[FairfieldLife] Re: Response to Curtis
Whether or not my intellect was satisfied with this or that superficial thing about Maharishi or the Movement is irrelevant. Anybody who has experienced that magic moment of surrender and engagement just before liftoff in the flying sutra, how can they fret over such little things? Power, enormity and bliss. I'll fret over those. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter drpetersutp...@... wrote: I'm more than happy with the results that my association with Maharishi brought me. Was there a level of PR (aka bullshit) that MMY and the TMO promoted? Of course, but I simply ignored this because it had nothing to do with me. Maharishi introduced me to the transcendent foundation of personal existence. This is wonderful, extraordinary, and profoundly mysterious. I don't think there has been a powerful spiritual teacher, such as MMY, in history that was not surrounded by a level of profound wisdom and also personal and political bullshit. You simply have to discriminate between what the wheat and the chaff is for you. But, I want to add, that I certainly understand people complaining of Maharishi's gross over-sell. It was, at times, quite ridiculous and maybe that's why I never really invested in it. --- On Sun, 8/8/10, Rick Archer r...@... wrote: From: Rick Archer r...@... Subject: RE: [FairfieldLife] Re: Response to Curtis To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Sunday, August 8, 2010, 9:52 AM From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:fairfieldl...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of raunchydog Sent: Sunday, August 08, 2010 8:27 AM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Response to Curtis  --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer rick@ wrote: What I'm saying is that Maharishi promised numerous benefits from the practice of his techniques, but neither he nor any of his students exemplified those benefits to the degree to which they were advertised. How many people have had such experiences? According to Rick not almost everyone...in fact no one exemplifies the benefits as advertised, not even Maharishi. How would Rick know what anyone's experience really is anyway? Even if he interviews thousands of supposedly awakened people as extensively as he does, he will never know anyone's experience as intimately as they do.  Maharishi didnât merely offer subjective benefits from TM (i.e., gratifying internal states). In keeping with the scientific age to which he catered, he offered a host of objective benefits and results, and touted them as objectively verifiable.  In fact, he insisted that yogic flying was the acid test of enlightenment, yet neither he nor any of his followers ever mastered it, or if he (they) did, they never demonstrated it. But even if they did, I would consider that mastery less important than the basic human development one would hope to find in any normal person in his fifties, what to say of a man who had supposedly attained the highest stage of human development (enlightenment). In simple terms, if a Guru is hitting on 19-year-old girls, does that say something about the completeness of his enlightenment or the efficacy of his techniques, or can we give it a pass? Iâm with Curtis in suggesting that to give it a pass is to say âdonât look at that man behind the curtainâ. I think that the TM movement could mature dramatically through the self-examination these questions require, and could end up becoming much more successful as a result.
[FairfieldLife] Re: WG: Colombian president receiving blessing of the older brothers
I am surprised that the news media chose to report that the Vice President had a stroke rather than report on this beautiful gesture by the incoming Colombian President. It is a GREAT post - the photos are amazing! Just a month ago when Bolivia's President Evo Morales took power for his second term he also participated in an indigenous ceremony that was beautiful to look at. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shukra69 shukr...@... wrote: so beautiful, thank you --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, merlin vedamerlin@ wrote: this article is made by David Nayan, one of the secretaries of Raja Luis. Subject: great blog post about Colombian president receiving blessing of the older brothers http://theaccidentalmonk.com/2010/unprecedented-presidential-oath/ Unprecedented Presidential Oath By David NayanPublished: August 8, 2010
[FairfieldLife] Re: Andrea Bocelli
Tu me acostumbraste led me to an awesome favorite by Rey Ruiz, No Me Acostumbro! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, John jr_...@... wrote: He sings bolero music, Tu Me Acostumbraste. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUVDPe7bDT4feature=related
[FairfieldLife] Still the best YouTube clip of All Time - and only 5 seconds!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a1Y73sPHKxw
[FairfieldLife] restful alertness
Ahead of His Time: Roger McGuinn of the Byrds wrote these lyrics in 1966 for a song called `5D'. The words hint at some pretty genuine experiences... Oh, how is it that I could come out to here And be still floating And never hit bottom And keep falling through Just relaxed and paying attention All my two dimensional boundaries were gone I had lost to them badly I saw the world crumble And thought I was dead But I found my senses still working And as I continued to drop thru the hole I found all the surrounding Who showed me the joy that innocently is Just be quiet and feel it around you And I opened my heart to the whole universe and I found it was loving And I saw the great blunder my teacher's had made Scientific delirium madness... I will keep falling as long as I live All without ending And I will remember the place that is now That has ended before the beginning Oh, how is it that I could come out to here And be still floating And never hit bottom and keep falling through Just relaxed and paying attention...
[FairfieldLife] What is enlightenment like
When all has fallen away and Dissolved all the distracting complication which is a hallmark of mind goes as well. What one *thought* they knew which was a benchmark of ego wisdom (?) blows away as dust in the wind. hahahahahahahahah Over and done. Entering into the Unknowing Beyond knowledge - leaves in it's wake Utter Freedom. The Bondage of bookish heaviness is over - and simply the Pure Reality which is Ever Untouched and Pure IS remains. It cannot be denied, and what was once a very skewed concept which intellectual mind can never construct or grasp or hold bursts and shatters all conditionings. The 0-ne without a second replaces the transient drama - and the IS which is the Life of All Life and the Death of All death replaces the me. hahahahahahahahah Freedom has always been. hahahahahaha Yes once gone 0-ne cannot ever manufaction any relationship to or recall of the old me drama - it is as if it never took place. That Infinite Vastness that is beyond ability to be spoken of - replaces the limited enraptured and disillusioned mind - body - emotional transient delusion. What great freedom - Simple yet beyond measure. Glorious yet Natural. How to explain the Living Pardox which simply becomes a most normal cognition and it's paradoxical nature has no mind and there fore no limitations or un-natural glitches such as encounted by those within mundane intellectualized concepts. Always well - only the body gets ill hahahahahahahahah As within all transient things - the Unchanging IS remains Forever untouched by the transient play
[FairfieldLife] Answers from the enlighened
Namaste Guruji and all, Namaste and Beauty FILLED evening, *Guruji, I wanted to thank you for your responses to my most recent posts. S The satsang videos are a wonderful blessing for all. *Also, I have had two other questions that keep coming up all the time. I think I have addressed them on this forum before and they were touched on, but the questions are still poking at me. S Okay. * 1.) Do you and the other realized beings here ever worry that you might try to rebuild an ego? Or are you so firm in your nature that this is an impossibility? S For this one there is still some settling of kundalini energy taking place - some residual imagery and movement. It is more like a playing out versus a getting caught up in and the vast expanse remains always, the empty fullness and beauty of the heart - the stillness deepens and settles over time. It is like ripples on the surface when the breeze kicks up and settles down again into pure awareness - there is no sense of concern about losing anything...only a deepening and settling. *2.) Also, what do you think will happen to your perception of the world when your body dies? Do you think that your perception might attach to another baby's body or another creature's body and begin to live through the perspective of that particular form and possibly rebuild an ego? S This feeling of MY perception and YOUR perception comes to those that are falsely identified with form and an individualized view point. To the realized being, this is not the case at all...there is nothing separate, only the vast expanse of pure awareness in which all forms rest in and are nurtured by. The body lives within this awareness and not the other way around - so then, there is nothing for pure consciousness to attach to. It is like air, pure space...completely free and in no way dependent on form. When there are no identifications and attachments, these worries do not come. * In other words, when your body dies, whose eyes will you see out of? S There are no eyes to see out of - the universal self shines on all that is seen...it is the light of the heart that has nothing to do with the physical. Pure consciousness is unborn, existing always as beauty and light and all is radiant within it's glow. All eyes glow with this beauty- there is nothing left out, yet this light transcends all as well. It is difficult to understand if one sees the self as a single body onlyyet dear Amy, this light exists within you as truth and is the very same light. *I realize there is no you but there is a one-person perception taking place through the eyes of your particular form. S Pure awareness has nothing to do with form or the physical eyes - one sees truly when this false notion of I am someBODY that sees someTHING vanishes. Once this knot of attachment is cut, pure awareness shines like the sun - shining on all, but not being anything in particular...only pure illumination - all visible within this glow. * This is occurring as opposed to your perception seeing the entire universe at one time, correct? This is confusing to me. Or could it be that the idea of perception is incorrect...to perceive there must be two? Maybe this is where I am getting it wrong. Very confused here... S Knowledge comes with the experience - One (hahahahahaha so funny to say one - how could it be otherwise) starts out with the sense of two which is more like a witness state - there is a ME observing something... with surrender, samadhi experience blooms and the sense of Oneness is experienced, a ME merging with something and a feeling of no distance in betweenthen there is the final blow out of 0 ...blowing out all sense of a separate identity and only pure awareness or the unconditioned mind remains...not two, not two. So keep going - these insights and questions come along the way. * I wasn't exactly sure what I was asking so it was long. Dissect it anyway you like. S Hahahahahahhaha it is okay, the questions are coming as your experiences are deepening. Thank you, Amy Continue forward and enjoy the blossoming Om Shanti, Siddhananda
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev has something to say about rajas
This is a profound question Ron. I hope others weigh it. I think you have given a false choice here, Response: It is not my choice- it is for each to choose - I was addressing the ones that are not happy with TM, for the ones that are, you are all set For the ones that are not, what' s it going to be? Are you going to look for another Guru? Throwing in the towel? doing it on your own? or something else- I can't think of all the options available, so listed a few. If you tried something and it didn't work, if you choose to lump in this thing and then categorize it with all the other things in this field- well, no one is stoping you, your choice. I was just addressing that particular aspect and saying I don't think ththis is wise. What went on in one place may have nothing to do with ananother Specifically with Gurus, and connecting it specifically to my path as an example, what goes on in any other path has nothing to do with what is here. As a side note, I can site this recent publication with Ramana Maharishi and say yes, what is described in this book - Padamalai does take place in my path. So in this case, if one is turned off by the points in that book, then yes, what went on there does go on here in my path. Hridaya
[FairfieldLife] Re: Ramana Maharishi- book with unusual acounting
Here is the definite spelling- Padamalai It was first published in 2004 Comments from my Guru about this book: This book is called Padamami ( I think). It is also edited by David Godman, and the acounting was by one that was with Ramana. The difference in this book compard with other acountings is the real essence of what the path is there without sugar coatings. This book reflects all the methodologies and understandings which are in mt path to the T Hridaya
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev has something to say about rajas
Since this thread is one of many where there are some that are happy
to be where they are with TM and then some indicating they would
have nothing to do with TM, my question to the latter is what is it
you have decided to do now?
Have you continued seeking another path that can bring about the
promises that you thought were incorperated in TM or have you thrown
in the towel and lumped all paths with TM and taken the position
that all Gurus and paths are fraud?
Of course the decision is up to you but if you have made the latter
choice, it differs from what I chose.
The point is that what is taking place in any other path has nothing
to do with the other, all deserve a fair chance of unbiased
investigation
Hridaya
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex do.rflex@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin
jflanegi@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008
no_reply@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex
do.rflex@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, shukra69
stephen4359@
wrote:
There is no worshipping Rajas in Maharishi's
movement-
Raja's
are
worshipping Bhagavan.
The Rajas [kings] in Maharishi's movement are phony
Rajas of
imaginary
countries. It's all part of Maharishi's pretend world.
It
has no
connection to what's actually happening in the actual
world
of
human
affairs.
For you to fuss about whether the phony Rajas actually
worship
Bhagavan is ludicrous in light of their phoniness to
begin
with.
But my dear friend; I thought we had already established
the
fact
that
the actual world is not only boring but even
dangerous.
It
is
people
that only relate to the little things they can see and
hear
and
touch
etc that are responsible for the plight this planet is
in !
For what its worth, I recall Maharishi referring to
material
life as
the lowest form of life. Not as a value judgement, but
relative
to a
sliding scale of evolution.
Interesting. Guru Dev on the other hand claimed that a life
in
this
world is preferable a life in the God worlds.
Divine birth is longed for by those wishing for a share of
the
celestial, to be acquired by people who make specific
religious
sacrifices and works relating to the divine. In devaloka
(heaven)
the
abundance of things to be experienced causes the minds of
devataa{}
oM
(gods) to remain wandering endlessly, hence they do not make
efforts
to do purushhartha (work for fulfilment of life). Therefore
birth
as a
human is said to be preferable; since here man can do
purushhaartha
and so can be in the presence of parabrahma (the Supreme
Soul)
~~ Guru Dev
And I recall Maharishi having said just about the same thing
Guru
Dev
said.
I agree that all levels of life, from the base material, to
the
divine transcendent are all available right here in human
form.
Depends on the level of consciousness how much is accessible.
The point is that this world is preferable as a place to grow.
Point, John!
[FairfieldLife] Ramana Maharishi- book with unusual acounting
Hello, Comments from my Guru about this book: This book is called Padamami ( I think). It is also edited by David Godman, and the acounting was by one that was with Ramana. The difference in this book compard with other acountings is the real essence of what the path is there without sugar coatings. This book reflects all the methodologies and understandings which are in mt path to the T Hridaya
[FairfieldLife] Re: Ramana Maharishi- book with unusual acounting
I think this book title is Padamali --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, Comments from my Guru about this book: This book is called Padamami ( I think). It is also edited by David Godman, and the acounting was by one that was with Ramana. The difference in this book compard with other acountings is the real essence of what the path is there without sugar coatings. This book reflects all the methodologies and understandings which are in mt path to the T Hridaya
[FairfieldLife] Re: Guru Dev on the Siddhi Powers
The short explanation of this which will be easily understood is enlightened are not performing Sidhis because there is no one to be the performer, no desires for such things but they do occur around the enlightened, it just happens A performer of sidhis is not enlightened --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ...Few people have a siddhi, but by their greediness for siddhi a good many people are caused to get cheated. Our wish then is to be wary. We are like the village guard who calls Jagtay raho! (Be awake!)... There are five kinds of siddhis:- janmaushhadhimantratapaH samaadhijaaH siddhayaH. [yogadarshanam (Patanjalis Yoga Sutras) ch4 v1] 'siddhis are attained by birth, drug, mantra, tapa samadhi.' 1 Truly, it occurs that someone is born as a siddha (one who has supernatural powers). Must have worshipped in a former life, but not so much as to have merged with Bhagavan (God), so in this way, by previous worship people actually have miraculous siddhis - in this manner Jada Bharata was a siddha from birth, who did not have to hear, learn and memorise in order to understand. 2 Various kinds of sidhhis are come to be seen by means of drugs. When I was staying in the jungles, on several occasions Kola and Bhil (tribal peoples) came and informed me of the properties of drugs. One time a Bhil brought one such which would make a tiger senseless who saw only a little of it from afar. By means of drugs a human being can live several hundred years. By means of drugs many siddhis can come. So there are also drugs that give the strength to fly for the one who puts it in the mouth. 3 From a mantra come siddhis. Once the deity of the mantra becomes favourable it will act according to its ability. The proper form of siddhis is of mantras. Common people receive siddhi from yakShini, karNa-pishachi and bhuta-preta (demi-gods, demons and ghosts) or trifling deities - and dark spirits of people inform of the past and present or do amazing feats and [the medium] pretends to be a siddha yogi. This is how straightforward simple people are deceived. 4 siddhi occurs by doing tapa (austerity). Maintaining brahmacharya (celibacy), fasting and enduring ones sadhana in order to gain God are performances of tapa which are satvik (pure). From this [tapa] peace and satisfaction grow. tapa aimed at dishonouring, killing, bewitching, enchanting etc. are rajasik and tamasik tapa. By this there will be neither peace nor satisfaction, the intrinsic enemies of unrest and anxiety increase bringing about the downfall of the sadhaka. 5 From samadhi come siddhis. But, these siddhis go to the sadhaka who has gained the supreme situation or jivanmukti. With these siddhis the duty is to be steady and if a good deal of work is not undertaken then the steadfastness is gone. The significance of this is that if there are miracles seen in any person this is not the true measure of a yogi. Seriously there are yogis in whom miracles occur and they do not perform miracles for their wealth or reputation. They only want for happiness in the world, tenderness and compassion. Understand that folk should be saved from misunderstandings about these siddhas. Do bhajans (hymns) to Bhagavan (God). You should become a ruler to the siddhis then siddhis will wander behind you. How to be made a ruler? Not to belong to the world of imagination. Until such time as your world is of a different kind, not longing for a son, for wealth, for a wife, for prestige and reputation, until then you will really be bereft of strength. The proverb is that khuda is scared of the beggar (Pharsi / Urdu word khuda = God). Withdrawing from the fancies of the world, grow in desire of Paramatma (the Supreme Self, God) then a multitude of siddhis will wander behind you, [but] no siddhi will occur when you seek them. The way that one should possess is that where ones own honour is not sacrificed. When you can be in the steady presence of the almighty Paramatma, then it would be a calamity if you were to go stumbling behind, here and there, following trifling siddhis. Be sure of this the siddhis behind you will run away when they see you. If you do not wish for siddhis, if you obstinately make a boundary with the siddhis that obstuct your spiritual progress, then siddhis will stay surround you. The way to keep siddhis under control is by remaining bowed to Bhagavan (the Supreme Being) and don't wish for the siddhis - this is the way to freedom. If the siddhis wander behind you then they will be subjected. At that time then the siddhis cannot be the swami (master), say they will really be only slaves. Therefore don't be a slave to the siddhis, become a master of the siddhis. Becoming a slave to Bhagavan you will become a swami of the siddhis. Becoming a servant of Bhagavan then all your service will be performed - in
[FairfieldLife] Definition of sage vs Sat Guru
Sat Guru: 0- Inner Guru is that which resonates with Truth, that the Sat Guru ignites with Living Expression and methdologies that pull away the layers of untruth, until simply the Reality rather than a projection remains. Sage: Go Guru, Go Guru, get your Groove on, Go Guru!! Sat Guru: 0- it's a bit more than this. Guru Dispels darkness - Guru is only a Sat Guru when they can get seekers from Darkness to the Light beyond lights. Sage is a living expression of Truth as well. Not all Sage's are Sat Guru's yet all Sat Guru's are Sages. Maha Shanti Om D
[FairfieldLife] On line ashram description
Om Namo Narayan - Great Day This is not a chat list but rather an working online Ashram. As such there are some rules and regulations. The following are Musts and not simply suggestions. 1. Post an introduction as per the instructions sent via the automatically generated mail. 2. Post your photo Do not think you are the exception to these rules - you will find rather that your membership will be rapidly terminated. You are quite able to ask the Sadhakas here questions and may ask the Sages or Sat Guru's questions. Where else is there such an open ability to converse with Sat Guru's - Sages - and those who are progressing on this path. Rather than making assumptions about the Sat Guru's etc. ask from those who know them well and dispel the erroneous thoughts and replace them with facts. This One knows of no other such an undertaking to allow practices to be given out and ongoing aides to be given out so freely. Neither is there known of any other place where so many are making such rapid journey's that take one to Liberation. This is not as seen with other Guru's where people are led to believe they are realized with a starting samadhi experience. You will find that those who are Liberated and pronounced Realized have Truly dissolved into Realization and that their lives are a living testament to the authenticity and powerful methodologies developed and given out to those who are sincerely seeking Liberation. While there are no ego games allowed here, there is much laughter along the way. Don't miss this opportunity as it has never been given in history, and this is a vanguard taking place, it is a place where Sages and Sat Guru's emerge; versus like most paths where more confusion arises due to seekers paying their monies then being left to their own devices and fallacies. Perhaps the Sages and Sat Guru's may give a synopsis of their journey's as far as time and the methodologies and paths walked before. What is different here ? This 0-nes path was the long way around and learned the valuable lessons the hard way. It took 30 years from start to completion. Paths walked and initiations taken and some no initiation just living within the tradition for a time. 1. Esoteric Christian Order (Father Blighton) 2. AC Bhaktivedanta - ISKON (no initiation) but lived within this tradition for 2 years fully at the ashram. 3. Karma Kagyu Buddhist - (initiation) name Karma Sonam Wangmo (one of first in the US to recieve the Kala Chakra empowerments) Also was Lama in last life - full remembering of that time and tradition based upon Chod practices. 4. Way of the Mystic - internal self quest for many years. 5. Tantric Wisdom - given by my Sat Guru Rajiv (traditional way One to One) Tantra is not taught in classes. Rajiv broke through the remaining threads. 6. Shavite Tradition Jhuna Acharaya under Guru Naga Baba Sundar Puri (this is oldest and most authentic recognised tradition in india - all Buddhist traditions stem from this) Naga Baba Sundar Puri has taken Maha Samadhi and he watches over the Sadhakas from the other side. He was well known in Haridwar and Rishikesh and in the Himalayan communities, was well respected. As per his admonitions as well as Sat Guru Rajiv's am going forward to carry on giving this Liberating Light to those in the west and to mankind. What is given here - the methodologies come out of this 30 year journey and the Wisdom gained as to what is beneficial versus what is not. Things have been streamlined into the easiest and most profound without all the layered trappings and coverings of dogmatic flair. A Sat Guru should be a reformer Like Christ that came to reform Judaism to take it out of the cold ritualized way, and like Buddha that wanted to reform Brahmanism with it's cast system. May this 0-ne continue in that vein to reform and bring the path back to it's original intent which is simply to take seekers to Liberation in the most expedient manner possible. Now how many are committed to sharing this with humanity ? How many are willing to walk their path of the Mystic to Realization and then be willing to aide other seekers along their way ? Maha Shanti OM 0
[FairfieldLife] An enlightened One's journey
OM Namo Narayan, Attempted to write something this morning about this one's background, but fell Silent. Only thing that came to 'mind' was: insignificantly significant. Once there was a me that beleived in True Peace, now there remains no *one* that Lives AS True Peace. This, sweet friends, is the Gift of SatGuru. *The Official Search began as a spontaneous kundalini awakening a little over a year ago. *Not versed (and without a hint of Belief) in anything spiritual or religious, the kundalini brought tremendous fear and confusion. *Pretty quickly Grace provided Guru and after an early blowout (this one didn't like the Truth initially.), Practices and Guru's Gift brought Grounding and Rapid Progress. *Practices, Humility and Surrender... day and night, night and day Revealed the Living Truth of Guru... of ONE. Guru's Grace is Essential. She pleaded, Please show Yourself to me! And so I moved to make my Presence Known. She ran in fear and ignorance, That is not You! Where are You? And so I came as Guru. I am Here as Guru without and also as Guru within. And she cried, You may be out here as Guru, but within there is only me. So I comforted her with Living Guidance and Practices. With Pure Love and Compassion, I Lead the Way. In Faith of My Living Form she remained Steady. In the Light of My Presence within she swam in Surrender. As she slowly dissolved into the Waters of My Being, My Presence Shined Brighter and Brighter. Then with a Final Brilliant Flash, she sank into the Depths of My Nothingness. Always Here Now I AM. Being AS Myself IN Myself and WITH Myself. The Only ONE. Not even as I, But AS IS. The Being, The Living, The Shining Presence of ALL That IS. Come BE what you ARE. SatGuru (I AM) is Here without to Show you I AM Here within. Bliss is your Being, Peace is your Pleasure, Eternal Life is your Nature. Pranams Guru. Shanti Shanti OMMM. Sat Chit Ananda, Sarojini
[FairfieldLife] Shaktipat Diksha initiation
This looks good from what they write: http://www.siddhyog.org/shaktipat_diksha_-_initiation.htm
[FairfieldLife] quote from MMY for Nabby
The world is as you are. Develop unbounded consciousness and the Universe is yours
[FairfieldLife] Response to when is it a miracle
OM Namo Narayan - 0- The Miracle is when all falls away and simply the Extraordinary Ordinary of 0 point balance remains. Then One begins to Live - when the illusion is laid bare then an even Greater Mystery is Entered. Hahahahahahahahahah Maha Shanti
[FairfieldLife] Concern about what people think
Comment: Also, I realized that I no longer care what people think of my experience. I'm no longer guarding it. It is what it is. Opinions and perceptions are barely fazing me. I'm delighting in this liberation. Go ahead, think me crazy, no problem! If the nut bus is headed to Realization, well then save me a seat! Response: 0- the world of ego cannot understand the Clarity of Pure Awareness. They may judge it insane but one steps Into Sanity as In-Sane and the worlds illusion remains in it's darkened state. Who would change places with the world ever again ? hahahahahahahahahaha Not the Liberation 0-ne.
