don't humble myself to any but Truth as best I can

> perceive it. Is this wrong of me? " Â

> >

> > how did you came to know the truth. when did you became aware of

> the word 'god' or 'SELF'. if you heard it from the saint or from

the

> book then you need to have faith in them to believe in them. If you

> do not have faith in the realised saints and do not respect them,

> then doubt remains in the mind.

> >

> > Without faith and trust, nothing happens.

> >

> > If you think you are right, then go accordingly. i am no one to

> interfere in your personal life.

> >

> > Sujal

> >

>

> Sujal,

>

> Reading your posts I must tell that since longer I haven't met a

> person who is so stuck in spiritual tradition like you.

>

> There is not the least amount of genuity left in all your posts.

All

> that mental spiritutal crap sitting in your head made you in a very

> immature and chilish day-dreamer.

>

> Become real, run naked through the streets, bump your head against

a

> tree, dig a hole into the earth and sit there for thre days, sleep

on

> an ants heap - but for heaven's sake stop the incredible spiritual

> crap in your head.

>

> Werner

>

.....why didn't give you such fabulous advises to your Guru J.

Krishnamurti.....?

i think, that he would have ignored you completely.....just like non-

dual peaceful minds in here too....

but ok, always funny your words.....lol

......Werner....the spiritual clown in here....

Marc

May 23, 2008

Hi Sujal

If you believe one of us is right and the other wrong, we truly don't have a basis for discussion here. In any event, I don't even see where we disagree in any significant way. I lack your devotion in your guru, and I don't know him. Surely you can see that's okay.

In a message dated 5/23/2008 4:05:19 AM Pacific Daylight Time, sujal_u writes:

Phil,Purity of mind is a must for spiritual development. Money, does not mean money alone. It includes all worldly things to which the human mind clings. The attachment has to be removed and not the object. (now please dont argue that why Ramakrishna did not touched money) Again, judgement comes when we think, analyze and then conclude, not when there is spontaneous action. The issue indicates purity of Sri Ramakrishna's mind. In this issue, there is no importance given to worldly objects.Devotion is a platform on which non-duality rests. Even non-dual approach needs devotion.Regarding the 'ignorant storyteller':"For those who do not believe, no proof is possiblethose who believe, no proof is needed.""but I do not respect names and stories and traditions, only Truth, and I don't humble myself to any but Truth as best I can perceive it. Is this wrong of me?" how did you came to know the truth. when did you became aware of the word 'god' or 'SELF'. if you heard it from the saint or from the book then you need to have faith in them to believe in them. If you do not have faith in the realised saints and do not respect them, then doubt remains in the mind.Without faith and trust, nothing happens. If you think you are right, then go accordingly. i am no one to interfere in your personal life.Sujal--- On Fri, 23/5/08, souldreamone <souldreamone wrote:

souldreamone <souldreamoneRe: Re: .....but i'm not the only one.......Nisargadatta Date: Friday, 23 May, 2008, 2:53 AM

I got the point of the story. It's a rather crude and obvious story about purity with regard to the temptations of the world, is it not? I don't believe it requires any in-depth discussion. As I said, the story does not speak to Ramanakrishna, but only to the storyteller, since I do not believe the story to be true, and so nobody has been disrespected (except perhaps the ignorant storyteller) , but I do not respect names and stories and traditions, only Truth, and I don't humble myself to any but Truth as best I can perceive it. Is this wrong of me? There is no issue with purity or shunning money or material things or anything else you want to make it. You're not paying attention to what's being said.

Again, the point that was missed is that money is not inherently bad, and to be repelled by it implies judgment rather than purity. That's all.

In a message dated 5/22/2008 10:56:00 PM Pacific Daylight Time, sujal_u writes:

Phil,Sri Ramakrishna was not a sanyasin (monk). But still he had givenup everything. Monks drop things from within and outside (as they setup a reference for lay disciples and devotees), while a saint living in society can only drop things from his mind (within). You need to read his life story and than comment it.You always try to catch the words and drop the essence. Could you tell honestly what did you conclude from this incident from Sri Ramakrishna' s life. If you will try to see it positively than maybe it can help you. You do not need to reply to me.It seems that you cannot respect anybody. You tell Adi Shankaracharya and swami Vivekananda and now Sri Ramakrishna and his devotee (mahendranath Gupta) as 'somebody'. Had shankaracharya not been there, we could not have any saints and scriptures.. Doctrines nearly extinguished. He is responsible to re-establish them. Seriously, Phil, tunnelled vision does not help to excel in spirituality. One becomes broadminded

Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch "Cooking with Tyler Florence" on AOL Food.

May 23, 2008

In a message dated 23/05/2008 4:19:43 AM Pacific Daylight Time, wwoehr writes:

>> Phil,> > Purity of mind is a must for spiritual development. Money, does not mean money alone. It includes all worldly things to which the human mind clings. The attachment has to be removed and not the object. (now please dont argue that why Ramakrishna did not touched money) Again, judgement comes when we think, analyze and then conclude, not when there is spontaneous action. The issue indicates purity of Sri Ramakrishna's mind. In this issue, there is no importance given to worldly objects.> > Devotion is a platform on which non-duality rests. Even non-dual approach needs devotion.> > Regarding the 'ignorant storyteller':> > "For those who do not believe, no proof is possible> those who believe, no proof is needed."> > "but I do not respect names and stories and traditions, only Truth, and I don't humble myself to any but Truth as best I can perceive it. Is this wrong of me?"Â > > how did you came to know the truth. when did you became aware of the word 'god' or 'SELF'. if you heard it from the saint or from the book then you need to have faith in them to believe in them. If you do not have faith in the realised saints and do not respect them, then doubt remains in the mind.> > Without faith and trust, nothing happens. > > If you think you are right, then go accordingly. i am no one to interfere in your personal life.> > Sujal> Sujal,Reading your posts I must tell that since longer I haven't met a person who is so stuck in spiritual tradition like you.There is not the least amount of genuity left in all your posts. All that mental spiritutal crap sitting in your head made you in a very immature and chilish day-dreamer.Become real, run naked through the streets, bump your head against a tree, dig a hole into the earth and sit there for thre days, sleep on an ants heap - but for heaven's sake stop the incredible spiritual crap in your head.Werner

****Now we know what Werner's spiritual practice consists of. Hehe. Juuuuust kidding, Werner. :)Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch "Cooking with Tyler Florence" on AOL Food.

