1998/04/22 23:46
kundalini-l-d Digest V98 #322
kundalini-l-d Digest Volume 98 : Issue 322
Today's Topics:
Re: Taking Jerry (UN)seriously [ Jerry Katz <umbadaATnospamns.sympatico.ca> ]
Re: Saint or Sinner? [ "Ed Jason" <lobATnospamlineone.net> ]
Re: Delirium's guide to the universe [ Delirium <deliriumATnospamfull-moon.com> ]
Re: curious [ "Susan Carlson" <divine_goddessATnospamhot ]
Re: curious [ "Susan Carlson" <divine_goddessATnospamhot ]
Re: curious/ [ David Bozzi <david.bozziATnospamsnet.net> ]
Re: Layers of mind [ David Bozzi <david.bozziATnospamsnet.net> ]
Re: curious [ "Ed Jason" <lobATnospamlineone.net> ]
Knee Surgery on Thursday... [ MMeyers541 <MMeyers541ATnospamaol.com> ]
even more curious [ "Susan Carlson" <divine_goddessATnospamhot ]
even more curious [ "Susan Carlson" <divine_goddessATnospamhot ]
re:curious [ Dan Margolis <margolisATnospamtransbay.net ]
Re: even more curious [ Dan Margolis <margolisATnospamtransbay.net ]
Re: Meditation April 23th [ MMeyers541 <MMeyers541ATnospamaol.com> ]
RE: Knee Surgery on Thursday... [ "Roberto Gonzales del Valle" <93035 ]
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998 00:31:09 -0700
From: Jerry Katz <umbadaATnospamns.sympatico.ca>
To: samyanaATnospamhotmail.com
CC: kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com
Subject: Re: Taking Jerry (UN)seriously
Message-ID: <353EEE3D.2C43ATnospamns.sympatico.ca>
Gloria Lee wrote:
>
> >Jerry wrote:
> But, hey, that's just
> >between you and me and does not go beyond these four walls.
> Glo: And the 400+ on the list??? Promises, promises...you men practice
> this selective deafness so well, too. (I TOLD you it's too late,
> anyway..but do you listen?? Noooo)
Are you serious?
> >Glo Lee wrote:
> >BUT
> >> Will you take me out for Chinese food and PAY for it, even??
> >
> >
> >Jerry wrote:
> >I think at this point I would like to discuss Kundalini.
> >
> >Did someone say PAY?
> Glo: One of the side effects of K is a craving for Chinese food.
> I am not a cheap date, Jerry. (Having degenerated to this level
> of sexist bantering proves NOTHING.. I can say anything I want, you
> said so yourself.)
Are you serious?
> >You are funny, smart, sweet and wonderful. What are you doing hanging
> >out with a borderline nutcase like me?
> >
> >Love,
> >Jerry
>
> Dear Jerry,
> It appears I must be rather desperate for flattery, but let me hasten
> to assure you that your sincerity, wit, and wisdom are obviously more
> important to me than your mental status exam scores.
That's a compliment, right?
> PS.. May I use you as a reference next time I apply for a job??
Are you serious?
(Seriously, I am grateful for your allowing me to go waaaaaay out on a
limb with my craziness. I think I'm gonna settle down for a while now.)
Lotsa love,
Jerry
______________________________
"We are all One."
The Wild Disco Dance of Enlightenment, Ch.52, p.893
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 1998 04:37:54 -0700
From: "Ed Jason" <lobATnospamlineone.net>
To: <kundalini-lATnospamlists.execpc.com>, "Danijel Turina" <sinisa.turinaATnospamzg.tel.hr>
Subject: Re: Saint or Sinner?
Message-Id: <199804230344.EAA19088ATnospamboober.lineone.net>
> >However many holy words you read, how many you speak, what good will they
> >do you if you do not act upon them?"
> >
> >These words I recently posted are *not* ascribed to Charles Manson as I
> >stated but are in fact the words of the Buddha. You can probably now see
> >how spiritual they are . . .
>
> ;))))) I don't know, I liked it and then read the name, and then it was
> "what the f"#$?!?". ;))))))))
Lack of clarity? People confuse wisdom with emotional expectation?
Be well
Somebody Else
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 1998 22:53:02 +0100
From: Delirium <deliriumATnospamfull-moon.com>
To: Paul West <paulATnospamstationone.demon.co.uk>,
Kundalini-l <Kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com>
Subject: Re: Delirium's guide to the universe...
