sean tremblay <bethjams9@...> wrote:
>
> I am not even going to pretend to understand what direction this conversation
has turned.I asked a simple question about doing good things for bullshit
reasons and now these rantings are about as meaningfull to me as the garbled
speach of your average bag ladyAnd you sir Sandeep I probably should respect you
like Bob does...But I don't probably because I have no Idea who you are....But
you seem to be full of answers and the rest of us should all nbow down to your
greatness...But I don't think so you spew ego laden rants that from a position
of superiority.  Now I have been biting my tonque with you for the past two
years, to be polite but I have had you are offensive, combative and easily
offended, And I am tired of you you are tedious at best!  You also keep
mentioning the war in Afghanistn in a round about way You got something you want
to say to me come out and say! I've heard it all before.Bob I'm sorry about this
you have been very supportive over
>  the past few years, and I appreciate all you have done for me.  But I am not
going to bow wide eyed like an school girl just because a guy has a reputation
for have cows follow him. I'm fuckin done with this shit thank you 
>
Yo Sean,
Semi-interesting reaction to Sandeep. I have always
seen him as "not there". By that I mean he has no
attachment to name, fame, game, and just presents
his presents, which come in the form of reminders
(using reminders to refer to "hey - look at what
your mind is chattering about"). And for me, he does
it very well. To me where he is coming from is in the
non-dual, Advaita, Vedanta and Jhana Yoga traditions,
and it is said that only 1 seeker in 1,000 will find
these concepts ones they are comfortable with. No big
deal about him or the way he presents things. It's not
a good or bad thing - it's just his way of expressing
the inexpressible. I think Papajeff is one of the
most eloquent writers around, and in a very different
styling, so is Sandeep. If their words don't bring you
peace, they are no good for you. If they do, they are.
I'm just pleased they both share so freely. As for you,
I think you will be amazingly successful when you write
your book because you reek of passion and your life
has been extra-ordinary. You're for sure "the real deal".
Peace and blessings,
Bob
> --- On Wed, 2/17/10, Sandeep <sandeep1960@...> wrote:
>
> From: Sandeep <sandeep1960@...>
> Subject: Re: [Meditation Society of America] Cause and Effect and On-line
Strategies
> To: meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Wednesday, February 17, 2010, 12:04 AM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi Bob,
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> medit8ionsociety wrote:
>  
>
>
>   Carl Sagan once said that to really find
>
> the cause of any effect you have to go back
>
> to the Big Bang and work from there.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Why even stop at that minor event?
>
>
>
> :-)
>
>
>
> Much though it may seem like........ ..there is no linear cause-effect
> continuum.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>    In a
>
> universe that's characterized by adjectives
>
> and adverbs like "Chaos", it's interesting
>
> that things pop up exactly when they would
>
> fit in.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Exactly.
>
>
>
> Including the arising thought which may of  the nature of bewilderment,
> anger, agony....... .....as to how can this "pop up" be  seen  to be a
> fit...
>
> .. from any perspective.
>
>
>
> Aka, earthquakes, tsunamis, innocents getting blown apart in the name
> of Allah or democracy.
>
>
>
>  
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>   Right after reading Papajeff and
>
> Sandeep, both of whom I respect and think
>
> are wiser than the average bear, I found this
>
> site that deals with strategies that are used
>
> in on-line arguments.
>
>   http://www.jerzeede vil.com/forums/ showthread. php?t=70321
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> LOL
>
>
>
> Very good.
>
>
>
> Being on the cyber circuit from the early 80s.....have seen all these
> variations.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>   I hope you enjoy what is shareed there even if it
>
> doesn't exactly fit with what has been going on
>
> in these recent posts. In the case of the last few
>
> posts here, I want to say that when I read Sandeep,
>
> my mind's chatter often stops and that opens the
>
> "doors of perception", and since Swami Chidananda's
>
> recent death, I think Sandeep may be the most conscious
>
> person in India.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hey, the geographical spread of that endorsement is too small.
>
>
>
> Bob, how do you expect me to expand the business, in face of
> competition ?
>
>
>
> Be a little more generous, a bit more expansive, will ya!.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Coming back to the subject of effortless effort.
>
>
>
> In fact, every effort is effortless.
>
>
>
> Not that reaching an enlightened state makes subsequent efforting as
> effortless.
>
>
>
> Effortless effort is already the case.
>
>
>
> What would effortfull effort be?
>
>
>
> It would be the enacting of actions, accompanied by a sense of
> ownership of the action, which as a package deal comes with the sense
> of stake with the unfolding actions.
>
>
>
> Doing....... .. with the accompanying halo of "I am the one doing such
> and such and I am the one who hopes that such and such will get me, the
