Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2015 5:40:00 GMT -5
morning sunshine agree disagree or other ??  ola Farmer! no one ever is though there seem to be separate minds who think they are ... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2015 5:49:17 GMT -5
morning sunshine agree disagree / other ?? ola Farmer! no one ever is though there seem to be separate minds who think they are ... the quote I posted was created in humor, so well, there's that  |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 5, 2015 6:19:31 GMT -5
But your "PEACE" is conditional. Sorry guy, there's another peace that is beyond description by words, much less a body-practice road map. conditional only where it comes to practice--like autolysis--once the hole is punched it stays open, that is the peace you point to Nope, not the peace I'm pointing to. Unconditional peace isn't contingent upon any conditions. |
|
|
|
Post by laughter on Dec 5, 2015 6:27:53 GMT -5
Well, is there: .. or many? What is realized is absolute, always here and now, which is to say, eternal. The chakra's are relative points of entry and exit, and the work you're referring to is reconditioning those. That might lead to a better person, a better experience -- or it might not -- but none of that has any bearing on the truth. It can happen before or after realization, or not at all. No bearing, no relationship. It seems that OTOH there is SR and OTOH there is SR. However, if all karma is not burned up where one has a clean slate, the journey ain't over. It doesn't matter what kinds of words are thrown into the arena (dialogue) or by whom. The journey's over when ya' die, and karma's constantly created and resolved -- partially or otherwise -- for as long as that lasts. Karma isn't some spiritual accounting ledger in the sky. That's a Western misconception of it that makes for a nice lever of control. It's the same boogeyman as the Devil, just reformulated. Thing 'bout karma is that any action has the entirety of eternity as it's possible target, and while you might assume a given reaction is because of the impure thought you had over lunch last Tuesday, fact is it might instead match up exactly to the misbehavior of some 5 year old sentient squid on a planet orbiting Orion a century in the future. Any conceptual meaning you try to make of this reality is doomed dude. Give it up. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2015 9:02:27 GMT -5
conditional only where it comes to practice--like autolysis--once the hole is punched it stays open, that is the peace you point to Nope, not the peace I'm pointing to. Unconditional peace isn't contingent upon any conditions. never mind, we speak different languages and come from different backgrounds~pasts. peace is always there, unlimited and infinite at some point the veil drops, or is torn, and one becomes aware of it. c'est tout. paz |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2015 9:13:08 GMT -5
It seems that OTOH there is SR and OTOH there is SR. However, if all karma is not burned up where one has a clean slate, the journey ain't over. It doesn't matter what kinds of words are thrown into the arena (dialogue) or by whom. The journey's over when ya' die, and karma's constantly created and resolved -- partially or otherwise -- for as long as that lasts. Karma isn't some spiritual accounting ledger in the sky. That's a Western misconception of it that makes for a nice lever of control. It's the same boogeyman as the Devil, just reformulated.
Thing 'bout karma is that any action has the entirety of eternity as it's possible target, and while you might assume a given reaction is because of the impure thought you had over lunch last Tuesday, fact is it might instead match up exactly to the misbehavior of some 5 year old sentient squid on a planet orbiting Orion a century in the future.
