1998/04/06 21:15
kundalini-l-d Digest V98 #274
kundalini-l-d Digest Volume 98 : Issue 274
Today's Topics: Re: KL : EGO [ "Sandeep Chatterjee" ]
[Fwd: KL : EGO] [ Dan Margolis To: "Jan Barendrecht"
Cc: Subject: Re: KL : EGO
Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Hello Jan,
Whatever you say Jan is perfectly OK with me.
Just for kicks you might like to go to the List Owner of Lakota and check
who is the source of the two articles that you have referred to.
After you have got your answer, then comeback and reflect on this:
Nothing I write, express, feel, communicate, espouse or state do I claim ownership.
My best wishes to your advertising friend and to you Jan
In zikr
Sandeep
-----Original Message----- From: Jan Barendrecht
To: kundalini-lATnospamlists.execpc.com Date: Monday, April 06, 1998 10:58 PM
Subject: Re: KL : EGO
>Hi Sandeep,
> >This time it took me some time. Or put more accurately, one of my friends
>who has been working for an advertising agency. I asked him for an opinion >on your posts (actually, I "bought" his services in exchange for song I am
>making). This is what he told me: >
>"I would have offered this man a job immediately. He uses all the tricks of >the trade - I will explain to you. You always use arguments; you are wrong.
>Common people use feelings for communication - not arguments. He uses your >name many times - just to associate you with somebody lost in delusion for
>whom he can show compassion. It is very effective. I will show you another >example. His name and E-mail address suggests Bombay - anyway, somewhere in
>India. In India, poor people are miserably dying from starvation and illness
>in the streets - he refers to this but doesn´t say it. Then he continues and
>suggests, you take another look at dying. He knows that in the West, the >majority dies under very different conditions - many sleeping peacefully or
>with a smile on their face. But the harm is done; again, I would have hired >this man immediately. Take my word for it: this man probably did not
compose >a single bar of music in his life! No doubt his writing skill brought him a
>lot of vanity. Because your eyes are bad, I checked this for you and yes, I >found these sites (there may be more):
> >http://www.elexion.com/lakota/textos/texto25b.htm whirlpools in the river
>of life >
>http://www.elexion.com/lakota/textos/texto24b.htm#24 god is dead >
>I hope you get the message. Take my advice and exchange this NG for a NG >about music if you do want to communicate with other people. You would do
>your eyes a favor and me too. Successful writing is making an emotional >wrapping first. Then you attach the message. With the proper emotional
>wrapping, you can convey any message. It's the essence of advertising. This >way, you don't have to be original. Judging content, he isn't."
> >Having digested the words of my friend, yes, Sandeep, there is a universe
of >differences between us. It will save you a lot of time Sandeep, if you don´
t >have to reply to my comments anymore. So, dear Sandeep, let us continue
life >on the basis of mutual respect but without replying to each others posts.
Do >you agree Sandeep, that this makes sense? For me it does, Sandeep.
> >Jan
> >
> >
>> -----Original Message----- >> From: Sandeep Chatterjee [mailto:sandeepcATnospambom3.vsnl.net.in]
>> Sent: Sunday, April 05, 1998 5:25 PM >> To: Jan Barendrecht
>> Cc: kundalini-lATnospamlists.execpc.com >> Subject: Re: KL : EGO
>> >>
>> Hi Jan, >>
>> I have been away over the weekend and I see lot of water has >> flown under the
>> Bridge of Ego. >>
>> Firstly all I wish to do here Jan is attempt some more clarity of what I >> said earlier.
>> I do not wish to convince you because for me Life is a mystery beyond the >> tools of reasoning or logic. The mystery is "livable" not
>> "solvable" for me. >> So may I bow out of this game of analysis and paralysis.
>> >> Secondly Jan for me there are close to 2.5 billion paths to Truth or
>> whatever was the last global population figure. Each is valid and I have >> little interest to compare and contrast. Yes there are "imagined"
>> paths but >> for me even these are valid states of being.
>> If one chooses to be "asleep" it is perfectly alright with me. >>
>> >> Thirdly the key issue is not my words or path being espoused, it is your
>> state of being as of now. >> May I humbly suggest to you Jan, to let my words sit on you,
>> get a feel of >> them and if you find value- good.