[FairfieldLife] Sidhis and Kundalini
0 Namaste - Siddhis come as a matter of course - but development of Siddhis is not what the path is about - it is about entering the Best of the Siddhis which is Realization where all conditioned knowledge is at an end. Siddhis are signposts along the way. Maha Shanti OM (Reply) the best siddhi combined with grace - is samadhi :) 0 Om Namo Narayan - the best siddhi is Realization - go beyond lower samadhi's. Maha Shanti OM 0 New Post Questioner: I've never had any negative experiences with meditation and kundalini, yours sounds far more like migraine, epilepsy or a brain tumour although you did recover. You do read of others but your negative parts do seem to be more than most. The kriyas are more to be expected, but I do wonder what positive experiences and abilities you've had since your guru fixed you up as you haven't mentioned them and would be the true signs of a kundalini awakening. Response Siddhananda: Your comments display extreme ignorance about kundalini and a true spiritual awakening. My Guru did not 'fix me up' as you say, but offered a light so that this one could find the way to freedom. and now because of the Guru's compassion and grace, realization has been entered. This one has absolutely no abilities that can speak of or care about, so am certain you will not be impressed. So, what positive experiences can be spoken of? The suffering me mentality, the sense of separateness, the internal drama, the illness, the depression, the anxiety, the kriyas, the lights, phenomena have settled down and died, and what remains is emptiness, deep peace, stillness and vast beauty - the eternal, unchanging, constant God Consciousness that wouldn't trade for any abilities. So, here it is - the end of the story and beginning of pure life. Come find that which you have always been not two, not two Blessings, Siddhananda
[FairfieldLife] Re: Diksha Initiation vs. regular Initiation.
ater all these years of doing tm and if regular and sincere with it, I would submit there is a good chance that one would move rapidly by taking diksha under the terms specified below. my experience dictates that it is different to have the initiation by the diciple compared with the sat guru. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, BillyG. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In Diksha Initiation a Sat-Guru (true god-man) gives you some of his God Consciousness, in regular Initiation any human teacher can give you a meditation technique. The difference is in Diksha Initiation the initiate must *qualify* for the experience by his past spiritual sadhana (practice), and be able to sustain the tremendous spiritual power brought on by the Guru, obviously only a true realized Master can do this and an advanced disciple. In ordinary Initiation any human teacher (even a book) can instruct one in techniques to empower the sincere seeker! I would submit TM is such a technique, perhaps one of the more effective techniques available but still not a diksha Initiation. It may however, lead to Diksha Initiation based on merit like any reputable meditation technique. Sources: Swami Yoganada, The Second Coming. The disciple,in turn, must be advanced and deserving in order to be able to receive such a 'baptism' in Omniscience (diksha) by his advanced guru who is one with CC. Kirpal Singh, The Crown of Life. But when the student..succeeds in rising above physical consciousness, he finds the Radiant Form of his Master waiting unsought to receive him. Indeed, it is at this point that the real Guru-disciple or teacher-student relationship is established. Up to this stage, the Guru had been little more than a human teacher
[FairfieldLife] Why enlightened prefer This one or One
Namaste Guru G and Amy, G :the *you* that you speak of is no more. When *you* is used by One that is Realized it is only used as a manner of speaking. The *you* is no more - it belongs to the illusion of maya. In Lila what dances is that One Singular Essense which is One. Udit: That's right. I don't feel like using I, me or mine anymore since you and I are One and what is mine is yours. Nevertheless, i use them as a manner of speaking as Guruji said to make myself understood. Love, Udit
[FairfieldLife] Walking the path alone
Actually, the guru is only a guide and it has been stated here that one must walk the path alone ultimately. This is no way means that while one is with the Guru, the evolution is not in full force until one is walking the path on their own but just the opposite. From that well known verse- Be still and know that I am God Genuine gurus guide the disciple for none other than this and not in some distant far off time but now. A guru is the same as the disciple except the maya is no longer there. The Guru guides one to remove this maya, but leaves the disciple to live thier life, make their own choices and then reap the consequences of these choices. Hridaya
[FairfieldLife] Definitions sahaha, Sarrvikalpa, Nirvikalpa
Om Namo Narayan Sahaja means effortless and continuous - (not simply the result of being in sitting meditation) This is rather a continous state of Consciousness versus an experience that comes and goes. Sarvikalpa - is still having an identity but it is merged in Oneness. Being One Nirvikalpa - is no me remaining - Simply IS. One does not percieve any story any longer it is over. There is only Pure Awareness without any attributes layered over. IN Nirvikalpa Sahaja there are no longer rising thoughts and oneness has dissolved into 0 point balance. Maha Shanti
[FairfieldLife] Re: Definitions sahaha, Sarrvikalpa, Nirvikalpa
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, BillyG. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ron sidha7001@ wrote: Om Namo Narayan Sahaja means effortless and continuous - (not simply the result of being in sitting meditation) This is rather a continous state of Consciousness versus an experience that comes and goes. Sarvikalpa - is still having an identity but it is merged in Oneness. Being One Nirvikalpa - is no me remaining - Simply IS. One does not percieve any story any longer it is over. There is only Pure Awareness without any attributes layered over. IN Nirvikalpa Sahaja there are no longer rising thoughts and oneness has dissolved into 0 point balance. Maha Shanti Sri Ramakrishna describes this distinction very well: Savikalpa Samadhi was compared by Sri Ramakrishna to a cotton doll which when put in water gets saturated with it, and Nirvikalpa Samadhi to a doll of salt which when immersed in water dissolves and loses itself in it. Nirvikalpa is the higher... It reminds me of the saying by Christ Jesus that: Whoever finds his life (ego) will lose it (Cosmic Awareness), and whoever loses his life (litte ego) for my sake will find it (Cosmic Consciousness). Little ego? as in small self? ego will do, there is no ego and enlightenment existing at the same time. You left out sahaja- in both cases with savikalpa and nirvikalpa, it will be different if the sahahja is either there or not. So Realization is Nirvalkalpa sahaja samadi. Sarvikalpa sahaja samadi while an exalted state has the me there. There is further to go yet this is a place one may stop in their journey. This again is a situation where when one is with a Guru resting in Realization, they will know where the disciple is at and then guide them to completion. This again is also the significance in knowing that the Guru is enlightened because they are only capable to take one as far as they themselves are. My Guru had this state and was ready to stop, it was only because of her Guru that she continued as instructed. Sarvikalpa sahaja Samadi is a very attractive place saturated in bliss. Here is an answer to a question from the newest enlightened in our group, resting in nirvakalpa shaja samadhi since 7 days ago: Namaste all, While reading through the posts a question popped up. In the realized state how do you feel about your loved ones? Do you feel as attached to them as before or do you now have a different love for them that is more detached? I am trying to understand how now you are feeling one with the everyone and everything in the world, how you could chose one person over another to spend your life with. Would you not love all people the same? I am not even sure my question makes sense, but hopefully someone will get the gist of it. Amy Namaste Amy You love them more than they have been loved, All IS love as all love itself. There is no *me* to enter in the act of loving, Love IS. Only responsibility to them no attachment and family remains as is, all is perfectly normal. most of what has been remains the same. if you are with a person who you share your life with there would be no reason to change that . But if you are single there is no reason to chase after some one because there is no desires. desires for the most part vanish one dose not feel lonely or dependent on an other. Realization is not an emotion and love is not a feeling but they are also the same. don't try to figure it out just do the practice an trust the Guru. Love Light Jyoti
[FairfieldLife] Re: Definitions sahaha, Sarrvikalpa, Nirvikalpa
For the hell of it, I will respond with the general opinions from my camp which I think differ from your opinions: --There's no false ego in Enlightenment; HP: there is no ego period. - ego is defined as identification with mind and body as being the self i.e. a delusional I associated with identification with mind, at the core of one's psyche. HP: not anywhere else either In spite of the vanishing act that eradicates the delusional I; evidence bears out the existence of other types of delusions, HP: The wording here is a little complicated but i think there is a stark difference in opinion here as all delusions are imploded into Being and there is no one and no thing left, only iS, so nope, no delusions left especially those pertaining to the Guru's notion of self-importance; HP: you will not find anywhere my guru claiming importance as a small self ego stance on a particular issue, however what is said is an enlightened being is helping humanity 24/7 and here the term self applies to body-mind. Your own Guru admits that there's a body-mind after Enlightenment. I read some of your messages. HP: Now there is- but when this is gone nothing changes - this is why Guru's do not care if they have a body or not. That body-mind is fully capable of the most egregious, grandious, Emperor/Empress - with no clothes types of delusions; HP: yup e.g. Bevan, and your Guru in particular, who seems to be infatuated with herself. HP: No comment on Bevan, and with my Guru, well, you are entitled to your opinion Besides, I dont' see any new information coming from her. HP: dont know what you are looking for, I have posted comments from the enligthened in our group, and the subject matter may be stuff which has not been seen to be commented on by other enligthened ones, this is rare with reference to the availability for most probably OK, she's Enlightened, what does she want, a medal? HP: No desires in enlgithenment but you know i am already so over posted with all this stuff, have covered everything so in actuality by now, all the stances of all the members in this forum are known and it is not going to change any time soon most likely, so now what - do you want a medal? - In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ron sidha7001@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, BillyG. wgm4u@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ron sidha7001@ wrote: Om Namo Narayan Sahaja means effortless and continuous - (not simply the result of being in sitting meditation) This is rather a continous state of Consciousness versus an experience that comes and goes. Sarvikalpa - is still having an identity but it is merged in Oneness. Being One Nirvikalpa - is no me remaining - Simply IS. One does not percieve any story any longer it is over. There is only Pure Awareness without any attributes layered over. IN Nirvikalpa Sahaja there are no longer rising thoughts and oneness has dissolved into 0 point balance. Maha Shanti Sri Ramakrishna describes this distinction very well: Savikalpa Samadhi was compared by Sri Ramakrishna to a cotton doll which when put in water gets saturated with it, and Nirvikalpa Samadhi to a doll of salt which when immersed in water dissolves and loses itself in it. Nirvikalpa is the higher... It reminds me of the saying by Christ Jesus that: Whoever finds his life (ego) will lose it (Cosmic Awareness), and whoever loses his life (litte ego) for my sake will find it (Cosmic Consciousness). Little ego? as in small self? ego will do, there is no ego and enlightenment existing at the same time. You left out sahaja- in both cases with savikalpa and nirvikalpa, it will be different if the sahahja is either there or not. So Realization is Nirvalkalpa sahaja samadi. Sarvikalpa sahaja samadi while an exalted state has the me there. There is further to go yet this is a place one may stop in their journey. This again is a situation where when one is with a Guru resting in Realization, they will know where the disciple is at and then guide them to completion. This again is also the significance in knowing that the Guru is enlightened because they are only capable to take one as far as they themselves are. My Guru had this state and was ready to stop, it was only because of her Guru that she continued as instructed. Sarvikalpa sahaja Samadi is a very attractive place saturated in bliss. Here is an answer to a question from the newest enlightened in our group, resting in nirvakalpa shaja samadhi since 7 days ago: Namaste all, While reading through the posts a question popped up. In the realized state how do you feel about your loved ones? Do you feel as attached to them as before or do you now have a different love
[FairfieldLife] Different enlightened one answers the same question
Namaste all, Namaste and Grace-filled Evening, * While reading through the posts a question popped up. In the realized state how do you feel about your loved ones? S There is no sense that the loved one is different than the self and within this purity, love and compassion flow freely..there is only flow.. * Do you feel as attached to them as before or do you now have a different love for them that is more detached? S It is a pure love that is not preoccupied with the other as there is no sense of otherness... *I am trying to understand how now you are feeling one with the everyone and everything in the world, how you could chose one person over another to spend your life wit Would you not love all people the same? S The difference is that there is no-one that is loving or *me* that is loving *something* or *some-body*...pure love is inherent in the universe and flows like a river when the mind is still. It is love that needs no object as this love just IS - Love and Compassion are the fragrance of freedom. *I am not even sure my question makes sense, but hopefully someone will get the gist of it. S They do make sense, but the responses will not be understood with the intellect or from a *me* vantage point. The great paradox and mystery cannot be grasped by a *me* ha ah ahahahahhahaaha - Amy Great Peace and IS, Siddhananda
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Outlaw Path To Enlightenment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Last night I rapped for a little while about outlaws and why I like them, and the flack they sometimes get from others for living by no rules but their own. But there is another reason why I love outlaws. For me they are the perfect metaphor for the pathway to enlightenment. In my considered opinion, *most* of the men and women in human history who have realized their enlightenment have done so by being outlaws. At some point in their lives they decided to stop following the advice or the laws of others, and follow only their own. You need look no further than the Buddha for an example. Yeah, he studied with a few teachers during his early days. But he rejected them all, and in the end wound up studying only with the Self. And that was all that was needed to realize the Self. That is essentially his message, and in my opinion it is still true, all these centuries later. Many in the spiritual community are *offended* by the idea of DIY (Do It Yourself). They come up with all sorts of intellectual arguments for how it isn't possible for a self to realize Self all by itself. They repeat the stuff they've been told (and, more often than not, *sold*) by teachers who told them that they *needed* a teacher to realize who they are. They go on and on like Ron does about how a guru is essential, and how doing exactly what he or she says is essential to become enlightened. Well, to echo Cuba Gooding, Jr. in Jerry Maguire, Show me the enlightenment! We were all told for years or decades within the TM move- to Just Follow Instructions. Do what we tell you to do and you'll become enlightened. Yeah, right. We all know how many people in the TM movement *that* worked for. And then I look at other spiritual traditions and what I see is that the guys and gals who get written about *as* enlightened beings are the ones who *didn't* follow instructions, who *didn't* do exactly what they were told to do. For the most part, the people whom history records as the enlightened were outlaws. For a while they tried doing things Somebody Else's Way, but in the end the thing that enabled them to realize their enlight- enment was finding Their Own Way. I could go on and on and on, listing the enlightened of the past whose life stories suggest that they were outlaws. It's pretty easy to do; there are far more of them than there are stories about people who realized enlightenment by doing what they were told. But instead, since I know that this is going to push some buttons, I'll ask those who still believe that one *can* become realized by doing what you're told to do (or that that's the *only* way you can realize enlight- enment) to provide some examples of this. Show me the enlightenment! Trot out some examples of someone follow- ing Someone Else's Path and getting enlightened by doing what he or she was told to do. We've certainly seen Ron trying to do this here, and I think we've all seen how believable his claims that all these people are poppin' into enlightenment are. I would suspect that there is not one person here who believes it. But *Ron* believes it, and obviously believes firmly that if he does everything he is told to do, for long enough, that enlightenment will be the result. Different strokes for different folks, I guess. I'm not convinced. I think there is great value in the moment in which one *rejects* doing what one has been told, and does Something Else instead. That moment often is referred to by the enlightened as the pivotal moment in their lives in which the seed of realization was planted. It may not have actually been *doing* the Something Else that caused realization, but just making that decision to no longer be reliant on Someone Else's Path in almost every case revealed their *own* path to them. And that path led them home. When sincere seekers are there , the universe offers a choice. Probably when the sincerety is kept up, more choices come along the way and the time frame is eternity so no need to worry. It looks like out of the 6 billion people on the planet, not many follow a Guru, this is their choice, that is what free will is about. Hridaya
[FairfieldLife] Re: The Outlaw Path To Enlightenment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robert Gimbel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (snip) That moment often is referred to by the enlightened as the pivotal moment in their lives in which the seed of realization was planted. It may not have actually been *doing* the Something Else that caused realization, but just making that decision to no longer be reliant on Someone Else's Path in almost every case revealed their *own* path to them. And that path led them home. This is good stuff- It is true you eventually have to 'find' it for yourself- basically this is the philosophy of the 12-step programs- that you need to find: 'Your own 'Higher Power'. Jesus claimed the same: Search within... Maharishi teaches the same: It's all within... Then there's the idea of 'old soul, young soul'... Some people aren't the least bit interested in any of this stuff of enlightenment, as they are caught up in the more material side of things: survival, position, possessions, not much time left for anything spiritual. Then there's the one's that need to just follow one of the various dogmas, of one the religions... Only problem is: all of the religions are generally based in a figure- head who was enlightened, but as was said, you can't get there, by just being a 'Parrot'...quack, quack... Then there's the 'Jacobs Ladder Principle'... Have you ever noticed when you are speaking to someone, About some ecsorteric stuff, that they just sort of 'blank out', And didn't hear a word you said; have you ever noticed that for yourself, at times: someone will have told you something, and you completely blank out on what was said. Sometimes your not ready to hear what is being said. You can't skip steps in the Soul's evolution, it comes in steps, lessons, trials and tribulations, pain, and joy. It's great to find a teacher, a guru, to hang with, and learn from. Especially if one has the good fortune to meet an enlightened one. Being around someone who is enlightened is contagious, as they are vibrating the vibration of one who is beyond the ego- very rare. It's called Darshan in India, and to be in the darshan of a high being, is an honor and a blessing. But eventually, if you are to become enlightened yourself, You have to take the final leap, yourself. And if you have a good guru, he or she will push you, when you are ready. I supose I can talk about my own experience. I was on my own because the way things were is not really like having a Guru compared to now. So this is new and the experience is good, There was rapid evolution this past year. I am already old enough and enlightenment is not there, but now it looks possible and I can grasp the situation. I am more relaxed, and actually out of the dogma which I was in. I put myself there by non the less it was uncomfortable. But about the doing it on your own, I have now been on both sides of the fence, the first side was 47 years, how much longer do i have to wait? the opportunity came up to be with a Guru and i gave it a shot. I could care less about public opinion, I just took sanyas, shaved my head for the ceremony, was walking around LA in an orange dress and shirt- does that sound like one that is concerned with public opionion? Why is it though that if I say it is the prebirth right that each person has this enlightenment, all would agreee, but if I say that also a Guru can come from any country and their dharshan would be the same- oh n, it has to be indian or it cant be? You know , i think most of the sadakas in my path are happy to have the Guru all to ourselfs because we know about the transformation and evolution that took place. The are like 15 sadakas reporting in , and one after the other talking about a stilled mind, etc. Well, we know it is not right to hog the guru to ourselfs, so we offer it up all over the place, mostly it is rejected. The honest truth is I dont care. I am really happy to have this individual attention. I also am happy if people are interested but either way is quite fine. Hridaya
[FairfieldLife] Re: for Nabby
It is not possible to have a useful discussion with Ron as long as you cannot even read and understand the simplest of statements. HP: Well Nabby, we know in advance that there is not going to be a discussion between us did not write what you claim, it's not useful for me with another guru, but could be for others if he/she was enlightened. HP: cant figure out what you mean here. Your comment indicated that if my Guru were enlightened meeting the criteria you have, then it would be of value to you. I am answering that as long as you have a Guru and you are on that path, then weather some other guru is or is not enlightened has no impact for you since you already have your Gur and your path. That was my point. Therefore weather you believe that my guru is a seeker not enlightened or if you believe that my Guru is enlightened, either way, it is not going to mean anything or have anything to do with your life. I'm sorry, but I have no trust in your guru whatsoever. HP: You would only need to have trust in my Guru is you were a disciple, since you are not, it makes zero difference weather you have trust in her or not. Also whatever writtings coming from my Guru, it would not make sense for you to read them She comes through as a someone who has been in India for awhile and is still a seeker, full of herself. Her claims for having brought 5 people to enlightenment is ridicelous to say the least when she stresses the need for the enlightened to study written material and keep coming to meetings to not reroot as you say. HP: In this path, there are no meetings, and no studying. For those interested in a path, then it is advised here that they both be with the Guru and also the disciples. So, these people are available to talk with, the phone numbers of my Guru and these enlightened disciples are available for sincere seekers, also they can meet them in person. What happens then is the book descriptions of what the enlightened are and are not will be challenged. They will never match and it is never going to be what you thought it was, this applies to meeting enlightenment and also the unfoldment of enlightenment for each one. Her claims are not real but fantasies, HP : You have the right to believe what you like as is her claim that Kalki has made 400 people enlightened. Fantasies. HP: You misunderstood this as it is not a claim of my guru- Kalki has nothing to do with the path here I think it would do you good to stop denouncing Masters like MMY, Muktananda and others. HP: I will make comparisons, then one can decide if that makes sense for them of not. There was a guy a few weeks ago who is from TM but his thinking was that it was not the right path for him, he was then going to go to Kalki. I ran into him, pointed out that I benefitted from TM, but then went on to point out what is not there, also what is not at Kalki's , that is here in my path. This is a negative thing for people to hear for those in the path that I am saying has something lacking, so those happy in those paths should not read or listen to what I have to say maybe- up to them Praise your guru if you like, but it makes you look even more foolish, if possible, to pretend you understand these Masters. HP: Again, I dont care how I look or what people think. I am not trying to recruit the masses. One disciple wrote in to my Guru first time and asked can I be your disciple, the answer was - are you ready to go through hell first? This is the kundalini path, ego candy is not handed out, prior to enlightenment, things may be very difficult and no one here is saying it is going to be easy, it is not. If I were looking to recruit, then there would be a very different presentation and methodology for that. It would be geared for all the things that look appealing these days. The big organizations have these things or else they wouldn't be big. They do and present things which look good. In my path, one may have to go through hell first- so which looks better? Hridaya