Any conceptual meaning you try to make of this reality is doomed dude. Give it up. btw not only ´´western ´´ misconception.The entire Hindu kast-system is based on it. |
|
|
|
Post by figgles on Dec 5, 2015 11:15:59 GMT -5
I am speaking of the "Jed McKenna" character of the book series....who from what I understand, is really just a character created by an author, not an actual person. He is very clear through his discourse in the book about how he feels about other people, particularly those who are not awake...heck, he could hardly even bear to have a conversation with his own sister who he had not seen for some time....how is it that dude would be looking foward to 'fun with new faces' if he can hardly bear sitting face to face with a family member...or has to hire an assistant to 'interface with a world in which I just no longer function very well in'? I'm not buying that the Jed of that forum is the character or even the sole author of books (i have heard there were 2 authors involved, so perhaps one has ventured off the do the forum...?) ....I've read through a bit and the forum "Jed" seems very careful about not crossing the line of saying that he is author/character of the books......Or perhaps I've just missed posts where he indicates that he is the same Jed as in the books....? feel free to enlighten me if this is so... I am speaking of the actual being behind 'Jed McKenna'. The points you raised have already been mentioned earlier in the thread. Don't buy anything. You have your own head. Well, I've not spent any time at all talking the the guy of the forum, so, All I can really speak to is the "jed" of the books. That Jed in his own words, "does not do heart." & fwiw, As I recall the "Jed" of the books was very clear on his conveyance to readers to be wary of paying heed to the being behind Jed McKenna or the behavior/being of any other who puts forth words attempting to convey Truth, but rather, to take the message put forth at face value, independent of the character/behavior/way of being of the one offering it, or if it doesn't resonate, leave it...essentially, to disregard "messenger' in favor of the message. In this sense, he makes it clear, whether one is loving,kind, compassionate or not, has little to do with basic Truth realization. And as I've said, I agree if he is simply speaking of basic TR....in terms of possibility of deepening though, TR is just the very tip of an ice-burg. The book Jed Does indeed speak of deepening, going further post TR, and as I've said does seem to demonstrate some degree of having 'gone further' himself as the books progress...but still nowhere near an actual 'embodiment of Love' in the sense that he is wide open and seeing 'other' as one with 'I' when it comes to his interactions. He still very much focuses upon differences that irritate and repel and in general, create a surface sense of separation between him and others who appear to him. |
|
|
|
Post by figgles on Dec 5, 2015 12:40:08 GMT -5
Well, I've not spent any time at all talking the the guy of the forum, so, All I can really speak to is the "jed" of the books. That Jed in his own words, "does not do heart." & fwiw, As I recall the "Jed" of the books was very clear on his conveyance to readers to be wary of paying heed to the being behind Jed McKenna or the behavior/being of any other who puts forth words attempting to convey Truth, but rather, to take the message put forth at face value, independent of the character/behavior/way of being of the one offering it, or if it doesn't resonate, leave it...essentially, to disregard "messenger' in favor of the message. In this sense, he makes it clear, whether one is loving,kind, compassionate or not, has little to do with basic Truth realization. And as I've said, I agree if he is simply speaking of basic TR....in terms of possibility of deepening though, TR is just the very tip of an ice-burg. The book Jed Does indeed speak of deepening, going further post TR, and as I've said does seem to demonstrate some degree of having 'gone further' himself as the books progress...but still nowhere near an actual 'embodiment of Love' in the sense that he is wide open and seeing 'other' as one with 'I' when it comes to his interactions. He still very much focuses upon differences that irritate and repel and in general, create a surface sense of separation between him and others who appear to him.
It's an illusion that you are seeing. He simply doesn't want to be worshipped. Did you read his books? He's pretty insistent in the first three about his deep distaste for interfacing with most people, his own sister included. He really drives home the point that he's got little patience/tolerance for non-awakened folks....and, important to note, he regards the majority of folks the world over to be sleeping. Regardless of a realization of Oneness, if one is purposefully creating a buffer between him and interaction with 'others' appearing in his world, because his dislike of them is so strong, there is indeed a 'surface sense of separation' happening there. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Dec 5, 2015 19:02:06 GMT -5
