Amma & Mazie

[Guest guest]

Be most wary not to fall into the trap of adoration, please, as this

is all to easy to do...and differs from the state of loving

acceptance by a very wide margin.

When we love in a state of pure fulfillment, it is impossible for that

love to be unequal--or for there to be a division or glorification of

one at the expense of the other.

When you use another's love to find that love within yourself, then

you are on the path of enlightenment...but if that love is used to

ensnare, beguile or trap...where one becomes the servant and the

other the master...then that is the trap of ego need...even for the

most (seemingly) liberated individual.

Fine teachers and loving yogis have often fallen into this trap when

their devotees lavish them with such praise. It is not wrong to

love, nor to express to others that love, but it can be a trap if one

is not careful. So many good people have been terribly disillusioned

when their human targets of devotion turned out to be human. And

they always turn out to be human. We are unfair to them in the

expectation that they have somehow gone beyond that state of

imperfection.

IMHO

Blessings,

Love,

Zenbob

Meditating on His Own Ferrari Nature...

[Guest guest]

So true, Zenbob.

 

The phenomenon is "idealization."

 

It tends to build of its own momentum,

like a fervor builds during a football game,

a contagion effect.

 

It's not always so easy to see that it's

basically the same phenomenon of idealization,

whether applied to Mom or Dad, my perfect mate,

Hitler, Jesus, the Buddha, Reverend Moon, Mick Jagger,

Mother Theresa, Ramana ...

 

The need for an ideal is deep, can include

religious feelings that are overlapped

with erotic (like the swooning at

Beatles concert, or "being slain in the spirit"

at a Christian revival, or reactions to shaktipat

with teachers that do that)

 

The idealized and the idealizers are in a dance,

each playing off the other ...

 

Dancing,

Dan

 

 

 

> Lovely times, glad everyone was touched by the experience...

>

> Be most wary not to fall into the trap of adoration, please, as

this is all

> to easy to do...and differs from the state of loving acceptance by

a very

> wide margin.

>

> When we love in a state of pure fulfillment, it is impossible for

that love

> to be unequal--or for there to be a division or glorification of

one at the

> expense of the other.

>

> When you use another's love to find that love within yourself, then

you are

> on the path of enlightenment...but if that love is used to ensnare,

beguile

> or trap...where one becomes the servant and the other the

master...then that

> is the trap of ego need...even for the most (seemingly) liberated

individual.

>

> Fine teachers and loving yogis have often fallen into this trap

when their

> devotees lavish them with such praise. It is not wrong to love,

nor to

> express to others that love, but it can be a trap if one is not

careful. So

> many good people have been terribly disillusioned when their human

targets of

> devotion turned out to be human. And they always turn out to be

human. We

> are unfair to them in the expectation that they have somehow gone

beyond that

> state of imperfection.

>

> IMHO

>

> Blessings,

>

> Love,

>

> Zenbob

> Meditating on His Own Ferrari Nature...

[Guest guest]

Thank you both Dan and Zenbob for saying what I wanted

to say but saying it in a way that sounded much nicer

than it might have coming from me.

 

, "dan330033" <dan330033> wrote:

> So true, Zenbob.

>

> The phenomenon is "idealization."

>

> It tends to build of its own momentum,

> like a fervor builds during a football game,

> a contagion effect.

>

> It's not always so easy to see that it's

> basically the same phenomenon of idealization,

> whether applied to Mom or Dad, my perfect mate,

> Hitler, Jesus, the Buddha, Reverend Moon, Mick Jagger,

> Mother Theresa, Ramana ...

>

> The need for an ideal is deep, can include

> religious feelings that are overlapped

> with erotic (like the swooning at

> Beatles concert, or "being slain in the spirit"

> at a Christian revival, or reactions to shaktipat

> with teachers that do that)

>

> The idealized and the idealizers are in a dance,

> each playing off the other ...

>

> Dancing,

> Dan

>

>

>

>

> > Lovely times, glad everyone was touched by the experience...

> >

> > Be most wary not to fall into the trap of adoration, please, as

> this is all

> > to easy to do...and differs from the state of loving acceptance by

> a very

> > wide margin.

> >

> > When we love in a state of pure fulfillment, it is impossible for

> that love

> > to be unequal--or for there to be a division or glorification of

> one at the

> > expense of the other.