[FairfieldLife] for Nabby
I'm happy that you found reality with a guru that suggest reading material and meetings for the enlightened to stay enlightened Ron. Now that's real enlightenment, right ? ;-) The update in my path here is My Guru said there are 5 that have unfolded in Realization. Maybe it is even 6 or 7. When Sarojini came in, my Guru's comments were something like now we dont wont the mind to reroot, then she told her to read some scripture- I forget which one, but Sarojini did it immediately. I don't question too much about anything anymore, I did in the begining but it is not necessary now. why why why is not some much of interest to me, things are as they are. Main thing is - when you get there, it is never what you thought it was. My Guru and the other enlightened ones here make a lot of comments and I forward some of them on. My Guru said yesterday in trying to explain things that ounce you are there, you find it hard to believe that Maya could have ever sneaked in like this. As you know in TM, there was the reading of rig ved, 9th and 10th. In theory, one did it and either not questioned why or even if you wanted to question it, then to who? I never heard an explaination why we should read it, we were just told to do it. One in theory surrenders to the guru's instructions, along with the transmissions from the Guru, and in the end it is only grace that brings one's forward, it is not a matter of one doing something although it appears this way. Later on, instead of reading the mandalas, we listened to the chanting of them in the native language. I also for example attended the coronation ceremony for Rajaram but then also the first group of rajas. after like an hour of politics waiting outside each day, we got in ( uninvited guests numbering up to about 200). once in, when the chanting started, I went very deep for the whole 5 hours of it. I thought this is so enjoyable, this is how it should always be or maybe this is how it is going to be in the future. there was a transmission coming through with those pundits chanting. This was among the deepest I have even been to that point as a result of listening to some chanting via audio. At present, I am not with TM, I am with my new path completely. Even though only certain things carried a transmission for me in TM and to some degree, in theory, some of these things prescribed such as reading the mandalas, listening to certain chanting- may carry an extremely deep transmission that some may have had or still have. i dont know, i only know my experience with certain audio things I listened to. I was so deep in listening to them that it already was like probably hard for anyone to believe that did not have this experience. in my path now, and this is again my experience, there also are certain audios I listen to, it was done by my guru and designed to carry a transmission. The effect of it is beyond what I thought possible in that the mind can totally still. I thought back to something the late Charlie lutes said after hearing about some new machine on the market that was said to bring people along in the path. Charlie said that someone once asked MMY if it is possible to transcend using audio, then MMY closed his eyes for a while , then answered yes. Hridaya
[FairfieldLife] Re: I guess this will make Shiva happy...reminds me of a
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ron sidha7001@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, boo_lives boo_lives@ wrote: At first, I was very annoyed about the announcement that they intended to build hundreds of these towers of invincibility around the world, at several mil a pop, which seemed only to designed to tell Bevan et al how wonderful they are, and seem foolish when many cities do not have TM centers and MUM and the M. Central University are drastically underfunded. That's certainly part of it, as there are plaques on the sides of the towers saluting TM administrators, but these are really Shiva lingams, and as a wearer of rudraksha who learned TM from a monk in the Shankara (Shiva) tradition, I can't be opposed to that. Building these towers/lingams creates auspiciousness -- doesn't matter what the ignorant public thinks one way or the other. MMY is going to create this influence of Vedic civilization, and there are not enough hillbillies in the world to stop it. http://tinyurl.com/28rojh It's not hillbillies who think it's stupid, it's anyone in touch with reality. I am laughing myself to death . This is the effect of laughter like this, the me is gone in the middle of it. I lost it when I read this one line response Hridaya I'm happy that you found reality with a guru that suggest reading material and meetings for the enlightened to stay enlightened Ron. Now that's real enlightenment, right ? ;-) ouch!:-) The ouch would be questioning the methodology of a guru that has brought 5 to enlightenment since 1999. Nityananda, Guru to Muktananda sadly left his body early declaring that there were none ( and Muktananda is one of his disciples), and this was not long ago. Even in this case, it was probably not an ouch as the methodology was reasonable. The real ouch is where there are none enlightened after a long presence - then in looking at the methodology, it may be quite obvious why this has happened. There are wild things taking place with Gurus these days. Hridaya
[FairfieldLife] Re: I guess this will make Shiva happy...reminds me of a
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ron sidha7001@ wrote: There are wild things taking place with Gurus these days. The claim from your guru to have brought 5 into enlightenment probably is the wildest of them all. I don't buy it and I seriously don't believe anyone else on this forum does. Hridaya Well lemme think, what would be the purpose in knowing or believeing that my Guru has brought 5 to enlightenment since 1999. For those interested in a Guru who may be available to work with, it would be most useful I would guess. For those questioning what is taking place in their own path, again there may be some usefullness depending on what is going on in their path. But in anycase, I don't really care how others think. Hridaya
[FairfieldLife] Re: for Nabby
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ron sidha7001@ wrote: I'm happy that you found reality with a guru that suggest reading material and meetings for the enlightened to stay enlightened Ron. Now that's real enlightenment, right ? ;-) The update in my path here is My Guru said there are 5 that have unfolded in Realization. Maybe it is even 6 or 7. When Sarojini came in, my Guru's comments were something like now we dont wont the mind to reroot, then she told her to read some scripture- I forget which one, but Sarojini did it immediately. I don't question too much about anything anymore, I did in the begining but it is not necessary now. why why why is not some much of interest to me, things are as they are. Main thing is - when you get there, it is never what you thought it was. If you are enlightened there is no possebility to reroot. Enlightenment is irreversible. If it is not permanent it simply is something other than enlightenment. I am not one of those enlightened but this comment is what my Guru says. However, you can find plents as i did in the last 2 years that even with the mind rerooting', they still claim enlightenment. My Guru says where there is a me, there is no enlightenment. The 'me' has imploded into Being or IS or absolute or what ever word you want to use. Which, as if I ever doubdted this, means that the people you have been duped to believe are enlightened are more or less as ignorant as the majority of the rest of us. There has not been any rerooting of the mind- and in this path the Guru is right here to look after the disciples to ensure that they have come to enlightenment and not a glimpse. My expereince has been with the 20 or so that declareed enlightenment where it was not the case, was it usually was a glimpse, the mind rerooted, the guru was either not available or there was no guru in the first place, then they were decalring enlightenment even though mind was still there. Even what I am writting would be objected to most likely by the same ones I am referring to. I watched a you tube presentation of one explaining what enlightenment was based on his own experience. in this explaination, he said - the mind comes back in enlightenment. What is the mind? What is the ego? So, there is not even an agreement on this but I can pass along what my Guru has to say- in enlightenment , one knows 100% they are not the mind, not the body. There is no one to be enlightened, and a quote from my Guru I never existed nor will I ever So, this mind rerrooting is only a glimpse here in my path which my Guru explains does not hold a candle to Nivakalpa Sahaj Samadi, but it appears in other paths the mind rerrooting is enlightenmetn. This was just a long commentary which is about equll to me expalining what ice cream tastes like having not tasted it myself. If you are going to argue my points , it is an honest thing to first state where it is that your consciousness rests, especially if one is going to speak with athority about what can and cannot happen to an enlightened one. If it is two people speaking to each other about the ice cream that they themselves have never tasted, how valuable is it ? The intellectual understanding of what ice cream tastes like doesnt hold a candle to the tasting of it. too late now, i just typed alot, it could be like the blind leading the blind. Hridaya
[FairfieldLife] Re: for Nabby
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In my opinion, 5 or 8 people enlightened in 8 years isn't an extraordinary track record. I'm sure there are many gurus who could claim that, but I'm not sure that there are many who would. I think it is an area of uncertainty anyway. Maybe in kalki's group, there are 400 realized now- but there are claims of 30 million disciples and also claims of enlightening the world. Even if 400, there are 6 billion in the world, and also 400 out of 30 million? The 5 here is out of maybe 50. So there are not grandious over the top claims here to enlighten the world, and in my path, it is a traditional one to one disciple/chela relationship and this is the only way it is offered. As far as an extraordinary track record, it looks like the numbers are better than it was for Nityananda, but removing the maya may have something to do with the times or with how much maya is prevelent. Alot means Kaliyuga. maybe at some other time, the numbers will look a lot different. There also are no rules acording to my Guru about stating what is, and therefore the accuracy of what is being stated is therefore one way or the other. One can be enlightened and say so as Christ did or not, but the reality of the situation stays the same, and the same for what is taking place regarding the declarations in my path . Hridaya
[FairfieldLife] Re: for Nabby
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ron Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2007 12:08 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: for Nabby As far as an extraordinary track record, it looks like the numbers are better than it was for Nityananda, but removing the maya may have something to do with the times or with how much maya is prevelent. Alot means Kaliyuga. maybe at some other time, the numbers will look a lot different. I think that things are heating up in the world, and that people are getting enlightened more readily than they did in Nityananda's day. No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.0/1048 - Release Date: 10/3/2007 8:22 PM One comment my Guru made was that more and more Guru's are needed because there are more and more spontaneous kundalini awakenings these days, so will it be a casualty or will it be put to use for the purpose of moving one forward for enlightenment as quickly as possible. Regarding enlightened ones, my experience tells me that what is written by the claimants is a start, then the truth comes out once one is around them, and especially seen by one that knows what to look for. such things as is there a need for outer stimuli in order to feel contented, is there a total flow in the life or is there doership by a me. Sometimes it does not even take an enlightened one to detect something sour going on but still always tricky. i had one claimant that was revealing her discoveries of my past life to me. Then it was obvious that she was doing this with many. One not knowing what is going on may be quite fascinated with this, then ask questions about her discovery as I did. This is when the shit hit the fan and things went out of control. In this case, my Guru was aware where i was and was there as guidance for me. To make a long story short, I have been through this sort of thing, resulting in going into a big depression for months afterwards, but didn't happen this time. The words of my Guru about this one, who declares enlightenment on her own and is a kalki Diksha giver- she is lost she is going to give diksha to people and fuck them up iN my path here, only those with a stilled mind are athorized to give shaktipat Hridaya
[FairfieldLife] Re: I guess this will make Shiva happy...reminds me of a
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, andrasayer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What is the source of Nityananda saying that none of his diciples were enlightened? My Guru knows someone that was there at the time of his passing. He had said not one came that was there for a bigger Me. My guru said they didn;t find anything wrong with the form. Just as there was a writting claiming Gurudev apointed MMY to go out to the world ( read this in this forum) which contradicted what I heard MMY say about how the movement got started, so there also is some writtings floating around where Nityananda is supposedly recognizing muktananda as the guru to go out to the world. My quote is going to run out so either email me directly if you have something further to say or i will start an overflow post yahoo group for ffl Hridaya
[FairfieldLife] Re: for Nabby
HP : Well lemme think, what would be the purpose in knowing or believeing that my Guru has brought 5 to enlightenment since 1999. For those interested in a Guru who may be available to work with, it would be most useful I would guess. Nabby: Of course, if it was true. But since it is just a contradicting story from you it has 0, zero, nada value whatsoever. HP: if an enlightened Guru were available to work with you one to one that has brought people to enlightenment, and then this would be useful to you as you claim, then please let me know how it would be useful? Do you think that any enlightened Guru is going to accept you when you insist on doing your TM and keep up with and taking instructions from MMY? Or do you think by going to this Guru and taking blessings or darshan that this is going to propel you to enlightenment? My opinion is if you are happy with TM fine, then why would you need another guru? This is why weather you believe my Guru is enlightened or not , either way, it has no bearing in your life right now, nothing changes for you. For me, the belief that my Guru is enlightened has a major impact, major change in my life because based on this belief, I have gone into the path full force, adopted the practices, received transmissions, which is grace, and entered into a state of peace that prior to this was not there. So, believing one way or the other in itself has very insignificant effect, it is the course of action put into place based on a belief that can move mountains. Hridaya
[FairfieldLife] Why does the veil of illusion even exist?
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Amy Hard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Namaste GuruJ. OM Namo Narayan - In response to your post below: Why does the veil of illusion even exist? I realize it's a joke, but it seems like a cruel one. :( 0- one got lost in the story and the projections and this is pointed to also if you remember how Satan became Satan. In the beginning he was the Head of the chior of Angels. But he decided he wanted to have the glory for himself and so came the fall and the infamous identity as Satan took place as Ego. Also if you remember the Garden of Eden they had it all - walked with God - were in paradise- but they chose *knowledge* hahahaahahahahah All they knew at that point was Good - but they chose to know good versus evil. Duality - whoosh and a limited physical body at that point was brought into being to hold the eternal spirit, and their years upon the earth was limited. This was still compassion. So much for chosing to know good versus evil. - OK we tire of that game and sin. Sin means nothing more than separation. So in the end with all those pointings we chose OUR way aka EGO and to become individual gods - and this is also in the bible rather than Knowing the One God. So much for the preachiology today. hahahahahahaahahahah The Good News is that the way back is open. hahahhahahahahaahahaha One can't beat paradise. Immersed within the One is infinitely better than being trapped in the numerous as a one. Love, Amy Maha Shanti
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'One Defintion of Enlightenment', also ice cream
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When the soul expands and overshadows the body, Then you realize you are the energy of the soul, And you no longer experience yourself, as the body, But you experience yourself as an energy called 'The Soul'. In other words, when the energy of the soul, expands enough... You experience yourself as energy, and not body. - Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out. This is for those who never tasted ice cream: It is sweet, really really creamy, cold, and melts when warmed up - ok, now do you fully get it?
[FairfieldLife] Re: 'One Defintion of Enlightenment', also ice cream
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Robert Gimbel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ron sidha7001@ wrote This is for those who never tasted ice cream: It is sweet, really really creamy, cold, and melts when warmed up - ok, now do you fully get it? Yes, now I fully get it... That's the mystery of it all, isn't it? The very thing that animates the body, Is over-looked. The soul is such a mystery- what is it? How do you explain it? Where do you find it? Paradox. That 's the type of things 'they say. Here is a comment from an enlightened one about Maya: Namaste GuruJ. Namaste Dear One, *In response to your post below: Why does the veil of illusion even exist? S The truth is that illusion does not exist in reality It appears real due to a knot of attachment that has been formed A mistake or misperception assuming the body and mind are the self This mistake is formed by self interested activity - wanting enjoyment and good things for the self...wanting to know and gather in this way the movement of ignorance (attachment to mind and body) is perpetuated and seems to be a separate entity, but it cannot be- it is truly the forces of nature or clashing energy that are taking place - it is energy bound and energy patterns in motion. In truth, there is no separate, objective existence, but the one caught in illusion takes the projections for reality and wanders there. *I realize it's a joke, but it seems like a cruel one. :( S The joke is not God's - God is faultless, free from all the antics...it is karma in motion/past actions and all, so to be free of the mistake, the tools of the heart (spiritual practices and guides) manifest to the sincere seeker. The cosmic joke is had when the knot is dissolved and the understanding comes that all is God - that there has never been a seeker, nothing separate has ever and can ever exist...this is the good laugh that gets all kinds of mileage. Love, Amy May the laughter bloom continue to allow the petals to unfold Om Shanti Siddhananda
[FairfieldLife] Re: I guess this will make Shiva happy...reminds me of a
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, boo_lives [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At first, I was very annoyed about the announcement that they intended to build hundreds of these towers of invincibility around the world, at several mil a pop, which seemed only to designed to tell Bevan et al how wonderful they are, and seem foolish when many cities do not have TM centers and MUM and the M. Central University are drastically underfunded. That's certainly part of it, as there are plaques on the sides of the towers saluting TM administrators, but these are really Shiva lingams, and as a wearer of rudraksha who learned TM from a monk in the Shankara (Shiva) tradition, I can't be opposed to that. Building these towers/lingams creates auspiciousness -- doesn't matter what the ignorant public thinks one way or the other. MMY is going to create this influence of Vedic civilization, and there are not enough hillbillies in the world to stop it. http://tinyurl.com/28rojh It's not hillbillies who think it's stupid, it's anyone in touch with reality. I am laughing myself to death . This is the effect of laughter like this, the me is gone in the middle of it. I lost it when I read this one line response Hridaya
[FairfieldLife] New initiate falls into enlightenment first day
Namaste Thankyou Jeff for your post - Jyoti took Diksha and was ripe this was the first time that someone actually transcended and imploded into Realization at Diksha. It was great. hahahahahaha Just gave the last of the mantras and her new name and said now nyingje no longer remains and only Jyoti Light IS. Her eyes started getting larger and larger as everything fell away - and of course then there was only Great Laughter and the laugher continued for the rest of the 3 days here. The other two taking Diksha really shifted as well. Udit is on the very edge if not within Realization as well. There was only Light for him and just kept repeating all is only illusion. hahahahahaha Tusti is indeed her name which means Peace and Happiness - as she just was in Silence and Peace for the 3 days here and called from the airport to say the joy was bubbling up like bubbles of effervesnce. hahahahahahahahahahahah Wish that all who came had such immediate shifts. But for those who stick with it the shifts Do come and it is a joy when Realization appears. Another light within the world. Maha Shanti May you aide many along the way. It is always good to hear from you. Love Light 0
[FairfieldLife] Re: New initiate falls into enlightenment first day
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 10/2/07 12:17:28 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Namaste Thankyou Jeff for your post - Jyoti took Diksha and was ripe this was the first time that someone actually transcended and imploded into Realization at Diksha. It was great. hahahahahaha Just gave the last of the mantras and her new name and said now nyingje no longer remains and only Jyoti Light IS. Her eyes started getting larger and larger as everything fell away - and of course then there was only Great Laughter and the laugher continued for the rest of the 3 days here. The other two taking Diksha really shifted as well. Udit is on the very edge if not within Realization as well. There was only Light for him and just kept repeating all is only illusion. hahahahahaha Tusti is indeed her name which means Peace and Happiness - as she just was in Silence and Peace for the 3 days here and called from the airport to say the joy was bubbling up like bubbles of effervesnce. hahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahWBRahah Wish tha immediate shifts. But for those who stick with it the shifts Do come and it is a joy when Realization appears. Another light within the world. Maha Shanti May you aide many along the way. It is always good to hear from you. Love Light 0 Not that rare. I Initiated somebody in 1972 that had the same type experience on hearing his mantra for the first time. An explosion of Light, Infinite expansion of awareness and Bliss, lasting the entire initiation process. They, Jyoti and Tusti, will come down. i don't know. maybe the mind reroots, that is the explanation that takes place a lot. What happens here is there is no longer an experiencer, so beyond experience, as it is an implosion of the me merging with Being, beyond lights, bliss and all relative. Mind- which is thoughts falls silent. if the mind reroots, this is where it is totally essential for the Guru to be there working directly with the disciple, otherwise, it appears one on thier own thinks this is how it always is, but acording to my Guru and the other enlightened ones in my group, it is not. The mind falls silent, the mind is gone and it does not reroot. I followed Jyoti when she first posted in our group, she has an extensive background of spiritual devotion and was living and is still living in a monasterry as something like a nun. It would be something like a mother divine, but one that was with a total focus for developement and serving humanity, so one like this may not be so common. I read in Ramana Maharishi 's book about different levels of ripeness of disciples, the most ripe is one that enters realization just from hearing about it- and I thought at one point that this was taking place with Jyoti. The next levels of ripeness can be imagined, something like just some darshan or initiation into the path, then one unfolds in a permanent state of enlightenment. Hridaya
[FairfieldLife] Can one regress from enlightenment?
