'Death of death, Cayce etc.

[Guest guest]

Namaste All,

 

Roger wrote>I challenge you, Tony, especially about

"Amilius in Atlantis", tell us

how

your comments are useful. And tell us how it is that

you can say with

certainty that your comments are true. What hard facts

do we know about

"Amilius in Atlantis"?

 

You are simply indulging in imagination. How can you

ever know the real

when

you make a career out of projecting the false?<

 

I could easily have said Osiris in Atlantis, there are

no hard facts about any past sages, except recent

ones. The hard facts about Rajneesh or patently

obvious and many in court and police records. Just a

fraud!!!!

 

With regard to Cayce many of his hits and misses are

on record and run about 90% plus or so. I also said

others for much of what he says also exists in some

mystical kabbalistic teachings.

 

The whole point was to show how Jesus was a sage and

what he taught was the 'death of death', as opposed to

the fundamentalist Christians you were referring to.

 

I don't really want to debate you, I haven't the time

and it would only be trying to debate your solidified,

preconceived notions.

 

Om Namah Sivaya, Tony.

 

 

 

=====

http://members.xoom.com/aoclery/sanskritglos.htm

 

ASATHO MA SATH GAMAYA, From the unreal lead me to the real,

THAMASO MA JYOTHIR GAMAYA, From darkness, lead me to light,

MRITHYOR MA AMRITAM GAMAYA.From death, lead me to immortality.

OM, SHANTI SHANTI SHANTI. Om, Peace Peace Peace.

 

 

 

Send online invitations with Invites.

http://invites.

[Guest guest]

>The hard facts about Rajneesh or patently

>obvious and many in court and police records. Just a

>fraud!!!!

 

Hi, Tony. Yes - those who believe they are in love

with the tree, may not look closely at the fruit.

Thus, the happy feeling of infatuation can be

continued. Nonetheless, I think Roger has a point

that discussing imaginative things is different

than speaking directly from experience/awareness.

>The whole point was to show how Jesus was a sage and

>what he taught was the 'death of death', as opposed to

>the fundamentalist Christians you were referring to.

 

I like this phrase: "teaching the death of death".

It has a great ring to it, and is consistent with

Biblical statements.

>I don't really want to debate you, I haven't the time

>and it would only be trying to debate your solidified,

>preconceived notions.

 

Yes, debate generally is a clash of one system of

beliefs with another. If a debate leads to

simple openness without reliance on maintaining

set beliefs, then regardless of who is the winner

and who the loser - there is only One.

 

Love,

Dan

[Guest guest]

Tony O'Clery <aoclery

> I don't really want to debate you, I haven't the time

> and it would only be trying to debate your solidified,

> preconceived notions.

>

> Om Namah Sivaya, Tony.

 

I would let this go, Tony. However, you seem to be projecting that I have

"solidified, preconceived notions". And you stated that I am "an arrogant

little boy aren't we?????"

>Tony wrote:

>According to Cayce and others Jesus was Adam, the

>descended Earth Deity, Sons of God, Sirians Pleiadian

>spirits etc, Kumaras, Enoch, Melchizadek, Joshua,

>Jeheshua, Elisha-succesor to Elias,Zend the father of

>Zaroastra, and Amilius in Atlantis. the teacher with

>the people of the Law of One, Is-Ra-El-ites, as

>opposed to the sons of Belial.

 

Is this statement of your's fantasy or fact? How can you demonstrate that

what you've stated here is the truth from your own experience?

 

If this is just a fantasy, what is the use in it? Doesn't it keep the mind

busy & keep the mind from settling down into the stillness where Realization

may be known?

 

What do we really know as undisputed fact? If we cannot distinguish the

imagined from the real, isn't this a barrier to realization?

 

You say:

>Well the purpose was to show you a little bit more

>about Jesus, what he was, and his history with

>Mystical Kabbalists etc.

 

I'm waiting for corroboration or proof regarding your Atlantis comments. If

your comments are only a speculative fantasy, then you HAVE NOT accomplished

your purpose of "showing more about Jesus" have you? You've only engaged in

imaginative disinformation. Distinguishing between substance & imaginative

disinformation is useful?

 

What do you really know about Jesus that is absolute fact? And of what use

is fantasy or opinion?

 

Tony says:

>The hard facts about Rajneesh or patently

>obvious and many in court and police records. Just a

>fraud!!!!

AND

>With regard to Rajneesh/Osho, now there we have a real

>fraud and dishonest pervert. He could teach the

>Christian fundamentalist evangalists a trick or two.

>Guns and votes and all.

 

I quoted Osho. Rather than address this quote specifically, you have chosen

to attack Osho's reputation. I think this means that Osho's comment was

strong & truthful and you couldn't find any way to challenge it, so you

resorted to attacking Osho's personality & reputation instead.

 

If you can comment on Osho's quote please do so. That would be the honorable

course, to show how his words are incorrect. Otherwise, while you continue

to divert the discussion into personality & reputation issues, I wonder if

the negativity that you project on others orginates in yourself!

 

You say that I have "solidified, preconceived notions" & am "an arrogant

little boy". Please show what my "solidified preconceived notions" are!

Please demonstrate with fact!

 

Your comment above about 'Jesus was Adam, Pleiadian spirits...Atlantis..."

is a "preconceived notion" because there is no way that you could know this

conclusively from your own experience. Your stubborn clinging to occult

disinformation & your insulting words show YOU as arrogant. Aren't you

projecting your own personal weaknesses onto others?!

 

Have you heard the Chinese axiom: when you point your finger outward in

blame (at Osho, at Roger...) note that 3 other fingers will be found

pointing back at yourself?

 

Roger