Message-ID: <353E66A4.AF16386EATnospamfull-moon.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Paul West wrote:
> {referring to my "rules" of my universe}
>
> I would have used precicely the same words I think.
Hmmn...I'm thinkin' we are on the same "ego-driven" wavelength (no insult meant)...and here, I thought my ego (and my Pollyanna complex) was dead...
> I have been having the problem of trying not to let myself feel
> desires or have bad sexual attitudes.
Sounds all too Puritanical (and familiar, being a child of church of christ mamma) to me...being too hard on one-self...
> I guess I do also feel that there is a catch to people making my
> happy, that they are actually /making/ me happy rather than me
> choosing it. Sometimes I'm just not in the mood.
Yep, sometimes I just positively *bask* in my grumpiness!
> I can only seemingly live in the present moment like I have no
> history, and I can only think of the future and past.
What a damned frustrating conundrum, this!
> Seem's I'm sharing a roundabout donkey with you.
Well, Paul dear, I hope at least *one* of us catches the brass ring...and it turns out to be golden and enlightening and all those passionate desires we like so much to squelch! (but I don't think that's how it works...ah, well!)
--Confused, dazed, delirious, and bruised all over from leaping for that damn ring...Kath (Delirium)
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 1998 21:13:57 PDT
From: "Susan Carlson" <divine_goddessATnospamhotmail.com>
To: kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com, margolisATnospamtransbay.net
Subject: Re: curious
Message-ID: <19980423041357.2419.qmailATnospamhotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
>
>I may have anthropomorphized the tree but I was trying to
treepomorphize
>people... The root of the assumption is that a tree does what a tree
does.
>To people that seems to be giving. To a tree it is it's nature. An
>enlightened person does as an enlightened person does.
Yes Dan! Yes! Can we see the natural effect of enlightenment as we the
natural effect of being a tree ( tree-ment?)? Enlightenment is as
enlightenment does....a la Forrest Gump.
>
>> When people are
>> unenlightened they behave one way and when they are enlightened they
>> behave another way, wouldn't you think?
>
>Not exactly...Before enlightenment carry water and chop wood...After
>enlightenment carry water and chop wood.
Yes...thats what i said a couple of days ago accept now I am aware I am
the Goddess who chops wood and carries water.
>
>
>> I have a question....if we are all a part of God, and some peoples
are
>> enlightened and some are not, then god is not totally enlightenment?
(
>> another foolish question but these things I want to know about).
>
>When I asked a similar question to a teacher he told me "This may seem
>important to you now but eventually it won't concern you."
And you believed him? What an effective way to limit inquiry! If the
answer was not important to him, then why not tell you? Did you ask him
is he even had an answer? Maybe it wont concern you but at least you
made that decision for yourself.
Are we once enlightened, always enlightened?
>Yes
Please tell me why you believe this to be so. Sometimes I think this is
true and sometimes I dont. I would like to hear why you think this is
so.
>
>> I am beginnging to think that the pursueing of enlightenment is
>> something of a cultural vanity, particularly when people are unable
to
>> recognize or identify the traits of an enlightened person.
>>
>
>Cultural vanity might be considered trying to limit the unfamiliar to
>familiar terms.
As might be trying to obfuscate the obvious with the unfamiliar.
Wondering if there are other people who wonder if their is a demystical
school of practical enlightenment,
Susan
______________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 1998 21:41:05 PDT
From: "Susan Carlson" <divine_goddessATnospamhotmail.com>
To: Harsha1MTMATnospamaol.com
Cc: kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com
Subject: Re: curious
Message-ID: <19980423044105.19899.qmailATnospamhotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
>Harsha: Well put. One contemporary approach to this is seen in the
claims of
>"gurus" who claim to be "enlightened." The logic is that because the
"guru"
>is enlightened whatever he does and says must be enlightened behavior.
OK Harsha....me thinks we are cooking with gas now.
Given
>the sexual and financial and ethical scandals surrounding "enlightened
gurus"
>this logic is problematic. Indeed, most gurus claiming to be
enlightened
>exhibit a high degree of confusion and conduct not worthy of even our
elected
>officials.
Would you think that claiming to be enlightened is a trait of the non
enlightened in a generic way?
I was reading in the journal, 'what is enlightenment?' that the Dalai
Lama claims to NOT be enlightened. Until Tibet is free he wont be able
to work on his enlightenment because his vow of compassion comes first.