Note: 0 = Swami G, The question here is answered by two of the enlightened : Another question: Not to burst anyone's bubble, but I was just#8232; wondering if Diksha can wear off? Or if it is possible to slip back#8232; into an ego after one reaches realization? #8232;#8232;0- As long as mind does not re-root it is secure. The practices #8232;given and also stabalization material to read will keep the mind #8232;stilled and so here none should regress. #8232; Sarojini: Am sure it is a possibility (although a Laughable one at #8232;that), but if one has been led by a Guru and has become centered #8232;through Practices in Stillness, followed by some adjustment time #8232;by reading, staying involved with Guru, etc. then don't see that #8232;there would be any problem. This is why Guru and the Practices are #8232;so Essential, not only for aiding one through the Process, but also #8232;to Steady the Center once Realized. OM. #8232;#8232;Shanti OM,#8232;Sarojini
[FairfieldLife] Repost- can one digress from enlightenment
Note: 0 = Swami G, The question here is answered by two of the enlightened : Another question: Not to burst anyone's bubble, but I was just wondering if Diksha can wear off? Or if it is possible to slip back into an ego after one reaches realization? 0- As long as mind does not re-root it is secure. The practices given and also stabalization material to read will keep the mind stilled and so here none should regress. Sarojini: Am sure it is a possibility (although a Laughable one at that, but if one has been led by a Guru and has become centered through Practices in Stillness, followed by some adjustment time by reading, staying involved with Guru, etc. then don't see that there would be any problem. This is why Guru and the Practices are so Essential, not only for aiding one through the Process, but also to Steady the Center once Realized. OM. Shanti OM Sarojini
[FairfieldLife] Re: MMY on Phase Transition
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sgrayatlarge no_reply@ wrote: Yes, the rudrabhisek is a yagya for peace Seems like we have been in a phase transition for over 30 years and we don't seem anywhere near peace. Either this works or it doesn't. I don't see evidence that it does work. Aren't you and others just making excuses based on a very questionable theory? Shiva is appeased by both devas and asuras. I don't mean to sound sarcastic, but I just read your words, and you're like, c'mon guys! its taken 30 whole years to transform every element of the world, and I don't see any clear evidence yet!!! I don't see it-- what's taking so damned long?... Pretty funny actually, when you consider that even global warming for goodness sake took almost two hundred years to begin manifesting, and here we are 30 short years into a far more profound transformation, and you're already yelping, where's the beef!?. Relax...:-) The idea of a shift in the consciousness of humanity has been around for decades. It has been the essential central thesis of 'New Age' literature all along. To attribute the actual changes only to Maharishi's efforts is more than silly, in my view. At best, Maharishi's movement is a part of, a manifestation of, the much larger phenomenon. And, for goodness' sake, the expression that the TM programs bring cohesion to outer functioning systems, befuddles the mind. The TMO, itself, is one of the most consistently, ineptly run organizations I've ever seen in my life. Such claims of 'cohesion' remind me of Orwell's 'love is hate, war is peace and ignorance is strength.' I find that my TM experience reflects almost the *opposite* of what I see manifest in the TMO - and I have a VERY difficult time with your [Jim Flanegin's] easy acceptance of it all as just peachy keen just how it is. It seems acceptable only on the cosmic level of accepting that the bullshit we see in the world is also peachy keen when viewed as perfect just how it is. But that idea is contrary to actually doing anything about the bullshit. Sure, you can become 'part' of the bullshit - and then perhaps you no longer see any difference, eh? I have experienced the confusing response- all is perfect, how can you be judgemental- however, some words to remove the confusion- The only thing perfect is that eternal non changeing IS, all else requires checks and balances. Also in my path, the world is not discussed much because the Guru here explains- what will be, will be. One has to use wisdom to know what the capability is for changeing this. All come to realization in their own time once they are ready to get serious about it even though it turns out to be the great cosmic joke once known. Even if a bunch of old men hopping on foam improves the health of the world, lines the wealthy with even more money, reduces hospital admissions- what does this have to do with enlightening the world? I would say maybe and cast the opinion that any guru that speaks in a more definitive way other than maybe is misleading the disciples. kalki's 2012 formula is the same thing in my opinion- maybbee- I don't know if it is true but I heard their famous scientist that was behind verifying those claims has left that movement. That doesn't matter anyway, all is just so perfect Hridaya
[FairfieldLife] Re: The fallacy is that a *Me* can Gain Realization
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bronte Baxter Sent: Saturday, September 22, 2007 7:32 PM To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The fallacy is that a *Me* can Gain Realization Christ said I and the Father are One where is the two in that? They are one but they are also two, as a branch can say I am the tree and still be a branch. You can experience being one with the Infinite yet an individual at the same time. And I suspect that's how everyone who experiences it experiences it. Including these people who say there is no longer a me. Hit the thumb with a hammer. Someone or something feels an aversion to that pain. Well, no matter what we suspect, imagine, think, picture, cognize, know, - I am told when we get there it is way different that what we thought. The cosmic joke, etc. I am continiuing to post the comments of those I think are enlightened- they wrote something so I think there is a usefullness to it, so I am passing it along. I would say if the one's I am posting from don't meet the criteria for being enlightened, maybe find some that do and absorbe. Here is a new short one: Sarojini: All is Well. When one finally begins to Still, it is seen that the struggle was always with oneself. Life/God is never in opposition with any*one*. It is just believed there is separation and so one continues to bump (or crash) up against what Really IS. In the Silent Stillness of Acceptance lay Great Peace and Eternal Life. Come discover the Treasure of Being. OM and Prem, Sarojini
[FairfieldLife] The mysterious one known as Peter
I haven't been hanging around FFL long enough ( 3- 4 year pause) to know if that one known as peter reveals where the consciousness is resting. In the short time span of my return, I have noticed questions directed that way towards Peter and they went unanswered. This post is the first one I have seen where the reference is about what is known by direct knowing. Most of the jokes that have been made through the years, I struggle and beg to understand even one, it would be like Lord, please just once, let me understand one of his jokes, but noo, didnt happen. Well maybe a few once in a while Did you Peter refer to me as weird or mysterios once or twice? Anyway, why peter would joke the way he does when the writting below looks as far as I am able to tell, a writing about truth, is beyond m. I would think there is great hope here if all the mind and body identification is not yet gone, that in this case the descriminating facualties are good enough for Peter to know that the ego can play tricks when there is just a trace left, and this is a significant time to be close with a Realized guru so that the certainty of it is there, in spite of the comments from Realized Gurus that once one is there, they know it for themselves 100%. I think you are barking up the wrong tree with ssrs and TM at this point. I also think you erred with your assessment of Ego for sarojini- i am familar with her writtings in the past year and have observed her journey, and there was non sense in your response when poised with a response concerning your kundlaini comments. With writtings like below, why you would also post non sense responses sometimes which I think you know are non sense and are capable of not doing is again beyondd meee. I have expressed my opinions here and have said i am not enlightened- wouldnt surprise me that I may be quite off the mark in some of the things I just wrote. I can say if you can relate to it, I am more in the present than ever, and this is an exerience hard to explain with words but the memory is like blocked out yet what is needed comes. It is sort of like an experience of concscious knowing what to do, and the mind quiet. My letters are almost always first run- then hit the send button without rearranging anything or maybe very little.Sometimes I just write and send without proof reading. This post is along these lines as well. I wondder what that mysterios one known as Peter has to say in response. Hridaya Let me riff off of your comment, Rick. The ego and consciousness are two completely separate things. Prior to Realization there is a confound between consciousness and the mind: consciousness is projected into and identifies with mind. Out of this results an ego; a felt quality of bounded, separate individuality. This is a result of consciousness becoming the boundary that it is projected into. The condition of ignorance is simply that the unrestricted, unlimited, non-relative nature of consciousness is lost to the consciousness of limitations; space/time boundaries. Realization is very simply the cessation of this projection/identification with anything limited. In my experience of 20 years ago coming out of the dome, consciousness very quickly stopped this projection and foundationally shifted from a distinct ego to no-boundary. I did not experience the no-boundary,I was no longer there in any sort of experiential form. When the mind tried to find that familiar felt sense of me there was absolutely nothing there. I was and continue to be the same person as before. Same sense of humor, same interests, same habits,etc., etc.. I contend that people profoundly misunderstand statements from Realized people when they speak of having no I. They are not talking about any aspect of the mind or emotions. They are talking about the localization of consciousness. Realization is the cessation of this localization. The localization creates the ego; the individual, psychological me. The first step of Realization is CC or Kaivalya ala Patanjali, the fruit of Yoga, is this cessation of projection and the clear recognition that one's consciousness, what one is is not localized. Everything is the same as before, but now there is no localization of a me. Quiz on Wednesday. No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.13.35/1040 - Release Date: 9/30/2007 9:01 PM Yahoo! oneSearch: Finally, mobile search that gives answers, not web links. http://mobile.yahoo.com/mobileweb/onesearch?refer=1ONXIC
[FairfieldLife] Re: Here's the REVISED parable
The problem is that the air is polluted but people think it is fresh and clean, they dont know any better. All one can do that knows of a cleaner fresher air is be an example of what it is like to take in the fresh air, and when they also are capable to show others, extend that offer. History shows this offer is often rejected. What happened with Christ is an example of that rejection. He showed people the way but rejection level was at it's peak --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bronte Baxter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How about this for a parable? A man met a man who told him about air. You can't live without it, he was told. But I already have air, said the first man. I am breathing every moment. No you aren't, said the second man. You can't possibly be breathing if you haven't had a teacher show you how to breathe. But breathing is the very nature of life, the first man said -- I don't need a teacher. Fool you are, said the second man. I'm sure you'll drop dead any moment. -Bronte Ron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Namaste Beautiful ones, Here's a parable: There was a man who had heard of this great thing called air. He had never seen air before, experienced air before or even knew that air existed. So, he went to a local teacher of air to teach him all about it. What is air? Where is it? How can I find it?, he asked. It is right here. All around you. You are in it right now., said the teacher. Where? I don't see it? What does it look like? What should I be looking for? How do I catch it?, he responded. There is no 'where', because it is everywhere. You can't see it because it is nothing. You can't look for it, because you will never find it. You can't catch it or hold it because it is nothing., answered the teacher. Well, I want to be a part of this air that many say is what gives life. I want to understand it. I want to experience it. I want to swim in it, be in it and breathe in it. You Already Always Are., replied the teacher. I don't understand. I don't feel it. I don't see it. I can't hold it. I don't know what this air is or how to be in it., said the frustrated man. You would not be alive and breathing if it were not for this air, which can not be seen, touched, grasped or known as It IS. You believe it isn't right in front of you because of this. Yet, here, there, everywhere it Already Always IS. Silent and being... bringing life to your lungs., answered the understanding teacher. So the man went home, exhausted and confused, hoping that he would be able to understand this air that brings life and wondering why he could not see, feel or touch what the teacher said was always there. That night during sleep the man stopped breathing. In panic and dread he began gasping and coughing. In then the next instant he breathed and now knew that this air was always there. More familiar to him than anything else. It had been ignored because it was so close, so familiar, so ordinary, unseen, untouchable, pure expanse and was a part of his being. What did he lose? Nothing but the misunderstanding. What did he gain? Nothing, it was Already Always there. What was the result? The constant and continual Gratefulness and Joy for this breath which gave him Life. It was not separate from him nor he from it. It was the Breath of his Being. Maha Shanti O, Sarojini - Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect. Join Yahoo!'s user panel and lay it on us.
[FairfieldLife] Enlightenment description like you have not heard
Well it certainly sounds hilarious! 0- it IS - it is the great cosmic joke - as there is no one there to be Enlightened. What remains is Reality. There is Bliss but not a someone to be blissful. The past is over as if it never was. The Divine Essence which is Life is what is paramount and Known. One cannot manufacture it with mundane mind. One cannot fathom it in imagination. It is not what one surmises it to be no matter how astute their intellectualizms may be. It is a Mystery and Wonder. Maha Shanti
[FairfieldLife] Lurker notice in out Yahoo group
Om Namo Narayan 0 - why is it that ego has the egotisitcal mindset that through lurking one has no obligations to support what is given here, and that if one just remains under the radar that they will hear Just the Right thing and then they can do it ALL on their own. If ego could do it on it's own and didn't need a Guru at all then there would be no need to lurk and Hope to glean just the *right* thing in order to progress. If you feel you need No Guru and can do it all on your own - this is quite fine - then go do so. But be honest in this. Don't play the game of conning yourself that chasing teacher after teacher and Darshan after Darshan is consistent with doing it All on *your* own. That is a lie of the egotistical mind. So either participate here or unsub and enjoy your journey. The choice is yours - and for those who are deaf and have not ears to hear or seem to think that they are the Except to this rule - the choice will be made for you. The methodolgy here may not be for everyone - and that is fine, but don't hang here as this site is a priviledge and not a right simply because there is an open membership. Respect the site - respect the teachers and teachings - respect the practices and if using them, then support and give back for what is being given. To not do so in some manner is to be less than honest. The first 3 things taught here are 1. Honesty 2. Integrity 3. Transparency If these are not willing to be followed through with then please enjoy your journey to greener pastures which are always on the other side of the fence. For those who are following through may your journey's continue to unfold to Realization where suffering is no more. Maha Shanti
[FairfieldLife] Come on already! /Re: Lurker notice in out Yahoo group
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bronte Baxter brontebaxter8@ wrote: Gimminee critters, Ron. Here you go again. You are a nice, sincere guy, but this proselytizing is a drag. Isn't it an edifice of the ego, that you are always decrying? Who are you to tell lurkers on this site that they are not welcome just to read the posts, and what authority do you have to analyze give advice on the spiritual life of strangers? Er, Bronte, read the original thread title again, then look at the end of the post. Ron is quoting the post of somebody called Maha Shanti who appears to be the moderator of another Yahoo group in which Ron participates. It's not Ron telling lurkers on FFL that they aren't welcome. Yes, I was just posting what takes place in my yahoo group I belong to which is my path. But I was cracking up when I read Bronte's post. I totally agree with the points if I were directing the comments to this group. hope this clears that up. Hridaya
[FairfieldLife] Comments from an enlightened one
Note From Hridaya- I pick out interesting comments from the enlightened in my Path- 0= Swami G, S= Swami Fisshananda, and then Sarojini. These short comments coming from the three have similar or the same air to them because it is that One essence from which they speak. Maybe some enjoy these here: Question from seeker: * It must be both sad and funny to see the seeker running around looking for that which is already right there in the very midst of them, but it is not so funny for the one who suffers, and is so caught up in ego they are blind to the very 'Thing', which is already right there - NOW. S - The laughter that bubbles up from the absolute is like a fountainit is not directed at anything or any-one at all (that is what is so funny and brings more laughter). All who have awakened to the true nature have walked the very same path as others the path of ignorance (attachment to body and mind). To see others struggling and know that the struggle and suffering is needless, that there is another reality to be entered that gives rise to freedom and joy here and NOW is why the awakened one gives pointings and continues working with humanity.