> other,
>
> society, community, nation, humanity at large, such and such".
>
>
>
> The halo is all mentation.
>
>
>
> The presence or absence of the halo of mentation... ......does not in
> any way effect the nature or content of the moment, which unfolds
> exactly as it did as the moment.
>
>
>
> (A delving would apperceive that even the physical act as the content
> of the moment.... is a wiggle in the field of mentation, but let's
> leave that for the moment)
>
>
>
>
>
> So this state of effortless effort( to use some terms for this
> communication) ........can it ever be reached, attained, realized,
> achieved?
>
>
>
> What is not-the-case. ......can be made to be the case.
>
>
>
> Which obviously needs something to be done by some one.
>
>
>
> What is already the case........ how can it be made to be the case again?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Now, espying these pixels.....thought immediately comes up......
>
>
>
> "-that's all neo-advaita bullshit, did not such and such (put in any of
> your favourite saint sage).....toil for decades, even several past
> lifetimes... ........to reach salvation, enlightenment.
>
>
>
> -"When nothing in life, ie.fame, fortune, sex, power can be got without
> rowing your boat......how can the biggest mazumma be achieved just by
> sitting on your back-side".
>
>
>
> Thought may even construct..
>
>
>
> "- How can such nonsense be allowed to be espoused when I through such
> exacting and arduous rock climbing have reached the pinnacle of
> spirituality"
>
>
>
> "-What would I be left with........ if all that I have done and achieved
> in the field of spirituality be debunked.... .
>
>
>
> ....what would I be.....if ......it is all fluff?".
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> In reverse thought may even construct
>
>
>
> " That is why effort is the very obstruction to realization,
> enlightenment and must be totally shunned.
>
>  I must hunt down all these doers and negate them on every spiritual
> lists on cyber space, as well as all physical satsanghs."
>
>
>
>
>
> Both schools of thought..... ....are actually the same.
>
>
>
> What is the difference between believing that something is necessary,
> that something is the causal requirement for what-is-already- the-case
> to be reached..... ..
>
>
>
> ......and .....
>
>
>
> ..... believing that nothing has to be done........ as the causal
> requirement. ..... for what-is-already- the-case to be reached.
>
>
>
> No difference whatsoever.
>
>
>
>
>
> Which is why......... ...if a specific technique is getting enacted
> which is held to be meditation, bhakti-japa, self-enquiry. .......coming
> across a spectacle of need, anguish, suffering and getting moved to do
> whatever one did in that moment to assuage the spectacle... ...(whether
> succeeded or not)
>
>
>
> .......in each of these instances... ......the apperceiving is
> that........ ...each of the instance was a natural nuance of the
> moment.....an unfolding play of totality as that very specific act of a
> multi-act drama......
>
>
>
> a drama .....which is nothing but a display of what would be it be
> like, if for example .....meditation, bhakti-japa, self-enquiry,
> empathy.....
>
>
>
> ...was ever possible to be.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Similarly, the absence of any of these facets of
> phenomenality. .......are as much .........a natural nuance of the
> moment.....as much as acts
>
> of the same multi-act drama.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Now what is to be pursued, craved, intended, affirmed?
>
>
>
> What is to be shunned, avoided, negated?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> The instance.... ... no matter what it's content..... ..... is not a
> means to another instance.
>
>
>
> The instance.... .... no matter what its content..... ... is not an
> obstruction to another instance
>
>
>
> For no instance has a relation with another instance.
>
>
>
> Why not?
>
>
>
> Because each instance, irrespective of the content of that
> instance.... .....is complete in itself.
>
>
>
>
>
> There is no pop-up needing to fit into frame.
>
>
>
> The pop-up IS the frame.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> In this light of apperception( again a mere term)....... .....where there
> is no surrounding halo of intentions, will, stakes, hopes.....
>
>
>
> the apperception that ....the halo IS the very unfolding meditation, if
> so.
>
>
>
> the apperception that .....the halo IS the very unfolding of empathy,
> if so.
>
>
>
> The apperception that....the halo IS the very unfolding absence of any
> such activities, if such is the case.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> The apperception that the pervading stillness... .......is not an effect
> of what is unfolding... ......... ....whether the unfolding happens in
> the dirt of the gutter
>
>
>
> or in the pristinity of cathedral towers.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> The light of this apperception .........consumes( to use a
> term)....... all "other" instances... ...... both the recalled and the
> projected.
>
>
>
>
>
> The consumption of the recall and the projected ............ .is the
> consumption of even this instance.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> And the apperception that the Big Bang ...
>
>
>
>
>
> ..a mere infantile wiggle....
>
>
>
> .....to display what would it be like...... IF...... something could
> ever be on display.
>

