[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened one comments- simple truth of it
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is it a requirement that the enlightened ones in this earth walking pepper their speech with sanskrit words and phrases? Om Tat Sat Linga-ji Thanks for the heads up Pete. All these years I had just assumed it was being peppered with ebonics. --- Ron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Namaste Siddhananda, Namaste Leena, *Thank you. S You are welcome. *Your openness is truly appreciated. You give me hope. S There is always hope, always that open door which when walked through a new land unfoldsand finally that last step (which is the first step) and freedom is entered - never to return to the old persona that at one point was so central. This is the simple truth - it is there for everyone. Love, Leena May you continue forward in faith - Om and Prem, 0 Swami Siddhananda To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Get the Yahoo! toolbar and be alerted to new email wherever you're surfing. http://new.toolbar.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/mail/index.php
[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened one comments- simple truth of it
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter drpetersutphen@ wrote: Is it a requirement that the enlightened ones in this earth walking pepper their speech with sanskrit words and phrases? Om Tat Sat Linga-ji Thanks for the heads up Pete. All these years I had just assumed it was being peppered with ebonics. I am that, you are that, all this is nothing but that. TRANSLATES IN EBONICS TO: I be dat, ya iz dat, all dis here iz nuttin' but dat. OR I dat, you dat, dat dat. Word.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened one comments- simple truth of it
My experience, which may be quite different than others, with regard to questons, answers, and transparency in TM is- 1. Not much of direct answers to quesitions 2. Not much transparency, but rather confidentiality. The next experience is I felt this is how it is on the spiritual path. Now, since I am experiencing this is not the case, I enjoy it more. Could be many reasons why circular answers and lack of transparency. For example, Q- Has enlightenment been reached? A. - Long, circular, and non comprehendable- Possible reasons why? Enlightenment wasn't reached Over here, this is how the Q and A goes Q- Has enlightenment been reached A. Yes I never thought such simplicity was possible. This is why there is no confusion with the sadakas.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened one comments- simple truth of it
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My experience, which may be quite different than others, with regard to questons, answers, and transparency in TM is- 1. Not much of direct answers to quesitions 2. Not much transparency, but rather confidentiality. The next experience is I felt this is how it is on the spiritual path. Now, since I am experiencing this is not the case, I enjoy it more. Could be many reasons why circular answers and lack of transparency. For example, Q. - Has enlightenment been reached? A. - Long, circular, and non comprehendable- Possible reasons why? Enlightenment wasn't reached Over here, this is how the Q and A goes Q. - Has enlightenment been reached A. - Yes I never thought such simplicity was possible. This is why there is no confusion with the sadakas. While I agree with you about some of the answers one receives from some spiritual teachers, I should point out that the situation you describe opens other another question: Q. - The answer you received may have been less confusing, but was it true? Someone says, Yes. Cool. But what if the person giving you this answer is trying to mislead people, for his or her own financial gain, trying to get them to sign on as his/her students and contribute to his/her bank account? What if the person giving you this answer firmly believes that he/she is enlightened, but is mistaken? See where I'm going with this? Less confusing is good, if what you want out of life is simple answers to simple questions. But with regard to enlightenment, are things really that simple? The tales of spiritual practice are *full* of stories, both old and modern, of teachers misleading their students, and of teachers misleading *themselves*, and assuming that they had realized their full enlightenment when they had only glimpsed a tiny part of it. What if the person who believes he or she is enlightened is right about it at the moment, but after a few weeks or months or years the enlightenment fades and is no longer present? That's happened to dozens of people I know, some of whom set themselves up in business *as* enlightened spiritual teachers while the experience was still present, and now have to cope with it *not* being present. So we're back to the first question I ever asked you, Ron. What are the criteria that you use when someone tells you that they're enlightened, and you choose to *believe* them? *Other than* the desire for a simple answer to a simple question, and the desire to be less confused, what is it that makes you assume that the person who just gave you the simple answer gave you a *truthful* answer? I think if you ponder this you'll come back with faith. Which, in my book, can be a noble and wonderful thing, but can *also* be just one more way to be confused.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened one comments- simple truth of it
