1998/04/25 12:33
kundalini-l-d Digest V98 #332
kundalini-l-d Digest Volume 98 : Issue 332
Today's Topics:
Re: Revelling [ "Paul West" <paulATnospamstationone.demon. ]
Re: Directions... (Ed) [ Jerry Katz <umbadaATnospamns.sympatico.ca> ]
Re: Jerry and Glo sittin' in a tree. [ Jerry Katz <umbadaATnospamns.sympatico.ca> ]
Re: Jerry and Glo sittin' in a tree. [ "Gloria Lee" <samyanaATnospamhotmail.com> ]
Re: The Nature of Self-Realization-( [ Afperry <AfperryATnospamaol.com> ]
Re: Pleasure (and an enlightenment t [ amckeonATnospamhsmail.nfld.k12.mn.us ]
Re: gets more curious [ "Sharon Webb" <shawebbATnospamyhc.edu> ]
Re: even more curious [ Dan Margolis <margolisATnospamtransbay.net ]
We are happy for you! [ Harsha1MTM <Harsha1MTMATnospamaol.com> ]
Re: Directions...Ed/Jerry [ "Gloria Lee" <samyanaATnospamhotmail.com> ]
Re: The Nature of Self-Realization-( [ Harsha1MTM <Harsha1MTMATnospamaol.com> ]
Re: Re: gets more curious [ Harsha1MTM <Harsha1MTMATnospamaol.com> ]
Date: 25 Apr 98 03:31:24 +0000
From: "Paul West" <paulATnospamstationone.demon.co.uk>
To: kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com
Subject: Re: Revelling
Message-Id: <3541590C.MD-0.196.paulATnospamstationone.demon.co.uk>
Hi Angie.
> Tell us then, do you know this: HOW CAN WE OPEN UP, ONCE AGAIN BE ONE???
Why ask me, everyone already is one. The only things in this world,
the only parts of people in this world which are not one, are the bits
which are not oneness.
There can be transformation but there can't be oneness so long as
those partial attitudes remain. There isn't much different between
seeing evil and seeing heaven, it's just a matter of how many parts of
reality you are prepared to see. The more you cover up the more
hell-like things become. Not that there is anything out of place, not
that this shouldn't happen, not that this does not have its place for
the way it is given the circumstances. It's still freedom.
> In earlier years, espcicially my earlier adolescence, I was overcome by
> shyness.
Sounds like me.
> aware...eventually I realized they coulnd't sense my energy the way I
> could theirs.
This is a tricky bit for me. I usually believe that the way I look at
another person is precicely the same thing as the way they really are.
That either happens when you're enlightened or when you're projecting
something onto the world. It's a universal fact for heaven and hell
alike. But somehow other people CAN'T see what I can see, and I can't
see what they can see. This is in fact a difficult thing for me
because a stranger might come up to me and be wearing certain clothes
that they may have chosen over a long period of time, there will be
great age and experience in their face, their whole personality will
have `the past' inside it, and yet it all comes here to stand in front
of me all at once. How the hell am I supposed to react but feel I have
been a bit slow off the mark? When this person somehow `knows' about
all these things and yet for me I am seeing them for the first time.
They seem to have something up on me, they know something I don't,
they're confident about the things they know about which I don't know
about and cannot be confident about. So IMO everyone else is more
confident than I am due to the simple fact that they know their
choices better than I do. But I have been learning that choice is an
illusion, it is a selfish thing, an exclusive thing. So if we are to
have oneness there should not be this choice, surely? Or does that
completely negate individuality? Can there be individuality if there
is oneness? I often feel the world would be a hell of a lot more like
heaven if people were more alike - didn't have so many personal
choices that other people wouldn't necessarily choose. I envisage a
heaven where everyone is alike.
But I am wrong, because there is such a wonderful thing as diversity -
of things being different and yet still being at-one. So obviously the
image or appearence of people is not the key to their oneness. It is
simply to find that there is a place for everything, which I like.
This includes the things we refer to as evil. Evil reality is like it
is simply because it /would/ be like that given the circumstances.
There is nothing out of place, no accidents, no uncertainty. If heaven
is the ability to see the whole of the front view of an apple then
hell is just what it looks like when you cover some of the apple up.
Of COURSE it would look that way. It's normal. Accept it. I think only
them, when we can accept the diversity and the difference without
thinking that it is out of place or that it hinders our union, only
then will there be that beautiful thing - transcendence. Thus oneness.
