Poor choice of words then. True, with your history you should definitely
have the understanding. Like Ammachi would say most in spirituality have
the knowledge, it's the awarenes (as in being a Sakshi or a witness)
that is lacking.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mark Landau <m@...> wrote:
>
> Thank you, Ravi, for your kind words. And I will take you at your
word about the condescension. But, if I remember correctly, that email
already had in it "as I've already explained" and how could someone with
my history possibly not thoroughly understand the Satguru principle?
>
> On Jul 27, 2011, at 11:44 PM, Ravi Yogi wrote:
>
> > "the self-same principle that Ravi was (condescendingly, I must say,
(it takes one to know one)) trying to explain to me way back when."
> >
> >
> > Mark, I have been (intentionally) condescending to others ("low
vibe" writer types) but not when I was responding to you, sorry if it
appeared otherwise. Your heart-centeredness became evident to me as you
posted more. A beautiful post BTW.
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mark Landau <m@...> wrote:
> > >
> > > Yes, Jim (how long does it take, here, to put names to email
addresses?), I, too, find this true and beautiful, with one possible
exception. The heart, the true heart (IME, E & U), has no need
whatsoever for story gratification. The true heart, the lion heart, is a
far better organ of perception/knower than the mind. It's the heart, or
hearts, of the inner frozen children that need constant soothing, the
"heart", if you will, of the ego complex, of our woundedness and our
pain, or I guess one could say, and perhaps more simply and truly, and,
in so doing dissolve this "exception," the wounded parts of our heart.
It's the stories that are the defense mechanisms that help us in our
long, misguided efforts to keep our pain away. Of course, this may not
apply to MZ, or any other particular individual, but, I believe, it
applies to most of us.
> > >
> > > What may more aptly apply to MZ (for all the profound things that
have occurred between us, and, yes, they truly are profound, just how
much so I have yet to see, I really do not yet know him well, as I have
not had the time to follow his suggestion and read all that he has
written here, nor do I think I will need to) is that he is using his
intellect to sincerely advance his spiritual growth through the towering
edifice created by the west's paramount religious institution (at least
in terms of it's effect on the west) and, yes, some of the world's
purest souls and highest thinkers (perhaps I will have to look into
Aquinas), combined with the highly developed qualities of his intuition
(for me, there's something I call inner knowing that is distinct from
and goes beyond intuition). How many have spent lifetimes lost in this
structure (of course, he would "know" they are not lost but are getting
found, and, perhaps, the only ones getting found)? We agree, I think,
that the mind, the intellect, no matter how developed and pure must
always fall short of true knowing. The truth of things is "unfathomable"
and better known by the heart. To know it one must lay the mind and
everything else aside and become it. To do this, one must put oneself
through whatever it takes to strip everything else away and become the
truly, truly, truly empty vessel.
> > >
> > > And, to this: the universe within us will never accept any story
as the the ultimate truth, I would add that the Satguru, God and the
universe, both the universe within and without (which you all may, of
course, have already agreed are one, though I still find it useful to
distinguish them) and, sometimes, the good guru, will totally knock the
shit out of us, if we force it/him/her to, the self-same principle that
Ravi was (condescendingly, I must say, (it takes one to know one))
trying to explain to me way back when.
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