Now that makes me ponder the nature of enlightenment. Many would
consider, i think, the Dalai Lama to be enlightened and his life a
reflection of his enlightenment.
> Yet many disciples insist that confusion, lack of restraint, lack
>of any clarity are perfect evidence for the high state attained by
their guru.
Boy, does this make me laugh with recognition and it is so sad and true.
I wonder where and why acting like an irresponsible space cadet became
an attribute of sainthood? Gosh, every time I turn around the world
becomes more full with enlightened people.
>The spiritual circus is both a comedy and a tragedy in that it is very
much
>like life.
Now there is a big hello from the universe....
May be its because people separate spirituality from living....
:)))
Love,
Susan
______________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998 00:13:40 -0400
From: David Bozzi <david.bozziATnospamsnet.net>
To: Kundalini <kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com>
Subject: Re: curious/
Message-ID: <353EBFF4.1691ATnospammail.snet.net>
Holly N. Barrett, Ph.D. wrote:
> When I read this I had such a joyful vision of God seeking Itself. And
> the more God finds Itself the more we fade into a kind of transparent
> version of ourselves. This is terrifying! No wonder we grab onto
> vanity with all our might.
Through That Terror Is Light...
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998 00:58:50 -0400
From: David Bozzi <david.bozziATnospamsnet.net>
To: Kundalini <kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com>
Subject: Re: Layers of mind
Message-ID: <353ECA8A.2BD9ATnospammail.snet.net>
Brent Blalock wrote:
> We are Brent.
Any good exorcists in the click?
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 1998 05:24:02 -0700
From: "Ed Jason" <lobATnospamlineone.net>
To: "Rik" <rik_wATnospamrocketmail.com>
Cc: <kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com>, <rik_wATnospamrocketmail.com>
Subject: Re: curious
Message-Id: <199804230504.GAA30574ATnospamboober.lineone.net>
> 1) To be enlightened is just to be "better" (calmer,
> freer, self-awarer, etc.) than those who aren't
?
Better at making distinctions and judgements as well perhaps?
I think not. (I think not therefore I am not?)
> 2) You are enlightened when I recognize you as such
As someone has pointed out (Harsha) many dangerous and ineffectual people diagnose themself or others as enlightened. Who does the recognising is important.
> 3) When you are enlightened, (please don't laugh!)
> other enlightened people will laugh at your jokes
If this was a joke
I did not laugh
If you are enlightened
I am not
Either way the distinction
is mostly imagination
> Don't fret Lobster. You've passed your own test #3,
> and I hereby dub thee enlightened. You may not refuse
> your honorary adjective.
Of course I refuse it. I may be arrogant but I am not stupid enough to believe this word has any importance or significance - except to those with vested interests to promote status instead of wisdom.
If you go over your post, you will see that you are conferring enlightenment on yourself and not me.
Be Well (and good)
Lobster
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998 01:05:24 EDT
From: MMeyers541 <MMeyers541ATnospamaol.com>
To: kundalini-lATnospamlists.execpc.com
Subject: Knee Surgery on Thursday...
Message-ID: <17602852.353ecc16ATnospamaol.com>
Dear List,
Thursday, 4 PM, DST in Denver, am (finally) having surgery on my knee to
extract the bb that has been there for months; the surgery was delayed because
of a scheduling mix-up ATnospam the surgeon's office.
Earlier this eve., went to Psychic Horizons in Boulder, & rec'd a wonderful
aura cleansing and other healing. So, request you also send some healing
thoughts my way.
I plan to have an OBE while under anesthesia, & plan to visit everyone on the
list...altho' I've only seen some of your faces on Franz's website. (BTW,
Lobster Man, you look EXACTLY as I pictured!)
Thank you all. Later...
Love, Michele
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 1998 22:19:54 PDT
From: "Susan Carlson" <divine_goddessATnospamhotmail.com>
To: kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com
Subject: even more curious
Message-ID: <19980423051954.7023.qmailATnospamhotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 1998 14:53:10 +0200
From: "Sen Ashanka"<sashankaATnospamaismi.ais.it>
To: kundalini-lATnospamlists.execpc.com
Subject: Re: curious
Hello friends,
Susan wrote :
<< What if enlightenment is a dynamic process, non linear? Then
Peswami
could feel he has lost his enlightenment. In church we used to
say,
"once saved, always saved'. Are we once enlightened, always
enlightened?
I am beginnging to think that the pursueing of enlightenment is
something of a cultural vanity, particularly when people are
unable to
recognize or identify the traits of an enlightened person.
