X-Ftn-To: keval dass 

"keval dass"  wrote:
>ugliness is in the mind of the beholder.  

Maybe, on the lower level of understanding. On the higher level,
there's only the truth and objectivity. If something is red, you say
it's red. If it's blue, you say it's blue. You have no bias one way or
the other. It's totally irrelevant to you whether it's red or blue, so
you just witness it. This applies to human qualities as well. 

>So are you  enlightened?  

What does enlightenment mean to you? I ask because every now and then
somebody brings up some strange definition and I really don't know
what is meant by the term.

>I'm not
>trying to be rude or mean, I guess I just do that naturally but I am trying
>to change.  I'm just interested.  I'm kind of glad that you are here, I
>think they hate you more than they hate me, in fact I'd put money on that.

:)

>Honesty certainly isn't appreciated here.  Checked out your web page.  Again
>I don't want to be mean or anything but you come across like some sort of
>sex guru.  

:))))
Yes, I teach sex with God. It helps your spiritual health and doesn't
put you in any AIDS risk group. ;)

>You know free love and all that.  

Freedom is inherent to the definition of love. But, if you mean
promiscuous sex on the physical plane, I can only smile.

>Where does Brahmacharya fit in
>to all that love making?  

Well, it fits somewhere between unconditional surrender to God's inner
nature and self-realization, which makes you so self-sufficient
(atma-arama) that you can't even think about physical sex because it
would disturb your inner bliss.
Come on, I hope you don't mean this stuff seriously, it makes you look
like a shallow, sexually frustrated character.

BTW, that pic is a moron-test. If you see a sexual object, you're
positive. Actually, it shows the energetic state of the system just
prior to full takeover of the elements by vajra. Anyone who even
_smelled_ energetic yoga can see that from a mile.

-- 
Homepage: http://www.danijel.org