> >

> > When you use another's love to find that love within yourself, then

> you are

> > on the path of enlightenment...but if that love is used to ensnare,

> beguile

> > or trap...where one becomes the servant and the other the

> master...then that

> > is the trap of ego need...even for the most (seemingly) liberated

> individual.

> >

> > Fine teachers and loving yogis have often fallen into this trap

> when their

> > devotees lavish them with such praise. It is not wrong to love,

> nor to

> > express to others that love, but it can be a trap if one is not

> careful. So

> > many good people have been terribly disillusioned when their human

> targets of

> > devotion turned out to be human. And they always turn out to be

> human. We

> > are unfair to them in the expectation that they have somehow gone

> beyond that

> > state of imperfection.

> >

> > IMHO

> >

> > Blessings,

> >

> > Love,

> >

> > Zenbob

> > Meditating on His Own Ferrari Nature...

[Guest guest]

when sunrays

focus on love,

it becomes dulled, overly done.

When the lightness of metaphor

touches upon it,

it is allowed to become a reflection of itself.

[Guest guest]

, zen2wrk@a... wrote:

>Be most wary not to fall into the trap of adoration, please, as this

is all to easy to do...and differs from the state of loving

acceptance by a very wide margin.

 

.....Well, that would take some volitionality, wouldn't it?

 

>When we love in a state of pure fulfillment, it is impossible for

that love to be unequal--or for there to be a division or

glorification of one at the expense of the other.

 

 

.....apparently, the message to which you are responding implies an

unequal love, division, and glorification of one at the expense of

another, by your interpretation. in fact, any meaning or lack thereof

of this (or any experience) is something you are adding, based upon

your own conditioned filters.

 

 

>When you use another's love to find that love within yourself, then

you are on the path of enlightenment...

 

.....there is no path to enlightenment.

 

 

>but if that love is used to ensnare, beguile or trap...where one

becomes the servant and the other the master...then that is the trap

of ego need...even for the most (seemingly) liberated individual.

 

 

.....have you had issues in your life around entrapment by teachers?

it sounds like you are speaking more about yourself than about

Ammachi. have you ever met her, btw? if you had, then such

considerations would be unlikely.

 

 

>Fine teachers and loving yogis have often fallen into this trap when

their devotees lavish them with such praise.

 

....only if they see others as others, rather than their own Supreme

Self.

 

> It is not wrong to love, nor to express to others that love, but

it can be a trap if one is not careful. So many good people have

been terribly disillusioned when their human targets of devotion

turned out to be human. And they always turn out to be human. We

are unfair to them in the expectation that they have somehow gone

beyond that state of imperfection.

 

 

....there is no such thing as a "state of imperfection". to believe

otherwise is what obstructs that realization.

 

LoveAlways,

 

b

[Guest guest]

, "dan330033" <dan330033> wrote:

 

So true, Zenbob.

 

The phenomenon is "idealization."

 

 

....the activity of labeling phenomena as this or that requires one to

construct an imaginary separation between subject and object.

 

LoveAlways,

 

b

[Guest guest]

, "jodyrrr" <jodyrrr> wrote:

> Thank you both Dan and Zenbob for saying what I wanted

> to say but saying it in a way that sounded much nicer

> than it might have coming from me.

 

 

....Speak your mind, Lad --

i won't bite!

 

LoveAlways,

 

b

[Guest guest]

, "hrtbeat7" <hrtbeat7> wrote:

> , "dan330033" <dan330033> wrote:

>

> So true, Zenbob.

>

> The phenomenon is "idealization."

>

>

> ...the activity of labeling phenomena as this or that requires one to

> construct an imaginary separation between subject and object.

 

That separation comes with the package (body/mind) and requires

no one to construct it.

> LoveAlways,

>

> b

 

loving you too--jody.

[Guest guest]

, "jodyrrr" <jodyrrr> wrote:

 

That separation comes with the package (body/mind) and requires

no one to construct it.

 

 

 

......is this true, or more like a belief you have acquired?

i am not looking for a yes or no answer, but simply inviting you to

inquire.

 

LoveAlways,

 

b

[Guest guest]

, "hrtbeat7" <hrtbeat7> wrote:

> , "jodyrrr" <jodyrrr> wrote:

>

> > Thank you both Dan and Zenbob for saying what I wanted

> > to say but saying it in a way that sounded much nicer

> > than it might have coming from me.

>

>

> ...Speak your mind, Lad --

> i won't bite!