>>
About trying to "recognise" spiritually enlightened persons,
the problem of genuine versus fraud always exists. Spiritual
issues are far removed from the wordly issues, so no behaviour
could be labled as "enlightened" or "non-enlightened.". It
is not in outward show that makes someone recognised as being
spiritually enlightened.
Oh Ashanka...i totally disagree...to separate spirituality from worldly
issues is precisely what makes genuine enlightenment so difficult to
recognize.
If you have been to a place, you know it within yourself, and
need not prove to anyone else that you have been there. If you
have seen a beautiful river and felt happy about it, there is
nothing to prove to anyone else.
Who said anything about proving anything? If I lay out in the sun I get
a tan...when I am in love people notice...
Similarly, when you realise your true self, you are so happy
about it, you do not have to prove anything to anyone after
this. You cannot prove to anyone that you are happy. Your
actions and behavour will show it. Just as different people
have different expressions of happiness and sorrow, so also
for the ultimate happiness of self-realisaton.
Yes and sometimes sorrow looks like happiness and happiness looks like
sorrow.
One person may jump and shout that he is happy, and cry and
howl when sad. Another person might smile and frown. A third
might not show any emotion on the face at all.... These are
all behaviours. But, there could be someone who does not even
feel happiness, sorrow, anger, jealosy....
I would call this person numb, maybe even depressed.
This person then
is enlightened. His actions and behaviour are independant of
external world stimulus and situations.
I dont know if you could call this person enlightened but I can see that
there would be a congruency between enlightenment and behaviour.
>I am beginnging to think that the pursueing of enlightenment is
>something of a cultural vanity, particularly when people are
unable to
>recognize or identify the traits of an enlightened person.
There is nothing in recognising the traits of an "enligtened
person". If there were traits, then simply emulating those
traits would make you enlightened.
Naaah...acting like a dog does not change me into a dog. Acting holy
does not make me holy. Change comes from within not from external
stimuli/structure. Pretending to be enlightened is not the same as being
enlightened although a lot of people have made money pretending to be
so. :)) And I know you said emulate...people practice being happy all
the time...those are the ones with the permanent grin on their faces
that looks like it would crack if you touched it.
However, enlightement is
the result of deep deep introspection, self-negation, self-
control, mind-control and lots more. When you reach enlightement
you will know it. It does not matter that anyone else knows
it or not, because by then you will lose the distinction of
"me" and "you" and "someone else".
Is it? I thought there are records of people attaining instant
enlightenment thru miraculous events.
An enlightened person simply behaves the way he/she likes to
behave, irrespective of anything else.
So do sociopaths. Maybe there is not any difference. Sociopaths are a
law unto themselves...have no conscience.
Whereas outwardly it
might look very ordinary, the mind of such persons always
travel far beyond the normal planes of thought and pleasures.
Suhc behaviour at times may be eccentric, sometimes egoistic,
sometimes happy, sometimes sad, for no apparent outward reason.
There is no way to categorise behaviour of enlightened persons
to say this is the way it should be and nothing else. God is
Infinite, and Infinite are His ways and His manifestations.
Who knows what He may be up to next ? :-)
Of course there is...wouldnt you expect enlightened people to act
godlike? Of course, as I think Emerson or maybe it was Thoreau who said,
"the god of the cannibals is a cannibal".
Love,
Susan
______________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 1998 22:24:55 PDT
From: "Susan Carlson" <divine_goddessATnospamhotmail.com>
To: kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com
Subject: even more curious
Message-ID: <19980423052456.27220.qmailATnospamhotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 1998 14:53:10 +0200
From: "Sen Ashanka"<sashankaATnospamaismi.ais.it>
To: kundalini-lATnospamlists.execpc.com
Subject: Re: curious
Hello friends,
Susan wrote :
<< What if enlightenment is a dynamic process, non linear? Then
Peswami
could feel he has lost his enlightenment. In church we used to
say,
"once saved, always saved'. Are we once enlightened, always
enlightened?
I am beginnging to think that the pursueing of enlightenment is
something of a cultural vanity, particularly when people are
unable to
recognize or identify the traits of an enlightened person.
>>
A: About trying to "recognise" spiritually enlightened persons,
the problem of genuine versus fraud always exists. Spiritual
issues are far removed from the wordly issues, so no behaviour
could be labled as "enlightened" or "non-enlightened.". It
is not in outward show that makes someone recognised as being
spiritually enlightened.