[FairfieldLife] oops- S= Swami Siddhananda
Title says it all
[FairfieldLife] Here's a parable
Namaste Beautiful ones, Here's a parable: There was a man who had heard of this great thing called air. He had never seen air before, experienced air before or even knew that air existed. So, he went to a local teacher of air to teach him all about it. What is air? Where is it? How can I find it?, he asked. It is right here. All around you. You are in it right now., said the teacher. Where? I don't see it? What does it look like? What should I be looking for? How do I catch it?, he responded. There is no 'where', because it is everywhere. You can't see it because it is nothing. You can't look for it, because you will never find it. You can't catch it or hold it because it is nothing., answered the teacher. Well, I want to be a part of this air that many say is what gives life. I want to understand it. I want to experience it. I want to swim in it, be in it and breathe in it. You Already Always Are., replied the teacher. I don't understand. I don't feel it. I don't see it. I can't hold it. I don't know what this air is or how to be in it., said the frustrated man. You would not be alive and breathing if it were not for this air, which can not be seen, touched, grasped or known as It IS. You believe it isn't right in front of you because of this. Yet, here, there, everywhere it Already Always IS. Silent and being... bringing life to your lungs., answered the understanding teacher. So the man went home, exhausted and confused, hoping that he would be able to understand this air that brings life and wondering why he could not see, feel or touch what the teacher said was always there. That night during sleep the man stopped breathing. In panic and dread he began gasping and coughing. In then the next instant he breathed and now knew that this air was always there. More familiar to him than anything else. It had been ignored because it was so close, so familiar, so ordinary, unseen, untouchable, pure expanse and was a part of his being. What did he lose? Nothing but the misunderstanding. What did he gain? Nothing, it was Already Always there. What was the result? The constant and continual Gratefulness and Joy for this breath which gave him Life. It was not separate from him nor he from it. It was the Breath of his Being. Maha Shanti O, Sarojini
[FairfieldLife] Re: DS responds to response to Rick Archer RE: Enlightenment
Well, in my path, could be one goes through hell first, even more so with certain conditionings coming in such as this- could be- and here it is in my brochure just for you. With that preface, I extend an invitation to you, and maybe it is hell anyway, it is venturing into the unknown and you are not going to get any promises here of enlightenment. At best, what can be said is one will move along from where they are. Since this is the kundalini path, what is burried will come to the surface quickly. It may be a very difficult journey and usually it is before enlightenment. And yes, as Ramana pointed out, without a Guru, it is a very rare thing that one reaches enlightenment. All of the above that I have written is not as nearly attractive as organizations that sugar coat the delivery, complete with anything from crowns and limosines, with rolled out red carpets to avatars born in a rare family with golden hair. Bottom line in response to your opinion with the dude with the sales pitch is the product will never be much appeal to you or like kind but this is known in advance. The other side to it is my path is not meant to be a big thing. If you would like to write a book picking apart all the faults and reasons why people should stay away, there will be a great welcoming and wishing you good luck with the book. Disciples coming present a tremendous burden of responsibility to my guru, and as has been stated no disciples is the preference. Hridaya Puri FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ron sidha7001@ wrote: **Here is one excerpt from my gurus writtings: As Ramana melted within Arunachala obedient and surrendered and never did he leave his Guru's side. He came amidst all obstacles and Surrendered to it's wisdom as Shiva. He stayed once home without ever a thought of leaving. Ron, As sweet as you seem to be, and as inspired as you obviously are by your new path, this is all starting to get really repetitive and tiresome and well, somebody's got to say so. You seem to get a bit compulsive with your post- ing whenever anyone around here suggests that one doesn't need a guru. You launch into post after post after post after post telling us what my guru and Ramana and any other authority figure you can think of says about such things. Give it a rest already. The person who needs a guru is YOU, dude. You can't say two sentences without invoking the holy words My guru says... in front of some sentence. And frankly, if you are the *product* of finding a guru, I want nothing to do with it. I kinda prefer having my *own* thoughts, and being able to answer someone's questions with my *own* words, and making my *own* decisions about my life and my path through it. Your guru has, as far as I can tell, turned you into a Class-A wuss who is now terrified to think for himself. You really *can't* do anything but repeat her words ad nauseum to other people, seem- ingly hoping to convince them to join you on the Path Of Being Unable To Think For Oneself. I honestly don't think you're going to find very many takers for this sales spiel here. All we have to do to measure its worth is watch how distraught and defensive you get whenever anyone suggests that someone may have realized their enlightenment *without* a guru, or that someone is even doing well without a guru. Dude, to be honest, that says more about *your* needs than it does any universal need for a guru. You've been sold a bill of goods. You've been told that you need someone's guidance to find who you really are, and who you always already have been all your life. You post here about how Maharishi couldn't poss- ibly be enlightened because he feels restricted if he's not safely inside a S-V building. Well, dude, it really seems to me that you feel awfully restricted unless you're safely inside the aura of some guru telling you what to do and what to think at all times. If that gets you off, more power to you and I wish you well on your Way. But I don't think it's going to lead you where you think it will. I've watched your language over the last few months become *more and more* dependent on your guru, and *less and less* able to express anything that sounds like someone I'd like to get to know. Much less buy anything from. So don't *sell* so hard, man. In the world of spiritual teaching, the brochure one uses to sell with is *oneself* -- how one thinks and acts and speaks. Your brochure consistently shows someone who has almost entirely lost the ability to think for himself, and who has been reduced to prefacing almost everything he says with, My guru says... While I understand that you may see this as a positive thing, I'm not sure that you understand that others here may not see it that way. Whatever. Continue doing your thing
[FairfieldLife] Aledged enlightened accuse me of spiritual arrogance
I think I have run into more than 20 people in the last 1.5 years claiming enlightenment, most are self declared in one form or another ( the other is some confusingh thing where I think they are claiming enlightenment but I have to guess at what it is they are claiming). Often it is their inner guru in the form of a personalized Guru or something like this. One on youtube said he was afforded the name jananoff and declared in God consciousness by none other than Lord shiva himself The same one's brother claimed he was declared enlightened by his guru, but then in closer scrutiny, the Guru only said something to the effect that the disciple is progressing, then the Guru moved on the mahasamaddhi, and after this, it was in a vision that his Guru afforded him this title. This guy falslely accused me of practicing witchcraft and also being a mason. My opinion is if the vast majority of those I have encountered claiming enlightenment were to be face to face with a living Sat Guru, they would be advised that there is yet further to go, there is no me, no ego, no mind rerooting in enlightenment. The majority of these people won't hear one word of this, would not come within 10 feet of a Sat Guru (a real one not interested in money, getting disciples, or handing out ego candy). If they do, it would only be on an equal level and the door would be closed for hearing one word that suggests there is yet further to go. Ramana has pointed out that it is a very rare one that will make it without a guru. This opinion I have is not popular but I frankly don't give a rats ass about popularity. It wouldn't surprise me that those in the category i mentioned won't even read this. There is a usefulness to this though in my opinion. My experience with those in the category I mentioned compared to with those that legitimately are enlightened is vastly different , the difference between walking away in a lasting clarity compared with a disharmonious surrounding air of confusion. It appears the people think they are accessing deeper levels than what is taking place, I asked my Guru how it is that this can happen. The answer was that the basis for it is one is now different than they were, so this is thought to be the enlightenment. Again, my guru said this is why it is very important that there be a one to one relationship with the living Guru. And yes, to those who disagree with my opinions, I am very arrogant. I think it can be understood why this is so. Hridaya Puri
[FairfieldLife] Re: DS responds to Bronte Baxter about possible mispost
I dont know exactly, I will inquire, I picked the text out from previous posts. In it, Ramana is quoted, and my Guru adds her own comments where she had Gurus that were not seen. I will try to get more specific details and post them when acvailable. If you read the quotes carefully, it is maybe leaving things up in the air. It seems it is not only Arunachala that Ramana is talking about --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, matrixmonitor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --Ramana didn't have a physically embodied Guru prior to getting Enlightened on 7-17-96; but he was born right next to a Shiva Temple and as a youth, spent a lot of time in Shiva and Kali Temples, even pouring water on a Shivalingam, then swimming in a nearby river. Thus, there was a Spiritual Transmission through the Temple Shakti. Around the same time, his Uncle met him at home, saying he had just come from Arunachala. Although Ramana had heard of this place in the context of the Saivite mythos, he then realized it was an actual, physical place. The term Arunachala refers to a. Arunachala Shiva, b. Arunachaleswarar Temple, c. the Arunachala Hill, and d. according to Ramana, The Self. - In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, oneradiantbeing oneradiantbeing@ wrote: DS: No, that was not written to Rick. I thought I was responding to Hridaya Puri or Ron (I believe they are the same person), whose name appeared at the bottom of the post (see below). Please explain further, if necessary. Thanks, DS __ Bronte: DS, did you confuse Ron with Rick?/ re: DS responds to response to Rick Archer RE: Enlightenment __ Bronte: Dear DS: Are you responding to Rick Archer or to Ron (Hridaya)? The comments below don't sound like Rick, and unless he sent you these questions privately, it isn't him, because such a post from him does not appear on the forum. You misconstrued me, Bronte Baxter, as being New Morning in an earlier post. Are you mixing these other two people up now? Please try to be careful getting the names right when you quote people. - Bronte __ oneradiantbeing oneradiantbeing@ wrote: Please note. To save time, I am placing my responses in CAPS minus the shouting. They easily distinguish my responses from the rest of the text. Thank you for your understanding. David Spero OK Rick, Now asking in public so all can participate. THANK YOU FOR THE INVITATION TO ENTER THIS DISCUSSION. I suspect that all of those that you know that you say are realized have proclaimed this on their own without their Guru declaring this, or they did not or currently do not have a guru, or they have their own inner Guru- either in some form or otherwise. It does seem that enlightenment is also possible without the guru but I think it is very rare. Even Ramana, from which this idea that it is possible, had a Guru (acording to my guru- I think the name was Archula). HERE IS WHAT RAMANA SAID: THE SELF, OR THE ATMAN, IS THE GURU. HE ALSO SAYS THAT THE SELF - OR GRACE - MAY GUIDE THE SEEKER TO FIND AN OUTER (LIVING) GURU. I'VE NOT HEARD ABOUT RAMANA HAVING AN EXTERNAL GURU. PLEASE HAVE YOUR GURU SEND YOU THE SOURCE OF HIS KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THIS GURU SO WE CAN LEARN ABOUT HIM OR HER. You pointed out that among other functions with the Guru is telling one to continue even though they think they have arrived. This is the key missing element for those self proclaiming as above because a Sat Guru in living form can quiclky see if there is further to go once they are with the people for some time. That is how it works in my path. AN APPOINTED GURU IS NO GUARANTEE OF AUTHENTICITY. ON THE CONTRARY, SPIRITUAL LINEAGES AND MOVEMENTS OFTEN CARRY A LOT OF POLITICAL BAGGAGE. AN APPOINTED, BONA-FIDE GURU - REALIZED OR NOT - IS JUST A BODY WITH A REPUTATION ATTACHED TO IT. My experience with it is I have been with and read about both those self proclaiming as above and also those proclaimed enlightened by their Guru who also were proclaimed enlightened by their Guru in a chain continueing upwards. The Self procalimed fell apart every time under scrutiny. I have seen a lot in the last two years like this- maybe 20. AND MANY APPOINTED GURUS HAVE ALSO BITTEN THE DUST IN PUBLIC HUMILIATION AND DISGRACE. THE PLAYING FIELD IS EVEN: NEITHER THE APPOINTED NOR THE SELF- PROCLAIMED HOLD ANY ADVANTAGE OVER THE OTHER. It is a subtle difference by quite clear to me, with the aide of my guru pointing out the diffferences. There is a value to it- keeping holy company is wise, so good to make sure the company one keeps is 100% holy
[FairfieldLife] For those not enlightened here
Ok, lemme explain something- I had experiences meeting many that claimed enlightenment but it wasn't the case. My experiences were not good. Too many and too much stuff to write in this post now. As a result of the meetings for example, I was depressed at times, bummed out, and confusion was ramped, not only with me, but also the claimant. The things I have pointed out in the previous posts regarding this matter of those self declaring, etc, can possibly be very usefull to some here down the road. If some predictions I heard are correct, this aint nothin yet compared to what;s coming regarding people stepping forward with the declaration of enlightenment. Certainly Being is the core essence of what is there for all but none the less, my experience has been that I walked away in peace and clarity from those truly enlightened, and with confusion and depression from those claiming it that were not. I have suggested ideas for what to look for. This means, if you are like me, then you will avoid this unprefered experience I am talking about. Is there anyone else here that has had dealings with one claiming enlightenment, and then things ended up with difficulties? Having dealings means getting close, spending some time with that one, etc I learned TM in 1978 and the first time I ran into anyone claiming enlightenment was 2006. Then to my astonishment, they were coming out of the wordwork. By now, it is about 20, I have to make a list. The majority of these think they are enlightened but all indications point to this not being the case. Hridaya Puri
[FairfieldLife] Ricks enlightened friends
OK Rick, Now asking in public so all can participate. I suspect that all of those that you know that you say are realized have proclaimed this on their own without their Guru declaring this, or they did not or currently do not have a guru, or they have their own inner Guru- either in some form or otherwise. It does seem that enlightenment is also possible without the guru but I think it is very rare. Even Ramana, from which this idea that it is possible, had a Guru ( acording to my guru- I think the name was Archula). You pointed out that among other functions with the Guru is telling one to continue even though they think they have arrived. This is the key missing element for those self proclaiming as above because a Sat Guru in living form can quiclky see if there is further to go once they are with the people for some time. That is how it works in my path My experience with it is I have been with and read about both those self proclaiming as above and also those proclaimed enlightened by their Guru who also were proclaimed enlightened by their Guru in a chain continueing upwards. The Self procalimed fell apart every time under scrutiny. I have seen a lot in the last two years like this- maybe 20. It is a subtle difference by quite clear to me, with the aide of my guru pointing out the diffferences. There is a value to it- keeping holy company is wise, so good to make sure the company one keeps is 100% holy sometimes. Some of these people screw others up in various ways. Most amazing I saw was one with all the perfect words describing themselves as enlightened. What came out once there was an association with Sat Guru was this person was depressed, angry. and with violent thoughts. I just recently saw in person a guru proclaiming his disciples enlightened, however the guru himself is a self proclaimed enlightened one, and this also looks flawed. The topic is a tricky one. Hridaya Puri
[FairfieldLife] Either pregnant or not- same with enlightenment
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I agree with you about premature claims to enlightenment. I think they are common. If the people I'm referring to were saying I have reached the pinnacle of human evolution or if they displayed egotism or even if they were setting themselves up as gurus, I'd doubt them. All of them have achieved significant degrees of awakening, all acknowledge that there's plenty more growth to undergo, not only for themselves but for MMY, Amma, your guru, CAPS ONLY TO FIND MY RESPONSE- MY GURU SAYS THERE IS A DEEPENING ONCE ONE IS ENLIGHTENED and any living being, no matter how enlightened, and all are living private lives and are not inclined to become gurus. MY GURU EXPLAINS ONE IS COMMISSIONED TO BE A GURU, IT IS NOT A DESIRE, AMBITION. OR CHOICE If they were, that wouldn't rule out their enlightenment in my estimation, but it would make them suspect of ambition-based motives for claiming enlightenment. All of the folks I'm referring to have TM backgrounds. A few have branched out into other things. If the guru's stamp of approval were an absolute necessity for realization, no one in the TM movement could become realized, because MMY doesn't do that. MMY WAS CAGED UP ALL THESE YEARS BECAUSE OF A WRONG VASTU. IF YOU BUY INTO A GURU NOT BEING ABLE TO TAKE THE DISCIPLES FURTHER THAN HE IS, THEN IT IS UNDERSTANDABLE WHY MMY DOESN'T GIVE THE STAMP OF APRAOVAL. EVEN IF HE DID, WHERE IS HIS STAMP? IF YOU BUY INTO THE CONCEPT THAT EVEN A SICK MAN CAN OWN A HEALTH FOOD STORE-GO AHEAD AND GET YOUR GUIDANCE FROM HIM - YOUR CHOICE You can think you are realized yet not be. THAT IS WHAT I HAVE RUN INTO But if you are realized, you'll know it. SEEMS TRUE BUT ALSO THIS SAME SPEACH IS COMING FROM THOSE NOT REALIZED Your experience will be sufficient confirmation. I ALSO HAVE HEARD UNENLIGHTENED SAY THIS ABOUT THEIR OWN EXPERIENCE. THERE WAS ONE WHO WROTE TO MY GURU WITH HER DECLARATION OF ENLIGHTENMENT, AND THEN EXPLAINING HOW THEY WERE LAUGHING AT MY GURU BECAUSE THEY KNEW FOR CERTAIN SHE WAS NOT ENLIGHTENED. THIS SAME ONE DID A 180 DEGREE TURNAROUND AND THEN ADMITTED IT WAS SHE HERSELF THAT WAS NOT ENLIGHTENED , THEN WHAT UNFOLDED IN THE MONTHS AHEAD WAS THIS PERSON WAS THE ONE DEPRESSED, ANGRY AND MAYBE EVEN SUICIDAL And you'll be the only one at your graduation. LETS SEE WHAT HAPPENS REGARDING THE OTHER POSTS, THERE IS A GREAT VALUE IN THE CLARITY OF KNOWING WHO IS AND IS NOT ENLIGHTENED. IF YOU DONT AGREE WITH THIS, FINE- YOU HAVE YOUR OPINION, I JUST GAVE MIINE. I HAVE GIVEN REASONS WHY IT IS OF VALUE- SORRY FOR THE CAPS- TOO LATE NOW
[FairfieldLife] Will we become mindless in enlightenment?
Amy: Will we become mindless and not be able to write, speak, and thus work, take care of ourselves, etc. in the midst of this process? Sarojini: Oh no, dear, dear one. This will not be the case what-so- ever. The body/mind will continue on, for the most part, as it always has. The conditionings and personality will not be affected, unless of course one comes to find a previous conditioning useless and not worth expending energy upon, but nothing changes. This ones friends, family and aquaintances do not notice much difference at all. All the responsibilities of this one are still taken care of, Perfectly. Not by a me, but by Pure Intelligence, Grace and Great Peace al-0ne. There may be a few funny quirks, but they are nothing to be taken *seriously* and are rather endearing. Amy: Swami G. seems to be able to do these things quite well and she has already gone through the process. Sarojini: Yes. Our dear SatGuru is Living Proof that there is nothing to fear. Life goes on, the body/mind goes on and everything is taken care of Perfectly by Life itself. There's nothing else to it and not a thing to worry about at all.
[FairfieldLife] Ramana's Guru, comments about needing a Guru
**Note- G = Swami Ganaga Puri ( my Guru), the asteric is a disciple of Christine Breese, who has videos up on your tube: As for the real question about whether this is true, RAMANA contradicted his own teaching that the guru is necessary (and he would be tickled to see that this has come up!). After all, who was his teacher? He did not have one except sitting in meditation and bringing forth the wisdom from within. Is that not being one's own teacher? G FAR from being tickled Here is what Sri Ramana said on these subjects. My suggestion is that you buy some books on Ramana and research it for yourself. Ramana did not contradict his own teachings as you will see. G i also had some Guru's that weren't seen - and this has nothing to do with being your own guru. Here is what Ramana said about these subjects - Q; How did some great persons attain knowledge without a guru ? A: To a few *mature* persons the Lord shines as the formless light of knowledge and imparts Awareness to the Truth. (pg 93) G Ramana went on to say - i have never said that there is no need for a guru. Q: Sri Aurobindo and others refer to you as having had no guru. A: The Guru is Absolutely necessary. The Upanishads say that none but a Guru can take a man out of the jungle of intellect and sense perceptions. So there Must be a Guru. Q: I mean a human Guru - Maharishi didn't have one. A: I might have had one at one time or other. But did i not sing hymns to Arunachala ?(paraphrase as is long) When man leaves materialism aside and prays to know God then God appears to him in some forn or other, human or non human, to guide him to himself in answer to his prayers. Q. J Krishnamurti says no Guru is necessary. A. How did he know it ? One can say so *After* Realizing (Realization) and NOT before. Q is it absolutely necessary to have a Guru if one is seeking Self Realization ? A: So long as duality persists in you the Guru is necessary. Because you identify yourself with the body you think that the Guru is also a body. You are not the body and neither is the Guru. You are the Self and so is the Guru. This knowledge is gained by what you call Self Realization. G knowledge *gained* isn't talking about a conceptual understanding it is talking about a cannot be denied Reality that becomes ones Conscious Awareness in every moment of every day- * I'm Jenny and I maintain this site for University Of Metaphysical Sciences and Christine. Aaah, yes, there are quite a few people who believe a teacher is absolutely and undeniably necessary. However, Christine says a new paradigm makes it possible for people to awaken without the teacher moreso than ever before. Veils aren't so thick anymore. As for the contradiction (see Christine's talk on Paradox, Its All True), both are true. Some need the teacher, others don't. G many are starting to awaken - but starting to awaken is a far cry from not needing a Guru. What is She doing ? Being a Guru - Guru means dispeller of Darkness - (it doesn't mean one that has adoring fawning devotees) Any teacher that is attempting to bring Guidance in Spirituality is a Guru. They may not be a Sat Guru which is a Realized Actualized ONE - but they are attempting to break through the coverings to the Truth of Being. THIS IS A GURU - no matter how you want to spin it the Truth is they are acting as Guru's. A friend is someone you pal around with - hang out with- yaps endlessly with about each others troubles. And while people want to hear (as it is so ego affirming) i am Not a Guru i am your friend. Let's see how many of these Not Guru's will let their friends come on a moments notice just to hang out and shoot the breeze. i doubt that is going to happen. Try to call up Gangaji or Christine and say look i'm not interested in going to the retreat let's hang out and be friends - what do you think the response is going to be ? While a Guru on one hand may be your best *friend* as they are there to shed light on what you are not seeing clearly within your self or path , the Guru is not there to be your buddy and pal. * For those who believe they need the teacher, then yes, the teacher is necessary. For those who don't believe it, then no, the teacher is not necessary. Both are possible. In another talk Christine mentions to try not to think a single thought for 5 minutes. If you can pass that test, you are ready to start being your own teacher and bring out the transmission and wisdom from within that resides in the One Self that we all are, which is the same resource the teacher brings it from. G IF they need to HEAR that then they Need a Guide. Even IF one can have a quiet mind - and i had a quiet mind Many Many years before even halfway coming close to realization. And even with that was caught in delusion and it was only through the Compassion of my Guru (who i thought i didn't need because all of these wonderful
[FairfieldLife] Re: DS responds to response to Rick Archer RE: Enlightenment
HERE IS WHAT RAMANA SAID: THE SELF, OR THE ATMAN, IS THE GURU. HE ALSO SAYS THAT THE SELF - OR GRACE - MAY GUIDE THE SEEKER TO FIND AN OUTER (LIVING) GURU. I'VE NOT HEARD ABOUT RAMANA HAVING AN EXTERNAL GURU. PLEASE HAVE YOUR GURU SEND YOU THE SOURCE OF HIS KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THIS GURU SO WE CAN LEARN ABOUT HIM OR HER. **Here is one excerpt from my gurus writtings: As Ramana melted within Arunachala obedient and surrendered and never did he leave his Guru's side. He came amidst all obstacles and Surrendered to it's wisdom as Shiva. He stayed once home without ever a thought of leaving. I have made a seperate post about Ramana, his Guru, and comments about needing a Guru AN APPOINTED GURU IS NO GUARANTEE OF AUTHENTICITY. ON THE CONTRARY, SPIRITUAL LINEAGES AND MOVEMENTS OFTEN CARRY A LOT OF POLITICAL BAGGAGE. AN APPOINTED, BONA-FIDE GURU - REALIZED OR NOT - IS JUST A BODY WITH A REPUTATION ATTACHED TO IT. ** First of all, I have promoted here that based in my experience, I recommed that for the unfoldment of enlightenment, one should have two things- a Sat Guru, then work one to one with this Guru. The reason why is it has been pointed out that it is a very rare one that will make it without this. I buy into this, so herewith is my beliefs expressed, as it usually is- I cant preference every line with this is my belief, but most of my posts, that is what it is. Now, I think most will not go along with this so not really to much need to figure out which guru is for real and which is not. What good is that? for one to fill up their encyclopedia brain? However, if there happens to be one here interested in a Sat Guru and working one to one, then he has to use his discrimination in picking. First thing is to see what is available, then narrow things down. when all is said and done, it is going to take faith for the part that is unknown to him and claimed to be known by the mentor. So, they can weigh all the logic presented and then choose the way they are going to choose. The complications are unlimited- Sai Baba and his boys, Muktananda and his girls, MMY and his kings and queens, If you research Muktananda, you get writtings as in TM where on the one hand he is not appointed by his Guru, on the other, things surface which claim he is- and this is only a short time into history- imagine what happens in a few hundred years, things will really be distorted AND MANY APPOINTED GURUS HAVE ALSO BITTEN THE DUST IN PUBLIC HUMILIATION AND DISGRACE. Who? each situation has to be looked at THE PLAYING FIELD IS EVEN: NEITHER THE APPOINTED NOR THE SELF- PROCLAIMED HOLD ANY ADVANTAGE OVER THE OTHER. Once you are interested in a guru, which most are not, then it is not just weather they are self proclaimed or not as the only criteria to pick a Guru. For example, my guru would recommend spending time with both the Guru and the sadakas to see how the consciousness and progress looks. In spending a short time, I have seen the real essence of the claims come to the surface and fall apart. Each seeker has to use his discretion, then procede HOLINESS IS MERELY APPEARANCE AND THERE ARE NO OUTER BEHAVIORIAL CRITERIA TO JUDGE WHETHER SOMEONE IS ENLIGHTENED OR NOT. IN my case, for example, a lasting exalted state of consciousness came about within a few days of being with my Guru and it is here now as a platform from which I am writting this. This again is a part of the discrimination used but a significant one. Each seeker has to weigh as much as he needs to weigh in order to choose. There is nothing on the outside with my guru that makes her seem any different than anyone. I'VE MET MANY PROFOUNDLY WOUNDED PEOPLE AFTER STUDYING UNDER HIGHLY ACCLAIMED, APPOINTED GURUS. As I said, if sadakas are like that, then this is a sign that this guru may not be a Sat Guru. Again, it is good to not only check out the Guru but also the sadakas YES, IT IS. SO PLEASE TRY NOT TO SOUND SO CERTAIN ABOUT THIS SUBJECT. My post is formulated by both my experience, then belief beyond my experience. I am certain about both but the belief part is revealing in that you know it is my belief- so then one can have their own beliefs and opinions- if they state if forcefully or not, either way is ok- we know it for what it is.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Not all shaktipat or dharshan is equall
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ron (or shoud we call you by your new name?), what's the name of the guru commissioned by Poonjaji? -Peter Well, I took sanyas- it is more karma sanya, the name Hridaya Puri means something like living in the city with eyes on Braman. All function within the world here in this path, so as a matter of practicality and choice, maybe sometimes I use my birth name- in this group here, I think there is enough spiritual maturity to understand that it has it 's use for me to be using my sanyas name. While there is great laughter in my path here- I was laughing so hard with my guru last week, I thought I would drop the body on the spot, and while my Guru points out that laughter is of great value in the the me is gone in the midst of it, as you might guess I have every intention not to play at being on the path but rather see if it can be pulled off that Realization is unfolded as soon as possible. Anyway, my Guru's name ( the most recent of a total of 4 gurus) is SatGuru Rishi Rajiv. You can see a picture of him in the most active yahoo group- here is the home page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Swami-G/ There is a picture on the opening of the sanyasis here in the path- pictured is my guru in the middle, Sadvi Siddhananda Puri is the one with hair ( Realized July 20, 2007), then the rest is the new sanyasis. It has a beautifull background to the picture taken in California. In the photos section are more pics of the sanyas ceremony, as well as pics of the sadakas. Posting a pic is required for those that are members on the site, and not following the rules is subject to termination. The membership has been wiped clean more than once. Below is the comments on the oppening page: Namaste This group is for open discussion for, Sadhakas and potential sadhakas. If you want to discuss and have access to Sage Sadhvi Ganga-Puri (October 99) Sage Sadhvi Siddhananda-Puri (July 2007) Sage Sarojini. (Aug. 2007) Here is also the place to ask questions of the Sadhaka's who have already taken diksha. Who have been with Sadhvi -G and Know what her every day existance is. I WELCOME YOU ALL WITH GREAT LOVE AND RESPECT PLEASE DON'T BE A LURKER - LURKING WILL BE SUBJECT TO MEMBERSHIP TERMINATION. THIS GROUP IS FOR THOSE IMMERSED IN THE PATH OF THE MYSTIC - OR FOR THOSE SEEKING ENTRANCE INTO THIS PATH. PLEASE POST YOUR INTRODUCTION AND PATH TO DATE WHEN YOU JOIN MEMBERSHIP AND A PHOTO IS MANDATORY. Discussions and exploring various spiritual texts - the path of kundalini from start to completion termed non duality aka Realization, Mukti. THERE ARE A FEW RULES AND THIS IS TO ENGAGE IN INTERACTIONS RESPECTFULLY - GIVE AN INTRODUCTION- POST A PHOTO - MONTHLY REPORT ALSO NAMASTE IS THE OPENING GREETING USED IN THIS PLACE For those who would like to view the Swami-G youtube videos they are located at: Guru Swami G on YouTube Her book Kundalini from Hell to Heaven may be found in a number of stores (author name - Ganga Karmokar)at: Livingcure DONATIONS MAY BE MADE AT: Kundalini Support DONATIONS ARE A WAY TO ALLOW THIS TEACHER TO CARRY ON THIS WORK AND AIDE OTHERS IN THEIR JOURNEY'S. Maha Shanti OM Love and Light 0 Find the Beauty Life has to offer - Be a Great Existance it is all in your hands. Sage Sadhvi Ganga-Puri I welcome you all with great love and respect.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Not all shaktipat or dharshan is equall
If my posts are pissing you off, you may consider hitting the delete button whenever you see a post from me All this mix of gurus is probably the reason for your profound confusion, IMO.
