Purification of the Buddhi - talk returning

[Guest guest]

Well, Tony, you are a delightfully, strange bird....

>Tony: PURIFICATION OF THE BUDDHI,AND SELF-SADHANA. P=Participant.

>

> Before I start let me say that because I can talk about all

> this, doesn't mean I can do it.

 

Joyce: I did download all this to read. Seven pages actually, although the

seventh had only one line on it and then was empty, that was the most pithy

page -very zen.

 

Now, Im not completely certain that with this post you weren't just having a

wee joke. Usually, one gets whatever practice one attempts to do straight,

so that one can the practice ardently and with clear comprehension. It

rather seems to me that while I don't question your ardour, your

communication of whatever this is all about is incomprehensible to me

because it is incomprehensible to you. Even if you were clear on this

practice, if this is what it is, I doubt whether you would be able to teach

it to me before you had realized it, could "do it". And even then, I doubt

that I would have the capacity to really understand, although from your

realization I would feel your great kindess blessing and this would be

teaching enough for me. I have difficulty with the notion that someone is

teaching others about Reality that says he really knows nothing much - and

then makes rather questionable and somewhat bizarre statements to

P=participant about how to realize. Kind of a strange pudding to serve

others.

 

Still, it was a teaching for me, for which, many thanks. Since I did you the

courtesy of reflecting upon your words, Ill assume you will do the same for

me. Read to the bottom, you won't be sorry. How was it a teaching? Have

patience and let me tell you.

 

A "list" is a difficult place for relationship - a bit iffy. One is always

relational to whatever appears but through words only this is a challenge.

But I can somewhat feel from various posts from various people, who I would

really enjoy spending time with, who I would drink wine with, listen to and

laugh with. But with you, you have caught my interest and attention because

you seem remote -we two ships passing each other in the night -dots on the

great horizon.

 

Im interested in communication. I have heard that this has to do with the

way human beings create consensus reality based on agreement -ie. we agree

that we all view physical reality in a common way, filtering out most of

what is present and so a table is a table and a chair is a chair, there's

time and space and a sun in the sky that comes and goes etc. thus creating a

basic common physical reality and we then proceed from there.

 

The next part of creating reality has to do with agreements about what other

things are "real" - ie. people who see angels love to hang out together and

have a intimate communication, and also a great affinity. All of us on this

list have a love of something Great, (what can I call It?) However we dimly

perceive it, this is real to us, our agreed reality. We communicate this

love through words as best we can and we like each other, feel affinity and

sometimes even infinity. And, to the degree that we agree on realities, even

the unlimited possibilties of multidimentional realities and Ultimate

Reality beyond our imagining at this time -is the degree of affinity and

communciation we can create with each other. A hint to anyone working with

others in crises -if you agree that whatever they are experiencing is real

for you too, that you like this, and them, and are willing to be open and to

communicate -this is very essential healing.

 

So - the first thing that I notice as I experience your post is -we share a

iimited agreement on any reality, (even about notions like "eating" and

"purity"). We thus communcate minimally and theres not much affinity or

liking. I also noticed that you now are having a dialogue between yourself,

someone called P=participant and someone called Joyce(the co-ordinator) LOL!

- Im not certain that this personage was meant to be me -but it is your own

creation in your play. If this is me, and if what words you put in this

mouth of Joyce are what you have discerned from my posts, then I fall on my

face to the list and promise never to post again. Still, thank you, Tony,

for allowing this much of me to be alive in your mind.

 

So - at this point I have the choice about whether to just allow a Tony to

live in mind as someone with whom I have no shared reality, no communcation,

no affinity -zilch. (rather like a lump of some undigested dual something)

Or, can I try to relate in some way, see if this is possible? So I also

created a play in mind, with Joyce talking with Tony and then switching and

being Tony listening to what Joyce had to say and then switching back again.

Our own little dialogue. It was very interesting, I discovered a bit of

iner work to be done but I'll spare the list this bit of Gestalt. I came to

some inner resolution, but, what to say to this Tony who wrote on this list.

How to find some common reality with him apart from fantasy? There must be,

just must be some common value here to build on.

 

So -then last night, I happened upon some fine words, where someone stated

that basically, everything that is of value on earth - every structure of

value -is recreated or re-manifested in its essentiality in the realm of

Paradise. An example of this is given. If when we were twelve years old

and happened to be walking in the woods one winter and saw a rabbit crossing

a fresh field of snow and it looked pure and pristine and free and if we

remember this and cherish this, it will be in Paradise. This does not mean

that there will be snow in Paradise or the rabbit, but the essential reality

of this experience will be in Paradise.