S: Oh Ashanka...i totally disagree...to separate spirituality from
worldly issues is precisely what makes genuine enlightenment so
difficult to recognize.
A: If you have been to a place, you know it within yourself, and
need not prove to anyone else that you have been there. If you
have seen a beautiful river and felt happy about it, there is
nothing to prove to anyone else.
S:Who said anything about proving anything? If I lay out in the sun I
get a tan...when I am in love people notice...
A:Similarly, when you realise your true self, you are so happy
about it, you do not have to prove anything to anyone after
this. You cannot prove to anyone that you are happy. Your
actions and behavour will show it. Just as different people
have different expressions of happiness and sorrow, so also
for the ultimate happiness of self-realisaton.
S:Yes and sometimes sorrow looks like happiness and happiness looks like
sorrow.
A: One person may jump and shout that he is happy, and cry and
howl when sad. Another person might smile and frown. A third
might not show any emotion on the face at all.... These are
all behaviours. But, there could be someone who does not even
feel happiness, sorrow, anger, jealosy....
S:I would call this person numb, maybe even depressed.
A:This person then is enlightened. His actions and behaviour are
independant of external world stimulus and situations.
S: I dont know if you could call this person enlightened but I can see
that there would be a congruency between enlightenment and behaviour.
S: >I am beginnging to think that the pursueing of enlightenment is
>something of a cultural vanity, particularly when people are
unable to >recognize or identify the traits of an enlightened
person.
A: There is nothing in recognising the traits of an "enligtened
person". If there were traits, then simply emulating those
traits would make you enlightened.
S:Naaah...acting like a dog does not change me into a dog. Acting holy
does not make me holy. Change comes from within not from external
stimuli/structure. Pretending to be enlightened is not the same as being
enlightened although a lot of people have made money pretending to be
so. :)) And I know you said emulate...people practice being happy all
the time...those are the ones with the permanent grin on their faces
that looks like it would crack if you touched it.
A: However, enlightement is
the result of deep deep introspection, self-negation, self-
control, mind-control and lots more. When you reach enlightement
you will know it. It does not matter that anyone else knows
it or not, because by then you will lose the distinction of
"me" and "you" and "someone else".
S:Is it? I thought there are records of people attaining instant
enlightenment thru miraculous events.
A: An enlightened person simply behaves the way he/she likes to
behave, irrespective of anything else.
S:So do sociopaths. Maybe there is not any difference. Sociopaths are a
law unto themselves...have no conscience.
A: Whereas outwardly it
might look very ordinary, the mind of such persons always
travel far beyond the normal planes of thought and pleasures.
Suhc behaviour at times may be eccentric, sometimes egoistic,
sometimes happy, sometimes sad, for no apparent outward reason.
There is no way to categorise behaviour of enlightened persons
to say this is the way it should be and nothing else. God is
Infinite, and Infinite are His ways and His manifestations.
Who knows what He may be up to next ? :-)
S: Of course there is...wouldnt you expect enlightened people to act
godlike? But I think Emerson or maybe it was Thoreau who said, "the god
of the cannibals is a cannibal".
Love,
Susan
______________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 1998 22:29:00 -0700
From: Dan Margolis <margolisATnospamtransbay.net>
To: Kundalini Mailing List <kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com>
Subject: re:curious
Message-ID: <353ED19B.D550D0BEATnospamtransbay.net>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------0FAF3C6E61F030AB5A624765"
Message-ID: <353ECB29.5884589BATnospamtransbay.net>
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 1998 22:01:29 -0700
From: Dan Margolis <margolisATnospamtransbay.net>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.02 [en] (Win95; I)
To: Susan Carlson <divine_goddessATnospamhotmail.com>
Subject: Re: curious
References: <19980423041357.2419.qmailATnospamhotmail.com>
> >> I have a question....if we are all a part of God, and some peoples
> are
> >> enlightened and some are not, then god is not totally enlightenment?
> (
> >> another foolish question but these things I want to know about).
> >
> >When I asked a similar question to a teacher he told me "This may seem
> >important to you now but eventually it won't concern you."
>
> And you believed him? What an effective way to limit inquiry! If the
> answer was not important to him, then why not tell you? Did you ask him
> is he even had an answer? Maybe it wont concern you but at least you
> made that decision for yourself.
>
Of course I didn't believe him. I wandered around and asked alot of other
monks and teachers in the area many questions like that one and a lot of
other ones with the same emphasis. I got a lot of different answers. A few
months later his answer seemed to be the most accurate one.