It seems that OTOH there is SR and OTOH there is SR. However, if all karma is not burned up where one has a clean slate, the journey ain't over. It doesn't matter what kinds of words are thrown into the arena (dialogue) or by whom. The journey's over when ya' die, and karma's constantly created and resolved -- partially or otherwise -- for as long as that lasts. Karma isn't some spiritual accounting ledger in the sky. That's a Western misconception of it that makes for a nice lever of control. It's the same boogeyman as the Devil, just reformulated. Thing 'bout karma is that any action has the entirety of eternity as it's possible target, and while you might assume a given reaction is because of the impure thought you had over lunch last Tuesday, fact is it might instead match up exactly to the misbehavior of some 5 year old sentient squid on a planet orbiting Orion a century in the future. Any conceptual meaning you try to make of this reality is doomed dude. Give it up. To each his own. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Dec 5, 2015 20:12:21 GMT -5
It seems that OTOH there is SR and OTOH there is SR. However, if all karma is not burned up where one has a clean slate, the journey ain't over. It doesn't matter what kinds of words are thrown into the arena (dialogue) or by whom. The journey's over when ya' die, and karma's constantly created and resolved -- partially or otherwise -- for as long as that lasts. Karma isn't some spiritual accounting ledger in the sky. That's a Western misconception of it that makes for a nice lever of control. It's the same boogeyman as the Devil, just reformulated. Thing 'bout karma is that any action has the entirety of eternity as it's possible target, and while you might assume a given reaction is because of the impure thought you had over lunch last Tuesday, fact is it might instead match up exactly to the misbehavior of some 5 year old sentient squid on a planet orbiting Orion a century in the future. Any conceptual meaning you try to make of this reality is doomed dude. Give it up. Q: And what is death? Niz: It is the change in the living process of a particular body. Integration ends and disintegration sets in. Q: But what about the knower. With the disappearance of the body, does the knower disappear? Niz: Just as the knower of the body appears at birth, so he disappears at birth. Q: And nothing remains? Niz: Life remains. Consciousness needs a vehicle and an instrument for its manifestation. When life produces another body, another knower comes into being. Q: Is there a causal link between the successive body-knowers, or body-minds? Niz: Yes, there is something that may be called the memory body, or causal body, a record of all that was thought, wanted and done. It is like a cloud of images held together. Q: What is this sense of a separate existence? Niz: It is a reflection in a separate body of the one reality. In this reflection the unlimited and the limited are confused and taken to be the same. To undo this confusion is the purpose of Yoga. Q: Does not death undo this confusion? Niz: In death only the body dies. Life does not, consciousness does not, reality does not. And the life is never so alive as after death. Q: But does one get reborn? Niz; What was born must die. Only the unborn is deathless. Find what it is that never sleeps and never wakes, and whose pale reflection is our sense of 'I'. Q: How am I to go about finding out? Niz: How do you go about finding anything? By keeping your mind and heart on it. Interest there must be and steady remembrance. To remember what needs to be remembered is the secret of success. You come to it through earnestness. pages 11, 12, I Am That ................... Now, let's see how you can twist that, but I'm sure you can.......... ................... "Tom", "D!ck" or "Harry" dies when the body dies, or shortly thereafter. This is what the Bardo is about, spoken of in the Tibetan Book of the Dead (the western name, that's not what's it's really called). But yes, something accumulated, continues, the samskaras. This is what causes rebirth, if there are samskaras, rebirth is inevitable, and your present sh!t gets passed on to the next slob (which is in a sense you, yet not you, "another knower comes into being", the confusion of the unlimited and the limited continues, IOW, death does not undo the confusion), via the causal body. Everything Niz said there can be unfolded. He is precisely correct. Thanks for the recommendation. ........ ........ And, while I'm here, this is why sunshine is right and tano isn't. |