 

So - while I have no clue what you are talking about, and the bits you say

that I do understand I completely disagree with - if I really listen, I can

experience that in amongst all the words you post, buried deep and between

the lines is something you cherish greatly. As I began to contemplate this

and look about me and within with these eyes of cherishing, I found it was

rather like looking for mushrooms. At first you don't see anything, but

then all of a sudden you see one mushroom, and then more and more until the

whole field is alive with little mushrooms one had never noticed before yet

had always been there.

 

So now Im playing in this field of cherishing, our common reality and common

ground. What was once an empty field is now filled with flowers as far as

the eye can see. All the many, many simple experiences in this life that I

had forgotten, or even, (may God All-Merciful forgive me) disdained, now

come alive again to be cherished. Everything in this morning, in this day of

great good fortune is present to be praised and cherished. I feel like

painting again after a long night of darkness. For this I have you to thank

- that you took the time and the risk to post and that by chance for once I

was willing to be open - although nothing comes by chance.

 

Hoping to meet you in Paradise,

 

Love Joyce

[Guest guest]

, "Joyce Short" <insight@s...> wrote:

> Well, Tony, you are a delightfully, strange bird....

>

> >Tony: PURIFICATION OF THE BUDDHI,AND SELF-SADHANA. P=Participant.

> >

> > Before I start let me say that because I can talk about all

> > this, doesn't mean I can do it.

>

> Joyce: I did download all this to read. Seven pages actually,

although the

> seventh had only one line on it and then was empty, that was the

most pithy

> page -very zen.

 

Namaste Joyce,

 

No the 'Joyce', wasn't you. There were quite a few participants, I

deleted some. It was a talk that I gave to a full hall of people of

all sorts of beliefs and stages of developement.( a couple of years

ago) I posted some of it for it covered purification and awareness

sheaths etc. My advice on realisation was only up to my experience

and what the saints have taught. Very few realised souls talk at all.

ONS Tony,

[Guest guest]

, "Joyce Short" <insight@s...> wrote:

> Well, Tony, you are a delightfully, strange bird....

>

> >Tony: PURIFICATION OF THE BUDDHI,AND SELF-SADHANA. P=Participant.

 

Namaste Joyce,

 

Right! I am not strong on communicating through agreed 'realities',

for I believe this is part of the illusion and trap, even the

mechanics of it. Heavens and Paradises are just as illusory, people

getting together and creating a new 'reality'. The mind stuff of these

levels is still material albeit subtle and subtler. So I didn't make

much of an attempt to communicate this way.

 

I have my own experiences in these levels right up to the non

experience. So it something that I just tie in with the material

existence. What I was talking about was the elimination of agreed

realities in favour to the truth. I'm not realised but intellectually

I understand and appreciate non-dualism in a vedantic way. I do my own

purification exercises or sadhana everyday, working on that awareness

sheath, so that more prajna or higher consciousness may seep through.

 

It is a decision made on getting out not understanding or appreciating

the illusion. One doesn't have to understand or appreciate the

molecular structure of water to climb out of the pool.

 

Om Namah Sivaya.....Tony.

[Guest guest]

Hi Joyce,

 

Thanks for this thoughtful and magical answer. Good discussion of

communication... and I love your discovery of all the mushrooms and

flowers in amongst the zilch. ))

 

Love,

Dharma

> Well, Tony, you are a delightfully, strange bird....

>

>>Tony: PURIFICATION OF THE BUDDHI,AND SELF-SADHANA. P=Participant.

>>

>> Before I start let me say that because I can talk about all

>> this, doesn't mean I can do it.

>

>Joyce: I did download all this to read. Seven pages actually, although the

>seventh had only one line on it and then was empty, that was the most pithy

>page -very zen.

>

>Now, Im not completely certain that with this post you weren't just having a

>wee joke. Usually, one gets whatever practice one attempts to do straight,

>so that one can the practice ardently and with clear comprehension. It

>rather seems to me that while I don't question your ardour, your

>communication of whatever this is all about is incomprehensible to me

>because it is incomprehensible to you. Even if you were clear on this

>practice, if this is what it is, I doubt whether you would be able to teach

>it to me before you had realized it, could "do it". And even then, I doubt

[Guest guest]

Hi Tony,

>Right! I am not strong on communicating through agreed 'realities',

>for I believe this is part of the illusion and trap, even the

>mechanics of it. Heavens and Paradises are just as illusory, people

>getting together and creating a new 'reality'. The mind stuff of these

>levels is still material albeit subtle and subtler. So I didn't make

>much of an attempt to communicate this way.