We have to be able to look at the diversity of humanity without the
comparison, to let it be, to just let it all be the way it is without
comparing things. One person wears red, another person wears green.
But there is no comparing, no saying that red is better or green is
better. Thus free choice and yet the same mental attitude - thus
oneness.
> open then I've ever been before, but now I cannot find others who
>are open
> and this is where I can identify entirely with what you're
>saying!!!!!
> Where are they all? Why the mental walls, the boxes, for goodness
>sake
> telepathy for fun and conectionwithall happens all the time, with
>everyone
> if we'd just let it!!! EVERYONE LISTEN UP!!!!! How can we open up?
As I started to say above. It is simply a matter for there being a
place for everything and everything in its place. _ORDER_.
I mean, we're not going to get oneness while there is comparison of
any kind. And comparison has a character of its own which people
sometimes want to choose - they want to buy comparison as an image
rather than just to compare two images. The image of comparison is
simply the fact that comparison can only see itself, it is selfish,
and so when we look at it we see its egotistical image. We just have
to let things be.
Let's say that heaven is the ability to see a pot plant at night with
the light on. Let's then cast a shadow onto the plant and say that
this is hell. If you look ONLY at the hell, excluding the rightful
place of heaven, you will see only a partial pot plant. Thus you lose
some of the evidence for what it really is - you stop being able to
know that it is oneness. And likewise, if you are in heaven and you
only look at the heaven, you stop being able to see the hell and this
too is exclusion. So you just have to let everything exist, all
possible levels of awareness, and let them all have a place. This
means to accept the past - the entirity of everything you have ever
done. It's like you just slip between everything regardless of its
nature, like a spring of water flowing amongst the fires of hell.
Transcendence.
I mean, what would you expect something to look like if it was
half-covered up so that you could only receive half of its reality? It
would look like a half-reality, and you might take a disliking to that
and in that disliking you will be in bias, in comparison, and you'll
say that the half-reality is worse than the whole one, and that it is
hell and that it has no rightful place and that you don't want it. But
this is born in AS comparison, not the thing being compared. So you
get rid of the compariso and you look and just see wholly that a
reality where half of the stuff is covered up is simply there, and
that is the fact of its nature, there is nothing hidden. And then you
just slip between it all. It's all because of expectations that we
can't be at-one - we expect that things are not right, that things are
not where they ought to be, that things don't look right. And it is
only in these expectations that this is true. But of course those
expectations throw you off the scent, projecting themselves onto the
world and making it look like the world is wrong. So you have to
withdraw that expectation, withdraw the expectation that reality is
more or less than you expect. I mean, things are the way they are
because that is how things /would/ NORMALLY be given the
circumstances. It is normal for there to be that loss or that
deception. You have to look at the fact of what things are, their
factuality, just what is there without saying it is evil or making
comparisons. Because the only place that evil actually exists is in
the comparisons, and not in the places that evil designates as being
/where/ evil exists. It takes some parts of reality and if it doesn't
like them it puts them into the `hell' slot, so we avoid those bits.
We must reclaim them. Reclaim out from the hell into a whole unity.
Reclaim freedom. Reclaim and in the act of reclaiming have RECLAIMED.
--
Paul.
Date: Sat, 25 Apr 1998 11:45:05 -0700
From: Jerry Katz <umbadaATnospamns.sympatico.ca>
To: lobATnospamlineone.net, rik_wATnospamrocketmail.com
CC: kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com
Subject: Re: Directions... (Ed)
Message-ID: <35422F31.2784ATnospamns.sympatico.ca>
Dear Lobbie,
I've been boiling some water, so WATCH OUT....
Ed Jason wrote:
> Yes. People by their inclinations define the nature of the path. They produce circus training for future clowns. They are happy to do so.
Yes. But haven't you seen the Hubble photographs? What about this or
that asteroid en route to Earth? Black holes through space....
Evolution!...I don't know...if it looks like a circus and acts like a
circus .... I think I wanna be sitting in the back seat of a pick-up,
putting on lipstick when I'm not backstage shoveling giraffe shit.
The nature of the path doesn't matter as much as whether it is a path
toward clowns or toward Truth. A clown path toward Truth is okay.
> The people interested in genuine development discover that the >effective individual exists already in their environment and encourages >them to avoid their tendencies to prefer circus entertainment.
Nobody interested in another's spiritual development encourages
avoidance of any type. Please be aware of avoidance.