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ron sidha7001@ wrote: My experience, which may be quite different than others, with regard to questons, answers, and transparency in TM is- 1. Not much of direct answers to quesitions 2. Not much transparency, but rather confidentiality. The next experience is I felt this is how it is on the spiritual path. Now, since I am experiencing this is not the case, I enjoy it more. Could be many reasons why circular answers and lack of transparency. For example, Q. - Has enlightenment been reached? A. - Long, circular, and non comprehendable- Possible reasons why? Enlightenment wasn't reached Over here, this is how the Q and A goes Q. - Has enlightenment been reached A. - Yes I never thought such simplicity was possible. This is why there is no confusion with the sadakas. While I agree with you about some of the answers one receives from some spiritual teachers, I should point out that the situation you describe opens other another question: Q. - The answer you received may have been less confusing, but was it true? Someone says, Yes. Cool. But what if the person giving you this answer is trying to mislead people, for his or her own financial gain, trying to get them to sign on as his/her students and contribute to his/her bank account? What if the person giving you this answer firmly believes that he/she is enlightened, but is mistaken? See where I'm going with this? Less confusing is good, if what you want out of life is simple answers to simple questions. But with regard to enlightenment, are things really that simple? The tales of spiritual practice are *full* of stories, both old and modern, of teachers misleading their students, and of teachers misleading *themselves*, and assuming that they had realized their full enlightenment when they had only glimpsed a tiny part of it. What if the person who believes he or she is enlightened is right about it at the moment, but after a few weeks or months or years the enlightenment fades and is no longer present? That's happened to dozens of people I know, some of whom set themselves up in business *as* enlightened spiritual teachers while the experience was still present, and now have to cope with it *not* being present. So we're back to the first question I ever asked you, Ron. What are the criteria that you use when someone tells you that they're enlightened, and you choose to *believe* them? *Other than* the desire for a simple answer to a simple question, and the desire to be less confused, what is it that makes you assume that the person who just gave you the simple answer gave you a *truthful* answer? I think if you ponder this you'll come back with faith. Which, in my book, can be a noble and wonderful thing, but can *also* be just one more way to be confused. I think you are right about the faith part so the entire response is my own faith system beyond my experience. And even at that, I ask you about your own confirmed experience- how sure are you about it- who are you? how sure are you about that answer? Therefore, it just seems to be total faith. For example - who am I? am I this body? if an arm is chopped off, now what? So, each has their own criteria, but then unless one knows from direct experience what Being is, then there is going to have to be a leap of faith, and if one does know Being- why would they look for a Guru? I accept in faith what my Guru says, I dont see any other way this is possible- this is being straight forward about it. Not being straight forward, IMO, is what MMY calls it- someone was saying I believe in you, he stopped them and said recognition- that is not straight as this simply is not what is, so then the disciple is misled, in confusion. So, my own criteria for a Guru- what happened when you met them in person? what happened when you followed their instructions? what do the disciples say? How simple, direct, truthful is what the Guru is saying, actually so? Is there any effect or transmission in being around the Guru, speaking to the Guru in person or or on the phone, or with letters, emails? My criteria doesn't include the personality, as I don't believe this would be telling. If the obvious bad stuff you mentioned is there, I don't think I will miss it, can't speak for others. You can make a longer list or shorter, and when you feel the criteria is met, then it looks like it is going to be a leap of faith. It is a matter of one using their own discretion, and this is going to be different for each one. Yes, it does appear there is a lot of people claiming enlightenment, speaking about it yet giving the impression they are speaking from it, Guru's taking your money, out for sex, etc- many of the things you said. So, it is up
[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened one comments- simple truth of it
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So we're back to the first question I ever asked you, Ron. What are the criteria that you use when someone tells you that they're enlightened, and you choose to *believe* them? *Other than* the desire for a simple answer to a simple question, and the desire to be less confused, what is it that makes you assume that the person who just gave you the simple answer gave you a *truthful* answer? I think if you ponder this you'll come back with faith. An interesting and provocative statementthat we confirm our belief with regard to another's enlightenment primarily with faith. Faith for me plays a central role in my ongoing spiritual journey, but not in answering this particular question about whether or not someone is enlightened. Rather, faith comes in when my rational mind is pitted against my intuition. More specifically when intuitively I know what I must do in order to move my life forward, and yet all purely rational conclusions end either in contradiction or fear. So I gather my faith together like a parachute overhead, take a flying leap into the Infinite, and hope for a soft landing. The faith component in my ongoing spiritual journey is an intuitive sense that with a focused desire, I will find my way; I will find those who I am meant to find to progress on my path, and they will say and do the things most beneficial for me, and it all works out pretty seamlessly, albeit painfully sometimes (lol- joke's on me!). I am aware of my tendency to over think and over plan and second guess the next step forward, for just about anything. And because spiritual decisions tend to be so core-oriented and comprehensive, there is possibly a big tendency to over-think, over-plan, and second-guess such decisions. So I have worked hard at balancing such mental inspection with a good dose of just going along with it. Somewhere in between the two I've evolved a way that is both intelligent and grounded, and I'm sticking with it. Have I achieved my spiritual goals as a result? Absolutely. Has it taken shape completely differently than I would've imagined it? Absolutely. As far as the question about whether or not someone is enlightened, my assessment has always been more pragmatic, along the lines of, will this person advance my knowledge on my ongoing spiritual journey?. How I have always arrived at an answer on this one is based on how it feels. You know that common expression for why someone hesitates: It just didn't feel right? I use the same sort of sense when determining how to move forward spiritually. Its always an experiential thing with me. The specific question of whether or not someone is enlightened actually never came up for me, until I knew what enlightenment was experientially. And again the answer for such a question is on the basis of feeling, and the exposition on this answer occurs outside the boundaries of my gross senses and bodily limitations; tools and skills must be borrowed from GC and UC in order to arrive at an instantaneous, definitive answer here. And I'll just stop there for now. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened one comments- simple truth of it
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: So we're back to the first question I ever asked you, Ron. What are the criteria that you use when someone tells you that they're enlightened, and you choose to *believe* them? *Other than* the desire for a simple answer to a simple question, and the desire to be less confused, what is it that makes you assume that the person who just gave you the simple answer gave you a *truthful* answer? I think if you ponder this you'll come back with faith. An interesting and provocative statementthat we confirm our belief with regard to another's enlightenment primarily with faith. Faith for me plays a central role in my ongoing spiritual journey, but not in answering this particular question about whether or not someone is enlightened. Rather, faith comes in when my rational mind is pitted against my intuition. More specifically when intuitively I know what I must do in order to move my life forward, and yet all purely rational conclusions end either in contradiction or fear. So I gather my faith together like a parachute overhead, take a flying leap into the Infinite, and hope for a soft landing. The faith component in my ongoing spiritual journey is an intuitive sense that with a focused desire, I will find my way; I will find those who I am meant to find to progress on my path, and they will say and do the things most beneficial for me, and it all works out pretty seamlessly, albeit painfully sometimes (lol- joke's on me!). I am aware of my tendency to over think and over plan and second guess the next step forward, for just about anything. And because spiritual decisions tend to be so core-oriented and comprehensive, there is possibly a big tendency to over-think, over-plan, and second-guess such decisions. So I have worked hard at balancing such mental inspection with a good dose of just going along with it. Somewhere in between the two I've evolved a way that is both intelligent and grounded, and I'm sticking with it. Have I achieved my spiritual goals as a result? Absolutely. Has it taken shape completely differently than I would've imagined it? Absolutely. As far as the question about whether or not someone is enlightened, my assessment has always been more pragmatic, along the lines of, will this person advance my knowledge on my ongoing spiritual journey?. How I have always arrived at an answer on this one is based on how it feels. You know that common expression for why someone hesitates: It just didn't feel right? I use the same sort of sense when determining how to move forward spiritually. Its always an experiential thing with me. The specific question of whether or not someone is enlightened actually never came up for me, until I knew what enlightenment was experientially. And again the answer for such a question is on the basis of feeling, and the exposition on this answer occurs outside the boundaries of my gross senses and bodily limitations; tools and skills must be borrowed from GC and UC in order to arrive at an instantaneous, definitive answer here. And I'll just stop there for now. :-) I am not sure what you are saying here but it looks like your beliefs do not include with it having a Guru right now. My belief is that one wouldn't need a Guru if they are speaking from this level of being, otherwise when using intuition, then it is colored by the ego, it is a sticking place, one gets stuck. Phenomina is thought to be it, the goal is mistaken. It is ego delighted to proclaim I can do it on my own as Ramana did. It is ego fighting tooth and nail to stay on it's throne. For with a sat Guru, one will be following the instructions, and one may think they will loose their freedom. Visions, hearing voices, deep God revelations, deep Bliss, siddhis to know things- these are sign posts that are so often mistaken as the Goal. The sat Guru knows where one is, the one with these experiences that is seeking does not but may think he does. Again, these are my beliefs really, I am not speaking from that level of Being, only voicing my opinion. MY opinions are surely influenced by the path I am on now as I found the Guru to be expressing the truth, I think she speaks from Truth, it is simple and to the point.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened one comments- simple truth of it
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Ron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, jim_flanegin jflanegi@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: So we're back to the first question I ever asked you, Ron. What are the criteria that you use when someone tells you that they're enlightened, and you choose to *believe* them? *Other than* the desire for a simple answer to a simple question, and the desire to be less confused, what is it that makes you assume that the person who just gave you the simple answer gave you a *truthful* answer? I think if you ponder this you'll come back with faith. An interesting and provocative statementthat we confirm our belief with regard to another's enlightenment primarily with faith. Faith for me plays a central role in my ongoing spiritual journey, but not in answering this particular question about whether or not someone is enlightened. Rather, faith comes in when my rational mind is pitted against my intuition. More