|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jan 27, 2024 15:19:05 GMT -5
Dude, you just can't stop yourself. I've had enough of tour bullshit. I see 't' is next to 'y' on the keyboard. Looks like you and stardustpilgrim really pissed off Grandma, but I can't see why. Why are you guys such un-evolved losers? Does Grandma have a real life identity, so you can attend Satsang and absorb her holiness? Or is it just a virtual guru? About 99% of what ends up on the screen here, for everyone, is unconscious processing, including for GM. That's his blind spot. I don't think zazeniac has ever denied that. .......I think maybe GM is a UG wanna-be. I've read hundreds of stories about Gurdjieff, compared to Gurdjieff, GM is a powder-puff. And of course, with Gurdjieff, it was IRL, not mediated by the airwaves. And with Gurdjieff, it was ONLY with his students. With the ordinary person, people loved Gurdjieff, he was the kindest most generous man they ever met (he didn't like reporters, and he liked to fleece rich people (he called it sheering sheep), who didn't need their money anyway).. With his students, he was ingenuous, in a good way. With ordinary good hardworking people, or especially the poor, he was wholly and completely genuinely kind. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jan 27, 2024 15:58:29 GMT -5
You don't see that you are replying to zazeniac in kind, you just white-wash it. If you don't realize this, then it's just buried deep in your shadow. Solid point, but if you see shadow psychology, then you also know how utterly futile that attempt at debate is. Life teaches, using harsher methods. Indubitably. (I'm impressed). |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Jan 27, 2024 17:33:12 GMT -5
About 99% of what ends up on the screen here, for everyone, is unconscious processing, including for GM. That's his blind spot. I don't think zazeniac has ever denied that. .......I think maybe GM is a UG wanna-be. I've read hundreds of stories about Gurdjieff, compared to Gurdjieff, GM is a powder-puff. And of course, with Gurdjieff, it was IRL, not mediated by the airwaves. And with Gurdjieff, it was ONLY with his students. With the ordinary person, people loved Gurdjieff, he was the kindest most generous man they ever met (he didn't like reporters, and he liked to fleece rich people (he called it sheering sheep), who didn't need their money anyway).. With his students, he was ingenuous, in a good way. With ordinary good hardworking people, or especially the poor, he was wholly and completely genuinely kind. Do those Gurdjieff teachings ever have an end point for the student? Or is just on and on forever… (even across multiple lifetimes ?) ooof And end point of what though? There's no end to refinement of skills, or growth of capacities.....you mean something else? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2024 18:08:40 GMT -5
Are you challenging the post or the poster in your comment? I was careful to challenge only his post, although you are right: I recall this poster's older posts too, and that I disagreed with them at the time. I'll be honest inavalan it didn't look that careful to me. You had set a standard of engagement in your previous post here spiritualteachers.proboards.com/post/510899 and then in my opinion dropped below it in the very next post. I'll flesh it out a little because the forum is fraught enough at the moment, so to me, people set standards on others all the time but the majority of the time they are just ideals that they'd like to live by. If they were truly anchored in those standards then they would have little interest in comparing and critiquing all the time. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2024 18:09:42 GMT -5
Are you challenging the post or the poster in your comment? He became upset with my example when the point of my post was about examining contradictory beliefs. I hear ya.  |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jan 27, 2024 18:24:30 GMT -5
About 99% of what ends up on the screen here, for everyone, is unconscious processing, including for GM. That's his blind spot. I don't think zazeniac has ever denied that. .......I think maybe GM is a UG wanna-be. I've read hundreds of stories about Gurdjieff, compared to Gurdjieff, GM is a powder-puff. And of course, with Gurdjieff, it was IRL, not mediated by the airwaves. And with Gurdjieff, it was ONLY with his students. With the ordinary person, people loved Gurdjieff, he was the kindest most generous man they ever met (he didn't like reporters, and he liked to fleece rich people (he called it sheering sheep), who didn't need their money anyway).. With his students, he was ingenuous, in a good way. With ordinary good hardworking people, or especially the poor, he was wholly and completely genuinely kind. Do those Gurdjieff teachings ever have an end point for the student? Or is just on and on forever… (even across multiple lifetimes ?) ooof Gurdjieff said we know we have this one life, there are no guarantees of anything else. So the teaching concerns this one life. Gurdjieff taught we can complete the journey in this one life, it's possible. The end point is acquiring what Gurdjieff called Real I. That's having a body of a finer vibration, Gurdjieff called it a Soul body (in Beelzebub's Tales). The beginning process is using the physical body as a chemical laboratory to transform the energy of food, air and (sensory) impressions into a finer energy, not known in ordinary life. It's a tangible energy, meaning, you know when it is present (and when it isn't). Gurdjieff said a man or woman with Real I (Soul body) "is immortal within the limits of the solar system", meaning, nothing within the solar system could destroy the Soul body (and basically will last longer than the solar system lasts). In Search of the Miraculous pg 94. (Slightly combined with Beelzebub's Tales language). |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2024 18:28:29 GMT -5