Next step: "Your parents, what parents?" It doesn't matter what the
seeker prefers or 'serves.' We've been through this. What matters is
what drives a seeker within. If the circus does it, fine, enjoy the
peanuts. If a cave in the Himalayas does it, hey, enjoy the yak jerky.
Just be aware.
>At the same time the genuine attributes are revealed, reinforced and
>enhanced in order to further real progress.
At the same time as AWARENESS is encouraged, not avoidance. I don't know
what you mean by "genuine attributes." Sometimes, I swear, Ed, you are
using your literary skills only to hypnotize your readers and contain
them within your fold, such as it is. It is the oldest trick of the
Guru. Be complex, charming, abstruce, contradictory, and utter it all so
beautifully and calmly, and the masses will flock to you. You have
become what you criticize.
There are no "Genuine attributes." Of what? Just turn within to I AM.
There's nothing fancy about it. No genuine attributes.
> 'Spiritual' seekers are very few and far between. Experts, realised >individuals, 'k' activated holiness's and mad lobsters are the noisy >majority.
They are all few and far between, it would appear. Like birds
chattering, they make their presence known. It's not a bad thing and it
can always be turned off.
> Nothing can stop the sincere seeker after truth.
Yes.
> Everything confuses the clown seeker.
"Everything confuses the TRUTH seeker." When Truth is found, there is
clarity. Prior to that there is confusion. The clown seeker is having a
great time! There is lots of security in masses of people adhering to
the same lie.
Jerry (back to steering the universe through the Absolute)
_________
http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/umbada
Date: Sat, 25 Apr 1998 11:54:56 -0700
From: Jerry Katz <umbadaATnospamns.sympatico.ca>
To: amckeonATnospamhsmail.nfld.k12.mn.us, samyanaATnospamhotmail.com, madammumATnospamptialaska.net
CC: kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com
Subject: Re: Jerry and Glo sittin' in a tree...
Message-ID: <35423180.3ED5ATnospamns.sympatico.ca>
amckeon:
> > > I'd tell you two to get a room or take it on the road, but I am enjoying it
> > > too much. Carry on!
> > >
> > > voyeuristically,
> > > amckeon
Jerry wrote:
> > You like us. You really like us.
> v: yes, but you'd probably taste better in spaghetti...
> --
J:
What else would you do with one meatball and one gorgeous tomato?
> for what it's worth;
> valerie cooper
> http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/7982/index.html
You have a very nice website!
...J
Date: Sat, 25 Apr 1998 08:39:33 PDT
From: "Gloria Lee" <samyanaATnospamhotmail.com>
To: amckeonATnospamhsmail.nfld.k12.mn.us, madammumATnospamptialaska.net,
umbadaATnospamns.sympatico.ca
Cc: kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com
Subject: Re: Jerry and Glo sittin' in a tree...
Message-ID: <19980425153933.3913.qmailATnospamhotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
>Subject: Re: Jerry and Glo sittin' in a tree...
>
>amckeon:
>> > > I'd tell you two to get a room or take it on the road, but I am
enjoying it
>> > > too much. Carry on!
>> > >
>> > > voyeuristically,
>> > > amckeon
>
>
>Jerry wrote:
>> > You like us. You really like us.
>
>
>
>> v: yes, but you'd probably taste better in spaghetti...
>> --
>
>
>J:
>What else would you do with one meatball and one gorgeous tomato?
>
>
>> for what it's worth;
>> valerie cooper
>> http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/7982/index.html
>
>You have a very nice website!
>...J
>
Valerie..Loved your artworks!!! And stories, too..wowee,
so creative you are!! Hope more will take a looksee.. very good.
Amckeon,
Nice to know some on the list do not mind an occasional
outbreak of the circus...love those carnival mirrors, do you??
Simmering on the stove next to Lobster's hot water,
Glo
______________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Date: Sat, 25 Apr 1998 12:00:17 EDT
From: Afperry <AfperryATnospamaol.com>
To: Harsha1MTMATnospamaol.com
Cc: Kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com
Subject: Re: The Nature of Self-Realization-(Alan)
Message-ID: <8dff8f1a.35420893ATnospamaol.com>
In a message dated 24/4/98 8:27:00 pm, you wrote:
>I still do not see any difference between the two Slokas. Please do elaborate
>further if you have the time.
