"No matter where you go, there you are." - Buckaroo Banzai --- In [email protected], Ron F <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > IS SWAMI G SUPERIOR TO JESUS CHRIST AND > RAMAKRISHNA? > > From www.womanthouartgod.com - Rasa Von Werder > August 19, 2005 > > Swami G may be found at Guru_Satsang@ > > Dear Swami G, > > Peace be with you.... > > And with you - > > * Here is what is going on now. You did not like the force of my > arguments in favor of souls who have a discipline other than > yours, an > attainment I claim is comparable to yours, (most notably > Christians) and since > you cannot answer my statements, you are attacking me "ad > hominem;" which means > 'to the person, appealing to personal interests, prejudice and > emotions rather > than to reason.' > > G: no one is *attacking* you ..... didn't know there was supposed > to be > an argument in place ....... i HAVE answered every one of your > questions ...... > this was not done in order to have you come back with an > argument ....... it > was done because you asked about my path .... if you wanted to > make it about > some debate i would have declined ..... > > > * In this place, the argument ceases. It is not longer according to > the > rules of fair play. > > G: fair play would have been that you had been honest in your > intent in the > first place......... do you think it is fair play to come to my site and > post > the above heading *IS SWAMI-G SUPERIOR TO JESUS CHRIST > AND RAMA KRISHNA* ? > You go to sites > act as if you are the one being persecuted and then proceed to > ask questions > under False pretenses of simply seeking to know about > anothers path ..... then > twist things to suit your ends .... this has nothing to do with being > honest > ..... > > > * Although, I must add, you are continuing the discussion today, > and > perhaps there is hope. > > G: the lines have been open here ..... but if your intent is to > continue in the sarcastic bent you can go down the road .... > in giving you honest answers have tried to Broaden your scope > of knowledge and > to have an open dialog ....... but since answers given as to my > path and > consciousness have been taken as some type of put down > toward you, and have > been seen as offensive you have come back time and time > again with the sarcastic > commentarys totally off the topic at hand .... the topic was your > asking > about my path and NOT a dialog about past saints etc .... you > turned it into > some argument about east versus west ..... > > > * I am not surprized that you have taken this stance. Why should I > be? > > G: because it is what you do ..... when lines are open you have a > way of > finding something to argue about ...... going on the defensive > time and time > again ..... isn't it about time to ask why you keep getting yourself > into > these positions ...... and no i am not threatened by you ...... but > neither will > your twisting things be put up with for long ..... > > * You are a human being, your claims to the contrary. > > G: really so what is the claim to the contrary ? > > * Shall I tell you why I refrained from writing your article at first? > After listening to the tape of our conversation several times, I > despaired at the claims you made. A friend of mine told me how > you had suffered > from attacks (although you say you don't suffer!) > > G: what was said there still holds true ..... there is NO Suffering > here > ..... there was suffering in the past ....... it ENDED .... > > * and I did not want you to go through the same thing. I know how > vile > people get on the internet, as I have been the subject of many > tirades, > including those of your associate Rev. Jeff. I felt that if I wrote the > interview exactly as you spoke it, you would be subject to ridicule > and scorn. > You would become a laughing stock. After turning it over and > over in my mind, I > told a friend, > "I cannot write this interview. People would laugh at Swami G. > > G: so let them laugh .... it is the Truth .... > > * She would be subject to ridicule, and she has already been > through > that. I cannot subject her to this again. I don't write articles like > that.' > > G: again what was said in the interview is the way that it is .... > if people can understand it then fine ........ if not then fine ..... > i am not here to please the world ..... there are some that Will > understand it > ..... and many that don't ...... > > > * What was wrong with the interview? The same thing that came > up again, > now written in a slightly milder way - and it comes up again and > again. That is, that you are the only person who has the Truth, > and no one else > has it but this one guy in Los Angeles, and everyone else is > beneath you! > > G: you are the one that is saying that i have NEVER said that ... > WHERE DO YOU KEEP GETTING THIS FROM ? > There are Many Realized Beings that have the Truth..... There > have been > throughout the centuries ...... > > > * You do not say Jesus Christ is beneath you, but there > is a feeling you think so, because you believe that all saints who > called God God (and Jesus PRAYED to God and said we should > PRAY without > ceasing!) rather than BEING God - like you are - were and are > beneath you. > > G: this is your take ..... Where are you getting this from ? Never > would > this one say or intimate that Christ is beneath this one ....... HOW > could that > be .. ? > Christ was a Model for those in a path of duality ..... He showed > the way to > walk the Path ..... but HE WAS Realized .... He and the Father > ARE ONE > ----- the Realized Being Knows also this being One ....... So HOW > could they > Ever say that Christ was beneath them as there is no them > versus Christ there is > only the Divine Absolute which is ONE ..... > > > * This includes every great saint of the Christian > persuasion and all saints of all religions. The only ones left > standing (except for a tiny number that are dead) in this Lofty > Empyrean are yourself and the man in L.A. > > G: You can cut that out RIGHT NOW ---- NEVER- NEVER- NEVER > has this been > said ....... STOP twisting what is being put forward ...... There are > once again MANY REALIZED BEINGS in the world ...... We all > speak as mirrors > one to the other as we live within the One Reality beyond the > transient show > ..... > > > * The large majority of saints and mystics are all swept away in > your > vision, relegated to the lower rung of Sarvikalpa Samadhi > > G: that isn't being swept away ..... it is the highest rung of Duality > ....... there is nothing wrong in it ..... but if you are seeing some > type of > slight then you are judging wrong ....... it isn't a put down .......... it > is > just a differing state of consciousness that is all ........ ( this is > where > all your angst is coming from, that i am putting down the path of > duality ) it > isn't about putting it down ...... it is just a different awareness that > is all > ....... > > > * And I put the project down and did other things. Then, it > seemed, you > wanted to continue, so I obliged you. Perhaps it could be worded > in some way > that would be less offensive, and I felt, after it was written by you, > it > sounded much better. > > G: you called me on my vacation and time was given .... you > called me when i > returned and asked for an interview and time was given ..... you > have written > questions and time was given to answer ...... in each time you > were afforded > respect and honest answers ...... so why do you seem to think > that respect > should b afforded you while you seem bent on finding some way > to create a > distance ? what has been given has been given out of > Compassion and Love > ....... > > > * This did not prevent me from saying my piece. After all, I am a > journalist, not a devotee or press agent. If you want a fan to write > your > article, perhaps Rev. Jeff is a good candidate. He seems to want > to get > involved in every letter addressed to you, anyway. > > G: you asked How to get devotees to pay up .... you asked why > people are not > respecting you ..... you have asked many things but not as a > journalist ..... > i have given you advice in order to help you to not keep getting > slammed but > again must say that you keep putting up conflicting messages .... > conflicting > actions...... No one has asked you to be a devotee ....... Nor a > press agent > ...... No one asked you to do an interview nor to write an article > ........ > you asked if you could interview me about my path ----- about > who remains after > Realization because you didn't understand it .... when the > answers given > didn't coincide with the path of duality in a christian religious > context then > offence was taken and whatever was said then became skewed > as to somehow being a > put down of Christ and Saints and in your mind your own > Mission..... > This was NEVER the intent here ..... what my path was has > nothing to do with > comparisons towards anyone - it was not given in that light ....... > > > * A note to Jeff: Jeff, when you go to bat for someone, you need a > big > baseball bat. But you only have a small one. Hahahahaha. > (This is to refute the fact that you say I do not understand humor, > and Swami G keeps telling you to 'lighten up.' So there it is.) > > G: no Jeff actually has a very good sense of