>

> LoveAlways,

>

> b

 

Well, not to take too much away from Amma, but

she poops on the same pot the rest of us do,

meaning she's just another human being. She

may have thousands of followers who believe

she is a living Kali, but I'd contend her love

vibrations emanate from her devotees rather

than actually come from her to her devotees.

 

To bring it home to Mazie, Mazie is a person

obviously full of love. When she was in the

presence of Amma, with all the attendant

love hysteria that surrounds her, Mazie was

opened to her own love. Amma was just the

trigger, not the maker or transmitter of the

love. Amma's efficacy as a trigger has less

to do with Amma and much more to do with all

the hoopla that surrounds her.

 

love--jody.

[Guest guest]

, "hrtbeat7" <hrtbeat7> wrote:

> , "jodyrrr" <jodyrrr> wrote:

>

> That separation comes with the package (body/mind) and requires

> no one to construct it.

>

>

>

> .....is this true, or more like a belief you have acquired?

> i am not looking for a yes or no answer, but simply inviting you to

> inquire.

>

> LoveAlways,

>

> b

 

Thanks for the invitation.

 

love--jody.

[Guest guest]

, "jodyrrr" <jodyrrr> wrote:

> , "hrtbeat7" <hrtbeat7> wrote:

> > , "jodyrrr" <jodyrrr> wrote:

>

> To bring it home to Mazie, Mazie is a person

> obviously full of love. When she was in the

> presence of Amma, with all the attendant

> love hysteria that surrounds her, Mazie was

> opened to her own love. Amma was just the

> trigger, not the maker or transmitter of the

> love. Amma's efficacy as a trigger has less

> to do with Amma and much more to do with all

> the hoopla that surrounds her.

>

> love--jody.

 

Hi again, Dear jody,

 

Finally, online again! Ah, to bring it home to the maze. Simple, it's

all so very simple to Love. What you refer to as "opened to her own

love," well, dearest, i see it all, ALL as OneLove, so who or where

or what is this "her own Love?" There is the old "there is only One"

to consider, is it not? Whether Amma, or i, or the swans or the

trees, or my Beloved Robert, all is OneLove, OneBeing, OneHeart.

Being opened, so to speak, to Love, opens up to the Only Love of the

Beautiful Beloved One. Amma is so dear and everyone was so dear and

you are so dear and isn't it all just so utterly Beautiful, This Love

We Are Now? And As It Is, not as one might project or conceptualize

or promote or rethink or rehash. Love. Just That. Love.

 

Love,

Mazie

[Guest guest]

Hi,

 

I couldn't help but contrast this to my own experiences meeting guru-type

people. I was usually connected by the teaching delivered, and its

application to life over the emotional charge-level connection. That was

sometimes there, but in general I am not one of those who spends too much

time in that space.

 

Its interesting. Its probably a contrast of a mind-type that responds to a

bhakti-path approach, and my own, which is more analytical and hyper-logic

leaps spiced in with some deep connections. They both reach the same

place. its the idea of tears if you will. Have you ever felt another's

tear in your own face? to do that one has to abandon this little space we

usually exist in. One can do that by logic-leap into a wordless mindspace

that is not logic and not an ego thought, or get lost in a bhaktisphere

connection accomplishing the same thing.

 

the danger of the logic approach is getting lost in a cold analysis, the

dnager of the other is getting lost in a cycle of chasing bliss.

 

just some thoughts. hope it makes sense.

 

maitri,

 

--janpa

[Guest guest]

, "mazie_l" <sraddha54@h...> wrote:

 

[snip]

> Hi again, Dear jody,

>

> Finally, online again! Ah, to bring it home to the maze. Simple, it's

> all so very simple to Love. What you refer to as "opened to her own

> love," well, dearest, i see it all, ALL as OneLove, so who or where

> or what is this "her own Love?" There is the old "there is only One"

> to consider, is it not? Whether Amma, or i, or the swans or the

> trees, or my Beloved Robert, all is OneLove, OneBeing, OneHeart.

> Being opened, so to speak, to Love, opens up to the Only Love of the

> Beautiful Beloved One. Amma is so dear and everyone was so dear and

> you are so dear and isn't it all just so utterly Beautiful, This Love

> We Are Now? And As It Is, not as one might project or conceptualize

> or promote or rethink or rehash. Love. Just That. Love.

>

> Love,

> Mazie

 

Beautifully stated Mazie, and exactly as I expected you to reply.