Dear Harsha,
I sparked on your post because the Mundaka is a personal favourite of mine
(largely because of the 'two birds' imagery that I find so compelling). But
like all Upanishads, much is open to differing levels of understanding and can
also be misunderstood if taken out of context - IMHO like the famous verse you
quoted which has almost mahavakya status. This/your verse (3.2.3) implies a
personality to God/Self and the absolute necessity of grace; but I believe
3.2.4 is intended as a qualifier, to remove any doubt that grace is not
abritrary but the fruition of sadhana - and 'correct' sadhana at that, not
over-zealous asceticism nor mere intellectual study. Of course, the overriding
'correct' sadhana is the intense inner longing for that realization - the
Self seeking to know itself - but the Mundaka in 3.1 is unequivocal that
through purification of the mind, truth, austerity and meditation the Self can
be known. Perhaps these can be seen as the supporting limbs of spiritual
discipline through which that intensity longing emerges: but they cannot be
circumvented and I think there is a danger that Verse 3.2.3., when read in
isolation, may give some the impression that sadhana is actually futile.
I must admit that your probing response sent me scurrying back to my library
to check my reading, which shows either a lack of confidence in my own
understanding or my respect for yours, or a combination of the two!! And I
freely admit that my own interpretation does not necessarily agree with
Shankaracharya's (a bold stance when one is commenting on the Upanishads, but
he can be so very impersonal, don't you think :-)?): however, as always I
would be most interested to hear your view on the matter, particularly as I
believe this is a matter of vital practical significance.
With blessings,
Alan
Date: Sat, 25 Apr 1998 11:28:19 -0500
From: amckeonATnospamhsmail.nfld.k12.mn.us
To: kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com
Subject: Re: Pleasure (and an enlightenment trait!) (Rik)
Message-ID: <1318618797-61411473ATnospamhsmail.nfld.k12.mn.us>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Me:
>
>> The facilitator was very good at showing me the error of my thinking
>> without making me feel like I am a worthless human being. Quite a
>> skill. THERE, there is an example of an enlightened trait!
>
Rik:
>Yes, definitely an admirable communication skill possessed by many
>even without enlightenment! :) On the other hand there do come
>times when a student's inflamed ego proudly cries out
>" ** PROVE that my understanding is not indeed Godly! **",
>in which case what can one do but grant his request? :)
The key as I see it is in using the "right tool for the job." Some
student's may need a whack upside the head (figuratively speaking) while
others only need tickling with a feather. Knowing the difference is
something that cannot be faked or emulated. Thanks for giving me the chance
to make this point :)
best wishes,
amckeon
Date: Sat, 25 Apr 1998 12:55:20 -0400
From: "Sharon Webb" <shawebbATnospamyhc.edu>
To: <kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com>
Subject: Re: gets more curious
Message-ID: <005e01bd706a$efa2a560$6bd11fa8ATnospamsharonwe>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Susan,
I wrote:
>It was only in retrospect that I recognized
>this as the dark night of my soul.
And you wrote:
>>Aaaah yesssssss, the dark night of the soul..........the dark goddess's
>>domain.
And I finally realized that this is what I was trying to say all along.
Love,
Sharon
shawebbATnospamyhc.edu
A new fractal gallery and screensaver was posted to this site, 4/3/98:
http://www.fractalus.com/sharon/
USA Today Hot Site; Cosmic Site of the Night: Cool Central Site of the Day;
ENC Digital Dozen; Enchantment Award; ArtSearch Featured Site;
NetTech NeatTech: Web Best ; Eye Candy Award; Studyweb Featured Site;
Lotus Light Award; Wave of the Day; Hot Site Award; Critical Mass Award;
Best of the Planet, People's Choice Award, 1998; WS Award; Treasured Site
Award
Date: Sat, 25 Apr 1998 09:56:17 -0700
From: Dan Margolis <margolisATnospamtransbay.net>
To: Susan Carlson <divine_goddessATnospamhotmail.com>,
Kundalini Mailing List <kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com>
Subject: Re: even more curious
Message-ID: <354215B1.2A3F4BDEATnospamtransbay.net>
Often the path of spirituality is described as walking along a razor blade
trying to keep your balance.
One of the fine lines drawn in the razors edge is the balance between
surrender and control. While following a path there are two directions one
can lean at any time that can lead to major trouble.
If one is too surrendering, they surrender not only to Shaktipat, goddess,
truth etc... but also to urges and instincts within them which are their own
creations. Symptoms include not noticing your impact on other people and
accidently hurting them, maintaining bad habits which you know better than
doing and letting impulses drive your every action.