humor ..... there is no > reason > for me to tell him to lighten up ...... > > > * The things you said you never did - make yourself exclusive > and put > everyone lower - you do over and over again. You keep accusing > my vision of > being on a lower level! > > G: i can't help how you are judging it ..... there is Nothing > exclusive about > what is being said .... have not *accused* you of being at a lower > level > ...... there are differing states of consciousness that is all ....... > this idea of accusation and being put down is coming from your > own mind ----- it > was never coming from here ...... > > ALL HAVE THE SAME ESSENCE THERE IS NO HIGHER > OR LOWER IN THE ABSOLUTE SENSE ..... > > Do you want a lie about the difference between duality and > non-duality > ? there is duality and there is non-duality that is a fact ...... > > > * What is worse, as I said before, you began attacking my > physical person. > You are bringing psychology into this, analyzing me, (which I > don't need) and as > you did in your interview against saints (saints with messiah > complexes and > trying to > save others out of their pain, and attached to suffering, etc.), > accusing me of emotional needs or debits which are motivating > me within this > debate! > > G: really ? No you have not been attacked ........ if you are seeing > yourself in this then ask yourself why ? > > * If I needed counseling, I would have gone to a > therapist or a psychologist! > > G: no one has told you to go to a therapist ----- > > > * I came to you to debate a doctrine, not to talk about our mutual > psychological needs, if any! > > G: no you were not forthright in saying you wanted to debate > doctrines > ...... you asked IF i prayed and why not ....... you asked IF i > meditated > and why not ........ you asked if you could ask me about my path in > order to > understand me ..... then you went off on a mission of seeing my > answers > as some type of put down towards christians and christianity ....... > but you > Never came honestly and said i want to debate you about > eastern versus christian > doctrines and paths....... i have No problem with Christian - > Buddhist or > Hindu persuations ...... in fact my teachings are eclectic across > the board > ..... > > > * I am not analyzing you - why should you presume to analyze > me? > > G: your not ? look again ...... just look at the heading of the post > ...... judgements and sarcastic innuendo's are ok --- but > analyzing you isn't > ..... > > > * Again, there is the presumption of superiority here, on your part > - > that you are looking down on me and I need to be fixed! > > G: you are saying that not i ...... i only said you are in the path > of duality ...... again there is nothing wrong with that path .... > if it works for you now Enjoy it ...... but don't take offense at it .... > > > * Debate the issues, not my personality, motivations and > emotional > status, thank you. > > G: excuse me ....... if you read the first posts you will find that the > one > that was putting forth the comments about motivations - etc . was > you my dear > ..... again look at the heading of this post . it has been ongoing > since the > first of your editorializing ..... or do you not see in the mirror well ? > there was not supposed to be a debate ------ the debate began > with the > editorializing because you didn't like what the answers were to > the questions > you asked here....... > > * These are irrelevant. And part two of this is YOU DO NOT > KNOW ME. You > have scarcely met me, have never interviewed me nor asked me > about my life or > my reality. I am a total blank to you. And you make > pronouncements on my > state? How do you know who I am? > > G: you told me .... you were a stripper for God .... women feel > threatened by you ...... have looked at your site and made the > comment that it > gives a very mixed message and only causes confusion for > many ........ you > have Told me about your reality .... about the suffering and the > feelings of > being put down by others ..... feelings of being persecuted on > many sites .... > have told me about the ongoing pain you feel --- yes there is to > much to > mention ...... have read your site and the rants about how you > were abused by > this and that person ..... have heard how you want to reach others > and about > giving women power etc...... > have spoken with you for a couple of hours by phone .... listened > to your story > and life ..... although i don't understand your ideas about many > things they > have not been used to put you down ..... > > * You know NOTHING about my life except what a person sees > from an > image of another in a magazine. It