 

 

There is only one love, but there are many among Amma's devotees

who are utterly convinced that it *comes* from Amma, and her

organization is utterly geared to convincing newcomers of exactly

that belief. It's just a part of the guru business to get the

converts believing they are getting something rather than explaining

to them that they're accessing something they brought along

with them. That's what keeps them coming back, and that's what

funds Amma's extensive network of well-appointed ashrams around

the world.

 

love--jody.

[Guest guest]

, "jodyrrr" <jodyrrr> wrote:

> There is only one love, but there are many among Amma's devotees

> who are utterly convinced that it *comes* from Amma, and her

> organization is utterly geared to convincing newcomers of exactly

> that belief. It's just a part of the guru business to get the

> converts believing they are getting something rather than

explaining

> to them that they're accessing something they brought along

> with them. That's what keeps them coming back, and that's what

> funds Amma's extensive network of well-appointed ashrams around

> the world.

>

> love--jody.

 

 

....Dear Brother,

 

people believe what they believe --

i am not here to affirm or deny anybody's trip, but to set the record

straight in regard to Ammachi:

unlike many self-proclaimed teachers on the non-dual satsang circuit,

Amma does not keep "well-appointed ashrams around the world" -- if

you were aware of the humble circumstances of her life you would feel

embarrased by your comments. the center we visited, for example, is

little more than a barn. she spends all of her time going from place

to place, tirelessly embracing and showering unconditional Love on

millions, and she is also responsible for numerous hospitals, etc. to

which her organization has been created to funnel all charitable

donations.

please speak from what you know to be true, rather than projecting

your own fantasies and aversions on someone who manifests nothing but

true selflessness in every moment. it is fashionable among many in

the advaitic crowd to poo-poo devotion, but that is usually because

of their own unexamined concepts, preferences, and presumptions.

 

LoveAlways,

 

b

[Guest guest]

, "mazie_l" <sraddha54@h...> wrote:

 

[snip]

> ...Dear Brother,

>

> people believe what they believe --

> i am not here to affirm or deny anybody's trip, but to set the record

> straight in regard to Ammachi:

> unlike many self-proclaimed teachers on the non-dual satsang circuit,

> Amma does not keep "well-appointed ashrams around the world" -- if

> you were aware of the humble circumstances of her life you would feel

> embarrased by your comments.

 

I have been to San Ramon and I have been to Santa Fe. While

they may not contain any mansions or palaces, these are very

expensive properties in very nice areas that have been

developed with multiple buildings and improvements, and these

are only a fraction of what her organization owns.

> the center we visited, for example, is

> little more than a barn. she spends all of her time going from place

> to place, tirelessly embracing and showering unconditional Love on

> millions, and she is also responsible for numerous hospitals, etc. to

> which her organization has been created to funnel all charitable

> donations.

> please speak from what you know to be true, rather than projecting

> your own fantasies and aversions on someone who manifests nothing but

> true selflessness in every moment. it is fashionable among many in

> the advaitic crowd to poo-poo devotion, but that is usually because

> of their own unexamined concepts, preferences, and presumptions.

 

You are mistaken about my projecting as I do have firsthand

knowledge.

 

You've done a bit of projecting yourself, as I never questioned

Amma's sincerity. However, large organizations such as these require

large amounts of cash to continue existing. Amma's organization

has proven itself quite adept at meeting this demand, in part

due to their being able to persuade people that she is a divine

being rather than just a really nice lady who is enlightened.

 

With regards to my taste in fashion, the bulk of my practice

has been within the context of shakta devotion to Mother Kali

via the life and teachings of Sri Ramakrishna. I, dear sir,

do not poo-poo devotion. However, I do recognize the psycho-

social dynamics of large satsangs, having participated in them

as both a devotee and an organizer. What these eyes have seen

*firsthand* has led this mind to conclude that much of what

goes on is generated from within the devotee by the devotee

using cues provided (knowingly or unknowingly) by the guru

and his/her organization. As the cues come from "above",

so the devotees are led to believe that the love comes

from "above". And whether or not anyone did it on purpose,

the end result is money going from the devotee to the

organization and its leaders and figureheads.

> LoveAlways,

>

> b

 

love (and some critical thinking)--jody.

[Guest guest]

Dear Jody,

It sounds to me like you have a "bone to pick," or "sour grapes." or

"chip on your shoulder," an axe to grind! Take your pick....

Just what is considered an OK number of people to have sit in satsang?

Is 200 too much, how about twenty, fifty....?

How much land can a guru have before you think he's bilking people?