[FairfieldLife] Everything is perfect
i have had this come up a lot with people telling me this and i found my Guru's words and guidance comforting in the middle of the last incident. It was with one claiming enlightenment. Something came up like so and so was stealing and then my inclination was to point that this is not a good thing. the enlightened one was taking the position that all is perfect, we can't judge. My Guru commented - if you think stealing is a good thing, be my guest. The only thing that is perfect is that unchanging is, all else requires checks and balances. There was an incident where a man was steeling and Ramana slaped him. The stealing was not a usefull thing for what good is going to come to the man, but the slap was perfect as it was from flow and was what the man needed. Regarding a heirarchy with guru's, if one is seeking, then this means that one has not yet found the way out to liberation. If one is going to buy into the concept that they don't know the way and what they have done so far has not got them there, then they may seek out one that as a mentor or a Guru. If one is going to go to this Guru and at the same time instruct how things are to be done, then this is not sensible, one is not going to progress. Either face that you dont know the way, find one that you think does and then follow the instrutions or go off on your own. But to come to a guide for guidance, then to instruct that their truth is as valid as mine- there is no need to say much more. It is silly. I would say go one way or the other What does a Guru do- guide one, not live their life. What do they advise- be still and know, not ramble on with the mind and know- be still and know that I am God- the stillness where mind has not rerooted, when one knows 100 percent that they are not the mind, body, or identifications- this my Guru would describe as enlightenment Hridaya
[FairfieldLife] Not all shaktipat or dharshan is equall
Comment from post:--But Shakti comes from the teacher, igniting the student's Shakti. HR: Again, the central issue is that the fallacy is that a me gains enlightenment. As long as there is a me that is there, there is further to go. Cognitions belong to those having them, absolute IS all there is in Enlightenmenet. Not unusual for people to have this glimpse, then the mind reroots. Then such comments as I am enlightened and yes the me does return, there is an ego, then they can be forgiven. Well, just because this is the experience where the mind rerooted, it is not the experience for those enlightened. For those with this rerooting of the mind, there is more to go. If one is one's one guru, has the inner Guru as the guide, ( weather as form or absolute concept), and one thinks they have arrived, it is sad because there is more to go but they are not going to hear one word of that. The scriptures such as the one I posted, Ramana Maharishi and all the great sages of the past and now explain from their own existence that this is the case, there is no me and there never was. The me is ego and it can not exist in enlightenment- it is either one or the other. These are the general points from my Guru, and the other two recently enlightened echo the same independant of one another. I can only say that I have had the dharshan of MMY, Mother Meera and MY Guru. In addition, I have had shatipat with my Guru, as well as taking it from a healer and also from a deeksha giver with kalki- so I have all this to compare with. In my case, it is the most significant with where I am now, it has awakened the kundalini, and the on going guidance ensures that things are in balance and progress is taking place. I notice great progress with about 10 fellow sadakas, it is very impressive. The reason that Kundalini is finished in enlightenment, and the reason shakti does not come from an enlightened teacher is there is no persona there, Guru is only consciuous Hridaya Puri
[FairfieldLife] Re: Not all shaktipat or dharshan is equall
The use of words may be frustrating in this case. Often My Guru will say this one replacing the word I, the other Gurus in my path do the same. My Guru said that speaking this way is researved or those Realized because the me is gone and there is nothing to replace it with. On other occasions, my Guru will say I and me, but in general in my gurus books, she cautions the disciples not to view the Guru as persona but as consciousness Generally speaking, Gurus will say I and me, and as I cast my opinion before, when they use this speach, and if they are claiming enlightenment, and at the same time referring to the individual I, then this is dellusion. Since there is no Me, then when they use this, they are referenceing something other- I think this is understood by many or most here. The bottom line is not changing as I see it- my Guru's comments- the fallacy is that a me becomes enlightened --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, purushaz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ron---You don't understand, how many times do we have to go over this? In Muktananda's tradition, there's a transfer of Shakti from the BODY(s) of Muktananda to the BODY(s) of the disciple. Therefore, the me in that context refers to the body, (and of course all of attributes that make up a person, whether Enlightend or not). Do you agree that your Guru is a person, as opposed to other persons? Then he's an individual, and in due course of conversation, may say I, and me often. Nobody is saying there's a delusional false I or me that your Guru identifies with. If he's Enlightened, then there's no such false I; however, there's still a body, mind, actions, reactions, conditionings, manner of social interactions; etc; all of which make up the I that separates your Guru from other people. You will agree that your Guru is not MMY, correct? Refer to Prior to Consciousness, the transcribed statements of Nisargadatta Maharaj, page 31. The disciple asks, Ramana Maharshi was a great sage, he was unknown in India. When Paul Brunton wrote the book in English about him, everybody went to see him and he became well known MAHARAJ: I agree with that. Ramana Maharshi was discovered by Paul Brunton and I was discovered by Maurice Frydman. So! From the King of all Neo-Advaitins, Nisargadatta Maharaj, we have the use of I twice in two lines, proving there is an I; (since, obviously), this I doesn't refer to the delusional I which didn't exist in his case at the time he spoke that, but rather, everything - every property, quality, or attribute that made him an individual person, as opposed to other persons. One of those differences between him and RM was that the latter was discovered by Paul Brunton (for Westerners), and Maurice Frydman discovered Nisargadatta Maharaj. Again, hopefully for the last time, the I for Enlightened people is a valid referent to the entire spectrum of properties (beginning with the body(s); that makes up an individual person, and which distinguishes that person from others. But most important, the I in reference to Enlightened Gurus refers to a particular POV, differing from the POV's of other Gurus. In some cases, the POV's are closely allied, such as Nisargadatta Maharaj and RM. In other cases, the POV's differ; say MMY vs Eckart Tolle. In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ron sidha7001@ wrote: Comment from post:--But Shakti comes from the teacher, igniting the student's Shakti. HR: Again, the central issue is that the fallacy is that a me gains enlightenment. As long as there is a me that is there, there is further to go. Cognitions belong to those having them, absolute IS all there is in Enlightenmenet. Not unusual for people to have this glimpse, then the mind reroots. Then such comments as I am enlightened and yes the me does return, there is an ego, then they can be forgiven. Well, just because this is the experience where the mind rerooted, it is not the experience for those enlightened. For those with this rerooting of the mind, there is more to go. If one is one's one guru, has the inner Guru as the guide, ( weather as form or absolute concept), and one thinks they have arrived, it is sad because there is more to go but they are not going to hear one word of that. The scriptures such as the one I posted, Ramana Maharishi and all the great sages of the past and now explain from their own existence that this is the case, there is no me and there never was. The me is ego and it can not exist in enlightenment- it is either one or the other. These are the general points from my Guru, and the other two recently enlightened echo the same independant of one another. I can only say that I have had the dharshan of MMY, Mother Meera and MY Guru. In addition, I have had shatipat with my Guru, as well as taking it from a healer
[FairfieldLife] Re: Not all shaktipat or dharshan is equall
HP: I will do my best to respond. If you want insight into my Guru by reading, then all of what Ramana has to say is the same my Guru would say. My Guru's last guru that apointed my Guru as Guru, was commissioned to be a guru by Poonjaji. In addition, my Guru's Guru had 3 tantric masters and his father was an enlightened being --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ron sidha7001@ wrote: The use of words may be frustrating in this case. Often My Guru will say this one Right, but Ramana Maharshi and others say I'. Saying this one all the time is ridiculous!.. HP: My guru does not say this one all the time, and I am sure that all the gurus you mentioned dont say I all the time either replacing the word I, the other Gurus in my path do the same. My Guru said that speaking this way is researved or those Realized because the me is gone and there is Again, absurd. Tell your Guru to try speaking Engles, Senor. HP: Considering that my Guru is enlightened and has brought 2 others this past year so far to enlightenment, referring to my Guru as absurd is not only absurd but VERY IGNORANT, in my opinion. nothing to replace it with. On other occasions, my Guru will say I and me, but in general in my gurus books, she cautions the disciples not to view the Guru as persona but as consciousness Why would your Guru caution people to engage in mood making? HP: When a Guru brings 2 to enlightenment in one year, why they engage in certain methodologies is not important, and certainly if a student ( I realize you are not) needs to ask why, they are in the wrong place thMMY doesn't caution people in that manner. HP: ok, then question this since it is apparent that there are none conming to realization there Your Guru is an oddball. HP: Some people may call you an asshole but I certainly won't. I am a really calm guy. I will cast my opinion though and say that deep down, you know this is not the right thing to do, telling a disciple that their guru is an oddball. I could go into depth in responding to this but no need really. Generally speaking, Gurus will say I and me, and as I cast my opinion before, when they use this speach, and if they are claiming enlightenment, and at the same time referring to the individual I, then this is dellusion. Again, Ramana Maharshi and Nisargadatta Maharaj have used the I word on many occations, MMY likewise, and Jerry Jarvis. Are you saying these people are not Enlightened? HP: My Guru has also used the I word on many occasions. saying the above are enlightened or not is not based on this. Since there is no Me, then when they use this, they are referenceing something other- I think this is understood by many or most here. Precisely, at last we agree on something!. But nobody on this forum said there WAS a false Me or I. HP: I think you may have meant to phrase this line a bit better Besides, what's so special about that declaration, in view of the fact that Sages have been saying this for thousands of years. HP: It is not that it is special, it is more that even though it is in the scriptures and said by sages for thousands of years, it still continues to be in place- so again, the fallacy that a me gains enlightenment is very much in the forefront. My Guru's comments speaking FROM BEING is I just tell people the truth, I never existed nor will I ever . Your general response is to call her an odd ball- so it seems indirectly that you will stick with you thought, understanding or whatever it is- and insist that the me is there. Can you go to your guru and get insights on this? HP: I have my guru, and this is the inspiration in what i write. Progress is looking good here for me and the other disciples. I dont mind responding but if you had the name calling like this such as odd ball, then my odd ball Guru would show you the door very quickly. What my path is about is transparency, honesty, integrity and respect. The bottom line is not changing as I see it- my Guru's comments- the fallacy is that a me becomes enlightened Nobody every said a me becomes Enlightened. Stop confusing the issues. As reported by various Enlightened persons, Enlightenment as a Realization takes place within the realm of apparent space-time; in which case the individuals REPORT that they became Enlightned; realized the innate, prior, pure Consciousness of the Self. Thus, in the process of an apparent progression in which the obstacles to Enlightenment were gradually (or perhaps suddenly) removed, the false me obviously cannot exist. However, the I or me as mentioned by Ramana and Nisargadatta Maharaj, and many others, still exists as a body/mind minus the delusion of separateness. HP: I guess we can call it a paradox, and limitation with the use of words but again part of this paradox is refleected in the quote I mentioned where
[FairfieldLife] Signposts-MMY not enlightened- Ramana Maharishi quote
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, george_deforest george.deforest@ wrote: Ron, is the reason you mentioned 'cognizing the vedas' because of the rumor spread by TB's (probably purushoids) that Mahesh 'cognized the Vedas'? Never heard that Maharishi cognized the vedas. Could you spezify please ? FWIW, Maharishi is credited with cognizing the uncreated commentary of vedic literature in 1980, in the official lists of his year by year achievements; see http://www.alltm.org/Maharishi/Maharishi_year3.html another brief explanation: In the early eighties, Maharishi Mahesh Yogi cognized the nature and the details of this eternally fixed sequence of the words in Rik Veda. This cognition of the inherent structure of Rik Veda is termed as Apaurusheya Bhasya, or uncreated commentary. It brings to light, that the specific sequence of the letters, syllables, words, Padas, Richas, Suktas and Mandalas of Rik Veda, form an eternal structure in which every next expression provides a commentary on the previous expression. Every following expression is a natural elaboration or commentary on the expressions that are preceding it. From this it follows that all the knowledge of the entire Veda is contained in the first word and indeed even in the first letter of the Veda A. The term Apaurusheya Bhasya further implies that it is a commentary provided by the structure of the Veda itself. The whole essence of the Apaurusheya Bhasya can therefore be summarised in the phrase: Follow the sequence. Maharishi's Apaurusheya Bhasya has made clear to the world for the first time in the history of mankind that the sequence of the Vedic expressions is of an absolute significance. Only as such, the Veda can be understood as the blueprint of Creation, or as Maharishi formulated it in 1992, the Constitution of the Universe, containing the structuring dynamics of all the Laws of Nature that govern all evolutionary processes in the ever expanding universe. source: http://www.selfrealisation.net/VedicAstrology/instrman.htm Aparusheya Bhasya, thats right, forgot that one. Only a Maha Rishi could see the missing verse. Maharishi said he would write a commentary to the Brahma Sutras, if time allows. I dont think so, this belongs to one in the process- An enlightened One would not congnise or need to cognize anything. This again us a basis for much confusion as peoplee think that one with a certain dress, from a certain country, with a certain big following, with certain insights, cognitions, revelations, and powers is enlightened, but not so. And again, what is the purpose? The master can only take one as far as they are. I dont think it is reasonable to call one a Sat Guru if not capable to take one to enlightenment, that is just a guru that also can spark an awakening. For a completed awakening, then this is a sat guru Speaking of which, here is a short commentary from Ramamaharihi about Guru: Guru is the Self Sometimes in his life a man becomes dissatisfied with it, and, not content with what he has, he seeks the satisfaction of his desires, through prayer to God etc. His mind is gradually purified until he longs to know God, more to obtain His grace than to satisfy his worldly desires. Then, God's grace begins to manifest. God takes the form of a Guru and appears to the devotee, teaches him the Truth and, moreover, purifies his mind by association. The devotee's mind gains strength and is then able to turn inward. By meditation it is further purified and it remains still without the least ripple. That calm expanse is the Self. The Guru is both `external' and `internal'. From the `exterior' he gives a push to the mind to turn inward; from the `interior' He pulls the mind towards the Self and helps in the quieting of the mind. That is Guru Kripa. There is no difference between God, Guru and the Self ... (Ramana Maharshi)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Ron´s Guru
www.kundalinisupport.com if there is further interest, you may want to join the yahoo group, it is active, not for lurkers, participation is required --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nayakanayaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Ron! As a rare visitor to this group (though very interested, since I spent 5 yrs in Fairfield), I may have missed something, but would you care to reveal who your Guru /what your Guru´s background is? Thanks! Manohar --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ron sidha7001@ wrote: Cognitions and revelations are what my guru had prior to enlightenment and also this what s gave my Guru the understanding that enlightenment was there. As I said, there was a time where my guru could know anything about something and other such things The point is- who is there to cognize something? My recolletions are Bevan worships MMY as persona, therefore it is the greatest Guru in 10,000 years, and for example, on some walk MMY was having, all of the vedas or some certain apsects of the vedas were cognized. This has to do with knowing something, where as in Realization, the small self, the me, the identification of body and mind is imploded, merged, it IS only ONE, not one with something My Guru, speaking from this knowing, informed me a few days ago that no, ccognitions are not there for the enlightened, it also was from experiecne that with the cogitions and revelations, my Guru thought she had arrived, but as long as there is a me cognizing, there is further to go This is the significance of the Guru being there with the disciple, otherwise , the disciple will go no further and this ends up being a sad thing. It is most likely the new age thing which people can relate to- it is there in sai Ma's web sight- become a God, develope your full potential, choose enlightenment, etc. People can relate to becoming a better me, gaining a cosmic ego People can not relate to no me, no ego, no self, only IS- then life flows Regarding the Kundalini comment from another post- Maybe it again is this paradoxal thing. My guru explains that where shakti meets shiva, the kundalini journey is over. IN enlightenment, yes, my Guru gives shatipat and shakti is kundalini. The thing is the persona is no longer there so the enlightened experienceing Kundalini? All 3 enlightened in my path went through the kundalini journey- 2 of the 3 are gurus- the other a sage- and it is an inspirational story for that one being on the path for only one year, with 3 babies ( all under 4) and a housewife. The 2 gurus had very heavy kundlaini journeys, and having arrived in realization, are extremely qualified to speak about Kundalini. Both independantly commented on MMY comments about Kundalini and said it is one that knows nothing of the kundalini journey. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ron sidha7001@ wrote: Response: I will ask my Guru to comment, as I have been saying, I am not enlightened. snip Comment: If you or anyone else can explain to me how the Vedas can be cognized *before* enlightenment, I owe you a nickel. Such a foolish statement, which you have apparently swallowed hook, line and sinker.:-) I am not calling into question anything else regarding siddhis or other powers prior to enlightenment. All that is said about that, I agree with. Just the remark about the Vedas being able to be cognized, prior to permanent establishment in the Absolute.:-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Signposts that MMY is not enlightened
Response: I will ask my Guru to comment, as I have been saying, I am not enlightened. I can only provide some intellectual response. Such as, the vedas is not what is cognized, it was relative things cognizesd- vedic math is relative, so it jyotish, and scripture. when all relative is gone, then ONE is, it is not persona, it only IS. A person can cognize seemingly infinite things if this is what one wants- beyond this IS only Being- this is why it is explained that a siddha Guru is one that is beyond siddhis- and the greatest siddhi of them all is to know the absolute. In enlightenment, siddhis may occur around the enlightened but it is not a doership as there is no one to do something. There are no longing and lasting desires, which includes the desire to know anything about anything- this is siddhis. One can know wwhatever one needs to know- My Guru explained that this was in her own journey way before being enlightened. actually, it was because advanced siddhis were known, that my Guru thought she was enlightened. She was on her own most of the journey. The last Guru ( there were 4 total) screamed in her face- this desription can be seen on youtube in the video describing my Guru's own Journey. Because the siddhis were very developed, she thought she was enlightend, then when she revealed this to her Guru, this is when he screamed in her face and told her, you fool, you know nothing, you idiot!!! while at the time, my Guru had less than nice thoughts about her Guru, she reflected backward and said that if not for this, she would have still been on the hampster wheel of karma. This whole thing will again boil down to that other title's thread- the fallacy is that a me is going to get enlightenmed. Me means identity with mind or body which is ego, and ego and Enlightenment cannot exist at the same time. Comment: If you or anyone else can explain to me how the Vedas can be cognized *before* enlightenment, I owe you a nickel. Such a foolish statement, which you have apparently swallowed hook, line and sinker.:-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: The fallacy is that a *Me* can Gain Realization
Comment: Personally, I get the feeling that the vast maj- ority of gurus who claim that their followers need them to get enlightened in reality need their followers far more than the followers need them. If the followers weren't there hanging off every word and paying the bills, these gurus would have to work for a living. Response: Maybe it is so for the vast majority but that has nothing to do with my Guru. My guru does not need any followers, prefers to have none, will in a short time only accept people in person, probably no longer available on the net or by phone, My Guru has a pension from the military so the bills are all paid, no fees are asked for, the donations go into an acount for an ashram, I think the acount is up to about 5k after 8 years. If the pension were not there, and there were not disciples willing to support my Guru, then she would work, and then this is just less time available for the sadakas. The thing is, if one has been wronged 1000 times by Gurus, this is not a ligitimate excuse to stop- and a guru is needed if you buy into what Ramana and other Gurus say. If you dont, well fine- your choice- what the same legitimate gurus would tell you is may you get all that you seek for
[FairfieldLife] Re: Signposts that MMY is not enlightened
Cognitions and revelations are what my guru had prior to enlightenment and also this what s gave my Guru the understanding that enlightenment was there. As I said, there was a time where my guru could know anything about something and other such things The point is- who is there to cognize something? My recolletions are Bevan worships MMY as persona, therefore it is the greatest Guru in 10,000 years, and for example, on some walk MMY was having, all of the vedas or some certain apsects of the vedas were cognized. This has to do with knowing something, where as in Realization, the small self, the me, the identification of body and mind is imploded, merged, it IS only ONE, not one with something My Guru, speaking from this knowing, informed me a few days ago that no, ccognitions are not there for the enlightened, it also was from experiecne that with the cogitions and revelations, my Guru thought she had arrived, but as long as there is a me cognizing, there is further to go This is the significance of the Guru being there with the disciple, otherwise , the disciple will go no further and this ends up being a sad thing. It is most likely the new age thing which people can relate to- it is there in sai Ma's web sight- become a God, develope your full potential, choose enlightenment, etc. People can relate to becoming a better me, gaining a cosmic ego People can not relate to no me, no ego, no self, only IS- then life flows Regarding the Kundalini comment from another post- Maybe it again is this paradoxal thing. My guru explains that where shakti meets shiva, the kundalini journey is over. IN enlightenment, yes, my Guru gives shatipat and shakti is kundalini. The thing is the persona is no longer there so the enlightened experienceing Kundalini? All 3 enlightened in my path went through the kundalini journey- 2 of the 3 are gurus- the other a sage- and it is an inspirational story for that one being on the path for only one year, with 3 babies ( all under 4) and a housewife. The 2 gurus had very heavy kundlaini journeys, and having arrived in realization, are extremely qualified to speak about Kundalini. Both independantly commented on MMY comments about Kundalini and said it is one that knows nothing of the kundalini journey. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ron sidha7001@ wrote: Response: I will ask my Guru to comment, as I have been saying, I am not enlightened. snip Comment: If you or anyone else can explain to me how the Vedas can be cognized *before* enlightenment, I owe you a nickel. Such a foolish statement, which you have apparently swallowed hook, line and sinker.:-) I am not calling into question anything else regarding siddhis or other powers prior to enlightenment. All that is said about that, I agree with. Just the remark about the Vedas being able to be cognized, prior to permanent establishment in the Absolute.:-)