May 23, 2008

In a message dated 23/05/2008 5:06:08 AM Pacific Daylight Time, dennis_travis33 writes:

> > Sujal,> > Reading your posts I must tell that since longer I haven't met a > person who is so stuck in spiritual tradition like you.> > There is not the least amount of genuity left in all your posts. All > that mental spiritutal crap sitting in your head made you in a very > immature and chilish day-dreamer.> > Become real, run naked through the streets, bump your head against a > tree, dig a hole into the earth and sit there for thre days, sleep on > an ants heap - but for heaven's sake stop the incredible spiritual > crap in your head.> > Werner>....why didn't give you such fabulous advises to your Guru J. Krishnamurti.....?i think, that he would have ignored you completely.....just like non-dual peaceful minds in here too....but ok, always funny your words.....lol.....Werner....the spiritual clown in here....Marc

****When my mother was very ill and bedridden for many years and my father was taking care of her and watching her die slowly before his eyes, trying to hang onto his memories of who she used to be, he would go through bouts of fury, cursing God and cursing the hell he and his wife were both in. Strangely, the best advice I gave him was to buy a punching bag and hang it up on the patio and beat the crap out of it to get rid of his anger. I offer the same sage advice to you two.Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch "Cooking with Tyler Florence" on AOL Food.

May 23, 2008

Nisargadatta , souldreamone wrote:

>

> Well, my comments were not about the merits of meditation. I have no issue

> with that as such, only the particular practices that were mentioned. I also

> have no issue with the value of the Awakening event to humanity, nor whether

> the 'Awakened' one engages or secludes himself. (I was being a bit sarcastic

> with the 'powerful person' comment in an attempt to point out there is no

> powerful person.)

>

> My issue is a more fundamental one, that has to do with the accepted idea

> that there ultimately is no person. Given this, what person is it who controls

> the mind, and who's mind is it if it is not the mind of the person trying to

> control it? Not only do we have one imaginary person, now it has become two; a

> controller and a controlled. Who is it who expends effort to Realize, and is

> it not effort of the imaginary individual that actually blocks the

> Realization of a Truth that is not hiding, but is rather hidden by this

personal

> effort to sustain the volition of this imagined individual?

>

The question posed from the perspective of the " person " is seen as a logical

proposition.

If I am here........who am I?

From that perspective it is a circular validation from which there is no escape.

Seen through the vertical.......It is a non-sensical question like:

Do you like it here better than in the summer?

toombaru

>

> In a message dated 5/22/2008 10:40:49 PM Pacific Daylight Time,

> sujal_u writes:

>

> hi Phil,

>

> You should read Guru Gita. It will explain you everything. I thought since

> you do not like the concept of meditation, you will ignore this post.

>

> Anyway, it is not necessary that a person after realisation should establish

> an ashram.

>

> Swami Vivekananda said

>

> " a yogi can sit in a cave in the himalayas, thousands of kilometers away

> from the mankind, create a spiritual thought, this thought influence the

whole

> mankind, and the mankind is not even aware of who has created the thought. "

>

> traditional scriptures say that it is not necessary that after realisation

> one should send his life for upliftment of the masses and society. even if

he

> does so it's ok.

>

> after completing the graduation, it is left upto you to read the books or

> you can quit them, as you already have the degree.

>

> Also if you have this service as your goal you cannot achieve realisation.

>

> We always try to see action in inaction.. can we imagine a toughtless state,

> not even in a dream.

>

> " a wise man sees action in the inaction (of wordly minded men) and inaction

> in the action (of a realised saint) - Astavakra Gita.

>

> Same thing is also explained in Bhagawat Gita.

>

> When nothing exist than SELF, than who will teach whom.

> and if God orders a saint to come to a lower plane of the benefit of the

> society, then who can stop him. All powerful God is with him.

>

> AUM

>

> Sujal

>

> --- On Thu, 22/5/08, souldreamone <souldreamone wrote:

>

> souldreamone <souldreamone

> Re: Re: .....but i'm not the only one.......

> Nisargadatta

> Thursday, 22 May, 2008, 11:28 AM

>

> ***Who is it who gains complete control over the mind? Would this be the

> imaginary thought person in the mind? Who is it who Realizes the Self with

> effort? The one whos effort blocks the Realization of Self? Once the

individual

> has accomplished all of this, how could such a powerful identity ever be

lost?

> Seems like such a powerful person should at least go on to write books or be

> a guru in an ashram or sumthin.

>

> In a message dated 22/05/2008 1:37:00 AM Pacific Daylight Time,

> sujal_u writes:

>

> Hello Marc,

>

> If you have " Dhyeya Shiddhi " i.e. you have complete comtrol of your mind and

> your mind is always pointed to only one thing i.e. SELF than only you do not

> need any books nor the Guru i.e. External Guru.

>

> When a person has reached this state of mind (by meditation or

> comtemplation or etc whatever you term it) than the Guru lets him free and

the Disciple

> does not need to stay in the Ashram " under the care of a Guru " . For such a

> student the purpose of Books on Non-duality and the Presence of a Physical

Guru

> is over. So in the himalayan tradition, a Disciple having this Dhyeya

> Siddhi now achieve his Goal (of SELF Realisation) without external support.

> Inspiration comes from within and mind looses it's identity and merges into

the

> SELF (tapas). Repeated Realisation of the SELF (with an effort) leads to the

> distrution of Desires (mind) and the ego. It leads to Sahaj Samadhi (Sahaj =

> Spontaneous) .

>

> The disciple knew who he was, but could not stay in his SELF because he was

> still attached with the body and mind. By sitting in Meditation and repeated

> experiences of Samadhi, the state of Samadhi is prolonged from seconds to

> minutes to hours. A day comes when he sees the world as the SELF, in the

> waking state, after the meditation is over. Finally the effort ceases, and

now he

> does not need to force his body to sit in meditation any more. He stays in

> the SELF. He is the SELF.