specifically when intuitively I know what I must do in order to move my life forward, and yet all purely rational conclusions end either in contradiction or fear. So I gather my faith together like a parachute overhead, take a flying leap into the Infinite, and hope for a soft landing. The faith component in my ongoing spiritual journey is an intuitive sense that with a focused desire, I will find my way; I will find those who I am meant to find to progress on my path, and they will say and do the things most beneficial for me, and it all works out pretty seamlessly, albeit painfully sometimes (lol- joke's on me!). I am aware of my tendency to over think and over plan and second guess the next step forward, for just about anything. And because spiritual decisions tend to be so core-oriented and comprehensive, there is possibly a big tendency to over-think, over-plan, and second-guess such decisions. So I have worked hard at balancing such mental inspection with a good dose of just going along with it. Somewhere in between the two I've evolved a way that is both intelligent and grounded, and I'm sticking with it. Have I achieved my spiritual goals as a result? Absolutely. Has it taken shape completely differently than I would've imagined it? Absolutely. As far as the question about whether or not someone is enlightened, my assessment has always been more pragmatic, along the lines of, will this person advance my knowledge on my ongoing spiritual journey?. How I have always arrived at an answer on this one is based on how it feels. You know that common expression for why someone hesitates: It just didn't feel right? I use the same sort of sense when determining how to move forward spiritually. Its always an experiential thing with me. The specific question of whether or not someone is enlightened actually never came up for me, until I knew what enlightenment was experientially. And again the answer for such a question is on the basis of feeling, and the exposition on this answer occurs outside the boundaries of my gross senses and bodily limitations; tools and skills must be borrowed from GC and UC in order to arrive at an instantaneous, definitive answer here. And I'll just stop there for now. :-) I am not sure what you are saying here but it looks like your beliefs do not include with it having a Guru right now. My belief is that one wouldn't need a Guru if they are speaking from this level of being, otherwise when using intuition, then it is colored by the ego, it is a sticking place, one gets stuck. Phenomina is thought to be it, the goal is mistaken. It is ego delighted to proclaim I can do it on my own as Ramana did. It is ego fighting tooth and nail to stay on it's throne. For with a sat Guru, one will be following the instructions, and one may think they will loose their freedom. Visions, hearing voices, deep God revelations, deep Bliss, siddhis to know things- these are sign posts that are so often mistaken as the Goal. The sat Guru knows where one is, the one with these experiences that is seeking does not but may think he does. Again, these are my beliefs really, I am not speaking from that level of Being, only voicing my opinion. MY opinions are surely influenced by the path I am on now as I found the Guru to be expressing the truth, I think she speaks from Truth, it is simple and to the point. Ron, I always have a Guru- Don't leave Home without It!:-)
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened one comments- simple truth of it
--- curtisdeltablues [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is it a requirement that the enlightened ones in this earth walking pepper their speech with sanskrit words and phrases? Om Tat Sat Linga-ji Thanks for the heads up Pete. All these years I had just assumed it was being peppered with ebonics. Word. --- Ron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Namaste Siddhananda, Namaste Leena, *Thank you. S You are welcome. *Your openness is truly appreciated. You give me hope. S There is always hope, always that open door which when walked through a new land unfoldsand finally that last step (which is the first step) and freedom is entered - never to return to the old persona that at one point was so central. This is the simple truth - it is there for everyone. Love, Leena May you continue forward in faith - Om and Prem, 0 Swami Siddhananda To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Get the Yahoo! toolbar and be alerted to new email wherever you're surfing. http://new.toolbar.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/mail/index.php To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with Yahoo! FareChase. http://farechase.yahoo.com/
[FairfieldLife] Re: Enlightened one comments- simple truth of i
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, tomandcindytraynoratfairfieldlis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Barry writes snipped: I think if you ponder this you'll come back with faith. Jim Flanegin responds snipped: An interesting and provocative statementthat we confirm our belief with regard to another's enlightenment primarily with faith. Faith for me plays a central role in my ongoing spiritual journey, but not in answering this particular question about whether or not someone is enlightened. Rather, faith comes in when my rational mind is pitted against my intuition. More specifically when intuitively I know what I must do in order to move my life forward, and yet all purely rational conclusions end either in contradiction or fear. So I gather my faith together like a parachute overhead, take a flying leap into the Infinite, and hope for a soft landing. Tom T: If one goes to the very large and heavy unabridged dictionary you can look up the definition of the word TRUST. There are about 20 definitions that deal with various people who have a fiduciary relationship with money that belongs to other people. The last two though are very different and go like this 21-- Information received from the intuitive side of the mind. 22--- Action taken regardless of the consequences. Jim I would like to suggest that your action above is much more fitting to the definition of trust as outlined in 21 and 22 above rather than Faith. Tom You could be right- haven't lost a bet yet!:-)