[FairfieldLife] Enlightened Ones are not caged in and do not have cognitions
Oh well, maybe he did, and certainly from my POV lives the Reality of the Vedas. And no doubt ime he has the ability to cognize them-- I'm not disputing that. But he sure hasn't had the time to *document* his cognition.: Hridaya Puri: One doesn't live the reality of the vedas and at the same time is caged in by an inproper vastu, nor do enlightened have cognitions, revelations, or perform sidhis. Jim:If you or anyone else can explain to me how the Vedas can be cognized *before* enlightenment, I owe you a nickel. Such a foolish statement, which you have apparently swallowed hook, line and sinker.:-) Hridaya Puri: Cognitions are all to do with the transcient, it is only the unenlightened ones stil in the process that will have cognitions and revelations such as knowing whatever they want to know in an instant, unfoldiung the entire structure of Jyotish, vedic mathmatics, or the vedas. enlightened on Are the vedas, just Being- not persona Jim:I don't see an answer to my question, just some misdirection; playing Hridaya Puri: I think this is approximately how an enlightened one would answer. If I asked the 3 enlightened one's in my path for this answer, independantly, the same answer would come because it is coming from that same One. Jim:mind games with identification. Kinda boring.:-) Hridaya Puri: I state my reason for posting all this in the first place. There is a value to knowing if a master is enlightened or not because they are only going to take you as far as they are. One might consider when trying to figure out if the one they will entrust their faith with is enlightened by both being with this Guru, and then seeing the progress of the students- are they in confusion, are there enlightened one's etc. For those who are interested in enlightenment above all else, this is an important consideration. Ultimately, one has to use their own discretion, then live with these choices. I present my opinions because it is an option. The way it is received is not up to me but most certainly it will probably be hell for some and maybe heaven for some as well, and then anywhere in between that.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The fallacy is that a *Me* can Gain Realization
I suppose the paradox is there- maybe in thinking of the snake and string it clears it up- The significant thing is a process of ilimination for what is transcient and what is eternal. All that which is transcient has a reality to it but short lived and therefore no reality so a paradox Last week, we had a gathering so one of the newly enlightened was there. She was saying the wonder of it all- for you can never get it but yet It is there It again points to the headline of this post- as I said earlier, you will see these comments from Guru's speaking from this level of Being such as Ramana Maharishi- I don't think you will find this from TM's Maharihsi because it is not know to him There is a good purpose in poiinting out if a Master is enlightened or not. For those open to this, examination can show why this possibility exists one way or the other- then it explains why one is confused, or why one has not heard or understood these things which Ramana talks about, or very significant is that the disciple is not going to go further than the Guru. There are two newly enlightened one's in my path this year. By comparrison, Nityananda, the guru of Muktananda left his body early and stated there is not one that came seeking eternal Liberation, but rather seeking out guidance for a better Me Bottom line is enlightenment is really a possibility this life time but the master has to be enlightened, sat Guru, and then from the opinion of my Guru, it is essencial to be working one to one. The Guru is the light, the disciple is in darkness which is ego ( identification of mind and body as being the self, or the small self is the existence) If one is using the inner Guru, visions, revelatiuons, form of inner Guru of some Guru, it is fiultered through this ego. Ego will fight tooth and nail to keep it 's throne, Outter Guru is the light that has already traversed the path to enlightenment and has the know how to guide one in this darkness- out of it The formula for enlightenment is surrender to this Guru which is consciousness, not mind and body- 0r put it this way, one is surrendering to consciosness. Faith is involved. If one is intent on argueing, intent that they will use their own inner guru, intent that they will do their own navigating- then this process is obviously not for them. in such a case, all that is said from this camp here is good luck with your journey, may it bring all that you are looking for Hridaya Puri --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tertonzeno [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --Thanks, Bronte, I like your comments!. The statement, There's only the One is a true statement, but it's incomplete, since a certain Guru with a name is saying that. The Guru doesn't have a bodyhe is a body/mind as an individual as opposed to other individuals, in the relative sense. A more complete statement would be There's only One, which expresses Itself as many, without losing the nonduality.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The fallacy is that a *Me* can Gain Realization
Well again, the honesty of it for me is that there is still further to go, and therefore the parts not known by direct experience are accepted in faith, with the confirmation of my intuition That being the case, what I have heard is it is inevitable that all come to this Being- enlightenment unfolds for all, then what was read, or what has been told will now be actualized and known from direct experiece. Opportunities come along- it is something like when a sincere seeker is there, the open door is walked through. There will be plenty of choices offered from the Universe, and the time frame is favorable- eternity. Again, intuition says that the following statement from my Guru is correct- it is never what one thought it was --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ron, unfortuanately you're wasting your breath on these mala covered samsarins who insist on individuality and can not recognize the function of the ego in this belief that somehow realization of That includes individuality. Poor deluded bhogis. By the way, I'm not saying this, so there. --- Ron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I suppose the paradox is there- maybe in thinking of the snake and string it clears it up- The significant thing is a process of ilimination for what is transcient and what is eternal. All that which is transcient has a reality to it but short lived and therefore no reality so a paradox Last week, we had a gathering so one of the newly enlightened was there. She was saying the wonder of it all- for you can never get it but yet It is there It again points to the headline of this post- as I said earlier, you will see these comments from Guru's speaking from this level of Being such as Ramana Maharishi- I don't think you will find this from TM's Maharihsi because it is not know to him There is a good purpose in poiinting out if a Master is enlightened or not. For those open to this, examination can show why this possibility exists one way or the other- then it explains why one is confused, or why one has not heard or understood these things which Ramana talks about, or very significant is that the disciple is not going to go further than the Guru. There are two newly enlightened one's in my path this year. By comparrison, Nityananda, the guru of Muktananda left his body early and stated there is not one that came seeking eternal Liberation, but rather seeking out guidance for a better Me Bottom line is enlightenment is really a possibility this life time but the master has to be enlightened, sat Guru, and then from the opinion of my Guru, it is essencial to be working one to one. The Guru is the light, the disciple is in darkness which is ego ( identification of mind and body as being the self, or the small self is the existence) If one is using the inner Guru, visions, revelatiuons, form of inner Guru of some Guru, it is fiultered through this ego. Ego will fight tooth and nail to keep it 's throne, Outter Guru is the light that has already traversed the path to enlightenment and has the know how to guide one in this darkness- out of it The formula for enlightenment is surrender to this Guru which is consciousness, not mind and body- 0r put it this way, one is surrendering to consciosness. Faith is involved. If one is intent on argueing, intent that they will use their own inner guru, intent that they will do their own navigating- then this process is obviously not for them. in such a case, all that is said from this camp here is good luck with your journey, may it bring all that you are looking for Hridaya Puri --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tertonzeno tertonzeno@ wrote: --Thanks, Bronte, I like your comments!. The statement, There's only the One is a true statement, but it's incomplete, since a certain Guru with a name is saying that. The Guru doesn't have a bodyhe is a body/mind as an individual as opposed to other individuals, in the relative sense. A more complete statement would be There's only One, which expresses Itself as many, without losing the nonduality. 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 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Luggage? GPS? Comic books? Check out fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=oni_on_mailp=graduation+giftscs=bz
[FairfieldLife] Re: The fallacy is that a *Me* can Gain Realization
he didn't exist! His use of the I word and the me word is in the context of the body as referent. Of course, the Me can't gain realization but that's another topic, closely related. In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ron sidha7001@ wrote: I suppose the paradox is there- maybe in thinking of the snake and string it clears it up- The significant thing is a process of ilimination for what is transcient and what is eternal. All that which is transcient has a reality to it but short lived and therefore no reality so a paradox Last week, we had a gathering so one of the newly enlightened was there. She was saying the wonder of it all- for you can never get it but yet It is there It again points to the headline of this post- as I said earlier, you will see these comments from Guru's speaking from this level of Being such as Ramana Maharishi- I don't think you will find this from TM's Maharihsi because it is not know to him There is a good purpose in poiinting out if a Master is enlightened or not. For those open to this, examination can show why this possibility exists one way or the other- then it explains why one is confused, or why one has not heard or understood these things which Ramana talks about, or very significant is that the disciple is not going to go further than the Guru. There are two newly enlightened one's in my path this year. By comparrison, Nityananda, the guru of Muktananda left his body early and stated there is not one that came seeking eternal Liberation, but rather seeking out guidance for a better Me Bottom line is enlightenment is really a possibility this life time but the master has to be enlightened, sat Guru, and then from the opinion of my Guru, it is essencial to be working one to one. The Guru is the light, the disciple is in darkness which is ego ( identification of mind and body as being the self, or the small self is the existence) If one is using the inner Guru, visions, revelatiuons, form of inner Guru of some Guru, it is fiultered through this ego. Ego will fight tooth and nail to keep it 's throne, Outter Guru is the light that has already traversed the path to enlightenment and has the know how to guide one in this darkness- out of it The formula for enlightenment is surrender to this Guru which is consciousness, not mind and body- 0r put it this way, one is surrendering to consciosness. Faith is involved. If one is intent on argueing, intent that they will use their own inner guru, intent that they will do their own navigating- then this process is obviously not for them. in such a case, all that is said from this camp here is good luck with your journey, may it bring all that you are looking for Hridaya Puri --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tertonzeno tertonzeno@ wrote: --Thanks, Bronte, I like your comments!. The statement, There's only the One is a true statement, but it's incomplete, since a certain Guru with a name is saying that. The Guru doesn't have a bodyhe is a body/mind as an individual as opposed to other individuals, in the relative sense. A more complete statement would be There's only One, which expresses Itself as many, without losing the nonduality.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The fallacy is that a *Me* can Gain Realization
--Nope, you're wrong. There is an I after realization but it's not the delusional I as before. Response: what happens to that I when you die? ( drop the body?)- and what happens to the eternal Being? By process of illimination- whatever is left after everything else is gone- this is not transcient, non relative, and eternal- what reality is there to the transcient in this respect? It is way more popular to promote cosmic ego, get a bigger and better me- reach your full potential, become a God, choose elightenment- look up Sai Ma- all the ingredients for the making of a big mass movement. There is no interest in a movement where ego candy is not handed out and one will be challenged to the core- getting what is needed and not necessarliy what is wanted. In my path, you are not great, you are not this most wonderfull scientist, you are not the devantari of the heaven on earth, you are not a wonderfull savior with great insight to save humanity, you are not a leader to chnage the course of time, you are not a memeber of an organization that has the power to change the world as no other can- what you are is not a you, it is only ONE- Christ said I and the Father are One where is the two in that? where is the I minus the illusionary I in that? and how popular was Christ?
[FairfieldLife] Re: The fallacy is that a *Me* can Gain Realization
I am not enlightened and can not say from direct experience - I can only pass along what 3 people here say in my path- then again, the honesty of the situation is unless it is known from direct experience, then it is a belief system- so you have my beliefs presented. I will let you know when it is from direct experience as it has been amazing to watch what has taken place in the path here with two people this past summer. Fir sure, this is not a popular heading, the comic me, and all that is by far very popular and new age My Guru is ademant and claiming to speak from Being in saying there is no two, no two, it is only ONE, there only IS, then life flows. A quote from my guru in speaking to a person while I was there- : I just tell people the truth, I never existed nor will I ever My Guru also referenced scriptures written by enlightened Ones that say this same thing. The 3 people here, while not in contact with each other for coaching, have the same basic thing to say because they are speaking from that same ONE MY Guru explains that Oneness implies duality as one with something, and no, it only IS --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bronte Baxter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Christ said I and the Father are One where is the two in that? They are one but they are also two, as a branch can say I am the tree and still be a branch. You can experience being one with the Infinite yet an individual at the same time. - Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell.
[FairfieldLife] Signposts that MMY is not enlightened
1. I had felt caged in all these years from not living in a proper vastu Response from my Guru when I asked is anything had ever caged her in- no 2. cognitions of vedas Response from my Guru- cognitions, discoveries, knowing what needs to be known about anything, sidhis, cognizing all of jyotish, vedic mathmatics, vastu- these things are developed way beffore Realization and are not a part of a realized one- they are all about the transcient 3. Speaking about Kundalini and explaining it is said to be at the base of the spine, Kundalini is for identification of where one is at It is said the more the kundalini is awake, the more enlightened one is, ultimately when kunalini is fully awake, this is enlightenment Response- If one knows what ice cream tastes like- one doesnt say it is said to taste sweet- this is not the words from knowing directly. Kundlaini has been felt all over by some, not only in the spine. Kundalini is a process through consciousness that acts as rotor rooter clearing the pathways for unfolding enlightenment, and the kundalini journey is complete and over in Realization will collect more
[FairfieldLife] That's my theory, and I'm sticking to it... :-)
That's my theory, and I'm sticking to it... :-) Response: A spontaneous thought that came is yes, as long as there is a me, you may stick with that but it is inevitable that when the time is right, you won't be sticking with the me as it will only Be, and the Me will be as stciky as if being glued to the ocean surface. My Guru was just talking about questions yesterday. In the group sites it says if you want to see the group active, then ask questions. My guru explained that the reason for this is if there is no questions, then there is only silence with no thoughts. Hridaya Puri ( my new sanyas name)
[FairfieldLife] Re: The fallacy is that a *Me* can Gain Realization
For Now, I am having my fun. I have told my Guru what I am up to. I am speaking from my own experiences as well which I have the opinion have an effect to move one faster in the path, and the reason I attirbute is because of working directly with the living guru- one to one. By comparison, those on their own, which are many, appear to think they are accessing deeper levels than what is actually the case. They will not hear one word of it if it comes to letting them know that what they think they are accessing is not there yet because there is still a me in place. This is the casualty of taking techniques and running with them, the the guru handing them out and dissappearing. There is more than one Sat guru that will to work with students- although wouldn't be surprised if that offer today is withdrawn tomorrow- and the guru is not willing to accept new students, such as what appears to possibly happen in my path. The reason is stemming from that bible quote about casting the pearl of great price before swine or however that goes With regard to some of Barry's comments, the words, pointings, discussions are not for the enlightened, it is for those who dont know, and yes written by those who also dont know such as myself. So it is understandable if one wants to ignore it, but there also may be other reasons for ignoring it as well --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter drpetersutphen@ wrote: --- tanhlnx tanhlnx@ wrote: --Below, you ask if I is the individual. Depends upon how you define it: a. the illusory I that is the core of misidentification, or b. the individual who remains after the ignorance of misidentification is gone, and who STILL may refer to herself as I in ordinary exchanges of conversation with people. Of course this is done! It's mere convention. But your name and the personal pronoun, I don't experientially refer to anything. The question then becomes, what is the nature of this (b) I...; is it/he/she simply saying something that has no reality? No. Actually, yes. When you say I in Realization you aren't refering to anything at all within your own experience. There is no phenomenological or experiential I to refer to. When you try to do this there absolutely nothing. The I who remains has no substantial, i.e. in-itself reality separate from Brahman; but the ongoing error of Neo-Advaita is that there's no significance to the remaining I. I don't know what your experience is with this, but you seem to be trying to have your cake and eat it too, as it were. Since in Realization there is no I that is experienced you can't speak of it being non-substantial or not having an in-itself reality. All this makes no sense because there is absolutely nothing there to refer too. There is only consciousness which is completely unlocalized. What are you talking about? And why? :-) I've been staying out of this whole discussion because I honestly think it falls into the category of discussion that the Tao Te Ching nailed so well: Those who know don't say; those who say don't know. As an exercise in trying to express the inex- pressible, I guess it's fun for some people. But *all* of the descriptions are wrong. The map is not the territory. So I really don't get off much these days on discussing maps and trying to decide which of them is more accurate or less accurate. To me they are *all* inaccurate, every last one of them, even those drawn by the supposedly-enlightened. *Especially* those drawn by the supposedly- enlightened, who should have known better. For me, the attributes of enlightenment are best demonstrated, not talked about. Those here who have worked with teachers who can shift you *into* the states of consciousness they're pointing to, even if only temporarily, can then have somewhat meaningful discussions with their students. In that case, it's like, Ok, now that we're all here, look around. Notice that this thing (or concept) doesn't look the way (or seem the way) it did before. From this state of consciousness I might call that thing (or concept) X. You might call it Y. But right here, right now, isn't the thing (or concept) kinda neat? Transmission (or empowerment) kinda cuts through the crap of language and its inability to express the inexpressible. It also cuts through the crap of the intellect, in that one doesn't have to try to imagine what is being discussed; it is here and now, part of one's experience. In a way, it's the thing that Ron keeps harping on, but never seems to understand. Is this person speaking from Being, or about it? That is not the real question in these matters IMO, because even if the person speaking is speaking from the level of Being or enlightenment
[FairfieldLife] Re: The fallacy is that a *Me* can Gain Realization
from the Absolute continuum of pure Consciousness; but still composed of various relative components such as the capacity to interact socially, to perform actions with the mind, senses, and organs; and to engage in new types of perceptions, especially relating to the entire universe of existence that forms the holographic identity. The capacity to interact socially, to perform actions with the mind,etc., are relative components as you say, but in Realization these certainly do continue, but there is no identification with them as you or me or I. They just occur on their own as they did before Realization. The holographic aspect to the new I is important since holograms enfold the totality but each hologram differs from the others in having priorities of viewpoints. The things being seen have no inner core of an I' as a false identity, but they (the objects) are simply being seen. By what? The body and its senses. Agree with this. Thus, your Guru is misguided if he has fallen into the Neo-Advaita trap which claims that all types of an I vanish at Enlightenment. No, Ron's guru is correct. The Enlightenment I is a holographic I, nondifferent from the Absolute continuum but partaking of normal interactions by virtue of ongoing bodily impulses and the capacity to engage in entirely new, creative, and original enterprises. You are creating a conceptual distinction that makes no difference. How can there be a ...holgraphic 'I' nondifferent from the Absolute continuum.? If it was nondifferent there is no distinction and it is therefore the same. You seem to be trying to intellectually resolve the problem of individuality in Realization because you are confounding consciousness with the phenomenological/experiential I of waking state. - In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ron sidha7001@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, qntmpkt qntmpkt@ wrote: --The statement, ...then there only IS is an incomplete description of existence. Of course, any statement will never replace the reality of the situation A more complete statement would be IsAS: modifications of pure Conscious such as trees, the sky, the body; etc; and all of the components that STILL make up an individual, minus the false illusory I. The I is the individual, isn't it? Therefore, should the IRC come knocking on your door (after getting Enlightened), don't say, Sorry, can't pay since there's no Me. I have posted comments from the enlightened here so it helps to see how their day to day life is, and that this story book idea of special and superhuman belongs more to ego than Reaization 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 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Check out the hottest 2008 models today at Yahoo! Autos. http://autos.yahoo.com/new_cars.html
[FairfieldLife] Re: The fallacy is that a *Me* can Gain Realization
continuum of pure Consciousness; but still composed of various relative components such as the capacity to interact socially, to perform actions with the mind, senses, and organs; and to engage in new types of perceptions, especially relating to the entire universe of existence that forms the holographic identity. The capacity to interact socially, to perform actions with the mind,etc., are relative components as you say, but in Realization these certainly do continue, but there is no identification with them as you or me or I. They just occur on their own as they did before Realization. The holographic aspect to the new I is important since holograms enfold the totality but each hologram differs from the others in having priorities of viewpoints. The things being seen have no inner core of an I' as a false identity, but they (the objects) are simply being seen. By what? The body and its senses. Agree with this. Thus, your Guru is misguided if he has fallen into the Neo-Advaita trap which claims that all types of an I vanish at Enlightenment. No, Ron's guru is correct. The Enlightenment I is a holographic I, nondifferent from the Absolute continuum but partaking of normal interactions by virtue of ongoing bodily impulses and the capacity to engage in entirely new, creative, and original enterprises. You are creating a conceptual distinction that makes no difference. How can there be a ...holgraphic 'I' nondifferent from the Absolute continuum.? If it was nondifferent there is no distinction and it is therefore the same. You seem to be trying to intellectually resolve the problem of individuality in Realization because you are confounding consciousness with the phenomenological/experiential I of waking state. - In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ron sidha7001@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, qntmpkt qntmpkt@ wrote: --The statement, ...then there only IS is an incomplete description of existence. Of course, any statement will never replace the reality of the situation A more complete statement would be IsAS: modifications of pure Conscious such as trees, the sky, the body; etc; and all of the components that STILL make up an individual, minus the false illusory I. The I is the individual, isn't it? Therefore, should the IRC come knocking on your door (after getting Enlightened), don't say, Sorry, can't pay since there's no Me. I have posted comments from the enlightened here so it helps to see how their day to day life is, and that this story book idea of special and superhuman belongs more to ego than Reaization 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 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] __ __ Check out the hottest 2008 models today at Yahoo! Autos. http://autos.yahoo.com/new_cars.html