>

> But if you have not reached the matured state of " dhyeye siddhi " then you

> should continue to read books and physical presence of a Guru always helps.

>

> Your comments-

> reading books on nonduality.. ..for most of people...... don' t change

> anything in their life......

>

> for those those people who read books but does not try to live the life the

> book emphasises.

>

> AUM

>

> Sujal

>

**************Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch " Cooking with

> Tyler Florence " on AOL Food.

> (http://food.aol.com/tyler-florence?video=4 & ?NCID=aolfod00030000000002)

>

May 23, 2008

Nisargadatta , souldreamone wrote:

>

> Well, it's my philosophy to not attempt control, resistance or struggle,

The attempt to not control, resist, or struggle is an attempt to control.

> since I see these qualities as contradictory to the goal, which is

> effortlessness, acceptance, surrender of the self.

The self can't surrender or be surrendered.....for one very good reason.

If it is not already apparent that this

> is not directly accomplished through any doing, it is also my experience

> that this is so. And so the question arises, how is surrender brought about

if

> one cannot choose to surrender? It comes about through a deep realization of

> the futility of the struggle.

Yes.

Once this is seen, the mind quite naturally

> ceases to engage in that particular activity because it clearly will not

> accomplish the goal for which mind strives.

The only thing that the conceptual mind is programmed to strive for is the

satiation of its

hard wired needs.

>

> As one example nearly everyone can identify with, when it is clearly seen

> that trying to accomplish ultimate happiness within the dualistic illusion is

> quite impossible, then the effort to do so naturally subsides. The same

> pattern occurs through revealing unconscious ego patterns, recognizing the

illusory

> nature of control and cause/effect, the self destructiveness of ego drama,

> the stifling result of attachments, mentation, dwelling on memories and so

on.

> Each time clarity occurs around such issues, ego is weakened and mind

> releases more tension.

The mind is not the benefactor of the process.......It will continue to do what

it has to do to

survive.

As it is seen for what it is........it looses its opacity and then......and

then.......well..........

(about here is where the mind and its post-it world evaporate.)

....and one is left.......daft......flowing along with the flowing.

This has always been my process, and it has been very

> fruitful. Essentially, all that is needed is to pay attention, and this is a

> function of the Awareness that You are rather than the egoic energy that you

take

> yourself to be. The focus is ultimately effortless and is not a doing at all.

> Rather, it is an undoing.

Out beyond all ideas of doing and undoing.....there is a meadow.........I'll

meet you there.

Hummmmmmm....that sounds familiar......

:-0

toombaru

May 23, 2008

In a message dated 23/05/2008 9:31:50 AM Pacific Daylight Time, lastrain writes:

Nisargadatta , souldreamone wrote:>> > Well, my comments were not about the merits of meditation. I have no issue > with that as such, only the particular practices that were mentioned. I also > have no issue with the value of the Awakening event to humanity, nor whether > the 'Awakened' one engages or secludes himself. (I was being a bit sarcastic > with the 'powerful person' comment in an attempt to point out there is no > powerful person.)> > My issue is a more fundamental one, that has to do with the accepted idea > that there ultimately is no person. Given this, what person is it who controls > the mind, and who's mind is it if it is not the mind of the person trying to > control it? Not only do we have one imaginary person, now it has become two; a > controller and a controlled. Who is it who expends effort to Realize, and is > it not effort of the imaginary individual that actually blocks the > Realization of a Truth that is not hiding, but is rather hidden by this personal > effort to sustain the volition of this imagined individual?> > The question posed from the perspective of the "person" is seen as a logical proposition.If I am here........who am I?From that perspective it is a circular validation from which there is no escape.Seen through the vertical.......It is a non-sensical question like:Do you like it here better than in the summer?toombaru

****I like it much better here than in the summer. Summer is always too far away for me. :)Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch "Cooking with Tyler Florence" on AOL Food.

May 23, 2008

In a message dated 23/05/2008 9:46:15 AM Pacific Daylight Time, lastrain writes:

Nisargadatta , souldreamone wrote:>> > Well, it's my philosophy to not attempt control, resistance or struggle, The attempt to not control, resist, or struggle is an attempt to control.

~~~~Yes, but of course that's not what I said.

> since I see these qualities as contradictory to the goal, which is > effortlessness, acceptance, surrender of the self.The self can't surrender or be surrendered.....for one very good reason.~~~~~Yes, but of course I didn't suggest it could.

If it is not already apparent that this > is not directly accomplished through any doing, it is also my experience > that this is so. And so the question arises, how is surrender brought about if > one cannot choose to surrender? It comes about through a deep realization of > the futility of the struggle.Yes.Once this is seen, the mind quite naturally > ceases to engage in that particular activity because it clearly will not > accomplish the goal for which mind strives. The only thing that the conceptual mind is programmed to strive for is the satiation of its hard wired needs.

> > As one example nearly everyone can identify with, when it is clearly seen > that trying to accomplish ultimate happiness within the dualistic illusion is > quite impossible, then the effort to do so naturally subsides. The same > pattern occurs through revealing unconscious ego patterns, recognizing the illusory > nature of control and cause/effect, the self destructiveness of ego drama, > the stifling result of attachments, mentation, dwelling on memories and so on. > Each time clarity occurs around such issues, ego is weakened and mind > releases more tension.The mind is not the benefactor of the process.......It will continue to do what it has to do to survive.

~~~~Right, of course I never suggested it was.

As it is seen for what it is........it looses its opacity and then......and then.......well..........(about here is where the mind and its post-it world evaporate.)...and one is left.......daft......flowing along with the flowing.This has always been my process, and it has been very > fruitful. Essentially, all that is needed is to pay attention, and this is a > function of the Awareness that You are rather than the egoic energy that you take > yourself to be. The focus is ultimately effortless and is not a doing at all. > Rather, it is an undoing.Out beyond all ideas of doing and undoing.....there is a meadow.........I'll meet you there.Hummmmmmm....that sounds familiar......:-0toombaru

Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch "Cooking with Tyler Florence" on AOL Food.