 

So you don't want to learn to communicate with human beings?

 

Makes it kinda difficult to teach, doesn't it?

 

Dharma

[Guest guest]

-

Dharma

Thursday, May 10, 2001 1:04 PM

Re: Re: Purification of the Buddhi - talk returning

Hi Tony,>Right! I am not strong on communicating through agreed

'realities',>for I believe this is part of the illusion and trap,

even the>mechanics of it. Heavens and Paradises are just as illusory,

people>getting together and creating a new 'reality'. The mind stuff

of these>levels is still material albeit subtle and subtler. So I

didn't make>much of an attempt to communicate this way.So you don't

want to learn to communicate with human beings?Makes it kinda

difficult to teach, doesn't

it?Dharma----I'd like to thank you

guys/gals for this thread. Tony, especially you, for I coulda been

you & I'm happy as heck being me

:-)./join

All paths go

somewhere. No path goes nowhere. Paths, places, sights, perceptions,

and indeed all experiences arise from and exist in and subside back

into the Space of Awareness. Like waves rising are not different than

the ocean, all things arising from Awareness are of the nature of

Awareness. Awareness does not come and go but is always Present. It

is Home. Home is where the Heart Is. Jnanis know the Heart to be the

Finality of Eternal Being. A true devotee relishes in the Truth of

Self-Knowledge, spontaneously arising from within into It Self.

Welcome all to a.Your use of is subject

to the

[Guest guest]

On 5/10/01 at 2:04 PM Dharma wrote:

 

[...]

ºSo you don't want to learn to communicate with human beings?

º

ºMakes it kinda difficult to teach, doesn't it?

º

ºDharma

 

:-)

Tony probably belongs to the class of those privileged ones to whom

this haiku applies:

 

greatest joy of all

when making others happy

no longer enjoys

 

<laugh>

 

Jan

[Guest guest]

, Dharma <deva@L...> wrote:

> Hi Tony,

>

> >Right! I am not strong on communicating through agreed 'realities',

> >for I believe this is part of the illusion and trap, even the

> >mechanics of it. Heavens and Paradises are just as illusory, people

> >getting together and creating a new 'reality'. The mind stuff of

these

> >levels is still material albeit subtle and subtler. So I didn't

make

> >much of an attempt to communicate this way.

>

> So you don't want to learn to communicate with human beings?

>

> Makes it kinda difficult to teach, doesn't it?

>

> Dharma

 

Namaste Dharma,

 

One doesn't have to erect new edifices of illusion in order to

communicate. There is enough of that already. If you are talking about

my talks, most knew where I was coming from and my background before I

opened my mouth. Spinning the dreamworld out into new dreams isn't

communicating it is adding to the confusion and illusion already

existing. Sometimes less is more!!!

 

I'm sorry that some people seem upset that I don't indulge unnecessary

illusion or attempt to add to it. no offence meant.

 

ONS Tony.

[Guest guest]

, "jb" <janb@a...> wrote:

> On 5/10/01 at 2:04 PM Dharma wrote:

>

> [...]

> ºSo you don't want to learn to communicate with human beings?

> º

> ºMakes it kinda difficult to teach, doesn't it?

> º

> ºDharma

>

> :-)

> Tony probably belongs to the class of those privileged ones to whom

> this haiku applies:

>

> greatest joy of all

> when making others happy

> no longer enjoys

>

> <laugh>

>

> Jan

 

Namaste Jan,

 

Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit, and indicates a form of violence.

As being privileged, the only privilege I consider myself to be

blessed with is at least the intellectual knowledge of Advaita

Vedanta, even to my level. ONS Tony.

[Guest guest]

On 5/10/01 at 11:15 PM Tony O'Clery wrote:

 

[...]

º

ºNamaste Jan,

º

ºSarcasm is the lowest form of wit, and indicates a form of violence.

ºAs being privileged, the only privilege I consider myself to be

ºblessed with is at least the intellectual knowledge of Advaita

ºVedanta, even to my level. ONS Tony.

 

Thanks again for the humor Tony - what you consider to be a blessing

I consider to be the worst curse possible, even at "my level" - a matter

of perspective of course.