>> If you don't , cast them aside without any further ado or expending of >> energy in refuting them as I have no case to affirm or seek converts for.
>> Not even a case that I be seen as correct. >>
>> >> Sandeep (earlier):I would say an enlightened person lives totally and
>> completely in the NOW. >>
>> Does this imply that all others are living in the past or the future? >> Becoming enlightened then, must be equal to time-travel : - ))
>> >> Sandeep:
>> Forget everybody else. Look at yourself Jan. Do you or don't you >> live in the
>> past? And what is our normal sense of future? >> Dear God (or whatever is one's Mantra) let such and such not happen
again, >> or such and such did not happen, Dear God let such and such happen.
>> Our future is born from the seeds of our past. >>
>> It is only the Now which presents itself to us afresh, virgin but >> we look at
>> the Now with the eyes burdened by our past. >> For a being who "knows" the past, nay the moment that has passed does not
>> exist any more. >>
>> Jan: >> The evoking of the moment of now - why should it do anything at all?
>> >> Sandeep:
>> >> I do not have an answer for you.
>> May I suggest live in the moment totally and comletely "dead" to the past >> and arrive at your "knowing".
>> >> Jan:
>> A dead person does not analyze, think, interfere, choose, judge and act >> and it creates silence around it. Yet I wouldn´t call a dead person
>> enlightened. >>
>> Sandeep: >> There is also a state of being that does not analyze, think,
>> intefere, judge >> and "apparently" does not act and yet the most fundamental creativity and
>> actions appropriate to the moment occur through such states of being. >> In fact all fundamental "leaps" of discovery whether it be in Music or
>> Science takes place when one is dead to the "known". >>
>> Jan: >> Music gets created in the mind and not in or by an instrument.
>> >> Sandeep:
>> Is it Music of Re-Mixes that get created in the Mind? >> Any musician or for that matter a scientist who has created/discovered
>> anything original will acknowledge that what emerged through him/her had >> nothing to do with him/her or his/her "knowledge" of the subject.
>> >>
>> >> Sandeep:
>> >> >So to say such and such person became enlightened or even as some of the
>> >self confessed Gurus of today who affirm their enlightenment is BS. >> >Why?
>> >Because if there was still "someone" around to affirm, then >> really nothing
>> >has changed. >> >Rather a more correct description of the state would be........ I am no
>> >more, Isness Is. >>
>> Jan: >> Smiling... So the isness is stating it is only isness?
>> >> Sandeep:
>> A fundamental statement and I very happy that you did arrive at this state
>> of enquiry. >> Sounds ridiculous doesn't it?
>> That is because of the limitation in communication, both verbal as well as
>> through a medium as Internet. >> Truth spoken is false and anything said about Truth including
>> using the word >> Isness is taking you away from Truth.
>> Even to be silent while being much closer to Truth is still >> saying something
>> about truth viz that the quality of truth is silence. >> But tell me dear friend how to then communciate at all?
>> And that is why all those who "attained" spoke of What is NOT. On what IS >> they let the disciple find out for themselves.
>> >>
>> Jan: >> And please answer this question: If "I" am no more, where did it go and
>> whence did it come? >>
>> Sandeep: >> It never was, and will never be .The identification was the illusion.
>> Just like assume darkness as real and try to eliminate darkness. All your >> life you may spend your energy (and this is what you are trying to do in
>> trying to quiten the mind) and you cannot defeat darkness.Know for what it
>> is, ie bring the Light of Awareness and in that instant darkness >> is no more.
>> >> Sandeep (earlier):
>> I am reminded here of the Zen Masters. The greatest contribution >> of Zen for
>> >me is the "demystification" of the whole gamut of enlightenment, Samadhi,
>> >Kundalini Awakening, Nirvana, Moksha etc. >>
>> >Asked what was the difference before and after enlightenment a Zen Master
>> >laughed and said Now when I am hungry I only eat, when I am tired I only >> >sleep.