May 23, 2008

In a message dated 23/05/2008 3:11:46 PM Pacific Daylight Time, lastrain writes:

> > > > Well, it's my philosophy to not attempt control, resistance or struggle, > > > > The attempt to not control, resist, or struggle is an attempt to control.> > > > > > > ~~~~Yes, but of course that's not what I said.> > > If you have the philosophy of not attempting to control............that mean that you are attempting to control by not attempting to control.

****Yes, that can happen. Be very alert to it.

f you think that it is you who has a philosophy......you are stuck fast in the dream.....and it doesn't matter a hoot what that philosophy is.If you were to see that the you thing and the imagined "pilosophy" are one and the same phenomena......something very odd happens.> > > > > > since I see these qualities as contradictory to the goal, which is > > effortlessness, acceptance, surrender of the self.> > > > > > > The self can't surrender or be surrendered.....for one very good reason.> > > ~~~~~Yes, but of course I didn't suggest it could.> > > You make reference to a goal.A goal for whom?

Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch "Cooking with Tyler Florence" on AOL Food.

May 24, 2008

Nisargadatta , souldreamone wrote:

>

> In a message dated 23/05/2008 9:46:15 AM Pacific Daylight Time,

> lastrain writes:

>

> Nisargadatta , souldreamone@ wrote:

> >

> > Well, it's my philosophy to not attempt control, resistance or struggle,

>

> The attempt to not control, resist, or struggle is an attempt to control.

~~~~Yes, but of course that's not what I said.

>

If you have the philosophy of not attempting to control............that mean

that you are

attempting to control by not attempting to control.

If you think that it is you who has a philosophy......you are stuck fast in the

dream.....and

it doesn't matter a hoot what that philosophy is.

If you were to see that the you thing and the imagined " pilosophy " are one and

the same

phenomena......something very odd happens.

>

> > since I see these qualities as contradictory to the goal, which is

> > effortlessness, acceptance, surrender of the self.

The self can't surrender or be surrendered.....for one very good reason.

>

> ~~~~~Yes, but of course I didn't suggest it could.

>

You make reference to a goal.

A goal for whom?

>

If it is not already apparent that this

> > is not directly accomplished through any doing, it is also my experience

> > that this is so. And so the question arises, how is surrender brought

> about if

> > one cannot choose to surrender? It comes about through a deep realization

> of

> > the futility of the struggle.

>

> Yes.

Once this is seen, the mind quite naturally

> > ceases to engage in that particular activity because it clearly will not

> > accomplish the goal for which mind strives.

The only thing that the conceptual mind is programmed to strive for is the

> satiation of its

> hard wired needs.

>

> > As one example nearly everyone can identify with, when it is clearly seen

> > that trying to accomplish ultimate happiness within the dualistic illusion

> is

> > quite impossible, then the effort to do so naturally subsides. The same

> > pattern occurs through revealing unconscious ego patterns, recognizing the

> illusory

> > nature of control and cause/effect, the self destructiveness of ego

> drama,

> > the stifling result of attachments, mentation, dwelling on memories and

> so on.

> > Each time clarity occurs around such issues, ego is weakened and mind

> > releases more tension.

>

> The mind is not the benefactor of the process.......It will continue to do

> what it has to do to

> survive.

>

> ~~~~Right, of course I never suggested it was.

>

Who is the benefactor of the processes you mentioned above if it is not the

mind?

toombaru

May 24, 2008

In a message dated 5/23/2008 9:41:44 PM Pacific Daylight Time, sujal_u writes:

I agree with you Phil. But when i practically tried to apply your phylosophy of undoing, it i could not retain the awareness in a unbroken manner. As to decide not to make an effort is an effort too. When the mind is involved in something, awareness slips out unnoticed. To compansate this i meditate. I short, meditation is like charging a battery for 24 hours. It helps to be alert and aware for a long time. Again, what you practice is nothing wrong. many perople just meditate and then do not try to be aware throughout the day. So both things help each other. Regarding books on non-duality (shastras). What are these shastras? they are the collection of experience of innumerable realised saints since a long long time. I take their statements as authority and try to follow the path which they show. Regarding Guru, I do not expect everybody to pay respect to my Guru. I do not wish to superimpose or force my ideas on anybody. Any approach which makes the mind quite is ok, as the quit mind is an attentive mind.There are 24 hours in a day and i centainly cannot be aware for 24 hours. So by reading these books i can stay connected with the God for some more time.. Audio and video tapes also help. if thoughts of the author inspire me, than naturally, i will have respect for them.That's why you may have noticed that in majority of the posts i give the unedited quotes of the saints with the due credit to the author. I do not wish to engage in an argument. It's not my intention as the agitated mind does not help. We have a different approaches to a same goal. I took pain to reply because i thought that your reply was a genuine.Regarging the frustration, surrender of all emotions, good or bad to the god helps to calm the mind. You do not need to buy a punching bag.well, thats all Phil. I always take things positively (expect for some posts like that of Werner, i neglect them )AUMSujal

****Hi Sujal

From my perspective, there has been no argument or frustration here and our discussion has given me a useful internal focus, so I'm grateful. I'm afraid some of my conversational tact has fallen away along with other things, but there's not much to be read into it that isn't already written. (My comment about the punching bag was a recommendation to the "neglected" ones in whom there seems to be some negativity lurking on a somewhat permanent basis. I rarely feel such frustration myself and you certainly have not triggered any)

I should make it clear that I see all paths as valid for the one traveling it because it is ultimately self created, and so when I speak of my own, it's not in any way to dismiss yours.

As far as your comment : "As to decide not to make an effort is an effort too" I believe you may have misunderstood my comments. I agree with you, and so there is no deciding not to make an effort. What I was referring to is an understanding/realization/clarity/intuition of the futility of the effort. If this occurs, there is no effort needed to stop the effort. It stops quite spontaneously. You know for certain that it is quite impossible for you to flap your arms and fly to the moon, and so you have never expended any effort in trying.

Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch "Cooking with Tyler Florence" on AOL Food.

May 24, 2008

The wrath of Werner is unavoidable, and in it's predictability, there is a certain comfort, like an old worn out blankey.

In a message dated 5/23/2008 10:00:26 PM Pacific Daylight Time, sujal_u writes:

Hi,If I am here........ who am I?even in the statement I AM THAT (that = SELF). In these statement, THAT is always the SELF. But to make this statement as non-dual. 'I' should be THAT (SELF). But than, do i know "WHO AM I'. No. So to question 'who am i' is perfectly right.. the origin of the thought or the source of the thought (i.e. 'who am i' is the SELF. The absence or the source of EGO is the SELF. - Sri Ramana Maharshi (40 verses on Truth).... I hope werner is not reading this post :)Sujal--- On Fri, 23/5/08, toombaru2006 <lastrain wrote:

toombaru2006 <lastrain Re: .....but i'm not the only one.......Nisargadatta Date: Friday, 23 May, 2008, 9:31 AM

Nisargadatta, souldreamone@ ... wrote:>> > Well, my comments were not about the merits of meditation. I have no issue > with that as such, only the particular practices that were mentioned. I also > have no issue with the value of the Awakening event to humanity, nor whether > the 'Awakened' one engages or secludes himself. (I was being a bit sarcastic > with the 'powerful person' comment in an attempt to point out there is no > powerful person.)> > My issue is a more fundamental one, that has to do with the accepted idea > that there ultimately is no person. Given this, what person is it who controls > the mind, and who's mind is it if it is not the mind of the person trying to > control it? Not only do we have one imaginary person, now it has become two; a > controller and a controlled. Who is it who expends effort to Realize, and is > it not effort of the imaginary individual that actually blocks the > Realization of a Truth that is not hiding, but is rather hidden by this personal > effort to sustain the volition of this imagined individual?> > The question posed from the perspective of the "person" is seen as a logical proposition.If I am here........ who am I?From that perspective it is a circular validation from which there is no escape.Seen through the vertical.... ...It is a non-sensical question like:Do you like it here better than in the summer?toombaru> > > > In a message dated 5/22/2008 10:40:49 PM Pacific Daylight Time, > sujal_u writes:> > hi Phil,> > You should read Guru Gita. It will explain you everything. I thought since > you do not like the concept of meditation, you will ignore this post.> > Anyway, it is not necessary that a person after realisation should establish > an ashram.> > Swami Vivekananda said> > "a yogi can sit in a cave in the himalayas, thousands of kilometers away > from the mankind, create a spiritual thought, this thought influence the whole > mankind, and the mankind is not even aware of who has created the thought."> > traditional scriptures say that it is not necessary that after realisation > one should send his life for upliftment of the masses and society. even if he > does so it's ok.> > after completing the graduation, it is left upto you to read the books or > you can quit them, as you already have the degree.> > Also if you have this service as your goal you cannot achieve realisation.> > We always try to see action in inaction.. can we imagine a toughtless state, > not even in a dream. > > "a wise man sees action in the inaction (of wordly minded men) and inaction

Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch "Cooking with Tyler Florence" on AOL Food.

May 24, 2008

I agree with you Phil. But when i practically tried to apply your phylosophy of undoing, it i could not retain the awareness in a unbroken manner. As to decide notÂ toÂ makeÂ an effort isÂ an effort too. When the mind is involved in something, awareness slips out unnoticed. To compansate this i meditate. I short, meditation is like charging a battery for 24 hours. It helps to be alert and aware for a long time. Again, what you practice is nothing wrong. many perople just meditate and then do not try to be aware throughout the day. So both things help each other. Regarding books on non-duality (shastras). What are these shastras? they are the collection of experience of innumerable realised saints since a long long time. I take their

statements as authority and try to follow the path which they show. Regarding Guru, I do not expect everybody to pay respect to my Guru. I do not wish to superimpose or force my ideas on anybody. Any approach which makes the mind quite is ok, as the quit mind is an attentive mind.There are 24 hours in a day and i centainly cannot be aware for 24 hours. So by reading these books i can stay connected with the God for some more time.. Audio and video tapes also help. if thoughts of the author inspire me, than naturally, i will have respect for them.That's why you may have noticed that in majority of the posts i give the unedited quotes of the saints with the due credit to the author. I do not wish to engage in an argument. It's not my intention as the agitated mind does not help. WeÂ have a different approachesÂ to aÂ same goal. I tookÂ pain to reply because iÂ thoughtÂ thatÂ yourÂ replyÂ wasÂ a genuine. Regarging

the frustration, surrender of all emotions, good or bad to the god helps to calm the mind. You do not need to buy a punching bag.well, thats all Phil. I alwaysÂ take things positively (expect for some posts likeÂ that of Werner, i neglectÂ them Â Â )AUMSujal--- On Fri, 23/5/08, souldreamone <souldreamone wrote:souldreamone <souldreamoneRe: Re: .....but i'm not the only one.......Nisargadatta Date: Friday, 23 May, 2008, 3:38 AM Well, it's my philosophy to not attempt control, resistance or struggle, since I see these qualities asÂ contradictory to the goal, which is effortlessness, acceptance, surrender of the self. If it is not already apparent that this is not directly accomplished through any doing, it is also my experience that this is so. And so the question arises, how is surrender brought about if one cannot choose to surrender? It comes about through a deep realization of the futility of the struggle. Once this is seen, the mind quite naturally ceases to engage in that particular activity because it clearly will not accomplish the goal for which mind strives. Â As one example nearly everyone can identify with, when it is clearly seen that trying to accomplish ultimateÂ happiness within the dualistic

illusion is quite impossible, then the effort to do so naturally subsides.. The same pattern occurs through revealing unconscious ego patterns, recognizing the illusory nature of control and cause/effect, the self destructiveness of ego drama, the stifling result of attachments, mentation, dwelling on memories and so on. Each time clarity occurs around such issues, ego is weakened and mind releases more tension. This has always been my process, and it has been very fruitful. Essentially, all that is needed is to pay attention, and this is a function of the Awareness that You are rather than the egoic energy that you take yourself to be. The focus is ultimately effortless and is not a doing at all. Rather, it is an undoing.Â Â Â Â Â In a message dated 5/23/2008 2:31:29 AM Pacific Daylight Time, sujal_u writes:Hello Phil,how do you apply it practically?Sujal--- On Fri, 23/5/08, souldreamone@ AOL.com <souldreamone@ AOL.com> wrote:souldreamone@ AOL.com <souldreamone@ AOL.com>Re: Re: .....but i'm not the only one.......NisargadattaFriday, 23 May, 2008, 2:20 AMWell, my comments were not about the merits of

meditation. I have no issue with that as such, only the particular practices that were mentioned. I also have no issue with the value of the Awakening event to humanity, nor whether the 'Awakened' one engages or secludes himself. (I was being a bit sarcastic with the 'powerful person' comment in an attempt to point out there is no powerful person.)Â My issue is a more fundamental one, that has to do with the accepted idea that there ultimately is no person. Given this, what person is it who controls the mind, and who's mind is it if it is not the mind of the person trying to control it? Not only do we have one imaginary person, now it has become two; a controller and a controlled.. Who is it who expends effort to Realize, and is it not effort of the imaginary individual that actually blocks the Realization of a Truth that is not hiding, but is rather hidden by this personal effort to sustain the volition of this imagined individual?Â Â Â Â Â Â In a message dated 5/22/2008 10:40:49 PM Pacific Daylight Time, sujal_u writes:hi Phil,You should read Guru Gita. It will explain you everything. I thought since you do not like the concept of meditation, you will ignore this post.Anyway, it is not necessary that a person after realisation should establish an ashram.Swami Vivekananda said"a yogi can sit in a cave in the himalayas, thousands of

kilometers away from the mankind, create a spiritual thought, this thought influence the whole mankind, and the mankind is not even aware of who has created the thought."traditional scriptures say that it is not necessary that after realisation one should send his life for upliftment of the masses and society. even if he does so it's ok.after completing the graduation, it is left upto you to read the books or you can quit them, as you already have the degree.Also if you have this service as your goal you cannot achieve realisation.We always try to see action in inaction.. can we imagine a toughtless state, not even in a dream.Â Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch "Cooking with Tyler Florence" on AOL Food.

BMR - a key player in weight issues. Know more.

May 24, 2008

Hi,If I am here........ who am I?even in the statement I AM THAT (that = SELF). In these statement, THAT is always the SELF. But to make this statement as non-dual. 'I' should be THAT (SELF). But than, do i know "WHO AM I'. No. So to question 'who am i'Â is perfectly right.. the origin of the thought or the sourceÂ of theÂ thought (i.e. 'who am i' is the SELF. The absence orÂ the sourceÂ of EGO is the SELF. - Sri Ramana Maharshi (40 verses on Truth).... I hope werner is not reading this post Sujal--- On Fri, 23/5/08, toombaru2006 <lastrain wrote:toombaru2006 <lastrain Re: .....but i'm not the only one.......Nisargadatta Date: Friday, 23 May, 2008, 9:31 AMNisargadatta, souldreamone@ ... wrote: > > > Well, my comments were not about the merits of meditation. I have no issue > with that as such, only the particular practices that were mentioned. I also > have no issue with the value of the Awakening event to humanity, nor whether > the 'Awakened' one engages or

secludes himself. (I was being a bit sarcastic > with the 'powerful person' comment in an attempt to point out there is no > powerful person.) > > My issue is a more fundamental one, that has to do with the accepted idea > that there ultimately is no person. Given this, what person is it who controls > the mind, and who's mind is it if it is not the mind of the person trying to > control it? Not only do we have one imaginary person, now it has become two; a > controller and a controlled. Who is it who expends effort to Realize, and is > it not effort of the imaginary individual that actually blocks the > Realization of a Truth that is not hiding, but is rather hidden by this personal > effort to sustain the volition of this imagined individual? > > The question posed from the perspective of the "person" is seen as a logical