|
|
|
Post by justlikeyou on Dec 5, 2015 20:33:40 GMT -5
The journey's over when ya' die, and karma's constantly created and resolved -- partially or otherwise -- for as long as that lasts. Karma isn't some spiritual accounting ledger in the sky. That's a Western misconception of it that makes for a nice lever of control. It's the same boogeyman as the Devil, just reformulated. Thing 'bout karma is that any action has the entirety of eternity as it's possible target, and while you might assume a given reaction is because of the impure thought you had over lunch last Tuesday, fact is it might instead match up exactly to the misbehavior of some 5 year old sentient squid on a planet orbiting Orion a century in the future. Any conceptual meaning you try to make of this reality is doomed dude. Give it up. Q: And what is death? Niz: It is the change in the living process of a particular body. Integration ends and disintegration sets in. Q: But what about the knower. With the disappearance of the body, does the knower disappear? Niz: Just as the knower of the body appears at birth, so he disappears at birth. Q: And nothing remains? Niz: Life remains. Consciousness needs a vehicle and an instrument for its manifestation. When life produces another body, another knower comes into being. Q: Is there a causal link between the successive body-knowers, or body-minds? Niz: Yes, there is something that may be called the memory body, or causal body, a record of all that was thought, wanted and done. It is like a cloud of images held together. Q: What is this sense of a separate existence? Niz: It is a reflection in a separate body of the one reality. In this reflection the unlimited and the limited are confused and taken to be the same. To undo this confusion is the purpose of Yoga. Q: Does not death undo this confusion? Niz: In death only the body dies. Life does not, consciousness does not, reality does not. And the life is never so alive as after death. Q: But does one get reborn? Niz; What was born must die. Only the unborn is deathless. Find what it is that never sleeps and never wakes, and whose pale reflection is our sense of 'I'. Q: How am I to go about finding out? Niz: How do you go about finding anything? By keeping your mind and heart on it. Interest there must be and steady remembrance. To remember what needs to be remembered is the secret of success. You come to it through earnestness. pages 11, 12, I Am That ................... Now, let's see how you can twist that, but I'm sure you can.......... ................... "Tom", "D!ck" or "Harry" dies when the body dies, or shortly thereafter. This is what the Bardo is about, spoken of in the Tibetan Book of the Dead (the western name, that's not what's it's really called). But yes, something accumulated, continues, the samskaras. This is what causes rebirth, if there are samskaras, rebirth is inevitable, and your present sh!t gets passed on to the next slob (which is in a sense you, yet not you, "another knower comes into being", the confusion of the unlimited and the limited continues, IOW, death does not undo the confusion), via the causal body. Everything Niz said there can be unfolded. He is precisely correct. Thanks for the recommendation. ........ ........ And, while I'm here, this is why sunshine is right and tano isn't. Niz: "I do not say that the same person is reborn. It dies and dies for good. But its memories remain and their desires and fears. They supply the energy for a new person. The real takes no part in it, but it makes it possible by giving it the light" |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Dec 5, 2015 22:34:57 GMT -5
Q: And what is death? Niz: It is the change in the living process of a particular body. Integration ends and disintegration sets in. Q: But what about the knower. With the disappearance of the body, does the knower disappear? Niz: Just as the knower of the body appears at birth, so he disappears at birth. Q: And nothing remains? Niz: Life remains. Consciousness needs a vehicle and an instrument for its manifestation. When life produces another body, another knower comes into being. Q: Is there a causal link between the successive body-knowers, or body-minds? Niz: Yes, there is something that may be called the memory body, or causal body, a record of all that was thought, wanted and done. It is like a cloud of images held together. Q: What is this sense of a separate existence? Niz: It is a reflection in a separate body of the one reality. In this reflection the unlimited and the limited are confused and taken to be the same. To undo this