Brother Sandeep!

Your piercing insight is truly appreci-Loved:-) Thank you for sharing.

Hanif

ONE, or ZERO;-)



--- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, Sandeep <sandeep1960@...>
wrote:
>
> Hi Bob,
>
>
>
> medit8ionsociety wrote:
> >
> >
> > Carl Sagan once said that to really find
> > the cause of any effect you have to go back
> > to the Big Bang and work from there.
> >
>
>
> Why even stop at that minor event?
>
> :-)
>
> Much though it may seem like..........there is no linear cause-effect
> continuum.
>
>
>
> > In a
> > universe that's characterized by adjectives
> > and adverbs like "Chaos", it's interesting
> > that things pop up exactly when they would
> > fit in.
> >
>
>
> Exactly.
>
> Including the arising thought which may of  the nature of bewilderment,
> anger, agony............as to how can this "pop up" be  seen  to be a fit...
> .. from any perspective.
>
> Aka, earthquakes, tsunamis, innocents getting blown apart in the name of
> Allah or democracy.
>
>
>
>
> > Right after reading Papajeff and
> > Sandeep, both of whom I respect and think
> > are wiser than the average bear, I found this
> > site that deals with strategies that are used
> > in on-line arguments.
> > http://www.jerzeedevil.com/forums/showthread.php?t=70321
> > <http://www.jerzeedevil.com/forums/showthread.php?t=70321>
> >
>
>
> LOL
>
> Very good.
>
> Being on the cyber circuit from the early 80s.....have seen all these
> variations.
>
>
>
> > I hope you enjoy what is shareed there even if it
> > doesn't exactly fit with what has been going on
> > in these recent posts. In the case of the last few
> > posts here, I want to say that when I read Sandeep,
> > my mind's chatter often stops and that opens the
> > "doors of perception", and since Swami Chidananda's
> > recent death, I think Sandeep may be the most conscious
> > person in India.
> >
>
>
>
> Hey, the geographical spread of that endorsement is too small.
>
> Bob, how do you expect me to expand the business, in face of competition ?
>
> Be a little more generous, a bit more expansive, will ya!.
>
>
>
>
> Coming back to the subject of effortless effort.
>
> In fact, every effort is effortless.
>
> Not that reaching an enlightened state makes subsequent efforting as
> effortless.
>
> Effortless effort is already the case.
>
> What would effortfull effort be?
>
> It would be the enacting of actions, accompanied by a sense of ownership
> of the action, which as a package deal comes with the sense of stake
> with the unfolding actions.
>
> Doing......... with the accompanying halo of "I am the one doing such
> and such and I am the one who hopes that such and such will get me, the
> other,
> society, community, nation, humanity at large, such and such".
>
> The halo is all mentation.
>
> The presence or absence of the halo of mentation.........does not in any
> way effect the nature or content of the moment, which unfolds exactly as
> it did as the moment.
>
> (A delving would apperceive that even the physical act as the content of
> the moment.... is a wiggle in the field of mentation, but let's leave
> that for the moment)
>
>
> So this state of effortless effort( to use some terms for this
> communication)........can it ever be reached, attained, realized, achieved?
>
> What is not-the-case.......can be made to be the case.
>
> Which obviously needs something to be done by some one.
>
> What is already the case........how can it be made to be the case again?
>
>
>
> Now, espying these pixels.....thought immediately comes up......
>
> "-that's all neo-advaita bullshit, did not such and such (put in any of
> your favourite saint sage).....toil for decades, even several past
> lifetimes...........to reach salvation, enlightenment.
>