If one is too much in control, they shut themselves off from the truth
because they of their own grasping. Symptoms include becoming distressed by
situations which they can't alter, seeking lifestyle changes instead of
inner changes, becoming unhappy with things exterior to themselves. There
is only one thing you have any control of and that is your perceptions of
the world around you. If you lean too much on the edge of control you try
to control other things outside yourself...
How do you learn to balance your life? The same way you learn to balance on
anything. Stand on the razors edge and when you notice yourself leaning too
far one direction start moving yourself the other direction, gyrating
flailing shifting back and forth until you wobble less and less. There are
exercises that help shift you in both directions, forms of physical, mental
and emotional self-discipline work towards control, forms of physical,
emotional and mental release work towards surrender...
This is what I mean by mindful practice. Watch yourself, watch your efforts
and their results. Be amused by all the flailings and arm wavings, and when
you start leaning too far one way start leaning the other direction.
There are many other edges that must be balanced but surrender and control
are good things to observe...
still trying to dance on the head of
a moving pin
Dan M.
Date: Sat, 25 Apr 1998 13:27:20 EDT
From: Harsha1MTM <Harsha1MTMATnospamaol.com>
To: shamanicsceneATnospamyahoo.com, Harsha1MTMATnospamaol.com
Cc: kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com
Subject: We are happy for you!
Message-ID: <985dbc6c.35421cfbATnospamaol.com>
In a message dated 4/24/1998, 7:27:06 PM, shamanicsceneATnospamyahoo.com writes:
<<< Greetings and light to the ones that don´t explain us how to
live. And
> love to the ones that explain THAT to themselves by mistakenly trying
> to tell it to us.
> >>
> Harsha: Thanks for the explanation (to yourself of course)!
Well you are so welcome. But if the explanation was to me there is
nothing to be thankful in the first place.>>
Harsha: Glad you clarified this further (to yourself once again)! We are happy
for you!
Date: Sat, 25 Apr 1998 11:33:30 PDT
From: "Gloria Lee" <samyanaATnospamhotmail.com>
To: umbadaATnospamns.sympatico.ca
Cc: Kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com
Subject: Re: Directions...Ed/Jerry
Message-ID: <19980425183332.4801.qmailATnospamhotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
>Dear Lobbie,
>I've been boiling some water, so WATCH OUT....
>
>
>Ed Jason wrote:
>> Yes. People by their inclinations define the nature of the path. They
produce circus training for future clowns. They are happy to do so.
>
>
>Yes. But haven't you seen the Hubble photographs? What about this or
>that asteroid en route to Earth? Black holes through space....
>Evolution!...I don't know...if it looks like a circus and acts like a
>circus .... I think I wanna be sitting in the back seat of a pick-up,
>putting on lipstick when I'm not backstage shoveling giraffe shit.
>
>The nature of the path doesn't matter as much as whether it is a path
>toward clowns or toward Truth. A clown path toward Truth is okay.
>
>
>> The people interested in genuine development discover that the
>effective individual exists already in their environment and encourages
>them to avoid their tendencies to prefer circus entertainment.
>
>
>Nobody interested in another's spiritual development encourages
>avoidance of any type. Please be aware of avoidance.
>
>Next step: "Your parents, what parents?" It doesn't matter what the
>seeker prefers or 'serves.' We've been through this. What matters is
>what drives a seeker within. If the circus does it, fine, enjoy the
>peanuts. If a cave in the Himalayas does it, hey, enjoy the yak jerky.
>Just be aware.
OK...a serious question arises here for me...regarding the variety of
paths...there is a long tradition of "many seek, few find"..the way is
narrow, etc..Lobster could no doubt cite many more references supporting
that view. In the sense that the "circus of life" has many distractions,
detours, and dead-ends, Ed is correct about the "lack of progress"...at
worst, people do fall into "many evils" or at best they merely waste a
lot of time. And even a "sincere seeker driven by pure motives" (anyone
spotted this rare creature lately??) CAN mistakenly go down a "wrong
path" or gratefully profit from a wake-up call delivered by life or
someone.
Just in the sense that other people can be more or less helpful, to this
theoretically purely-driven seeker)...Ed has a valid point to make.
Jerry, by saying "Please Be aware of avoidance," provides an excellent
example of "spiritual advising." You both seem 'right'... to me, just
sorta making different points and observations.