Perhaps a consolation you're not alone <laugh>

 

Jan

l

[Guest guest]

Tony:

ºSarcasm is the lowest form of wit, and indicates a form of violence.

ºAs being privileged, the only privilege I consider myself to be

ºblessed with is at least the intellectual knowledge of Advaita

ºVedanta, even to my level. ONS Tony.

 

Jan:

Thanks again for the humor Tony - what you consider to be a blessing

I consider to be the worst curse possible, even at "my level" - a matter

of perspective of course.

Perhaps a consolation you're not alone <laugh>

 

Mira:

Geez Jan, I couldn't agree more...

Conceptual nonduality had become a secret weapon of my mind, in an attempt

to intellectualize and be 'accurate'. My mind basically gave in to a state

of apathy, turning Nisargadatta's quote of 'all knowledge is ignorance'

into a nightmare. The antidote I was given to neutralize this

conceptualization was a time in my life during which I was forced to 'know',

and forced to value and honor what I 'knew' or I would have ended up very

(physically and psychologically) damaged.

There are so many lovely ways for immediate discovery of truth, but the

intellect make or remember the discovery, for it is truth that discovers the

intellect.

Love (to you) and Laughs (about myself), Mira

[Guest guest]

Namaste All,

 

As a response to some posts I cannot understand. Let me explain

something. If one is not realised then the only way one can understand

is with the intellect. This is what I mean by intellectual grasp.

Nisargadatta said that only one in about 10 million, (Mumbai's

population at the time), can really understand advaita, even

intellectually.

 

I am lucky that I was intellectually educated to the tertiary level

early in life like most. I worked on building sites and in the

canefields until I got into sales and found I could do that well.

 

Consequently it saved me from a trap. I am still unable to write the

type of english that some do in this field. I am blessed that I have

had experiences that enlighten me, and that I can meditate.

 

My own words can be bumble unless I use sanskrit, but I notice reading

back there is not much to contradict what I have said.

 

This is a Ramana list after all.

 

Om Namah Sivaya....Tony.

[Guest guest]

Hi Tony,

>As a response to some posts I cannot understand. Let me explain

>something. If one is not realised then the only way one can understand

>is with the intellect.

 

I think Ramana might have suggested that you not hold so tight to the

intellect. Such a tight grip might keep you from going farther.

 

If in meditation you let go of the intellect and remain open, you open the

way for intuition.

 

Love,

Dharma

[Guest guest]

On 5/11/01 at 2:40 PM Mirror wrote:

 

ºTony:

ººSarcasm is the lowest form of wit, and indicates a form of violence.

ººAs being privileged, the only privilege I consider myself to be

ººblessed with is at least the intellectual knowledge of Advaita

ººVedanta, even to my level. ONS Tony.

º

ºJan:

ºThanks again for the humor Tony - what you consider to be a blessing

ºI consider to be the worst curse possible, even at "my level" - a matter

ºof perspective of course.

ºPerhaps a consolation you're not alone <laugh>

º

ºMira:

ºGeez Jan, I couldn't agree more...

ºConceptual nonduality had become a secret weapon of my mind, in an attempt

ºto intellectualize and be 'accurate'. My mind basically gave in to a state

ºof apathy, turning Nisargadatta's quote of 'all knowledge is ignorance'

ºinto a nightmare. The antidote I was given to neutralize this

ºconceptualization was a time in my life during which I was forced to

º'know',

ºand forced to value and honor what I 'knew' or I would have ended up very

º(physically and psychologically) damaged.

ºThere are so many lovely ways for immediate discovery of truth, but the

ºintellect make or remember the discovery, for it is truth that discovers

ºthe

ºintellect.

ºLove (to you) and Laughs (about myself), Mira

 

Hi Mira,

 

You couldn't be "more" right on the issue of conceptualizing: when a badly

damaged individual, conceptual Advaita can be of some help. But without

the experience as a foundation, it can only become belief - not different from

any other belief, with those, having realized the 'truth' of it, being used as

the

evidence.

 

And there still are many ways to discover 'truth' oneself - uninfluenced...

In that sense I was 'more' than lucky, from a more or less scientific

background that even questions the validity of experience.

No influence whatsoever from scriptures...

 

So not much of a surprise, 'life-energy' became 'the' issue regarding

nonduality.