[FairfieldLife] Re: The fallacy is that a *Me* can Gain Realization
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, qntmpkt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --Thanks, this is quite obvious if one defines the me = I; the notion of a delusional self associated with the mind as an identity separate from Pure Consciousness. Hridaya puri:I suppose getting the definitions matching is the first thing- small self= Ego which is identity with mind, body, and conditionings. When these things are gone, something is still left, that IS eternal Being. This is why enlightenment has nothing to do with vastu, body, the food you eat, the yagyas one does, the books one reads, the understandings one has. This is the snake that actually is a rope. The snake doesn't exist in itself, therefore the I or me in this sense can't get Enlightened. Hridaya puri:This is why ego and enlightenment can not exist at the same time But nobody on this forum is saying that the Me CAN gain Realization, Hridaya puri:Look closer so what's so special about your Guru? nothing- that is why there is hardly any disciples- people are attracted to a super human that performs siddhis, bases doership to save the world as it's platform, can't be contacted, speaks in very complicated double speak terms that no one understands and therefore is thought to be great, out to save the world, usually is Indian and wearing robes, with guru chairs in every corner of the world- with millions of disciples, famous, with castles, limos, and promisis a bigger grander you with cosmic ego which is such an important one that without you and all the fellow students, the world would die a quick death. When one has all these concepts which they have read about, then come across one that is none of the above, there is a disconnect. As you see, I have taken sanyas, my new name is Hridaya puri
[FairfieldLife] Re: The fallacy is that a *Me* can Gain Realization
This is a very complicated post - my opinion is it serves to get the mind engaged- where as enlightenment is very simple- the me falls away, then there only IS They say that then it was known that there never was a me, it was Maya- ego is the maya- so no cosmic ego's in my path --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Duveyoung [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: qntmpkt wrote: Thanks, this is quite obvious if one defines the me = I; the notion of a delusional self associated with the mind as an identity separate from Pure Consciousness. This is the snake that actually is a rope. The snake doesn't exist in itself, therefore the I or me in this sense can't get Enlightened. But nobody on this forum is saying that the Me CAN gain Realization . . . Edg: This word gain is problematic, eh? Let me take a hack at hitting the same target. If we step back from the concept that all is illusion/dream, and we talk as if objects of consciousness were separate entities instead of undifferentiated light, then immediately we can begin to speak of gains. A film can show an actor gaining a hat, but it is only actor-blotches-of-light being associated in time, space, memory with hat-blotches. There is no real ownership of the hat on the level of unity -- no causal connections, no laws. If hat or actor are seen again, the blotches will be entirely new, different and not in the least causally connected to the previous set of blotches that were designated hat and actor. Just so do ego-blotches sometimes seem to gain enlightenment-blotches. There can be no denying that the enlightenment-blotches are an all-time reality -- always being seen with the ego-blotches, but it is not a law, because, well, enlightenment-blotches accompany ALL blotches of every ilk all the time. When the ego gets it that it is not sentient, it is said that it dies, or that the mind is killed, or that me-ness evaporates, but in terms of functionality, enlightened folks can easily keep track of their bodies and thoughts. It is not the case that after enlightenment that a person will be confused; there's no concern that not-identifying-with-the-meat-robot will cause personal physical safety concerns, or that insanity will emerge without a central controller function. These things don't happen. The enlightened can in every way function as if not enlightened in order to harmonize with the not-admitting-yet-that-they're-enlightened folks. This illusion of having an ego, can then go about its day pretending to gain things -- including its enlightenment blotches. It will be no larger a mistake than any other this is assertion of entity-hood. Like noise that comes with the train, goes with the train, is of no use to the train, but the train can't go without it, ego is just another squeak in the robot's clockworks. Ramana Maharishi and every other guru ever can hold a conversation, use the word me, make decisions, eat, etc. The only difference is that their egos will not make the mistake of thinking that the sentience that is aware of the robot is the robot's ego-functions, nor that, because this robot-ego-function is observed, it is an observer of any sort whatsoever. Instead, the ONE PRESENCE is the observer of all blotchiness. The ego doesn't actually die, because it was never alive, never existed as a separate entity except that the mind mistakenly insists it is. The mind that once was supposed-into-existence is no longer required to make a place in which observation can take place, since it is recognized that observation is an all-time reality for every speck of creation. The most distant planet, the tiniest dust mote, the unseeable quarks, the 3,578,298,657th orbit of electron number 657,536,420,543,098,708,345,456,988 of hydrogen atom number 468,394,503,476,503,542,343,243,768,001 of water molecule number 654,543,324,489,593,549,987 of the tear drop number 37 running down your cheek is duly noted -- no ego need be in attendance for absolute appreciation of any imposed definition on any arbitrarily hacked out patch o'blotches. Matthew 10:30 But the very hairs of your head are all numbered. God is omnipresent -- what else needs to be said? Edg
[FairfieldLife] Re: The fallacy is that a *Me* can Gain Realization
I just read this to swami G and she said yea, that's what happens It might be quite complicated , but it does/can lead the mind towards transcending itself. I agree that enlightenment is simple, but it can come as quite a shock when the mind attempts to reference itself, to feel itself as a subjective I and absolutely nothing is there. This nothingness takes some getting used to from the minds perspective. Until the experience actually occurs, the profundity of this experience can not be comprehended by the mind. There is a foundational shift in identity from a unique, psychological I to absolutely nothing. Thoughts, feelings, actions, desires all continue as before but there is no identification of these phenomena with an I.
[FairfieldLife] Re: The fallacy is that a *Me* can Gain Realization
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, qntmpkt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --The statement, ...then there only IS is an incomplete description of existence. Of course, any statement will never replace the reality of the situation A more complete statement would be IsAS: modifications of pure Conscious such as trees, the sky, the body; etc; and all of the components that STILL make up an individual, minus the false illusory I. The I is the individual, isn't it? Therefore, should the IRC come knocking on your door (after getting Enlightened), don't say, Sorry, can't pay since there's no Me. I have posted comments from the enlightened here so it helps to see how their day to day life is, and that this story book idea of special and superhuman belongs more to ego than Reaization
[FairfieldLife] Re: The fallacy is that a *Me* can Gain Realization
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, qntmpkt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --The statement, ...then there only IS is an incomplete description of existence. Of course, any statement will never replace the reality of the situation A more complete statement would be IsAS: modifications of pure Conscious such as trees, the sky, the body; etc; and all of the components that STILL make up an individual, minus the false illusory I. The I is the individual, isn't it? Therefore, should the IRC come knocking on your door (after getting Enlightened), don't say, Sorry, can't pay since there's no Me. I have posted comments from the enlightened here so it helps to see how their day to day life is, and that this story book idea of special and superhuman belongs more to ego than Reaization
[FairfieldLife] Re: The fallacy is that a *Me* can Gain Realization
This is way too complicated for me, but I ask the usual- is the one writting this speaking from Being or about it? Start with that. We have 3 enlightened one's in our group and though there is not a coaching, they have the same basic thing to say because it is coming from that One essence. Their message is it is never a me that gets enlightened, it is the death of the Me that is the life or all life --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tanhlnx [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --Below, you ask if I is the individual. Depends upon how you define it: a. the illusory I that is the core of misidentification, or b. the individual who remains after the ignorance of misidentification is gone, and who STILL may refer to herself as I in ordinary exchanges of conversation with people. The question then becomes, what is the nature of this (b) I...; is it/he/she simply saying something that has no reality? No. The I who remains has no substantial, i.e. in-itself reality separate from Brahman; but the ongoing error of Neo-Advaita is that there's no significance to the remaining I. As pointed out by several contributors, the I that/who remains also has several major components when misidentification vanishes. One of these components can be called the social I, and includes all manner of habitual behaviors in the due course of social interactions. There are several other categories of this I: (b), the bodily/mind I; in essence, this body/mind that remains (even though non- substantial) is a new I that exists in the world of nonduality. Say you lived on a planet where everybody was born enlightened. Would people go around saying nobody has an I. No. First, not having tasted the ignorance of misidentification, they would have no conception of what it is, none whatsoever. In the course of social intercourse, the notational I would be required, because on that planet, visitors may knock on your door asking if you are so and so. Naturally, you would reply Yes, I am. More specifically and directly, exactly what is this new I, apart from being a mere notation? It's a relative body/mind! Thus, to answer your question, an I exists after Enlightenment, yes, but it's not the same I as before which is based on the delusion of separateness. The new I is a holographic me, wholly inseparable from the Absolute continuum of pure Consciousness; but still composed of various relative components such as the capacity to interact socially, to perform actions with the mind, senses, and organs; and to engage in new types of perceptions, especially relating to the entire universe of existence that forms the holographic identity. The holographic aspect to the new I is important since holograms enfold the totality but each hologram differs from the others in having priorities of viewpoints. The things being seen have no inner core of an I' as a false identity, but they (the objects) are simply being seen. By what? The body and its senses. Thus, your Guru is misguided if he has fallen into the Neo-Advaita trap which claims that all types of an I vanish at Enlightenment. The Enlightenment I is a holographic I, nondifferent from the Absolute continuum but partaking of normal interactions by virtue of ongoing bodily impulses and the capacity to engage in entirely new, creative, and original enterprises. - In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ron sidha7001@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, qntmpkt qntmpkt@ wrote: --The statement, ...then there only IS is an incomplete description of existence. Of course, any statement will never replace the reality of the situation A more complete statement would be IsAS: modifications of pure Conscious such as trees, the sky, the body; etc; and all of the components that STILL make up an individual, minus the false illusory I. The I is the individual, isn't it? Therefore, should the IRC come knocking on your door (after getting Enlightened), don't say, Sorry, can't pay since there's no Me. I have posted comments from the enlightened here so it helps to see how their day to day life is, and that this story book idea of special and superhuman belongs more to ego than Reaization
[FairfieldLife] From the newest enlightened One- the is no*one*
Namaste Sajani and Holly, When one comes upon That which IS, all else - every little experience (vision, dream, sounds, Samadhi, etc) that ever happened is absolutely burned to dust. Visions, experiences, dreams, insights are all wonderful in that they can help to keep one motivated to continue forward and also may show where one is at within the layers of conciousness, but are limited because they ARE experiences. An experience exists becase an experiencer exists... one should strive for no experience at all! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!! If they come, wonderful - say hello and goodbye to them in the same instant. If they don't, keep walking until there is no*one* walking or experiencing a thing! OM Shanti, Sarojini - A name with no experience
[FairfieldLife] Re: The fallacy is that a *Me* can Gain Realization
The enlightened say that there is no change when the body drops. People are drawn to very complicated explainations. My Guru's comments is that people hear it and dont understand it and think wow he is great. The complexity in all ways adds to keeping one from unfolding enlightenment which IS simplicity. IN my path, it is either one is enlightened or not, just like one is either pregnant or not. Any enlightened One will say the same thing- there is no me to get enlightened, there only IS, or Being- no two, only One. No it cannot be understood by intellect but if one want to believe in this aspect, since faith is going to be needed - and a Guru as well, if you buy into the concept that the guru will only take one as far as they are, then you might buy into not accepting when a guru tells you that you will become enlightened- for such a one that says this is not enlightened and therefore will not be able to guide others to enlightenment. This is the value I see in putting this statement out that a me will never become enlightened Prior to realization, the above point is very difficult to understand. In fact it can't be understood IMHO. Prior to realization consciousness and the sense of a psychological or private individual are experienced as the same. So if somebody talks about the experiential I or me vanishing in enlightenment it seems to be annihilation of consciousness itself. This seems to be the source of much of the protests regarding this point (e.g., Bronte's recent posts). But this does not happen. Prior to Realization consciousness is projected into and identified with aspects of mind so consciousness, phenomenologically, IS the mind. A powerful delusion of individuality is created. The initial step of Realization is consciousness pulling out of this identification. When this occurs there is a clear distinction between buddhi and purusha and a clear recognition that I no longer exists as a private psychological self, but is completely unbounded and non-localized. Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with Yahoo! FareChase. http://farechase.yahoo.com/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Off-World's Kundulini Experience (Was Dear Bevan and Dr. Hagelin)
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bronte Baxter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The only guidance needed is one's own inner guidance. It's the nature of the human spirit to wake up. My comments, coming from my path will mirror that of Ramana Maharishi's admonisions. Regarding a mentor or Guru, it is 100% that one will need this for unfolding enlightenment. Some very rare one's will do it on their own. It is ego which declares a Guru is not needed, or even I am that rare one - after all, Ramana did it this way and so can I. Why? because one in darkness needs light- and the light is just not there. If it were, then one wouldn't be in darkness.The Guru is the one that has traversed the journey from start to Realization, having gone through it, they are the light to show others. In my path, it is not that they desire to be guru or step forward to do so, they are commissioned by their own Guru's to do so.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Off-World's Kundulini Experience (Was Dear Bevan and Dr. Hagelin)
Well Bronte, The honesty of this situation is I have presented my beliefs. Your beliefs are otherwise. That's fine- so this is how it stands. [Bronte: The only guidance needed is one's own inner guidance. It's the nature of the human spirit to wake up.] Ron: My comments, coming from my path will mirror that of Ramana Maharishi's admonisions. Bronte: I disagree with almost everything of the philosophy of the Neo- Advaitins, RM's very much included. Ron: Regarding a mentor or Guru, it is 100% that one will need this for unfolding enlightenment. Bronte: This is a typical guru mind-enslavement statement: You can't do it without me. It spiritually disempowering of seekers and self- aggrandizing of gurus, designed to suck in clients. It's like a real estate agent telling you can't possibly sell our house successfully without an agent to guide you. Imagine what would happen to business if people realized they could do it by themselves? Ron: Some very rare one's will do it on their own. It is ego which declares a Guru is not needed, or even I am that rare one - after all, Ramana did it this way and so can I. Bronte: Good sales line: it's your ego. That one really snags the spiritual consumer. Get 'em with their guilt. Way to go, Ramana Maharishi! Ron: Why? because one in darkness needs light- and the light is just not there. If it were, then one wouldn't be in darkness.The Guru is the one that has traversed the journey from start to Realization, having gone through it, they are the light to show others. Bronte: What do you mean, the light is just not there? What is a human being's nature, darkness or light? Don't you believe that everything is God's light? Then how can you think one can't become aware of that light within themselves by the power of that light within themselves? To wake up to one's nature is as natural as waking up in the morning. Saying you can't do it by yourself is like saying you'd never wake up in the morning if you didn't have your mother to call you. Ron: In my path, it is not that they desire to be guru or step forward to do so, they are commissioned by their own Guru's to do so. Bronte: That may well be. It's those who've bought the sales pitch who are best equipped to perpetuate it. - Building a website is a piece of cake. Yahoo! Small Business gives you all the tools to get online.
[FairfieldLife] The fallacy is that a *Me* can Gain Realization
Namaste Guru G and all G:Having things stripped bare is not an attractive offer. hahahahahah people want to have *thier* lives but to have them Enhanced. And Surrender doesn't equate with the idea that *I* can get *Realization* . N: Being striped isn't attractive ether all the slobber and bed head. Ha ha ha ha. A famous Guy once said those who lose their lives have life more abundantly. He he G:The fallacy is that a *Me* can Gain Realization. The ME may have may insights aka realizations, but Realization only takes place when the ME is no more and has dissolved or imploded into simply Absolute. N: Yes, this me is so enlightened you should all buy my ME SO SOUP. $500.99 plus tax no Guru necessary we have a digital automated one. Soup cores requires you read the work book The Grate Me and the Guru Within written by Dorkdananda. N: The oddest things are observed. One could hardly call this deep Witnessing, but have been observing ego stuff as it mixes with mind it's like all thoughts are lies and crafted in a way that no one notices, the UN reality of thought which arises seem to be made up as one goes along. Ego is just a belief system and when that system is challenging the me freaks. But there is no me just a bunch of thought patterns that made one think im this or that. It has been very different unpleasant, some times crazy seeing the world like this, there is no descriptions or thoughts that could be accurate at all because they are made up according to the ego pattern. It all seems to be a big game. And every one seems to count on that game and getting the bigger better game. So this me is nuts, what's left of it. It's a challenge to talk or remember things, mantra spontaneous in the middle of the night and just seeing through the eyes is different. And yes, practice breath surrender and grace. Oh and more surrender. Like to kick the guy's butt who invented the me along with the guy who invented the high heel. Ha ha ha ha haaa rrrar. G:i do not offer enhancements - but rather lopping off heads. hahahahaha N: What! No pet a cure? Love Nyingje Maha Shanti
[FairfieldLife] Re: Love, the Ramtha School and Kundulini
Just to be clear, my Guru was not responding to your post, I was. I stated the general comments of my Guru. You will find it to parrellell Ramana Maharihsi, so possibly you can investigate what he says regarding the same comments. Tanmay --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bronte Baxter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bronte writes: The fact that your guru presumed to send a message to me brings up the emotion of irritation and anger, and I'm looking at that to see what goes. I realize I do have the opinion that gurus in general are part of a racket aimed at exploiting seekers. I have little respect for the lot of them. When I come across some enlightened person like Flanigan, or others, who isn't trying to convert people but simply sees the world from a certain perspective, and who'll tell you what that is if you happen to ask them about it, I find that cool. I'm interested. But people who fit the traditional concept of guru manipulate people's lives. They tell others they can read their souls and then they give them directions on how to live. They often wreck lives in the process. This is my experience. From what I've read of your postings in the past, your guru is of the traditional variety. I read the interchange you published on FFL between her and your friend and was appalled. I intend no insult to you personally, but Ron, I have to be frank. I just don't go for that stuff. So I have no desire to communicate with her or to receive comments on my postings from her. If YOU want to comment on something I wrote, that's a different matter. However, since guru lady has had a go at me, I'll have a go at her this one time. I really can't resist. It won't be pretty. Ron had written: * General comments coming from my Guru are - a person cannot be enlightened- this is why it is advised for the sadakas in my path here to think of Guru as consciosness and not the persona. Bronte writes: Bullshit. It's people who get enlightened. And gurus are no more and no less consciousness than the rest of us. Telling your lot not to think of you as a person but as consciousness is just a cool device for getting them to park their critical thinking at the door and swallow whole anything you tell them. *no doership with the enlightened as there is no one to do anything- the me is gone- sidhis, miracles, psychic phenomina may occur around the enlightened but this just happens, it is not being done Bronte says: All more crap. Yadda yadda yadda. If the me is gone for you lady, I don't want what you got. I perceive me-less people as walking zombies, who've sold out their sacred personhood for superior nihilistic bliss. Well go ahead and enjoy it. But if it's really that fulfilling for you, why do have a need to proseletyze to strangers who don't want to hear from you on Fairfield Life? Guru lady says: Also, the body has nothing to do with enlightenment- you are not the body, or mind, for when these things are gone, there is something left, this is what One IS. In the kudalini path, where shakti meets shiva, the kundalini journey, which is one of consciosness, is completed. Bronte says: The body has EVERYTHING to do with enlightenment. Enlightenment is achieved in the confines of the body. My old guru himself used to say that you have to come here and take on a body and get enlightened inside it in order the complete the journey of involution and evolution, the whole round-trip. Kundulini takes place IN a body, and transforms it into the divine. So your little preachy message here isn't even consistent with your own tradition. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In reply to Ron, who commented that developing psychic abilities has nothing to do with enlightenment ... bud, I disagree. IMO, the fully enlightened person * General comments coming from my Guru are - a person cannot be enlightened- this is why it is advised for the sadakas in my path here to think of Guru as consciosness and not the persona. would have access to divine abilities, psychic ones being part of it. *no doership with the enlightened as there is no one to do anything- the me is gone- sidhis, miracles, psychic phenomina may occur around the enlightened but this just happens, it is not being done When all the chakras are open and lit up with the power of kundulini energy -- available on a permanent basis -- the human being is capable of miracles. Also, the body has nothing to do with enlightenment- you are not the body, or mind, for when these things are gone, there is something left, this is what One IS. In the kudalini path, where shakti meets shiva, the kundalini journey, which is one of consciosness, is completed. Again, these are the general messages from my