> -"When nothing in life, ie.fame, fortune, sex, power can be got without
> rowing your boat......how can the biggest mazumma be achieved just by
> sitting on your back-side".
>
> Thought may even construct..
>
> "- How can such nonsense be allowed to be espoused when I through such
> exacting and arduous rock climbing have reached the pinnacle of
> spirituality"
>
> "-What would I be left with........if all that I have done and achieved
> in the field of spirituality be debunked.....
>
> ....what would I be.....if ......it is all fluff?".
>
>
>
> In reverse thought may even construct
>
> " That is why effort is the very obstruction to realization,
> enlightenment and must be totally shunned.
>  I must hunt down all these doers and negate them on every spiritual
> lists on cyber space, as well as all physical satsanghs."
>
>
> Both schools of thought.........are actually the same.
>
> What is the difference between believing that something is necessary,
> that something is the causal requirement for what-is-already-the-case to
> be reached.......
>
> ......and .....
>
> ..... believing that nothing has to be done........ as the causal
> requirement...... for what-is-already-the-case to be reached.
>
> No difference whatsoever.
>
>
> Which is why............if a specific technique is getting enacted which
> is held to be meditation, bhakti-japa, self-enquiry........coming across
> a spectacle of need, anguish, suffering and getting moved to do whatever
> one did in that moment to assuage the spectacle......(whether succeeded
> or not)
>
> .......in each of these instances.........the apperceiving is
> that...........each of the instance was a natural nuance of the
> moment.....an unfolding play of totality as that very specific act of a
> multi-act drama......
>
> a drama .....which is nothing but a display of what would be it be like,
> if for example .....meditation, bhakti-japa, self-enquiry, empathy.....
>
> ...was ever possible to be.
>
>
>
>
> Similarly, the absence of any of these facets of
> phenomenality........are as much .........a natural nuance of the
> moment.....as much as acts
> of the same multi-act drama.
>
>
>
> Now what is to be pursued, craved, intended, affirmed?
>
> What is to be shunned, avoided, negated?
>
>
>
>
>
> The instance....... no matter what it's content.......... is not a means
> to another instance.
>
> The instance........ no matter what its content........ is not an
> obstruction to another instance
>
> For no instance has a relation with another instance.
>
> Why not?
>
> Because each instance, irrespective of the content of that
> instance.........is complete in itself.
>
>
> There is no pop-up needing to fit into frame.
>
> The pop-up IS the frame.
>
>
>
>
> In this light of apperception(again a mere term)............where there
> is no surrounding halo of intentions, will, stakes, hopes.....
>
> the apperception that ....the halo IS the very unfolding meditation, if so.
>
> the apperception that .....the halo IS the very unfolding of empathy, if so.
>
> The apperception that....the halo IS the very unfolding absence of any
> such activities, if such is the case.
>
>
>
> The apperception that the pervading stillness..........is not an effect
> of what is unfolding................whether the unfolding happens in the
> dirt of the gutter
>
> or in the pristinity of cathedral towers.
>
>
>
> The light of this apperception .........consumes( to use a
> term).......all "other" instances......... both the recalled and the
> projected.
>
>
> The consumption of the recall and the projected .............is the
> consumption of even this instance.
>
>
>
> And the apperception that the Big Bang ...
>
>
> ..a mere infantile wiggle....
>
> .....to display what would it be like...... IF...... something could
> ever be on display.
>