>> >In such an ordinary statement look at the profoundness. In our ordinarily
>> >life do we at all "only" eat or "only" sleep.This Zen Master is saying he
>> >lives in the Now. >>
>> Jan: >>
>> The stray dogs I meet and feed when hiking do the very same. They >> are hungry
>> and only eat. When they are tired they only sleep. They are ever >> living in
>> the "now" but they don´t claim to be Zen masters. And they don´t hit me >> with a stick
>> >> Sandeep:
>> >> You think so? Have you seen a dog dying? I once spent close to an hour
>> watching a dog die. There was no struggle, there was no "Why Me", >> there was
>> only "let Thy Will be Done".There was total surrender, total acceptance. >> And Jan next time don't shun away from a human being dying. Look
>> at his/her >> face till the last moment. You will "know" much.
>> >> Yes a dog lives in non-duality but is not aware of it's nature. Existence
>> evolved into human being with no difference whatsoever except a >> capacity to
>> be aware of his own nature.This capacity is which differentiates this >> evolution.
>> >> I am now somewhat exhausted and will attempt separately to answer
>> your other >> points.
>> >> In zikr
>> >>
>> Sandeep >>
>> >>
>> >
> >
Date: Mon, 06 Apr 1998 17:25:57 -0700 From: anandajyoti
To: Gloria Lee CC: ImtgxxxATnospamaol.com, kundalini-lATnospamlists.execpc.com
Subject: Re: Master debaters? Message-ID:
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------649A2A900C4415976DE06565"
Gloria Lee wrote:
> > > >xxxtg >
> >* Master debaters often argue with themselves * > >
> No doubt this is true, but WHO wins?? WHO?? >
Who or What is asking?
Anandajyoti
Attachment Converted: "d:\slip\eudora\attach\kundal36" Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1998 09:06:43 -1000 (HST)
From: Chuam Lin To: kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com
Subject: AutoPost from Kundalini Resource Center Message-Id:
Here is a website related to kundalini, in which I found the most interesting and
profound things in the world. http://www-personal.umich.edu/~taow/falun.html
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1998 08:46:51 +0530 From: "Sandeep Chatterjee"
To: "Gloria Lee" Cc:
Subject: Re: Welcome Sandeep Message-ID:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Hello Gloria,
-----Original Message-----
>Dear Sandeep,
> Please pass along my and our thanks to your "friend" who sent you >here to us.
Sandeep:
Hello John Heaton. I have been asked by Gloria to pass on thanks to you
though I wonder at the bargain she has got (grin).
Enjoy your posts so much!!! Pray tell the meaning of zikr, >ok??
Zikr is a Sufi word. Ordinarily it means to mention, to indicate but for me
the real essence is " rememberance". The beauty of Sufism for me is their premise that whatsoever you are in this
moment is complete.Nothing needs to be done, except remember this fact, remember that Allah and you are not two seperate but that all is Allah.
Mansood exclaimed Anal haq -I am Allah and he was chopped up for his words.
He was remembering not as an Intellectual memory recall but his whole being resonated with this rememberance.
I like Sufis and their way of teaching through stories and anecdotes and
essentially their path of love. For me Sufi has taken the best of Islam and the best of Hinduism
just like Zen which emerged from merger of Buddhism and Taoism and as it happens, the hybrid seed flowers more strongly than the parents, Sufism like
Zen reached heights of consciousness unparalled.
Zen went a step further when it even discarded Sufi's love for the Divine. If I am Divine, if I am All that IS, then "love myself" seems childish.
Zen enabled Divinity to be seen, to be experienced in the mundane, in the ordinary
However for me Zen is still serious.The mundane is still "serious stuff".
When one can seen the divinity in the very enjoyment of all that is there to
enjoy, when the distinction of non-serious and serious has been laughed away in a smoke viz the state of "Zorba the Buddha" then ....................
Well here is one Zorba hitting the watering spots.
Cheerful zikr
Sandeep Date: Mon, 06 Apr 1998 16:22:12 -0700
From: anandajyoti To: Imtgxxx
CC: david.bozziATnospamsnet.net, kundalini-lATnospamlists.execpc.com Subject: Re: a poem
Message-ID:
Arguing with oneself gives a variety of answers, and many a time good ones at that, ain't that true?