Can an enlightened one be a millionaire and not share a dime?

Are there rules?

Is sandals the proper attire.

Or are we to make a cult of not following, a do-it-yourself cult? I

think Krishnmurti already covered that one! People flocked to him to

hear his mental mastabatory admonishment of "don't follow."

Whether or not you template the person of freedom and love out of your

own always existing nature or you get "enhanced vibes", the fact

remains that the one who "has" is a catalyst even if only in

inspiration.

I am glad they are here and don't just remain aloof! What good is

that? The fact that someone else sees my own suffering as an illusion

does not help alliviate my experience of suffering, especially if they

keep quiet!

I get the distinct feeling that all this talk about looking out..don't

get caught in *that* trap is like so many people with dog doo on their

finger pointing and saying, "watch out, don't step in it!"

Love,

Shawn

=============================

on 6/6/02 8:30 PM, jodyrrr at jodyrrr wrote:

, "mazie_l" <sraddha54@h...> wrote:

[snip]

> ...Dear Brother,

>

> people believe what they believe --

> i am not here to affirm or deny anybody's trip, but to set the record

> straight in regard to Ammachi:

> unlike many self-proclaimed teachers on the non-dual satsang circuit,

> Amma does not keep "well-appointed ashrams around the world" -- if

> you were aware of the humble circumstances of her life you would feel

> embarrased by your comments.

I have been to San Ramon and I have been to Santa Fe. While

they may not contain any mansions or palaces, these are very

expensive properties in very nice areas that have been

developed with multiple buildings and improvements, and these

are only a fraction of what her organization owns.

> the center we visited, for example, is

> little more than a barn. she spends all of her time going from place

> to place, tirelessly embracing and showering unconditional Love on

> millions, and she is also responsible for numerous hospitals, etc. to

> which her organization has been created to funnel all charitable

> donations.

> please speak from what you know to be true, rather than projecting

> your own fantasies and aversions on someone who manifests nothing but

> true selflessness in every moment. it is fashionable among many in

> the advaitic crowd to poo-poo devotion, but that is usually because

> of their own unexamined concepts, preferences, and presumptions.

You are mistaken about my projecting as I do have firsthand

knowledge.

You've done a bit of projecting yourself, as I never questioned

Amma's sincerity. However, large organizations such as these require

large amounts of cash to continue existing. Amma's organization

has proven itself quite adept at meeting this demand, in part

due to their being able to persuade people that she is a divine

being rather than just a really nice lady who is enlightened.

With regards to my taste in fashion, the bulk of my practice

has been within the context of shakta devotion to Mother Kali

via the life and teachings of Sri Ramakrishna. I, dear sir,

do not poo-poo devotion. However, I do recognize the psycho-

social dynamics of large satsangs, having participated in them

as both a devotee and an organizer. What these eyes have seen

*firsthand* has led this mind to conclude that much of what

goes on is generated from within the devotee by the devotee

using cues provided (knowingly or unknowingly) by the guru

and his/her organization. As the cues come from "above",

so the devotees are led to believe that the love comes

from "above". And whether or not anyone did it on purpose,

the end result is money going from the devotee to the

organization and its leaders and figureheads.

> LoveAlways,

>

> b

love (and some critical thinking)--jody.

Sponsor

/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.

Terms of Service

<> .

[Guest guest]

> The phenomenon is "idealization."

>

>

> ...the activity of labeling phenomena as this or that requires one

to

> construct an imaginary separation between subject and object.

>

> LoveAlways,

>

> b

 

It seems that way, Bob.

 

Assuming that there are phenomena being labelled,

for "phenomena" is also a label.

 

And of course, that's what perceptions and words provide,

forms and labels for phenomena,

and phenomena to be defined and labelled.

 

For example, when you talked about getting in a car,

car is a label for a phenomenon that requires one

to construct an imaginary separation between subject and

object.

 

Also true of the label "Amma," or "Bob," or "Dan" ...

 

Yet, we do our best to say what we have to say.

 

There isn't a true label for phenomena,

but we say all phenomena are "love" --

not in the sense that all phenomena are attractive,

but as all phenomena are interdependently

defined, and thus never separable.

 

Still, the label hasn't added to what is ...

 

Only love ...

 

-- Dan

[Guest guest]

> >b: ...the activity of labeling phenomena as this or that requires

one to

> > construct an imaginary separation between subject and object.

>

> j: That separation comes with the package (body/mind) and requires

> no one to construct it.

