10-06-2010, 12:00 AM
~
...and our magnificent GS says: "You wanna please me, completely?"
Yet, then digresses into:
"Osho would say that tradition is **** and make you..." "...pointing out that you...."
"Would that fix you up. Perhaps. If not, what then? It's *** ya in the ass."
"wouldn't try to GUESS that you are fucked..." "that for some reason doesn't work with you."
"A God-man aka Siddha would ask Power what you need and deliver it. Works or not, it's your problem."
"Last but not least, a true taoist would look at your intrinsic nature in order to find your path-of-least-resistance towards getting better.
So, GS, all talk about ME, pleases you, completely??? That was your first line. Or, are you making a generalization to anyone? (As you started to allude to.) If so, most writers use themselves as the example, as opposed to the 'yous' and 'yours.' Please be careful with this, you'll hurt my fragile ego.
Ok, next up, let's look at all these assumptions.
Now, in your defense, you do state: "Let's say, for the sake of example..."
Examples based on what? Your opinions? Your experiences? Reading of books and your perceptions of what the teaching style is?
What I see described in your words are your opinions. If not, please provide the words to describe your experiences with said individuals. Or, if you are a Yogi, Nagual, Sidda, etc., etc., please provide more context for the descriptions. I would love to read about it!
"Gururaj bla ble bli would give..." He would? ...and you've asked him directly on this exact issue of, again, what pleases you, completely?
"Osho would say that..." He would? How do you know in regards to this issue? Or, are you attempting to just assume that his words in regards to something similiar relate to your opinions?
"Now... a DJM..." Well, same as above. Your own personal history reflecting your interpretation of what DJM may or may not do. Perhaps he'll just wink at me and tell me to go and get stuffed? Perhaps we'll just sit around talking about the weather. Who knows?
"A God-man aka Siddha would ask...." He would? Once again, a lot of assumptions here, or as you say, perhaps examples, of your perception of what 'another' may or may not say.
"Last but not least, a true taoist would look at your intrinsic nature..." He would? What if I shielded him from my 'intrinsic nature' with my super-duper special force field shield? What then, Mr. smarty pants??
Now GS, we all know you've the brain and the book smarts of all the gooroos past, present and future, combined. That's a given. Yet, your comments just beg the question, if you've ever had any experience with anything or anyone mentioned (by you, above,) why would you even begin to speculate on what they would say in any given situation? You've channeled all above and what you've written are their exact words? You snuck into the the second, third, etc., etc., attentions and asked them? (All within the hour it took you to reply, btw.) If so, I bow at your feet, will perform 10,000 hail marys, will suicide bomb all those unworthy, and become your humble and faithful student.
To bring this around full circle to you initial comments of, "You wanna please me, completely?" it seems then your next line is true. "It's not the words, but the man." What pleases you completely is conjouring up scenerios of 'da' man' and inserting your mental images into your own interpretation of their teachings. Correct? If not, please correct me.
SHM
P.S. - You wrote: "The issue is who is saying what".
Is it? Didn't Juanito say that he's just a conduit? Curtis, Chinn, Tsuma and Bannai Sensei's all tell me they're just the messenger. As with Jed McKenna, "This isn't about me."
Now certainly a good teacher is important. We each have our own little gigs and some work better than others. (What I mean by that is that with one teacher we're more apt to stick with 'the teaching' than with another.)
"It's not the words, but the man".
It is one, not two. The proper conduit (man) will provide the words to us if it's meant to be.
Now if I'm all wet here, please straighten me out. I'm always up for a good discussion.
SHM the second
P.S.S. - Hey, how 'bout a discussion between you and I? No comments from Naguals or Yogis or Siddas or Divas or Devas or, or, or.... It just makes my head spin, as you know all too well that I'm quite ignorant. I'm also lazy, btw, and quickly grow weary of having to copy and paste. I know, I know, I'm the Google gooroo, the Cut and Paste Professor, but I'm getting old. Can you take it easy on this old man and just have a discussion with me?
