--- In [email protected], new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: <snip> > > And are you saying that you see im my writings that "this stems from a > hatred or > > denial of what IS, it spawns action stemming from stress and > > suffering, pain and fear and anger and hatred and contempt -- rajasic > > action, as it were, "acting out," instead of clearly seeing and > > healing the root-cause. That's fine, but IMO & IME there is no > > challenge there; one isn't facing one's own demons; one is attempting > > to change one's hairstyle by combing the mirror :-)" > > Or are you simply continuing to talk past me. To take any opportunity > to pedestalize your story.
I see essentially nothing but indescribable perfection in you -- utter bliss and passionate love and brilliant radiance, but that's not really the point, is it? Does it really make any difference to you, what I see or don't see? It's how *you* see and feel Now that makes the difference for *you* NOW, doesn't it? :-) > > I earlier wrote: > > > > > > It's not a matter of *my* choice -- it's the particle's choice, > > > > always, to imagine that it's not me, to explore its denial of me > > and > > > > of what IS, and consequently to suffer, for just as long and as > > > > intensely as it wishes :-) > > > > New wrote: > > > > > > So as Peg Leg says, "I could fulfill a desire to end the war in > > Iraq, > > > but its Iraq's fault for not surrendering to "MahaME"." (Or MiniMe > > if > > > they care to surrender to Jim instead of you, :)) > > > > *lol* Not exactly; I don't consider there to be a fault; it is all > > perfect; it's the way my particles are choosing to play right now. If > > and when they wish to end their suffering, they will tire of their > > play and surrender into what IS, and that will be perfect too, even > > for them/me. > > > > If you feel Iraq should be different than the way it IS in this > > moment, I invite you to Inquire more closely :-) > > And I invite you to ponder deeply Steve's Mahvakya I posted > adjacently. Ponder it deeply until you really GET it this time. Is that something I should do? Is it OK with you if I don't ponder it deeply until I really GET it this time? Because it's completely OK with me whatever you do or don't do, or GET or don't GET. I can live forever with you exactly as you are, *and/or* you can change and "grow" to your heart's content; I am fine either way; you're going to do whatever you please anyway, right? :-) > > > New wrote: > > > > >Its all just Perfect as it is. Nothing needs healing. > > > > I wrote: > > > > Not at all -- any thing that we see as a "should" outside > > ourselves > > > > needs healing, for it is a thought that is denying what IS and > > thus > > > > is a lie. The bodymind knows it's a lie because it hurts; it > > creates > > > > stress and suffering. > > > > New wrote: > > > > > > Funny, you see and hear should when I see "could". What is > > can "could" > > > always be more divine, more and expression of heaven. if you or it > > > don't like that, then sure, leave it as it is. > > > > What makes you think I wish to leave it as it is? Nothing stays the > > same. I LOVE it as it is, and based on that LOVE, I LOVE what is > > constantly emerging :-) > > So we agree on the last 6 words. That is the essence of Wok For me, there is no real difference between what IS and what is constantly emerging -- except What IS, is crucial to what is emerging :-) > > New wrote: > > >But if vision of what > > > could be has not been snuffed out within you, then seeing what could > > > and helpingto enable that change is a good thing, IMO. Something I am not doing, and should do, perhaps? :-) >Wallowing in > > > yesterdays news (now is what was conceived yesterday) is not a huge > > > virtue, IMCO, unless you want to gloriify something then worship it. > > > Pesestalphelia. > > > > Loving what IS, is the result of doing the Work and remembering the > > truth: Sat = Being = Love = Truth; it is its own reward. Remaining > > outside of Love in this moment, refusing to acknowledge the > > perfection of what IS, is any given particle's own choice, which I > > LOVE and honor fully :-) > > > Loving what Could Be, is the result of doing the Wok and remembering the > truth: The Divine is Always on the Move Creating. See, feel and Be > divine by expressing the spark of creativity within you. To enable > what could be. It is its own reward. Remaining > outside of Love for What Could Be, refusing to acknowledge the > perfection the every changing, ever emerging, ever creative > potentiality of every moment, emerging towards greater happiness, that > is any given particle's own choice, which I > LOVE and honor fully :-) > > > I wrote: > > > > Genuine peace and love and bliss are reattained when we Inquire, > > and > > > > through Inquiry see through and give up the lies and denial and > > > > external "shoulds" -- as we realize they are all projections; > > we've > > > > been attacking illusory demons, ourselves and others, out of the > > pain > > > > and anguish we've been inflicting on ourselves through our false > > > > beliefs, that they all out there "should" be different. > > > > New wrote: > > > > > > And if you want to continue to talk past me, not to me, I am > > certainly > > > not saying you should change. Its your call. > > > > > > I said nothing about shoulds -- but you apparently saw "shoulds" in > > > what I wrote. Projection could be an explanation. Rory wrote: > > You wrote a great deal about how what IS is the rotting corpse of > > God, and so on. If you passionately LOVE the rotting corpse of God, > > excellent; then we have no argument! My error; I thought I smelled > > some rejection there, some "should be different" :-) New wrote: > only in your projections and hopes, mon frere. Point to where I > advocated "should" or cast an imperative. The Wok is the antithesis of > the Imperative. You wrote, and I quote: "Don't Love what is, What is is a stinking corpse -- something God has moved on from. God is on the move -- Run, jump and keep up with It. Love the journey. Love what Isn't -- what Could Be...." I could be wrong of course -- perhaps a grammarian could weigh in here -- but that "Don't" certainly looks like a literal imperative to me :-) > > > New wrote: > > > But if my words are a good catalyst for you to sermonize on other > > > things, wonderful. Thats your creative urge to change the topic and > > > unload whats on your mind. Thats always an option. > > > > We've been over this point many times in the past few years; I guess > > I somehow haven't been clear -- I have said many times that I have no > > problem with change, with visions, with actions, with desires, with > > what could be and shall be. How could I? Life is change. I LOVE it > > all. Why do you think that somehow makes me want to resist change? > > LOVING it all is the perfect basis for change, the perfect foundation > > for change. > > Great. Your words appear far more inertic than that sentiment. Not to me, they don't. But who cares about me, let's talk about you. Should my words appear less "inertic"? Should I step out of my quicksand? :-) > > > > Something out there SHOULD be the same: > > > > Is that really true? > > > > Are we really sure that's true? > > > > How does it feel to think they "should" be the same? > > > > How would we feel without that thought? > > > > Can we see any stress-free reason to keep that thought? > > > > Are the turn-arounds on the thought equally true or truer -- are > > > > those detested qualities "out there" really inside ourselves? > > > > > > > Anyone can react against the evil out there and act to change it, > > and > > > > most do. More power to them! But IME it takes real courage to > > root > > > > out the evil where it actually lies > > > > New wrote: > > > > > > We are sympataco up to here. > > > > I wrote: > > > > > > -- in our own beliefs, our own > > > > thoughts. That's when we truly end the war. > > > > New wrote: > > > > > > I say its our resistance to use our divinely granted and enabled > > spark > > > of creativity and insight, inertia, stagnation in the present, that > > > restrict the application of our skills to remove blockages to things > > > moving towards greater fields of happiness. Now is one level of > > > happiness. Feel free to worship and be stuck in that. I wrote: > > What makes you think I am stuck in that? New wrote: > Your glibness an inertia in not rising to the wave in every moment and > catching it. If that's how it looks to you, great! Should I be less glib; should I rise to the wave in every moment and catch it? Is that true? etc. > > > >Out there is a > > > greater field of happines -- and if its within my power to enable > > > it, I will use apply my divine right to reflect the virtues of of > > that > > > creator / divinity. > > > > If you are exercising your divine right from a place of denial of Now > > and its consequent pain and anger and fear etc., IME your results > > will not be particularly divine :-) > > You keep seeing pain, anger and fear Rory. That has nothing to do with > me. Perhaps inquire, mon frere, ma souer, where that is coming from. I said, "*if* you are exercising your divine right from a place of denial." Whether you are or not is for you to say, not me. I see nothing but indescribable perfection, but what good is that to you? What do *you* see? > > New wrote: > > > I don't say everyone and everything should be happier, whole and > > > radiating creativity and love. I am saying, they Could be. > > > > Not in this moment, they couldn't, because they aren't, and this > > moment is what I am talking about Loving fully. It all starts Here, > > Now. > > Lots of inertia there. So, there's lots of inertia. I am down with that; how about You? > > New wrote: > > >And to the > > > extent I can enable that, that is my nature. why restrict nature? > > > > Who is saying we are restricting nature? Why do you think that Loving > > what IS implies stagnation? I have found precisely the opposite :- ) > > Ah good. So its just your words that reflect stagnation. Good to know. So, my words reflect stagnation. Should I be speaking or acting differently? etc. > > > > Right action continues, as always. And IME the actions arising > > from > > > > Love and Peace and Bliss are infinitely more effective than those > > > > arising from pain and suffering and contempt and hatred -- i.e. > > from > > > > false beliefs and projections :-) > > > > New writes: > > > > > > And in your story and projections, do you see me as advocating > > action > > > "arising from pain and suffering and contempt and hatred". R wrote: > > Not if you passionately love the "rotting corpse of God" in this > > moment, with all your heart -- otherwise, yes :-) N wrote: > aghoras are interesting. YES -- they LOVE me :-) N wrote: > > If so, I > > > see what could be -- you enjoying a happiuer, fresher, less > > > restrictive and conditioned view of things. THAT Could be. Its you > > > that appears to be saying it shouldn't be -- by staying stuck in the > > > quicksand of what has already happened. > > > > This is where we differ -- IME Loving what IS is not "quicksand"; it > > is divine heartfire :-) > > > > *L*L*L* > > Whats that I hear 'blub, blub, blu..." > > Is heart fire like hell fire and bimestone? Exactly! It may look and feel exactly like that until we look closer :-) Brimstone, anyway; I am not sure what bimestone is. Is that the new, improved, ertic brimstone? :-)