Do those Gurdjieff teachings ever have an end point for the student? Or is just on and on forever… (even across multiple lifetimes ?) ooof Gurdjieff said we know we have this one life, there are no guarantees of anything else. So the teaching concerns this one life. Gurdjieff taught we can complete the journey in this one life, it's possible. The end point is acquiring what Gurdjieff called Real I. That's having a body of a finer vibration, Gurdjieff called it a Soul body. The beginning process is using the physical body as a chemical laboratory to transform the energy of food, air and (sensory) impressions into a finer energy, not known in ordinary life. But, you have to keep your mind empty for that body to know itself. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jan 27, 2024 18:32:48 GMT -5
Gurdjieff said we know we have this one life, there are no guarantees of anything else. So the teaching concerns this one life. Gurdjieff taught we can complete the journey in this one life, it's possible. The end point is acquiring what Gurdjieff called Real I. That's having a body of a finer vibration, Gurdjieff called it a Soul body. The beginning process is using the physical body as a chemical laboratory to transform the energy of food, air and (sensory) impressions into a finer energy, not known in ordinary life. But, you have to keep your mind empty for that body to know itself. Yes, everything is/can be a distraction. And all energies can be transformed to a finer quality of energy. So the energy of thought can be transformed also. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jan 27, 2024 18:34:24 GMT -5
Gurdjieff said we know we have this one life, there are no guarantees of anything else. So the teaching concerns this one life. Gurdjieff taught we can complete the journey in this one life, it's possible. The end point is acquiring what Gurdjieff called Real I. That's having a body of a finer vibration, Gurdjieff called it a Soul body. The beginning process is using the physical body as a chemical laboratory to transform the energy of food, air and (sensory) impressions into a finer energy, not known in ordinary life. But, you have to keep your mind empty for that body to know itself. That's actually an interesting *turn of phrase*. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jan 27, 2024 18:37:09 GMT -5
Gurdjieff said we know we have this one life, there are no guarantees of anything else. So the teaching concerns this one life. Gurdjieff taught we can complete the journey in this one life, it's possible. The end point is acquiring what Gurdjieff called Real I. That's having a body of a finer vibration, Gurdjieff called it a Soul body. The beginning process is using the physical body as a chemical laboratory to transform the energy of food, air and (sensory) impressions into a finer energy, not known in ordinary life. But, you have to keep your mind empty for that body to know itself. Gurdjieff had a practice he taught the Ladies of the Rope. He told them to "Make all quiet inside". |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2024 18:55:16 GMT -5
But, you have to keep your mind empty for that body to know itself. Gurdjieff had a practice he taught the Ladies of the Rope. He told them to "Make all quiet inside". But he was also telling you that. Do you honestly think that Reefs and Zendancer are telling you anything different? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2024 18:56:12 GMT -5
But, you have to keep your mind empty for that body to know itself. That's actually an interesting *turn of phrase*. Because I understand what you're writing. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jan 27, 2024 19:06:19 GMT -5
Gurdjieff had a practice he taught the Ladies of the Rope. He told them to "Make all quiet inside". But he was also telling you that. Do you honestly think that Reefs and Zendancer are telling you anything different? But the point is, there's more to it. The ND written about here barely overlaps with what Gurdjieff taught. Some things I've written about tonight have never come up here before. There's {...[...(...)...]...}. This (...) is nonduality, discussed here. I've been trying to speak to this for 15 years, here. As I've often said, first you have to sail a small dingy. ND is the frog in the well, that thinks the well is the ocean. Of course {........} is also Nonduality. |
|
|
|
Post by stardustpilgrim on Jan 27, 2024 19:08:50 GMT -5
That's actually an interesting *turn of phrase*. Because I understand what you're writing. If that true, cool. And that's the meaning of "transmission outside the scriptures". I have seen the inner teaching given in a book on Kabbalah, and a book on Kundalini, neither time named self-remembering. In Beelzebub's Tales Gurdjieff said there was a genuine Initiate among the American Indians/Native Americans, he used a different (Washington NFL) word. Gurdjieff never claimed to be the only one with genuine interior practices. He also wrote the Essenes continued up to his present time (who had the inner work), unbroken back to the first century. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2024 19:18:09 GMT -5
But he was also telling you that. Do you honestly think that Reefs and Zendancer are telling you anything different? But the point is, there's more to it. The ND written about here barely overlaps with what Gurdjieff taught. Some things I've written about tonight have never come up here before. There's {...[...(...)...]...}. This (...) is nonduality, discussed here. I've been trying to speak to this for 15 years, here. As I've often said, first you have to sail a small dingy. ND is the frog in the well, that thinks the well is the ocean. Of course {........} is also Nonduality. In my honest opinion, you're getting caught up in what isn't so again. I get that it's taken all this time for you to write what's really important, but you have to understand the similarities and you can only do that from the 'Soul body' perspective. |
|
