On Jul 9, 2011, at 10:36 PM, emptybill wrote: > You are wasting our time Vag. >
Another ad hominem. Sheesh. I'm beginning to think "emptybill" is really an empty person. It makes me sad to have to think that of any sentient. > > You are also obviously afraid to answer those five questions. > No. I'm a private person, by nature, and so less reputable people will try to take advantage of that, like you, for one. They also, strangely, like to take advantage of students of dzogchenpas, and deprive such masters of the jalus (it's true, trust me - interdependent origination is not just a game). > I guess we should expect anyone who is a fake like you to ardently refuse to > answer questions about their background under any circumstance. > I've already freely shared who I am, many times here. I guess I'm just not a fan of interrogation by reincarnated Nazis. Why haven't you been working on THOSE samskaras? They may be chic in TM circles, but they're not chic with me! Get back to your ngondro! > Your claim, though, that I practice "ceremonial magic" is quite funny and > actually proves my point. When the Lama first came to my house and saw my > traditionally carved Shiva-Lingam (not a Namadeshvara Lingam) he pointed to > it and said ... "original tantra, very powerful". > Yeah, my Narmeshesvara was spontaneously blessed by a Mahamandeleshwara when he saw it. It seemed odd at the time. > However , ceremonial magic cannot be equated with performance of Maha Rudra > Abhishekam, which is what I do know how to do. > > OK, whatever you're into, that's fine. What that has to with Dzogchen - you've lost me. Apparently you have a LOT of spare time. > > Contrarily, ceremonial magic must be your actual background and is apparently > all that you really know how to do. > No, I'm just getting that off your private emails to me (in regards to your proclivities). Perhaps I was mistaken and you're just an Orthodox Greek Christian/TM teacher/Ravi Shankar devotee/Younge wannabee - again, sorry if I missed anything. > > As for "state of least excitation" this means reduction of the functioning of > "rajo-guna". > Oh. Good side-step (well...kinda). > To repeat what you failed to understand: > > > > "The words sama-dhi and sam-aa-dhi are different in meaning. Sama-dhi is not > a cognate for Shamataa either." > > > > To equate these two terms is to indubitably demonstrate your shallow, hackney > stance. > > Having experienced both, in both contexts, I don't give much credence to your intellectual gymnastics. You either understand it directly, in your own practice, or you do not. I'm putting you in the "not" category for now, FYI. I DO understand both - intimately. > As far as being a practicing "Greek Orthodox Christian" this also is quite > funny. You are just so shallow you barely construct three planes trying to be > so upright. What a joke you are. Of course, if I understood Modern Greek I > might have done better with them. One of their priests tried to set me up one > time for a marriage with one of them. She was really a knock out but I just > don't like manipulating priests. Later I saw how extraordinary it would be … > but it was too late. Then again once you become Greek Orthodox there is no > turning back. It is like the Mafia. > > So no Mt. Athos as previously claimed. I thought you might be lying. What does Younge think about this? > > > As are you. So who is your Lama? Who are your gurus? > > Guru, deva and dakini are the primordial state of spontaneous presence. These are not separate. > Answer the simple questions. Or are you just a fake? > > Please see above.
