The biggest secret about Advaita Vedanta

[gatito]

12 hours ago, dwai said:

😃

For whom that this may apply — 

Better way to share presence is using the MDT. The Lower  Dantien is good for things but not good for sharing presence.

 

 

*** Note to Lurkers Begins ***

 

This refers to members of this site's underground Chaturbation sexploitation cult that was cobbled together from a toxic mixture of misunderstood religious theories and practices.

 

It stifled all criticism and most rational discussion until the previous administrator and moderators were removed by this sites owner.

 

This cult is now located at theprimordialway.com      because their previous forum (at livingunbound.net) was closed down by its owners.

 

It should also be noted that most of it's activity takes/took place via PMs and Slack Chat.

 

Sharing presence is a reference to their invented practice of hanging out in various Chatrooms chatting their aforementioned bullshit.

 

*** Note to Lurkers Ends ***

 

[dwai]

32 minutes ago, gatito said:

 

 

Sharing presence is a reference to their invented practice of hanging out in various Chatrooms chatting their aforementioned bullshit.

 

 

No, sharing presence is not their invention. It is done by spiritual teachers across the globe, across traditions. It is very much a daoist tradition as well -- they just call it something different. Whether you like it or not is another matter, and it boils down to your personal preference. My teacher initiated me by sharing presence and it put me in a sahaja samadhi state for 18+ months continuously. It is called Shaktipat etc etc in other traditions.

 

That aside, my note was intended for someone else, not those whom you are referring to. 

[gatito]

2 minutes ago, dwai said:

No, sharing presence is not their invention. It is done by spiritual teachers across the globe, across traditions. It is very much a daoist tradition as well -- they just call it something different. Whether you like it or not is another matter, and it boils down to your personal preference. My teacher initiated me by sharing presence and it put me in a sahaja samadhi state for 18+ months continuously. It is called Shaktipat etc etc in other traditions.

 

That aside, my note was intended for someone else, not those whom you are referring to. 

 

You're demonstrating clearly to some of those observing your ignorant antics that you don't even begin grasp the fundamentals:

 

चैतन्यमात्मा

 

[dwai]

8 minutes ago, gatito said:

 

You're demonstrating clearly to some of those observing your ignorant antics that you don't even begin grasp the fundamentals:

 

चैतन्यमात्मा

 

 Okay...

[gatito]

1 minute ago, dwai said:

 Okay...

 

 

Good...

 

Farewell...

 

 

[ilumairen]

21 minutes ago, dwai said:

No, sharing presence is not their invention. It is done by spiritual teachers across the globe, across traditions. It is very much a daoist tradition as well -- they just call it something different.

 

Perhaps you would consider using the terminology found within the traditions you mention then, instead of a Jeffism which is bound to raise eyebrows for now obvious reasons?

 

[dwai]

3 minutes ago, ilumairen said:

 

Perhaps you would consider using the terminology found within the traditions you mention then, instead of a Jeffism which is bound to raise eyebrows for now obvious reasons?

 

It is not a "Jeffism". Why should I change what works for me because some folks don't like some other folks?

 

[ilumairen]

Just now, dwai said:

It is not a "Jeffism". Why should I change what works for me because some folks don't like some other folks?

 

 

Because Jeff has behaved like a creeper, and it is odd to me someone would want to be associated with such.

 

YMMV

 

And I wasn't suggesting change of what works for you, but appropriate language if you didn't want your sharing to bring to mind the Cult of Jeff with others here. If it is legitimately called other things then what would be the harm of using that terminology instead? When clearly there would be benefit in avoiding the Jeff rabbit hole?

 

 

[dwai]

7 minutes ago, ilumairen said:

 

Because Jeff has behaved like a creeper, and it is odd to me someone would want to be associated with such.

 

YMMV

 

And I wasn't suggesting change of what works for you, but appropriate language if you didn't want your sharing to bring to mind the Cult of Jeff with others here. If it is legitimately called other things then what would be the harm of using that terminology instead? When clearly there would be benefit in avoiding the Jeff rabbit hole?

