'Death of death, Cayce etc.

04-18-2000, 10:07 AM

Namaste All,

Roger wrote>I challenge you, Tony, especially about
"Amilius in Atlantis", tell us
how
your comments are useful. And tell us how it is that
you can say with
certainty that your comments are true. What hard facts
do we know about
"Amilius in Atlantis"?

You are simply indulging in imagination. How can you
ever know the real
when
you make a career out of projecting the false?<

I could easily have said Osiris in Atlantis, there are
no hard facts about any past sages, except recent
ones. The hard facts about Rajneesh or patently
obvious and many in court and police records. Just a
fraud!!!!

With regard to Cayce many of his hits and misses are
on record and run about 90% plus or so. I also said
others for much of what he says also exists in some
mystical kabbalistic teachings.

The whole point was to show how Jesus was a sage and
what he taught was the 'death of death', as opposed to
the fundamentalist Christians you were referring to.

I don't really want to debate you, I haven't the time
and it would only be trying to debate your solidified,
preconceived notions.

Om Namah Sivaya, Tony.

=====
http://members.xoom.com/aoclery/sanskritglos.htm

ASATHO MA SATH GAMAYA, From the unreal lead me to the real,
THAMASO MA JYOTHIR GAMAYA, From darkness, lead me to light,
MRITHYOR MA AMRITAM GAMAYA.From death, lead me to immortality.
OM, SHANTI SHANTI SHANTI. Om, Peace Peace Peace.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send online invitations with Yahoo! Invites.
http://invites.yahoo.com

04-18-2000, 11:32 AM

>The hard facts about Rajneesh or patently
>obvious and many in court and police records. Just a
>fraud!!!!

Hi, Tony. Yes - those who believe they are in love
with the tree, may not look closely at the fruit.
Thus, the happy feeling of infatuation can be
continued. Nonetheless, I think Roger has a point
that discussing imaginative things is different
than speaking directly from experience/awareness.

>The whole point was to show how Jesus was a sage and
>what he taught was the 'death of death', as opposed to
>the fundamentalist Christians you were referring to.

I like this phrase: "teaching the death of death".
It has a great ring to it, and is consistent with
Biblical statements.

>I don't really want to debate you, I haven't the time
>and it would only be trying to debate your solidified,
>preconceived notions.

Yes, debate generally is a clash of one system of
beliefs with another. If a debate leads to
simple openness without reliance on maintaining
set beliefs, then regardless of who is the winner
and who the loser - there is only One.

Love,
Dan

04-18-2000, 03:32 PM

From: Tony O'Clery
> I don't really want to debate you, I haven't the time
> and it would only be trying to debate your solidified,
> preconceived notions.
>
> Om Namah Sivaya, Tony.

I would let this go, Tony. However, you seem to be projecting that I have
"solidified, preconceived notions". And you stated that I am "an arrogant
little boy aren't we?????"

>Tony wrote:
>According to Cayce and others Jesus was Adam, the
>descended Earth Deity, Sons of God, Sirians Pleiadian
>spirits etc, Kumaras, Enoch, Melchizadek, Joshua,
>Jeheshua, Elisha-succesor to Elias,Zend the father of
>Zaroastra, and Amilius in Atlantis. the teacher with
>the people of the Law of One, Is-Ra-El-ites, as
>opposed to the sons of Belial.

Is this statement of your's fantasy or fact? How can you demonstrate that
what you've stated here is the truth from your own experience?

If this is just a fantasy, what is the use in it? Doesn't it keep the mind
busy & keep the mind from settling down into the stillness where Realization
may be known?

What do we really know as undisputed fact? If we cannot distinguish the
imagined from the real, isn't this a barrier to realization?

You say:
>Well the purpose was to show you a little bit more
>about Jesus, what he was, and his history with
>Mystical Kabbalists etc.

I'm waiting for corroboration or proof regarding your Atlantis comments. If
your comments are only a speculative fantasy, then you HAVE NOT accomplished
your purpose of "showing more about Jesus" have you? You've only engaged in
imaginative disinformation. Distinguishing between substance & imaginative
disinformation is useful?

What do you really know about Jesus that is absolute fact? And of what use
is fantasy or opinion?

Tony says:
>The hard facts about Rajneesh or patently
>obvious and many in court and police records. Just a
>fraud!!!!
AND
>With regard to Rajneesh/Osho, now there we have a real
>fraud and dishonest pervert. He could teach the
>Christian fundamentalist evangalists a trick or two.
>Guns and votes and all.

I quoted Osho. Rather than address this quote specifically, you have chosen
to attack Osho's reputation. I think this means that Osho's comment was
strong & truthful and you couldn't find any way to challenge it, so you
resorted to attacking Osho's personality & reputation instead.

If you can comment on Osho's quote please do so. That would be the honorable
course, to show how his words are incorrect. Otherwise, while you continue
to divert the discussion into personality & reputation issues, I wonder if
the negativity that you project on others orginates in yourself!

You say that I have "solidified, preconceived notions" & am "an arrogant
little boy". Please show what my "solidified preconceived notions" are!
Please demonstrate with fact!

Your comment above about 'Jesus was Adam, Pleiadian spirits...Atlantis..."
is a "preconceived notion" because there is no way that you could know this
conclusively from your own experience. Your stubborn clinging to occult
disinformation & your insulting words show YOU as arrogant. Aren't you
projecting your own personal weaknesses onto others?!

Have you heard the Chinese axiom: when you point your finger outward in
blame (at Osho, at Roger...) note that 3 other fingers will be found
pointing back at yourself?

Roger