Thanks!
SHM the third
...and our magnificent GS says: "You wanna please me, completely?"
Yet, then digresses into:
"Osho would say that tradition is **** and make you..." "...pointing out that you...."
"Would that fix you up. Perhaps. If not, what then? It's *** ya in the ass."
"wouldn't try to GUESS that you are fucked..." "that for some reason doesn't work with you."
"A God-man aka Siddha would ask Power what you need and deliver it. Works or not, it's your problem."
"Last but not least, a true taoist would look at your intrinsic nature in order to find your path-of-least-resistance towards getting better.
So, GS, all talk about ME, pleases you, completely??? That was your first line. Or, are you making a generalization to anyone? (As you started to allude to.) If so, most writers use themselves as the example, as opposed to the 'yous' and 'yours.' Please be careful with this, you'll hurt my fragile ego.
Ok, next up, let's look at all these assumptions.
Now, in your defense, you do state: "Let's say, for the sake of example..."
Examples based on what? Your opinions? Your experiences? Reading of books and your perceptions of what the teaching style is?
What I see described in your words are your opinions. If not, please provide the words to describe your experiences with said individuals. Or, if you are a Yogi, Nagual, Sidda, etc., etc., please provide more context for the descriptions. I would love to read about it!
"Gururaj bla ble bli would give..." He would? ...and you've asked him directly on this exact issue of, again, what pleases you, completely?
"Osho would say that..." He would? How do you know in regards to this issue? Or, are you attempting to just assume that his words in regards to something similiar relate to your opinions?
"Now... a DJM..." Well, same as above. Your own personal history reflecting your interpretation of what DJM may or may not do. Perhaps he'll just wink at me and tell me to go and get stuffed? Perhaps we'll just sit around talking about the weather. Who knows?
"A God-man aka Siddha would ask...." He would? Once again, a lot of assumptions here, or as you say, perhaps examples, of your perception of what 'another' may or may not say.
"Last but not least, a true taoist would look at your intrinsic nature..." He would? What if I shielded him from my 'intrinsic nature' with my super-duper special force field shield? What then, Mr. smarty pants??
Now GS, we all know you've the brain and the book smarts of all the gooroos past, present and future, combined. That's a given. Yet, your comments just beg the question, if you've ever had any experience with anything or anyone mentioned (by you, above,) why would you even begin to speculate on what they would say in any given situation? You've channeled all above and what you've written are their exact words? You snuck into the the second, third, etc., etc., attentions and asked them? (All within the hour it took you to reply, btw.) If so, I bow at your feet, will perform 10,000 hail marys, will suicide bomb all those unworthy, and become your humble and faithful student.
To bring this around full circle to you initial comments of, "You wanna please me, completely?" it seems then your next line is true. "It's not the words, but the man." What pleases you completely is conjouring up scenerios of 'da' man' and inserting your mental images into your own interpretation of their teachings. Correct? If not, please correct me.
SHM
P.S. - You wrote: "The issue is who is saying what".
Is it? Didn't Juanito say that he's just a conduit? Curtis, Chinn, Tsuma and Bannai Sensei's all tell me they're just the messenger. As with Jed McKenna, "This isn't about me."
Now certainly a good teacher is important. We each have our own little gigs and some work better than others. (What I mean by that is that with one teacher we're more apt to stick with 'the teaching' than with another.)
"It's not the words, but the man".
It is one, not two. The proper conduit (man) will provide the words to us if it's meant to be.
Now if I'm all wet here, please straighten me out. I'm always up for a good discussion.
SHM the second
P.S.S. - Hey, how 'bout a discussion between you and I? No comments from Naguals or Yogis or Siddas or Divas or Devas or, or, or.... It just makes my head spin, as you know all too well that I'm quite ignorant. I'm also lazy, btw, and quickly grow weary of having to copy and paste. I know, I know, I'm the Google gooroo, the Cut and Paste Professor, but I'm getting old. Can you take it easy on this old man and just have a discussion with me?
Thanks!
SHM the third