One of the advantages, the impossibility of a sense of 'arrivedness' as energy

will be flowing as long as manifested life will be 'around' <laugh>

Another advantage, the impossibility of "behaviorally ordained" blocks due to

societal constraints - one of the major reasons of being 'blocked' to

life-energy despite the familiar 'I could have known'.

I don't think there is much on 'nonduality and life-energy' though - to my

experience,

Kundalini yoga does not cover that at all <laugh>

 

Love,

Jan

[Guest guest]

Jan:

So not much of a surprise, 'life-energy' became 'the' issue regarding

nonduality.

One of the advantages, the impossibility of a sense of 'arrivedness' as

energy

will be flowing as long as manifested life will be 'around' <laugh>

Another advantage, the impossibility of "behaviorally ordained" blocks due

to

societal constraints - one of the major reasons of being 'blocked' to

life-energy despite the familiar 'I could have known'.

I don't think there is much on 'nonduality and life-energy' though - to my

experience,

Kundalini yoga does not cover that at all <laugh>

 

Mira:

This is exactly what I have perceived as being something like the 'middle

way' between that which moves and that which doesn't. In direct discovery of

truth, there is the immediate conceptualization of what it is... as if life

tries to define itself by using its ability to conceive itself. But

life-energy keeps flowing and does not tarry with yesterday's concepts and

understandings.

I don't know enough about Kundalini yoga in relation to nonduality inspite

of having been on this list long enough to cover the basics of what it is.

Could you elaborate a bit on that? Thanks, Mira

[Guest guest]

, "jb" <kvy9@l...> wrote:

> On 5/11/01 at 2:40 PM Mirror wrote:

 

Namaste,

 

Anything within the mind including energy experiences can only ever be

belief without realisation.......ONS Tony.

[Guest guest]

On 5/11/01 at 9:30 PM Mirror wrote:

 

[...]ºMira:

ºThis is exactly what I have perceived as being something like the 'middle

ºway' between that which moves and that which doesn't. In direct discovery

ºof

ºtruth, there is the immediate conceptualization of what it is... as if life

ºtries to define itself by using its ability to conceive itself. But

ºlife-energy keeps flowing and does not tarry with yesterday's concepts and

ºunderstandings.

ºI don't know enough about Kundalini yoga in relation to nonduality inspite

ºof having been on this list long enough to cover the basics of what it is.

ºCould you elaborate a bit on that? Thanks, Mira

 

Hi Mira,

 

The web is teeming with info regarding Kundalini yoga: and all of it is

conceptual <laugh>

Not even identical twins will go through the same K. experiences. Knowing

everything about

the chakras in order to deal with life-energy is just as useful as the

biological knowledge of the lungs

when it comes to breathing. So I don't think you will find anything of use:

 

All so called "spiritual training" falls into the class of "reverse

engineering":

conceptualizing "what worked for me", generalizing that and offering it as

"teaching".

The non-verified assumption is that such an approach will work for others:

quite often, it doesn't.

 

Hence, what I call a supreme blessing, not to have fallen into the hands of such

teachers

but having been trained by Yama, and later on, Shakti <laugh>.

So I couldn't recommend a study of Kundalini Yoga - it is dysfunctional unless

in a rare case of 'emergency'.

 

Jan

[Guest guest]

Tony:

> Anything within the mind including energy experiences can only ever be

> belief without realisation.......ONS Tony.

 

That's what you believe....

and then there is that which includes all energy experiences, does not

reject any belief, nor is it in need of realization.

Mira

[Guest guest]

, "Mirror" <mirror@u...> wrote:

> Tony:

> > Anything within the mind including energy experiences can only

ever be

> > belief without realisation.......ONS Tony.

>

> That's what you believe....

> and then there is that which includes all energy experiences, does

not

> reject any belief, nor is it in need of realization.

> Mira

 

Namaste Mira,

 

Energy itself is an illusion, 'God', or Saguna Brahman is an illusion.

It is all but a dream. This is my experience. Who are you saying

includes all energy experiences? Is it the body? the sheath you move

into at sleep? What is beyond all this? That is the truth. I say

nothing that the sages didn't say. If you find this is a reality

for you then fine, perhaps you can use a thorn to remove a thorn.

 

Kundalini rising is an illusion within all this also. K is the mind,

that's all, the focus changes so gives the sense of rising movement.

K is prana and doesn't lead to enlightenment. How can it when it

concentrates on experiences......ONS

 

ONS Tony.

[Guest guest]

Tony:

> Energy itself is an illusion, 'God', or Saguna Brahman is an illusion.