Anandajyoti
Imtgxxx wrote:
> < anandajyoti wrote: > > At least , > somebody knows the difference of being unripe compared to the
> ripe ego, > or is it vice versa. >
> David wrote: The unripe ones are green, right? >
> Unless you apply it to green tomatoes.... >
> xxxtg > * Master debaters often argue with themselves *
> > http://members.aol.com/Teeegeee/tgsplace.html
To: Sandeep Chatterjee CC: kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com
Subject: Re: God is Dead Message-ID:
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------935215213C7DD852169399E0"
Well said, Sandeep Sounds to be an epitaph for God. Anandajyoti!
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/6782
Sandeep Chatterjee wrote:
> God Is Dead >
> > WHO KILLED HIM?
> > We did!
> > We located Him and confined Him to the heavens, excluding Him from the
> > earth.
> > We dared to make images of Him. We gave the Ancient of Days a long
> grey > beard
> and a human form. >
> We cast His role as lying at the beginning of creation, >
> with odd interventions here and there in history. >
> We only conceded to Him "Acts of God" strange capricious disasters >
> which insurance companies will not cover. >
> We restricted His worship to drafty, old, stone buildings, one day out > of
> seven. >
> We gave Him Who has no form as we know it, a human form, >
> and when a mortal human being reminded us of God's transcendence >
> we elevated that man into a deity. >
> Our scientists stole His laws, straight plagiarism. >
> The planets had moved in elliptical orbits for millions of years > before
> Newton 'discovered' the Laws of Motion. >
> Lacking a Supreme Being we elevated nature to a position not hers. >
> Then we methodically set out to conquer this power, devastating land, > sea,
> our foodand the very air we breathe. >
> Already satisfied that we had got rid of God, we revived an assembly > of
> lesser gods >
> that would have confused the Greeks, embarrassed the Romans and are > the
> envy of the Hindus. >
> We are contemptuous of worship and prayer, yet we pass our lives in a > thousand empty rituals,
> adoring and propitiating a multitude of friendly and hostile gods. >
> We spend lives dedicated to eating and drinking. >
> Is this not worship? >
> We have committed ourselves to spending the greater part of our lives > making money,
> > and by that we make money our god, for no ascetic monk in his little
> cell > ever showed more complete devotion.
> > We have restored the old idol of voluptuous sexuality, and its nubile
> form > graces our newspapers, films, our walls and our dreams.
> > It, in its turn, has rewarded us with venereal diseases, their sister
> AIDS > and social disintegration
> on an unparalleled scale. >
> We are too proud to bow before God, but we will crawl on our faces to > the
> bank manager, >
> when we run into trouble on our mortgages. >
> We are, in fact, living our lives in order to buy our houses, like > Pharaoh
> who dedicated his reign >
> to building his pyramidical tomb. >
> With God passed away Heaven and Hell and in their place we put the > fantasy,
> > never-never land of computer graphics and its fully-automated,
> centrally-heated, > double-glazed, fast-food brothel which has unfortunately the
> terrifying potential to > metamorphose into the
> Gulag Archipelago, genocidal massacres and state tyranny as a way of > life.
> > -----
> ------------------------------------------------------------------ >
> So God is dead >
> We killed Him. >
> Yet the God we killed does not exist anyway. >
> God one-of-three does not exist. God old man with grey beard does not > exist.
> > God remote above the heavens does not exist.
> > God of this or that people does not exist.
> > God who sent His son does not exist.
> > God as Avatars coming to save Humanity from time to time does not
> exist >
> > There is no god,
> > But THAT
> > beyond all words, all definitions, all religions, all philosophies,
> beyond > the
> Gita, beyond the Bible, beyond the Koran beyond all mortal thought and >
> human > conception
> ---------- > -------------------------------------------------------------
> THAT is One. >
> THAT is not located in any place, for if THAT were, THAT would be > limited
> and > so,
> > not divine.
> > THAT has no form, for THAT is the ceaseless originator of all forms.
> > THAT eternally creates the entire cosmos, and THAT sustains every
> photon, >
> atom, cell and quasi-stellar object at every instant. >
> Without THAT they do not exist. >
> THAT sustains every living thing, Christian, Jew, Hindu or Atheist. >
> THAT is not the Lord of the Arabs or the Jews, or the Christians, >
> but Lord of the Worlds, of all beings and of all Being. >
> No thing resembles THAT, no image nor concept, >
> yet THAT is the Hearing, the Seeing. >
> THAT has no son, for THAT's son would have to be a god with limitless > power
> > and it is impossible for two omnipotent beings to exist, they would
> limit > each other.