 

True, Jody.

 

Any one thought to have constructed

an imaginary separation would

also have to be a construction

involving an imaginary separation.

 

Namaste,

Dan

[Guest guest]

> Well, not to take too much away from Amma, but

> she poops on the same pot the rest of us do,

> meaning she's just another human being. She

> may have thousands of followers who believe

> she is a living Kali, but I'd contend her love

> vibrations emanate from her devotees rather

> than actually come from her to her devotees.

>

> To bring it home to Mazie, Mazie is a person

> obviously full of love. When she was in the

> presence of Amma, with all the attendant

> love hysteria that surrounds her, Mazie was

> opened to her own love. Amma was just the

> trigger, not the maker or transmitter of the

> love. Amma's efficacy as a trigger has less

> to do with Amma and much more to do with all

> the hoopla that surrounds her.

>

> love--jody.

 

Thanks Jody --

 

It's great that people have and share

experiences that feel wonderful and

loving to them ... and thanks to

Bob for doing so ...

 

When someone shares a wonderful, glowing,

fulfilling experience, this is yet

in the realm of experiencing, and

can be contrasted with the "opposite"

experiences: unwonderful, nonglowing,

or maybe relatively neutral experiences.

 

And nothing against Amma, nor anyone who

enjoys her presence, nor someone

who perhaps might post on a different

list about enjoying

and feeling a peak experience at a

rock concert ...

 

And ... is there not a *knowing* which is love,

which doesn't depend on the quality

of an experience?

 

Such *knowing* being equally present when

getting told by one's boss at work

that your quality of work isn't what is

expected, or your partner yelled at you

and told you that what you meant to say positively

just bothered him or her, or you

interacted with a homeless

person going through your dumpster, or a

mangey-looking dog bit

your leg, or you cleaned the diaper of an

elderly person with cancer and Alzheimer's who just

yelled at you and spat in your face for

coming near?

 

Such *knowing* as love being equally present

when this present body-mind isn't filled

with feelings of love at all, perhaps is

aching or is on a battlefield or

is dealing with a severe illness -- not

in the presence of a "saint" or lover,

but simply as is, however that is,

right now ...

 

Love,

Dan

[Guest guest]

> the danger of the logic approach is getting lost in a cold

analysis, the

> dnager of the other is getting lost in a cycle of chasing bliss.

>

> just some thoughts. hope it makes sense.

>

> maitri,

>

> --janpa

 

Yes, it very much makes sense.

 

And the limitation of an approach,

is that there is something one

thinks or feels one wants to approach.

 

And the limitation of having no

approach is maintenance of the status quo.

 

Peace,

Dan

[Guest guest]

>"dan330033" > > > Well, not to take too much away from Amma,

but > > she poops on the same pot the rest of us do, > > meaning

she's just another human being. She > > may have thousands of

followers who believe > > she is a living Kali, but I'd contend her

love > > vibrations emanate from her devotees rather > > than

actually come from her to her devotees. > > > > To bring it home to

Mazie, Mazie is a person > > obviously full of love. When she was in

the > > presence of Amma, with all the attendant > > love hysteria

that surrounds her, Mazie was > > opened to her own love. Amma was

just the > > trigger, not the maker or transmitter of the > > love.

Amma's efficacy as a trigger has less > > to do with Amma and much

more to do with all > > the hoopla that surrounds her. > > > >

love--jody. > >Thanks Jody -- And thanks Danji, for all the dialogue

and LovePlay with words and ideas and more than that, the Heart of

Love exposing Its Tenderness and infinitie unfolding into a clearer

view, no, a more variagated Loveliness of Love's Face Shining into

the Heart, from the Heart, as the Heart, the Home, the Home... and

Yes, just Yes to Love. What a metaphoric Pothos, a Fragrant

variagated Leafing into This That We Are Now, As it is...Ahh.

> >It's great that people have and share > experiences that feel

wonderful and > loving to them ... and thanks to > Bob for doing so

.... ~~~Oh my, indeed these experiences are not sought out, not

attempted to have, but they are the Ever-Flowing Source of Beauty

pouring over All the Beloved's Babies. Wonderful is Beloved and

wonderful are all manifestations shown and wandered in, for there is

Only That Love and what else is there to do but pour back to all

Hearts this Beauty that reveals Itself in such and so many ways and

Aha to Yah! Adya, Ahh!