 

 

I am really not interested in discussing this further. If people don't like what I wrote, please ignore it. I'm not going to take on the role of the latest Jeff whipping post. 

[gatito]

2 minutes ago, dwai said:

I am really not interested in discussing this further. If people don't like what I wrote, please ignore it. I'm not going to take on the role of the latest Jeff whipping post. 

 

 

Run away and hide  - you spineless little ignoramus...

[ilumairen]

Just now, dwai said:

I am really not interested in discussing this further. If people don't like what I wrote, please ignore it. I'm not going to take on the role of the latest Jeff whipping post. 

 

 Yeah, poor martyred Jeff.

 

Honestly, this could easily be avoided by using traditional terminology - which is exactly the point I'm attempting to make, and you seem unable to see.

 

Don't want a "Jeff whupping post" don't use the language which brings it about. Easy Peasy.

[dwai]

3 minutes ago, ilumairen said:

 

 Yeah, poor martyred Jeff.

That is really of no concern to me. 

3 minutes ago, ilumairen said:

Honestly, this could easily be avoided by using traditional terminology - which is exactly the point I'm attempting to make, and you seem unable to see.

Oh I see it alright. I think the point you're missing is that I don't think its your (or anyone else's) place to tell me what I can or cannot write, so long as I maintain civil and respectful language.  I really am not looking to add you to my ignore list...so can we agree to disagree on this?  

3 minutes ago, ilumairen said:

 

Don't want a "Jeff whupping post" don't use the language which brings it about. Easy Peasy.

And who is the arbiter of what is "okay" and what is "not okay"?  

If we have to constantly be worrying about what terminology is "approved" and what is "not approved", not much will get done.

 

In any case, TDB is not the center of my universe, I stop by from time to time and like to read meaningful posts and share what I find meaningful.  

 

[ilumairen]

16 minutes ago, dwai said:

That is really of no concern to me. 

 

Good start.

 

Quote

Oh I see it alright. I think the point you're missing is that I don't think its your (or anyone else's) place to tell me what I can or cannot write, so long as I maintain civil and respectful language.  I really am not looking to add you to my ignore list...so can we agree to disagree on this?  

And who is the arbiter of what is "okay" and what is "not okay"?  

 

I was not telling you what you can or cannot write.

 

I was making a suggestion regarding how to more easily avoid what you seem to wish to avoid. If you could say the same thing with different terminology which wouldn't lead to what is presently arising here, why wouldn't you? (Unless it doesn't actually mean the same thing? At this point I honestly don't know, and this all seems a bit surreal to me.)

 

 

Quote

If we have to constantly be worrying about what terminology is "approved" and what is "not approved", not much will get done.

 

For better or worse, certain phrases develop certain associations. When we are aware of the associations we may be more able to convey what we actually wish to convey. Which isn't actually about approval or disapproval, but the development of skill imo.

 

Quote

In any case, TDB is not the center of my universe, I stop by from time to time and like to read meaningful posts and share what I find meaningful.  

 

 

This is good. If my posts bother you, then it is your right to put me on ignore if you wish. But much like the stand you are attempting to make, I will continue to respond and share where and how I wish.

 

Take care.

[gatito]

15 minutes ago, dwai said:

And who is the arbiter of what is "okay" and what is "not okay"?  

 

Certainly not you and your cult  - now that that Chaturbator's control over the administration and moderation has been removed...

 

19 minutes ago, dwai said:

That is really of no concern to me. 

 

There's clearly no honour amongst thieves -  who purloin and pervert religious texts abusing them to sexually exploit others in secreteive chatroom sessions.

 

17 minutes ago, dwai said:

In any case, TDB is not the center of my universe, I stop by from time to time and like to read meaningful posts and share what I find meaningful. 

 

He doth protest too much, methinks 

 

^TM

 

 

[Apech]

Hugs everyone

[gatito]

1 hour ago, Apech said:

Hugs everyone

 

No thanks.

 

As I've said previously (on one or two occasions), you can keep them:

 

 

for yourselves...