confusion is the purpose of Yoga. Q: Does not death undo this confusion? Niz: In death only the body dies. Life does not, consciousness does not, reality does not. And the life is never so alive as after death. Q: But does one get reborn? Niz; What was born must die. Only the unborn is deathless. Find what it is that never sleeps and never wakes, and whose pale reflection is our sense of 'I'. Q: How am I to go about finding out? Niz: How do you go about finding anything? By keeping your mind and heart on it. Interest there must be and steady remembrance. To remember what needs to be remembered is the secret of success. You come to it through earnestness. pages 11, 12, I Am That ................... Now, let's see how you can twist that, but I'm sure you can.......... ................... "Tom", "D!ck" or "Harry" dies when the body dies, or shortly thereafter. This is what the Bardo is about, spoken of in the Tibetan Book of the Dead (the western name, that's not what's it's really called). But yes, something accumulated, continues, the samskaras. This is what causes rebirth, if there are samskaras, rebirth is inevitable, and your present sh!t gets passed on to the next slob (which is in a sense you, yet not you, "another knower comes into being", the confusion of the unlimited and the limited continues, IOW, death does not undo the confusion), via the causal body. Everything Niz said there can be unfolded. He is precisely correct. Thanks for the recommendation. ........ ........ And, while I'm here, this is why sunshine is right and tano isn't. Niz: "I do not say that the same person is reborn. It dies and dies for good. But its memories remain and their desires and fears. They supply the energy for a new person. The real takes no part in it, but it makes it possible by giving it the light" Yes, exactly. This is the meaning of "Tom", D!ck" or "Harry" dies when the body dies, or shortly thereafter. ........ It's a very complicated issue, but Niz put it in a nutshell, my quote and your quote. ...........If one ponders these two quotes, a very great deal can be learned, but can't leave out any of the words of Niz, especially the words confused and confusion. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2015 6:32:38 GMT -5
Quoting Tano There is a couple of oddities in what you said. 'Mental', yet you send me to... read books, of all things. I haven't read on the subject in more than a year.´´ Read more: spiritualteachers.proboards.com/thread/1902/jed-mckenna?page=18#ixzz3tRDyEpBRhey, you are reading and writing here,and quoting Jed and now i suddenly cant? A mental realisation doesnt mean you cant read,write or understand or even learn things. ..but the mind in its arrogance thinks it has ´´the final vision´´,with capitals no less,, whereas at the same time you deny the facts of clairvoyance and telepathy? Advaita-blinker-vision?'.Jed-´´i am the greatest´´-´´oh perhaps there´s a thing or two to learn´´--vision...he writes but we cant read anything else?'? The possibility of perhaps a mind vastly superior to his, unbearable?Thats what happened to Andrew Cohen—he fell into a trap early on in his ´´realisation´´ and never even noticed—yes the mind is a tricky place, -- indeed. After some close students of his finally got to read Aurobindo and even understood it,they got to see through Andrew Cohen as fake (a posessed person), easy to spot if you know what to look for. I learned to see and experience consciousness as a Force,among other things.And you can feel it move up and down in the body,depending on your activity.You can concentrate it, make it grow, and even individualise it.(personal brahman) The thing is, there are some here who obviously are bit further than you in´´expanding´´, and to hear you boast about your ´´Vinal Vision´´ comes across as pretty ignorant,actually. I mention clairvoyancy and you dismiss it as non existent. Why not leave infinite possibilities open? You ar e free, nothing can happen, so whats the problem? Why did Jed write in the first place?To make his mark on monkey-hill? Why are you here on STF? Surely not to tell us what jed already told us? Most of us know that, Are That already. So,just as your mental has gone cosmic, so can your vital, after it is pacified.(emotions,basically)--and if it had happened you´be shouting it of th rooftops,and most certainly mention it here. Better,much better than sex, actually. And if you stick with the process,it ill Univeralise, like your mental did.And it will STAY, just like your ´´final vision´´...An active,contagious Peace, not the absence of activity that is often mistaken for Peace. Good luck. Some will shout, your offered example of Sri Aru is one such. Some will simply get on with their life.
"Why not leave infinite possibilities open?"