proposition. If I am here........ who am I? From that perspective it is a circular validation from which there is no escape. Seen through the vertical.... ...It is a non-sensical question like: Do you like it here better than in the summer? toombaru > > > > In a message dated 5/22/2008 10:40:49 PM Pacific Daylight Time, > sujal_u writes: > > hi Phil, > > You should read Guru Gita. It will explain you everything. I thought since > you do not like the concept of meditation, you will ignore this post. > > Anyway, it is not necessary that a person after realisation should establish > an ashram. > > Swami Vivekananda said > > "a yogi can sit in a cave in the himalayas, thousands of kilometers away > from the mankind, create a spiritual thought, this thought influence

the whole > mankind, and the mankind is not even aware of who has created the thought." > > traditional scriptures say that it is not necessary that after realisation > one should send his life for upliftment of the masses and society. even if he > does so it's ok. > > after completing the graduation, it is left upto you to read the books or > you can quit them, as you already have the degree. > > Also if you have this service as your goal you cannot achieve realisation. > > We always try to see action in inaction.. can we imagine a toughtless state, > not even in a dream. > > "a wise man sees action in the inaction (of wordly minded men) and inaction > in the action (of a realised saint) - Astavakra Gita. > > Same thing is also explained in Bhagawat Gita. > > When nothing exist than SELF, than who will teach whom. > and if God orders a saint to come to a lower plane of the benefit of the > society, then who can stop him.. All powerful God is with him. > > AUM > > Sujal > > --- On Thu, 22/5/08, souldreamone@ ... <souldreamone@ ...> wrote: > > souldreamone@ ... <souldreamone@ ...> > Re: Re: .....but i'm not the only one....... > Nisargadatta > Thursday, 22 May, 2008, 11:28 AM > > > > > > ***Who is it who gains complete control over the mind? Would this be the > imaginary thought person in the mind? Who is it who Realizes the Self with > effort? The one whos effort blocks the Realization of Self? Once the individual

> has accomplished all of this, how could such a powerful identity ever be lost? > Seems like such a powerful person should at least go on to write books or be > a guru in an ashram or sumthin. > > > > In a message dated 22/05/2008 1:37:00 AM Pacific Daylight Time, > sujal_u writes: > > Hello Marc, > > If you have "Dhyeya Shiddhi" i.e. you have complete comtrol of your mind and > your mind is always pointed to only one thing i.e. SELF than only you do not > need any books nor the Guru i.e. External Guru. > > When a person has reached this state of mind (by meditation or > comtemplation or etc whatever you term it) than the Guru lets him free and the Disciple > does not need to stay in the Ashram "under the care of a Guru". For such a > student the purpose of Books on Non-duality and the

Presence of a Physical Guru > is over. So in the himalayan tradition, a Disciple having this Dhyeya > Siddhi now achieve his Goal (of SELF Realisation) without external support. > Inspiration comes from within and mind looses it's identity and merges into the > SELF (tapas). Repeated Realisation of the SELF (with an effort) leads to the > distrution of Desires (mind) and the ego. It leads to Sahaj Samadhi (Sahaj = > Spontaneous) . > > The disciple knew who he was, but could not stay in his SELF because he was > still attached with the body and mind. By sitting in Meditation and repeated > experiences of Samadhi, the state of Samadhi is prolonged from seconds to > minutes to hours. A day comes when he sees the world as the SELF, in the > waking state, after the meditation is over. Finally the effort ceases, and now he > does not need

to force his body to sit in meditation any more. He stays in > the SELF. He is the SELF. > > But if you have not reached the matured state of "dhyeye siddhi" then you > should continue to read books and physical presence of a Guru always helps. > > Your comments- > reading books on nonduality.. ..for most of people...... don' t change > anything in their life...... > > for those those people who read books but does not try to live the life the > book emphasises. > > AUM > > Sujal > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ************ **Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch "Cooking with > Tyler Florence" on AOL Food.. > (http://food. aol.com/tyler- florence? video=4 & ? NCID=aolfod00030 000000002) >

Unlimited freedom, unlimited storage. Get it now

May 24, 2008

Always a pleasure to chat with you, Sujal.

In a message dated 5/24/2008 12:55:23 AM Pacific Daylight Time, sujal_u writes:

hi phil,nice to see you that things are ending positively.i also understand "What I was referring to is an understanding/ realization/ clarity/intuition of the futility of the effort. If this occurs, there is no effort needed to stop the effort. It stops quite spontaneously."Sujal --- On Sat, 24/5/08, souldreamone <souldreamone wrote:

souldreamone <souldreamoneRe: Re: .....but i'm not the only one.......Nisargadatta Date: Saturday, 24 May, 2008, 12:27 AM

In a message dated 5/23/2008 9:41:44 PM Pacific Daylight Time, sujal_u writes:

I agree with you Phil. But when i practically tried to apply your phylosophy of undoing, it i could not retain the awareness in a unbroken manner. As to decide not to make an effort is an effort too. When the mind is involved in something, awareness slips out unnoticed. To compansate this i meditate. I short, meditation is like charging a battery for 24 hours. It helps to be alert and aware for a long time. Again, what you practice is nothing wrong. many perople just meditate and then do not try to be aware throughout the day. So both things help each other. Regarding books on non-duality (shastras). What are these shastras? they are the collection of experience of innumerable realised saints since a long long time. I take their statements as authority and try to follow the path which they show. Regarding Guru, I do not expect everybody to pay respect to my Guru. I do not wish to superimpose or force my ideas on anybody. Any approach which makes the mind quite is ok, as the quit mind is an attentive mind.There are 24 hours in a day and i centainly cannot be aware for 24 hours. So by reading these books i can stay connected with the God for some more time.. Audio and video tapes also help. if thoughts of the author inspire me, than naturally, i will have respect for them.That's why you may have noticed that in majority of the posts i give the unedited quotes of the saints with the due credit to the author. I do not wish to engage in an argument. It's not my intention as the agitated mind does not help. We have a different approaches to a same goal. I took pain to reply because i thought that your reply was a genuine.Regarging the frustration, surrender of all emotions, good or bad to the god helps to calm the mind. You do not need to buy a punching bag.well, thats all Phil. I always take things positively (expect for some posts like that of Werner, i neglect them )AUMSujal

****Hi Sujal

From my perspective, there has been no argument or frustration here and our discussion has given me a useful internal focus, so I'm grateful. I'm afraid some of my conversational tact has fallen away along with other things, but there's not much to be read into it that isn't already written. (My comment about the punching bag was a recommendation to the "neglected" ones in whom there seems to be some negativity lurking on a somewhat permanent basis. I rarely feel such frustration myself and you certainly have not triggered any)

I should make it clear that I see all paths as valid for the one traveling it because it is ultimately self created, and so when I speak of my own, it's not in any way to dismiss yours.

As far as your comment : "As to decide not to make an effort is an effort too" I believe you may have misunderstood my comments. I agree with you, and so there is no deciding not to make an effort. What I was referring to is an understanding/ realization/ clarity/intuitio n of the futility of the effort. If this occurs, there is no effort needed to stop the effort. It stops quite spontaneously. You know for certain that it is quite impossible for you to flap your arms and fly to the moon, and so you have never expended any effort in trying.

Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch "Cooking with Tyler Florence" on AOL Food.

Has your work life balance shifted? Find out. **If you do not wish to receive individual emails, to change your subscription, sign in with your ID and go to Edit My Groups: /mygroups?edit=1Under the Message Delivery option, choose "No Email" for the Nisargadatta group and click on Save Changes.

Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch "Cooking with Tyler Florence" on AOL Food.

May 24, 2008

hi phil,nice to see you that things are ending positively.i also understand "What I was referring to is an understanding/ realization/ clarity/intuition of the futility of the effort. If this occurs, there is no effort needed to stop the effort. It stops quite spontaneously."Sujal --- On Sat, 24/5/08, souldreamone <souldreamone wrote:souldreamone <souldreamoneRe: Re: .....but i'm not the only one.......Nisargadatta Date: Saturday, 24 May, 2008, 12:27 AM In a message dated 5/23/2008 9:41:44 PM Pacific Daylight Time, sujal_u writes:I agree with you Phil. But when i practically tried to apply your phylosophy of undoing, it i could not retain the awareness in a unbroken manner. As to decide notÂ toÂ makeÂ an effort isÂ an effort too. When the

mind is involved in something, awareness slips out unnoticed. To compansate this i meditate. I short, meditation is like charging a battery for 24 hours. It helps to be alert and aware for a long time. Again, what you practice is nothing wrong. many perople just meditate and then do not try to be aware throughout the day. So both things help each other. Regarding books on non-duality (shastras). What are these shastras? they are the collection of experience of innumerable realised saints since a long long time. I take their statements as authority and try to follow the path which they show. Regarding Guru, I do not expect everybody to pay respect to my Guru. I do not wish to superimpose or force my ideas on anybody. Any approach which makes the mind quite is ok, as the quit mind is an attentive mind.There are 24 hours in a

day and i centainly cannot be aware for 24 hours. So by reading these books i can stay connected with the God for some more time.. Audio and video tapes also help. if thoughts of the author inspire me, than naturally, i will have respect for them.That's why you may have noticed that in majority of the posts i give the unedited quotes of the saints with the due credit to the author. I do not wish to engage in an argument. It's not my intention as the agitated mind does not help. WeÂ have a different approachesÂ to aÂ same goal. I tookÂ pain to reply because iÂ thoughtÂ thatÂ yourÂ replyÂ wasÂ a genuine.Regarging the frustration, surrender of all emotions, good or bad to the god helps to calm the mind. You do not need to buy a punching bag.well, thats all Phil. I alwaysÂ take things positively

(expect for some posts likeÂ that of Werner, i neglectÂ them Â Â )AUMSujal****Hi SujalFrom my perspective, there has been no argument or frustration here and our discussion has given me a useful internal focus, so I'm grateful. I'm afraid some of my conversational tact has fallen away along with other things, but there's not much to be read into it that isn't already written. (My comment about the punching bag was a recommendation to the "neglected" ones in whom there seems to be some negativity lurking on a somewhat permanent basis. I rarely feel such frustration myself and you certainly have not triggered any)Â I should make it clear that I see all paths as valid for the one traveling it because it is ultimately self created, and so when I speak of my own, it's not in any way to dismiss yours.Â As

far as your commentÂ : "As to decide notÂ toÂ makeÂ an effort isÂ an effort too" I believe you may have misunderstood my comments. I agree with you, and so there is no deciding not to make an effort. What I was referring to is an understanding/ realization/ clarity/intuitio n of the futility of the effort. If this occurs, there is no effort needed to stop the effort. It stops quite spontaneously. You know for certain that it is quite impossible for you to flap your arms and fly to the moon, and so you have never expended any effort in trying.Â Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch "Cooking with Tyler Florence" on AOL Food.

Has your work life balance shifted? Find out.

May 26, 2008

Nisargadatta , souldreamone wrote:

>

> In a message dated 23/05/2008 5:06:08 AM Pacific Daylight Time,

> dennis_travis33 writes:

>

> >

> > Sujal,

> >

> > Reading your posts I must tell that since longer I haven't met a

> > person who is so stuck in spiritual tradition like you.

> >

> > There is not the least amount of genuity left in all your posts.

> All

> > that mental spiritutal crap sitting in your head made you in a

very

> > immature and chilish day-dreamer.

> >

> > Become real, run naked through the streets, bump your head

against

> a

> > tree, dig a hole into the earth and sit there for thre days,

sleep

> on

> > an ants heap - but for heaven's sake stop the incredible

spiritual

> > crap in your head.

> >

> > Werner

> >

>

> ....why didn't give you such fabulous advises to your Guru J.

> Krishnamurti.....?

>

> i think, that he would have ignored you completely.....just like

non-

> dual peaceful minds in here too....

>

> but ok, always funny your words.....lol

>

> .....Werner....the spiritual clown in here....

>

> Marc

>

> ****When my mother was very ill and bedridden for many years and my

father

> was taking care of her and watching her die slowly before his eyes,

trying to

> hang onto his memories of who she used to be, he would go through

bouts of

> fury, cursing God and cursing the hell he and his wife were both

in. Strangely,

> the best advice I gave him was to buy a punching bag and hang it

up on the

> patio and beat the crap out of it to get rid of his anger. I offer

the same

> sage advice to you two.

lol

no need for anger....

it just don't make any sense.....and it's even bad for health....such

little ego-minded emotions.....

Marc

>

> **************Get trade secrets for amazing burgers. Watch " Cooking

with

> Tyler Florence " on AOL Food.

> (http://food.aol.com/tyler-florence?video=4 & ?

NCID=aolfod00030000000002)

>

May 26, 2008

Nisargadatta , " dennis_travis33 "

<dennis_travis33 wrote:

>

> Nisargadatta , souldreamone@ wrote:

> >

> > In a message dated 23/05/2008 5:06:08 AM Pacific Daylight Time,

> > dennis_travis33@ writes:

> >

> > >

> > > Sujal,

> > >

> > > Reading your posts I must tell that since longer I haven't met

a

> > > person who is so stuck in spiritual tradition like you.

> > >

> > > There is not the least amount of genuity left in all your

posts.

> > All

> > > that mental spiritutal crap sitting in your head made you in a

> very

> > > immature and chilish day-dreamer.

> > >

> > > Become real, run naked through the streets, bump your head

> against

> > a

> > > tree, dig a hole into the earth and sit there for thre days,

> sleep

> > on

> > > an ants heap - but for heaven's sake stop the incredible

> spiritual

> > > crap in your head.

> > >

> > > Werner

> > >

> >

> > ....why didn't give you such fabulous advises to your Guru J.

> > Krishnamurti.....?

> >

> > i think, that he would have ignored you completely.....just like

> non-

> > dual peaceful minds in here too....

> >

> > but ok, always funny your words.....lol

> >

> > .....Werner....the spiritual clown in here....

> >

> > Marc

> >

> > ****When my mother was very ill and bedridden for many years and

my

> father

> > was taking care of her and watching her die slowly before his

eyes,

> trying to

> > hang onto his memories of who she used to be, he would go through

> bouts of

> > fury, cursing God and cursing the hell he and his wife were both

> in. Strangely,

> > the best advice I gave him was to buy a punching bag and hang it

> up on the

> > patio and beat the crap out of it to get rid of his anger. I

offer

> the same

> > sage advice to you two.

>

> lol

>

> no need for anger....

>

> it just don't make any sense.....and it's even bad for

health....such

> little ego-minded emotions.....

>

> Marc

> >

Ps: but indead.....you could cut little your hair....would look less

crazy.....lol

.....but i'm not the only one.......

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Popular Days

Popular Days

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest guest

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Join the conversation