 

In relation to what? To reality?

The joke is on you Tony.

Mira

[Guest guest]

On 5/11/01 at 9:30 PM Mirror wrote:

 

[...]ºMira:

ºThis is exactly what I have perceived as being something like the 'middle

ºway' between that which moves and that which doesn't. In direct discovery

ºof

ºtruth, there is the immediate conceptualization of what it is... as if life

ºtries to define itself by using its ability to conceive itself. But

ºlife-energy keeps flowing and does not tarry with yesterday's concepts and

ºunderstandings.

ºI don't know enough about Kundalini yoga in relation to nonduality inspite

ºof having been on this list long enough to cover the basics of what it is.

ºCould you elaborate a bit on that? Thanks, Mira

 

Hi Mira,

 

The web is teeming with info regarding Kundalini yoga: and all of it is

conceptual <laugh>

Not even identical twins will go through the same K. experiences. Knowing

everything about

the chakras in order to deal with life-energy is just as useful as the

biological knowledge of the lungs

when it comes to breathing. So I don't think you will find anything of use:

 

All so called "spiritual training" falls into the class of "reverse

engineering":

conceptualizing "what worked for me", generalizing that and offering it as

"teaching".

The non-verified assumption is that such an approach will work for others:

quite often, it doesn't.

 

Hence, what I call a supreme blessing, not to have fallen into the hands of such

teachers

but having been trained by Yama, and later on, Shakti <laugh>.

So I couldn't recommend a study of Kundalini Yoga - it is dysfunctional unless

in a rare case of 'emergency'.

 

Jan

[Guest guest]

, "Mirror" <mirror@u...> wrote:

> Tony:

> > Energy itself is an illusion, 'God', or Saguna Brahman is an

illusion.

>

> In relation to what? To reality?

> The joke is on you Tony.

> Mira

 

Namaste,

 

You, I, all this 'creation', never happened, it is like a dream. It

has no relationship to anything...ONS Tony.

[Guest guest]

--- Dear Tony,

you wrote:

This is a Ramana list after all.

 

 

i would like to say that i was privately emailed from another list

and asked to consider joining this one by Harsha. He did not say i

had to be of any eastern religious persuasion. What i had to say on

the other list was similar to what i have said here. I am Native

American, and while i was raised roman catholic toplease my dying

mother, I find that i dont completely to the teachings of

that religion. I find that native spiritualism permeates my belief

structure. You may think that you have found the ONLY ENLIGHTENED

WAY, but I would not presume to say that your religious beliefs are

incorrect, i amy not share them, and that is my choice. I am not

God darlin, and here's a news flash for you, NEITHER ARE YOU!!! God

decides what pleases Him, and we can only do what we think is best

in our human frailty and imperfection. So look up whatever you like

if it makes you feel superior, the fact remains that not all

participants on this list to Ramana, and I was not told,

when i was asked to consider this list, that it was a requirement.

Gracie

 

In , "Tony O'Clery" <aoclery> wrote:

> Namaste All,

>

> As a response to some posts I cannot understand. Let me explain

> something. If one is not realised then the only way one can

understand

> is with the intellect. This is what I mean by intellectual grasp.

> Nisargadatta said that only one in about 10 million, (Mumbai's

> population at the time), can really understand advaita, even

> intellectually.

>

> I am lucky that I was intellectually educated to the tertiary level

> early in life like most. I worked on building sites and in the

> canefields until I got into sales and found I could do that well.

>

> Consequently it saved me from a trap. I am still unable to write

the

> type of english that some do in this field. I am blessed that I

have

> had experiences that enlighten me, and that I can meditate.

>

> My own words can be bumble unless I use sanskrit, but I notice

reading

> back there is not much to contradict what I have said.

>

> This is a Ramana list after all.

>

> Om Namah Sivaya....Tony.

[Guest guest]

, "jb" <kvy9@l...> wrote:

Namaste,

 

Why waste time on the concept of kundalini, cakras etc. It is a

diversion within illusion. 'Who am I?' is the way. K is just cleansing

prana that's all it is........ONS Tony.

[Guest guest]

Tony:

> You, I, all this 'creation', never happened, it is like a dream. It

> has no relationship to anything...ONS Tony.

 

It can only have 'never happened' in relation to it having happened....there

is no never without ever.

Now let me guess....

you are not saying this,

and you are an illusion that never happened.

:-)

Mira