> >When someone shares a wonderful, glowing, > fulfilling experience,

this is yet > in the realm of experiencing, and > can be contrasted

with the "opposite" > experiences: unwonderful, nonglowing, > or

maybe relatively neutral experiences. ~~~~And of course it is so,

and whatever gave the idea that my Beloved and i have not known this,

not been aware of this striking Beauty of "experiences?" So, and yes,

the time with dislocated hips and still singing, automobile thrasings

of the body of Robert, and still, and always the Understanding of

OneLove, OneBeauty, all things so imbued, so That which we Are now

and who ever wanted or tried or cared about separating these

"experiences" for there is no separation of Beauty, not ever, and

Yes, of course Danji, of course it is so for these hearts broken open

in Love. All Is The Beautiful Beloved One, no differentiation, no

separation into "good and bad," this or that, or anything that is not

Beloved, of course, and indeed Danjiman.

> >And nothing against Amma, nor anyone who > enjoys her presence, nor

someone > who perhaps might post on a different > list about enjoying

> and feeling a peak experience at a > rock concert ... > >And ... is

there not a *knowing* which is love, > which doesn't depend on the

quality > of an experience? ~~~Well, yes. Of course as said above,

what is not Love and what is not the Beloved Kissing our Hearts with

Joy, Utter, Unutterable Joy?

> >Such *knowing* being equally present when > getting told by one's

boss at work > that your quality of work isn't what is > expected, or

your partner yelled at you > and told you that what you meant to say

positively > just bothered him or her, or you > interacted with a

homeless > person going through your dumpster, or a > mangey-looking

dog bit > your leg, or you cleaned the diaper of an > elderly person

with cancer and Alzheimer's who just > yelled at you and spat in your

face for > coming near? ~~~~Beloved, oh Beloved, the giving of Love in

all things, the Being of Love in all circumstances, the Love Loving as

it is, not somewhere else, not some other experience, not something

"different" that what is before us now, Now, this Moment is all Love

and all faces are the same One. Sweet, indeed it is so....

> >Such *knowing* as love being equally present > when this present

body-mind isn't filled > with feelings of love at all, perhaps is >

aching or is on a battlefield or > is dealing with a severe illness

-- not > in the presence of a "saint" or lover, > but simply as is,

however that is, > right now ... ~~~~~As It Is Now, This Moment,

perpetual Delight in all things, for that is All there is or ever was

or ever will Be, is it not so my Dearest Brother Danji? Bright Kissing

to the Heart of conceptual-Crimson, Colorless, Odorless, Formless, and

yet, of course all things and nothing, just the the Radiant Loving

Heart, the Home, the OneHeart...Dan, Good Morning my Love, and this

computer will not conform to form,atting yet and so you see this

strange non-ability to get "enter" to enter, and how humorous to coin

that coinage Love, Mazie.

> >Love, >Dan > Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: Click Here

[Guest guest]

, "Debora A. Orf" <dorf01@m...> wrote:

 

One can do that by logic-leap into a wordless mindspace

that is not logic and not an ego thought, or get lost in a

bhaktisphere connection accomplishing the same thing.

the danger of the logic approach is getting lost in a cold analysis,

the dnager of the other is getting lost in a cycle of chasing bliss.

 

 

 

 

..... The path of Jnana and the path of Bhakti:

 

The way of surrender, the way of Bhakti, finally

converges with the way of Jnana.

 

How?

 

In surrender, in Bhakti, after all the song and dance,

the expression " Not me, Only Thee" flows unimpeded.

 

And most on this path remain in this ecstasy.

 

In a Bhakti, a question might arise from that very

ecstasy:

 

Who is expressing this "Not me, Only Thee".

 

Who is surrendering?

 

And surrendering what?

 

What do I have, that I can surrender?

 

And "Not Me, Only Thee" also drops.

 

And

any of us can ask this question at any time.

 

 

In the path of Jnana, the "Who am I" Inquiry culminates in

"I Am", or "Tat Twam Asi" (That art Thou).

 

And most remain at this state.

 

In a Jnani, a question might arise from that very

recognition:

 

If only I,

to whom is this statement relevant?

 

IOW: If all is I,

to whom can this ever be affirmed?

 

If all is I,

who would need to babble "All is I"?

 

 

And "Tat Twam Asi" also drops.

 

And

any of us can ask this question at any time.

 

 

Surrender happens when there is not even an iota of hope

that the Lord will even look towards me to pick up the pieces.