I am not open to the infinite possibility that Santa Clause exists. Truth is not about confetti. Read more: spiritualteachers.proboards.com/post/302405/quote/1902?page=18#ixzz3tXRqed8uplease tell that to Jed, he wrote lots of books didnt he?You call that shouting as well,surely--his bragging ans boasting and dislike of other humans? and no,you dont understand you said earlier that true genius is effortless you comment on someone you know nothing about, SA wrote 6 books simultanuously, in 6 years time, each 600 plus pages, four of which are widely acknowledged masterworks. Ever tried to write oNE book? Then you´d acknowledge that indeed it is an incredible feat of genius. as for the quote i gave you, they re letters to students, several written to different students on the same topic--it was before email and copy-machines, and initially never intended to be published.This is why he appears to repeat himself in the quote.I thought that was obvious. He never asked for disciples, but they came (´´but alas--such is fate´´)and he was too kind to turn them away...that was his life and he went on with it. your comments show no real intention to try and understand. So you say clairvoyancy doesnt exist?'Compare it to Santa Clause? so, what are you doing here on STF, Tano ?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2015 7:29:53 GMT -5
Niz: "I do not say that the same person is reborn. It dies and dies for good. But its memories remain and their desires and fears. They supply the energy for a new person. The real takes no part in it, but it makes it possible by giving it the light" Yes, exactly. This is the meaning of "Tom", D!ck" or "Harry" dies when the body dies, or shortly thereafter. ........ It's a very complicated issue, but Niz put it in a nutshell, my quote and your quote. ...........If one ponders these two quotes, a very great deal can be learned, but can't leave out any of the words of Niz, especially the words confused and confusion. a neighbour of mine died some years ago.I didnt know he was dead, he appeared to me asking to tell his wife he was okay--i never saw such a thing bedore,and was perplexed by it,...i saw only his upper half of body,and he was bursting with joy.and light..(i hardly knew him).I went to her and he´d died quite unepectedly that morning.She said he´d always said he would try let her know if there was ´´life after death´´...On his funeral he was making jokes with me about some of the folks there(hypocrites after his money). some days later,his ´´lower half´´ appeared---i was doing a rather extreme fast, and vey open, nd this entity was not so friendly--it entered me before i knew what was happening and suddenly i really really wanted to f*ck his wife--weird and embarrassing---focussing on light, i managed to get it out of me... some days later i saw that this ´´entity´´ had entered their rottweiler. Neither bothered me after that. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Dec 6, 2015 9:40:49 GMT -5
Q: And what is death? Niz: It is the change in the living process of a particular body. Integration ends and disintegration sets in. Q: But what about the knower. With the disappearance of the body, does the knower disappear? Niz: Just as the knower of the body appears at birth, so he disappears at birth. Q: And nothing remains? Niz: Life remains. Consciousness needs a vehicle and an instrument for its manifestation. When life produces another body, another knower comes into being. Q: Is there a causal link between the successive body-knowers, or body-minds? Niz: Yes, there is something that may be called the memory body, or causal body, a record of all that was thought, wanted and done. It is like a cloud of images held together. Q: What is this sense of a separate existence? Niz: It is a reflection in a separate body of the one reality. In this reflection the unlimited and the limited are confused and taken to be the same. To undo this confusion is the purpose of Yoga. Q: Does not death undo this confusion? Niz: In death only the body dies. Life does not, consciousness does not, reality does not. And the life is never so alive as after death. Q: But does one get reborn? Niz; What was born must die. Only the unborn is deathless. Find what it is that never sleeps and never wakes, and whose pale reflection is our sense of 'I'. Q: How am I to go about finding out? Niz: How do you go about finding anything? By keeping your mind and heart on it. Interest there must be and steady remembrance. To remember what needs to be remembered is the secret of success. You come to it through earnestness. pages 11, 12, I Am That ................... Now, let's see how you can twist that, but I'm sure you can.......... ................... "Tom", "D!ck" or "Harry" dies when the body dies, or shortly thereafter. This is what the Bardo is about, spoken of in the Tibetan Book of the Dead (the western name, that's not what's it's really called). But yes, something accumulated, continues, the samskaras. This is what causes rebirth, if there are samskaras, rebirth is inevitable, and your present sh!t gets passed on to the next slob (which is in a sense you, yet not you, "another knower comes into being", the confusion of the unlimited and the limited continues, IOW, death does not undo the confusion), via the causal body. Everything Niz said there can be unfolded. He is precisely correct. Thanks for the recommendation. ........ ........ And, while I'm here, this is why sunshine is right and tano isn't. SDP, I have addressed this in We Are One thread. This place, this seeing - is the only basis of Love. That's fine, I read it. But that's not what Niz said, it distorts what Niz meant. That's why I said look carefully at the words confused and confusion (their context with the whole excerpt). But it doesn't matter, very few on ST's are interested in this sort of thing, even thought Niz is probably the most quoted person here. |
|