> Are we once enlightened, always enlightened?
> >Yes
>
> Please tell me why you believe this to be so. Sometimes I think this is
> true and sometimes I dont. I would like to hear why you think this is
> so.
Once you are free of your past and your future, of duality and of oneness of
emotional ties and intellectual distractions there is no way to rebind
yourself. If you truly let go of something it can't stay with you. For
example...When I was 10 my parents once wouldn't allow me to go to my friend
Kevin's house and blow up things with gun-powder. I was furious.
'Everybody was blowing up things at Kevin's house.' Now though, no matter
how hard I try, I can't get angry with my parents over that incident. I
can't rebind myself to it. I'm sure you can find a similar incident in your
past which you've let go of. I think no matter how hard you dig you won't
be able to raise any emotion about that incident. An enlightened person is
like that with almost all emotional, intellectual and even spiritual
constructs. So they can't go back.
> >
> >> I am beginnging to think that the pursueing of enlightenment is
> >> something of a cultural vanity, particularly when people are unable
> to
> >> recognize or identify the traits of an enlightened person.
> >>
> >
> >Cultural vanity might be considered trying to limit the unfamiliar to
> >familiar terms.
>
> As might be trying to obfuscate the obvious with the unfamiliar.
>
> Wondering if there are other people who wonder if their is a demystical
> school of practical enlightenment,
If there was, it would be eminently suitable for those new-agey, crystal
carrying, cranio-sacrum adjusting, aroma therapizing wanderers out there,
but probably not very useful for someone who is only lives in the practical
world.
Yours,
Dan M.
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 1998 22:54:58 -0700
From: Dan Margolis <margolisATnospamtransbay.net>
To: Susan Carlson <divine_goddessATnospamhotmail.com>,
Kundalini Mailing List <kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com>
Subject: Re: even more curious
Message-ID: <353ED7B2.3C38BC27ATnospamtransbay.net>
It seems to me that you have some strong opinions on how enlightenment
should be explained. You also seem to put great weight on the practical.
You also seem to hint at a distaste for 'spiritual' things, because they
often seem impractical. Your questions seem less a deep reflection on what
people are saying and more a reaction.
It might help to take time and try to recognize each opinion you are
expressing. After you have this opinion you might think, hmmm... this is
what I think... It could be like this... It could not be like this... I
don't know.
Each time you push in the manner you're pushing, you seem to be seeking an
answer other people aren't giving you, or seeking validation for your
opinions... I refuse to validate any opinions, because an opinion is not an
understanding.
You can continue your intellectual quest, but build a mindful practice and
you'll be able to find the answers within you.
Dan M.
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998 02:17:22 EDT
From: MMeyers541 <MMeyers541ATnospamaol.com>
To: 930359ATnospamaloe.ulima.edu.pe
Cc: kundalini-lATnospamlists.execpc.com
Subject: Re: Meditation April 23th
Message-ID: <2ccfa55f.353edcf3ATnospamaol.com>
In a message dated 98-04-22 23:00:35 EDT, you write:
<< he meditation, as you know is about world healing. Pass it on to your
friends and let`s all get togeteher.
Love to you all!
Roberto
Lima, Peru. >>
Michele: Hi Roberto, gosh I forgot--that's why I chose that date for my
surgery! Thx for reminding us. Everybody be well. Love, Michele
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998 01:30:36 -0500
From: "Roberto Gonzales del Valle" <930359ATnospamaloe.ulima.edu.pe>
To: "Kundalini List" <kundalini-lATnospamexecpc.com>
Subject: RE: Knee Surgery on Thursday...
Message-ID: <004601bd6e81$57527460$fbdb11cfATnospam930359ulima>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Hi Michele:
I am glad that you are getting there tomorrow. The healing day! My best
wishes go for you also. I plea the list to think a bit about Michele in her
surgery and Michele to take care on us while she is able to contact
everything! So you can meditate from above for the world healing while your
body is being healed aswell!
Greetings and lots of love
Roberto
Lima, Peru.
P:S: What is the URL adress of Franz's website?
DISCLAIMER!
Home | Archive Index | Search the archives | Subscribe
K. List FAQ | Kundalini FAQs | Signs and Symptoms | Awakening Experiences | K. list Polls | Member Essays | Meditations | List Topics | Art Gallery | Cybrary | Sitemap | Email the moderators.
symbol.