takes EFFORT to know > another. > > G: and what effort are you using ? you have turned asking about > this > ones path into some debate and judgementalism --- then > making the off the wall > pronouncements of this one thinking they are higher than Christ > ..... can you > wonder why you are not welcomed on many sites ? > > * is Before I even PRESUMED to interview you - to ask intelligent > questions > of you - I spoke to you for hours. I listened to the audio tape many > times. I > meditated on your words. I read your site and bought your book. > Still, I by no > means became an expert on Swami G. Just ready to ask the > right questions. But > what does Swami G. do? Not studying Rasa one iota she > pronounces her spiritual, > mental and emotional state > - which need fixing. This could be construed as Arrogance and > Pride. > > G: construe it as you wish ...... but you forget a conversation on > the phone > goes two ways ..... you are the one that has this idea about > needing to be > fixed ...... it didn't come from here ..... > > my comment was that perhaps you might change some things > so that others aren't > confused as your site brings up a mixed message ..... the > comment is that you > are on the path of Duality .... this is not akin to saying you need to > be > fixed ...... there is nothing wrong with that path ...... Christ taught > through that path ---- He taught what people were ready to know > ..... > > > * Now Rev. Jeff noted my appearence on your group, > Guru_Satsang, that I > had complained about prior treatment. So what? You and Rev. > Jeff had also been > mistreated. I heard a lot of this from a friend and felt sympathy. I > asked if > this was 'safe space' for gurus, where we could speak shoulder > to shoulder. You > said yes. We could talk about mutual > problems with devotees and the like - which is what I came there > for. > > G: then WHY on Gods earth are you taking this stance of > attempting to alienate everyone on this site ? once again your > questions about > my path were answered because it was felt > you were sincere ..... so they were answered as honestly and > openly as possible > ..... am sorry that they don't tally with your path or understanding > ...... > they weren't a put down of you or of any christian saints or any > others > paths......... the fact that you took it to be so ----- well there is > nothing that i can do as to how you receive it ......... but there is > something that can be done about answering any more ...... IF > you can't > understand or accept that there are many differing layers and > levels of > awareness ----- and that they are just what they are ........ then it is > best > to no longer speak of the Non-dual ........... Maybe everythings > needs to be > referenced from the point of duality in order to not cause offence > ...... but > then again how can this one go back to clinging to something > external when that > has fallen away ? > > > * It was for friendship that I came, not analysis and not being told > what > to do with my site. Then came a plethora of unwanted things. > > G: then be a friend ....... you have come as judge - and jury.... > > * One, a tirade of letters from Rev. Jeff, and two, a lot of advice of > what > to take off my site. I took this with a grain of salt and > thickened my skin. But friendship it was not. What is a friend? > > G: a friend will tell you when you have spinach in your teeth.... > a friend would attempt to open you up as to how others are > taking your site > ----- perhaps showing a side you are not congnizant of ...... you > wanted to > know why others are mocking you etc ....... why indians weren't > accepting you > ....... i shared WHY ...... this IS being a friend .... > > > * One, who at least on some level, sees the other as equal. > > G: you are being seen as an equal ....... > > * Right from the get go you let it be known this was not equals. I > was > lower, you were higher. > > G: where are you getting this from .... ? this has Never been > stated NOR implied ..... > > * We could not discuss, I could ask questions and you could > teach. So I > asked questions, and you told me your Truth. Then, much later, I > told you my > Truth. It was your FIRST indication of who I am. > And you don't like it! > > G:: have i ever offered to *teach* you ? NO ...... you just said > this one doesn't know you ..... Yes you told me your truth .... > it was said it is not understood ..... i don't understand being a > stripper > for God ....... nor putting half nude photos on a site and then > talking about > celibacy ...... am not judging you though ..... do as you will ........ it > isn't about like or dislike i don't care...... > that is about your path ..... do it as you will ....... but you asked > advice > and it was given that is all ...... it was said that your site gives a > conflicted image ...... > > > * Swami G, you say over and over again that I am "threatened" > and your words > should not be taken as a "threat." What are you talking about? > > G: am talking about when speaking about non-duality you get > angry and think > it is a put down of those on a dual path ...... > then you start writing about saints etc. and putting words in my > mouth and > ascribing that i am somehow looking down on Christ and Saints > ...... > > * The threat I am combating is the one against Truth - you > threaten > Truth, and so, I am defending it. I will give the finest example of > how you > threaten Truth, or speak against it. > > G: no i haven't threatend Truth ...... maybe your view of truth has > been > threatened ...... as such you have been reacting ..... > But Truth is as it is ........ > > * If one truly listens to you and analyzes your stance, it is obvious > that > you claim you are ABOVE both Jesus Christ and Ramakrishna. > > G: STOP THIS NONSENSE AT ONCE ...... get behind me Satan > for your words > are those of the divider ....... find ONCE where there is a claim out > of this > ones mouth that says " I am above Christ and RamaKrishna" ? > NEVER - NEVER - > NEVER HAS THIS BEEN STATED OR ANY WAY IMPLIED ....... > > you are now stepping over the boundaries and this type of > garbage is not > going to fly on this site ....... it may work on other sites but this is > Exactly > Why sites ban you ....... you take and twist things to suit your own > ends when > you feel put down ...... and it isn't that anyone is putting you down > at all > ...... it is only a faulty seeing on your part ....... > > have tried to be a friend to you ...... but you have reached the > limits > with this nonsense you are spewing now ....... > > > * That is why I keep asking you about these two Persons. You > know > well, that you would be made a laughing stock if you said this > outright, so you > talk around it. > > G: if it was what was thought here there would be No hesitation > in stating > it ....... but what you are saying is not close to the light of day ....... > i am OFFENDED to here you attempt to put such a notion in > place ....... > > > * But in your cosmology, there is no mistake, that > anyone who called God Father, Mother, or any other name, is in > the > less-than-Swami Nirvikalpa state, they are Savikalpa. > > G: One can say it ....... and yet as Christ said 'I and the Father are > ONE > if you have seen me you have seen the Father that sent me " In > other words > there is NO Separation .... ONE ---- Non-Dual ....... He didn't say i > am > within or one with the Father ..... He said I and the Father are > ONE ...... > > So you have NO IDEA of what has been said or why it is said ....... > But you can STOP your attempts at discrediting what is said here > by make vastly > wrong Assumptions ........ > > * Now you know people will laugh if you put down Ramakrishna, > so you > come up with specious, wobbly arguments why it was ok for him > to worship God as > separate, as he was not really separate, but he knew he was not > separate, just an echo, etc. And when I bring up his sufferings > and agonies, > (which is a no-no in your state), once again, he suffered, but it > was not really > suffering, etc. The point being that > Ramakrishna is accepted by all known as a Realized Being and > an Enlightened > Soul, and yet, he went through many nondual religions and > practiced them unto > perfection! He worshipped Krishna, Jesus and the Muslim way, > among other paths; > an all-around spiritual genius. So here, right before your eyes, is > a Being who > refutes what you say; that a person cannot be nondual and be > Enlightened, but > there is it. > > G: no RamaKrishna would not refute one iota of what has been > stated here > ....... only Rasa is refuting it because she has taken offence > because > what is being spoken of is not in her awareness or reality > framework as yet > ........ i understand RamaKrishna and have attempted to explain > his Reality > many times and yet you still don't have eyes to see or ears to > hear ....... YES > Christ was Honored ..... Just as in the Ashram here Christ is > Honored ...... > Just as my Guru is Honored ...... Just as Ramana Maharish is > Honored ..... > Just as all paths are Honored .... RamaKrishna entered into > many paths to find > that they all went to the One Absolute ...... this one also walked > many paths > and have found that same thing ....... Doesn't matter whether > through Christian > - Hindu - or Buddhist they lead to the One Absolute ..... > so again Rasa you are attempting to skew things in a darkened > light ...... > and how dark is that light ..... back up and repent .... > For NEVER has this one EVER even gave one moments thought > in that direction > ----- but it appears your mind can go there quite easily and this is > a sad > thing to see ...... > > > * And your explanations of how this could be, while still holding > onto your > doctrine, make about as much sense as Charlie Brown. > > G: there is no doctrine being held ...... this is the problem you > keep > trying to fit things into some neat package just like the catecism > of your > childhood ...... when it doesn't fit in your package then you go on > a witch > hunt and fabricate lies and ugly inuendos -------- is there no low > point to > which you will stoop in order to substantiate your position ? > > > * The other person who blows away your doctrine is Jesus > Christ. You > cannot touch Him, either, without making yourself look foolish. > So you talk > around Him, never facing the fact that JESUS WORSHIPPED > GOD OUTSIDE HIMSELF. > Jesus was a dualist as well as a nondualist. > > G: Christ Was the Living Truth ...... otherwise He wouldn't have > willlingly > laid down his life as a demonstration ...... He said to go within > ...... > He spoke out loud as a testament to others .... His life showed > the way for > those in duality ...... after Realizatation yes One can *see* the > world - it > is as i said like an echo ...... the world is a by-product of God ...... > it is > empty in nature ..... without lasting substance ...... God is the > Lasting > Essense of Life ..... > > > * Of course, Jesus was like Ramakrishna, both Geniuses who > could see > it either way. And there are other geniuses past and present, > living this sort > of spiritual realm, but you deny that they could be Realized or fully > Enlightened - like you - unless they are total nondualists. > > G: again DON'T MAKE FALSE STATEMENTS ABOUT WHAT HAS > BEEN SAID ......... > don't take things out of context and make them fit your agenda > ....... even a > total Non-dualist sees the world with the eyes ....... and yet they > are not > attached to the world as it is empty in nature ..... without solid > substance > .... > they Live in the Reality that God is the only Permanent and > Unchanging IS ..... > the rest is Shakti or the transient flux .... > > > * In other words, they cannot pray, do mantras, worship God in > any > image, talk to God, or even meditate. > > G: again you mis-understand ...... there is no need to worship > God in any > image as one KNOWS God is beyond all Forms here NOW..... > Meditation is ONGOING > ---- when the mind is stilled it is meditation ..... one meditates > without > doing meditation ..... it remains as the natural state ...... One is > always > in Communication with God for there is ONLY God .... NO > Separation ...... > > > * They must know they are God and that is it, no other way! You > say that > you are above those who say they are ONE with God, and they > and God are ONE and > the same - like when Jesus said, "I and the Father are One,' 'If > you have seen > me, you have seen the Father.' > > G: what Christ is saying IS That He is One and the Same .... > he is not saying that there is a persona that is one with .... He is > Stating > Non-dual Truth ..... If you have seen Me you have seen the Father > that sent > Me ------ in other words No Separation .... the Essense is ONE > ...... > this is WHY they wanted to crucify him .... that wouldn't have taken > place > if he had said i am one *with* God ... He was claiming to Be God > ...... > > > * When Jesus said his 'Seven last words' on the Cross > (meaning phrases) two > of them were addressed to His Heavenly Father. One was, > > 'My God, my God, why has thou forsaken me?' > And then, 'Father, into thy hands I commend my Spirit.' > > Now we who understand proper Christian theology understand > that Jesus operated > out of two principles: His Sacred humanity (that which you deny) > and His > Divinity. Those who become Him follow this as well. We > sometimes sink into the > Sacred Humanity of the clay God has given us, or we ascend into > the Divinity > where the Spirit dwells. We do not deny one or the other. You > affirm one, but > deny the other. And so, you contradict Jesus Christ and the > theology surrounding Him. > > G: i have contradicted nothing ....... read the Gnostic texts and you > will find that what is being said is compatible.... > > part B to follow >
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/JjtolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