But back to my question, as honest as I know how to be at this time,
I am aware of being both "sincerely driven and seeking" and
equally aware of "being full of crap"...and avoiding.. (opinions vary
day to day on this). (Please, no wagering..) So taking myself both
seriously and UNseriously..seems helpful and appropriate, depending
on situation. So maybe if you both could say a bit more about the nature
of this process (towards progress) Maybe I am on some "clown's path
toward Truth"..(they say clowns are laughing on the outside to hide the
crying on the inside)...well, I would like to hear more about how the
path does not matter..and then what DOES MATTER???
Maybe any religion (or no religion) is as good as any other..I am not
asking that sort of question..as in "here, try a little Buddhism..its
good for your ego problem"...but how unique and individual does any
spiritual advice need to be?? Its easy to say "just turn within"...
but you know what's IN THERE!!!
<SNIP>
>
>> Nothing can stop the sincere seeker after truth.
>
>
>Yes.
>
>
>> Everything confuses the clown seeker.
>
>
>"Everything confuses the TRUTH seeker." When Truth is found, there is
>clarity. Prior to that there is confusion. The clown seeker is having a
>great time! There is lots of security in masses of people adhering to
>the same lie.
This is very good material ....post the above with your submissions to
your website, Jerry. You may win your own contest..think of the postage
you'll save.
>
>Jerry (back to steering the universe through the Absolute)
>_________
>http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/umbada
>
>
>
______________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Date: Sat, 25 Apr 1998 14:24:25 EDT
From: Harsha1MTM <Harsha1MTMATnospamaol.com>
To: AfperryATnospamaol.com
Cc: Kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com
Subject: Re: The Nature of Self-Realization-(Alan)
Message-ID: <bc75a57e.35422a5aATnospamaol.com>
In a message dated 4/25/1998, 12:00:17 PM, Afperry writes:
<< This/your verse (3.2.3) implies a personality to God/Self and the absolute
necessity of grace; but I believe 3.2.4 is intended as a qualifier, to remove
any doubt that grace is not abritrary but the fruition of sadhana - and
'correct' sadhana at that, not over-zealous asceticism nor mere intellectual
study. Of course, the overriding 'correct' sadhana is the intense inner
longing for that realization - the Self seeking to know itself - but the
Mundaka in 3.1 is unequivocal that through purification of the mind, truth,
austerity and meditation the Self can be known. Perhaps these can be seen as
the supporting limbs of spiritual discipline through which that intensity
longing emerges: but they cannot be circumvented and I think there is a danger
that Verse 3.2.3., when read in isolation, may give some the impression that
sadhana is actually futile.>>
Dear Alan,
Very good points. Thank you for your clear and informative
response. I very much enjoyed reading it. When the genuine longing for Self is
there, everything follows in due course. What you say is also supported by
Patanjali who says that both "Spiritual Practice" and "Detachment" are needed
for "Success." So in order to Fly, the embodied soul, needs two wings. Right
Vision and Right Practice.
With great love --- Harsha
Date: Sat, 25 Apr 1998 14:07:48 EDT
From: Harsha1MTM <Harsha1MTMATnospamaol.com>
To: divine_goddessATnospamHotmail.Com, kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com
Subject: Re: Re: gets more curious
Message-ID: <f8100cf9.35422675ATnospamaol.com>
In a message dated 4/25/1998, 1:20:15 AM, divine_goddessATnospamhotmail.com writes:
<<Susan:
Harsha had the better response. I didnt even realize that was what I was
doing...questioning the obvious.
Harsha: In order to ask the obvious questions, one must have experience,
sincerity and a genuine longing for the Truth. That is what gives the
confidence to be straight forward and come right to the point. The spiritually
inexperienced beat around the bush as the fake gurus dazzle them with
brilliance or baffle them with bullshit whichever seems to work for the
moment. While all this is going on, the usual disciples will be claiming, "Our
guru is both stupid and smart and also beyond it all at the same time." or
"Our guru is greedy and detached and beyond both.." Or "Our guru is one with
all and one with nothing, which mean the same thing, and also beyond all
oneness." Or "It is very very very very difficult to understand the exhalted
state of our guru because he is so wise and yet so foolish. By the way, he
recently became unenlightened to help the greater humanity. Yes, on purpose he
broke his vow of celibacy once a day for 20 years so he could be like everyone
else and help them." So please don't ask any tough questions." :--))
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.