> > Anything limited is not a god.
> > THAT is terrible might and power, and sublime mercy and compassion.
> > THAT is far exalted above and yet THAT is useless
> > for if THAT was to be useful for anything a Goal, an aim, a
> destination >
> the Goal, the aim, the destination would be higher than THAT >
> and nothing is higher than THAT. >
> God is dead. THAT IS, >
> The Living Who does not die. >
> THAT is the Vast and no name can be named for THAT >
> even THAT. Sandeep
Attachment Converted: "d:\slip\eudora\attach\kundal37" Date: Sun, 5 Apr 1998 13:57:33 EDT
From: Imtgxxx To: kundalini-lATnospamlists.execpc.com
Subject: Enlightenment (One Mo' Time) Message-ID:
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Hellooo List....
Not to bring up a past subject, but heck, I'm gonna do it anyway....
I've been asking myself these questions these past few weeks about the
discussions on Enlightenment.... Why do some people think/know they are enlightened? Why are there so many arguments (ok, discussions) on whether or
not someone is enlightened? How will I know when I, or someone else, would be enlightened? What are the traits of Enlightenment? and the questions go
on and on....
It is important to discover what your own definition of Enlightenment means. And once you achieve that definition, then, you would be *enlightened*. Now
that doesn't mean you would be enlightened in someone else's eyes....
For instance, I may have a goal of *being rich*. What is my definition of that? Being rich to me may mean making $100,000 a year. To someone who
already makes $100,000 a year, it means being a millionaire. To a millionaire, being rich means being a multi-millionaire, and so on.... I may
already be *rich* (making my measly $100 grand) in the eyes of someone who only makes $15,000 a year.
On his audio tapes and books, Dr. Wayne Dyer is always proclaiming his
enlightenment. It is obvious to me that his definition comes from freedom and acceptance. He explains his definition further in the last chapter of his
book, "Your Erroneous Zones", which I have displayed on my webpage.
To be enlightened from Ram's point of view, is to be in the state he was in that he mentioned. And when he is not in that state, he is not enlightened
(from his viewpoint - I beg to differ).
The question would be then, is, what belief and definition have you placed upon being enlightened? Until this group as a whole, comes to one
conclusion, there will always be conflict on this subject as to who is enlightened or what it means. Being that this will most likely not be
occurring any time soon, I remain....
xxxtg To: Kundalini Mailing List
Subject: [Fwd: KL : EGO] Message-ID:
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------A42932F3826F9040389F2400"
Message-ID:
Date: Sun, 05 Apr 1998 15:53:01 -0700 From: Dan Margolis
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.02 [en] (Win95; I)
To: david.bozziATnospamsnet.net Subject: Re: KL : EGO
References:
David Bozzi wrote:
> Jan Barendrecht wrote: >
> > Control of the activities of mind (yoga) means > > control of ego also.
> > Who controls ego?
The higher mind... through constant vigilance...
A sufi story in the book 'Thinkers of the East" by Idries Shah describes
this:
One day Latif the Thief ambushed the commander of the Royal Guard, captured him and took him to a cave.
'I am going to say something that, no matter how much you try, you will be unable to forget,' he told the infuriated officer.
Latif made his prisoner take off all his clothes. Then he tied him, facing backwards, on a donkey.
'You may be able to make a fool of me,' screamed the soldier, 'but you'll never make me think of something if I want to keep it out of my
mind.' 'You have not yet heard the phrase which I want you to remember,'
said Latif. 'I am turning you loose now, for the donkey to take you back to town. And the phrase is:
'"I'll catch and kill Latif the Thief, if it takes me the rest of my life!"'
DISCLAIMER!
Home | Archive Index | Search the archives | Subscribe
K. List FAQ | Kundalini FAQs | Signs and Symptoms | Awakening Experiences | K. list Polls | Member Essays | Meditations | List Topics | Art Gallery | Cybrary | Sitemap | Email the moderators.
symbol.