 

Consider Massood's surrender:

 

When fundamentalists, angered by his ecstatic pronouncement "A' nal

Huq" ( I am God), hacked off his limbs, gouged out his eyes, and

finally decapitated him, Massood continued laughing,

laughing and exclaiming:

 

"You cannot fool me!

I see that it is only You,

only You,

Beloved!"

 

 

(Gratitude to Sandeep )

[Guest guest]

, shawn <shawn@w...> wrote:

>

>

> Dear Jody,

>

> It sounds to me like you have a "bone to pick," or "sour grapes." or

"chip

> on your shoulder," an axe to grind! Take your pick....

 

I'd characterize it as a critical view to present.

> Just what is considered an OK number of people to have sit in

satsang? Is

> 200 too much, how about twenty, fifty....?

 

I didn't say Amma's satsang wasn't ok. I said it is designed

to harvest money as much as provide access to Amma.

> How much land can a guru have before you think he's bilking people?

 

I never said they are bilking people. I've only pointed out

that they are an economic machine that must continue to harvest

money to survive.

> Can an enlightened one be a millionaire and not share a dime?

>

> Are there rules?

>

> Is sandals the proper attire.

>

> Or are we to make a cult of not following, a do-it-yourself cult? I

think

> Krishnmurti already covered that one! People flocked to him to hear his

> mental mastabatory admonishment of "don't follow."

 

And he provided the cleanest presentation of Advaita the

USA has had the blessing of hosting.

> Whether or not you template the person of freedom and love out of

your own

> always existing nature or you get "enhanced vibes", the fact remains

that

> the one who "has" is a catalyst even if only in inspiration.

 

I agree 100%. However, it is in the best interests of the economic

interests of the satsang to present the relationship as one that

flows from top to bottom. Amma's org does exactly that.

> I am glad they are here and don't just remain aloof! What good is

that? The

> fact that someone else sees my own suffering as an illusion does not

help

> alliviate my experience of suffering, especially if they keep quiet!

 

The only true cure for your suffering is to become your own Amma.

> I get the distinct feeling that all this talk about looking

out..don't get

> caught in *that* trap is like so many people with dog doo on their

finger

> pointing and saying, "watch out, don't step in it!"

>

> Love,

>

> Shawn

 

That is called having learned the lesson by experience.

 

[snip]

[Guest guest]

, "jodyrrr" <jodyrrr> wrote:

 

I have been to San Ramon and I have been to Santa Fe. While

they may not contain any mansions or palaces, these are very

expensive properties in very nice areas that have been

developed with multiple buildings and improvements, and these

are only a fraction of what her organization owns.

 

 

 

.....It's nice to have a place to come and enjoy Satsang, wouldn't you

agree? you seem to imply that ownership of properties carries some

kind of onus, perhaps not quite measuring up to your concept of what

it means to be "spiritual". are you willing to examine that belief?

 

 

>You are mistaken about my projecting as I do have firsthand

knowledge.

 

....i apologize for any offense i may have given, Dear Brother. there

is an old saying that when a thief looks at a saint's robes, he sees

only the pockets. i have also seen, over many years, the tendencies

of some who are so busy minding the costs for the feast that they

never enjoy the food.

 

>Amma's organization

has proven itself quite adept at meeting this demand, in part

due to their being able to persuade people that she is a divine

being rather than just a really nice lady who is enlightened.

 

 

 

.....anyone can draw their own conclusions about divinity,

enlightenment, etc.. i have been visiting with Amma for a number of

years, and nobody has ever asked me for a dime, or tried to convince

me about anything, except where to park when there are larges crowds.

this has also been the experience of many, many people with whom i

have personally communicated with. you seem to have a chip on your

shoulder regarding large organizations, etc.. this has nothing to do

with my original message, and belongs in another conversation, imo.

 

 

 

>What these eyes have seen

*firsthand* has led this mind to conclude that much of what

goes on is generated from within the devotee by the devotee

using cues provided (knowingly or unknowingly) by the guru

and his/her organization. As the cues come from "above",

so the devotees are led to believe that the love comes

from "above". And whether or not anyone did it on purpose,

the end result is money going from the devotee to the

organization and its leaders and figureheads.

 

 

.....money goes where it will. concepts about separation between guru

and devotee abound. people believe many things. can you account for

the existence of anything at all? does your hair stand on end at the

mere contemplation of the Grace of Beloved? do you know what any of

this is -- what it Is?

 

LoveAlways,

 

b