Hey Bob,

Neat take on the loop back
to the Big Bang as one of
Awakening...at least that
was my take on your take.

About your generous comments:
I would be humbled by them...
except my brother often asks,
"How can you be humble and
know you're humble?"

100W Love,

Jeff

PS: Strategies? Well, maybe
a couple...or so...resonated
as vaguely familiar.

--- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, medit8ionsociety
<no_reply@...> wrote:
>
> Carl Sagan once said that to really find
> the cause of any effect you have to go back
> to the Big Bang and work from there. In a
> universe that's characterized by adjectives
> and adverbs like "Chaos", it's interesting
> that things pop up exactly when they would
> fit in. Right after reading Papajeff and
> Sandeep, both of whom I respect and think
> are wiser than the average bear, I found this
> site that deals with strategies that are used
> in on-line arguments.
> http://www.jerzeedevil.com/forums/showthread.php?t=70321
> I hope you enjoy what is shareed there even if it
> doesn't exactly fit with what has been going on
> in these recent posts. In the case of the last few
> posts here, I want to say that when I read Sandeep,
> my mind's chatter often stops and that opens the
> "doors of perception", and since Swami Chidananda's
> recent death, I think Sandeep may be the most conscious
> person in India. Similarly, Papajeff is one of
> the brightest lights in America and has been very
> generous in presenting his wise in-sights. Both of these
> guys have demonstrated real Charity in the wisdom they
> share, and as I consider sharing those things that
> you have found to have helped you evolve in
> consciousness with others to the best thing you can
> do for someone. I feel this forum has been privileged
> to have so often been able to nurture our inner gardens
> with their enlightening words. I suggest that it is well
> worth checking out Papajeff's Yahoo group
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mysticheartmeditation/
> and Sandeep's web site:
> http://www.the-covenant.net/
> They both are thought provoking and thought stopping.
> And both have the potential to take you right to
> The Big Bang!
> Enjoy!
> Peace and blessings,
> Bob
>

"Aideen Mckenna" <aideenmck@...> wrote:
>
> Thanks, Bob, for letting us know more about Sandeep.  And thanks for nudging
> Sean about the book he needs to write – because I, for one, need to read it.
>
> Aideen
>
Yo Aideen,
Yeah, Sean can do some writing! And his real-life
adventures are so unique and different there's no
doubt he'll be a sensation when he begins to
share his experiences in a venue that brings a larger
audience to his unique persona. He'll do something some
day that has this come about and I hope it's sooner than later.
Peace and blessings,
Bob
>
>   _____
>
> From: meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
> medit8ionsociety
> Sent: February-17-10 8:09 PM
> To: meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Meditation Society of America] Cause and Effect and On-line
> Strategies
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> sean tremblay <bethjams9@> wrote:
> >
> > I am not even going to pretend to understand what direction this
> conversation has turned.I asked a simple question about doing good things
> for bullshit reasons and now these rantings are about as meaningfull to me
> as the garbled speach of your average bag ladyAnd you sir Sandeep I probably
> should respect you like Bob does...But I don't probably because I have no
> Idea who you are....But you seem to be full of answers and the rest of us
> should all nbow down to your greatness...But I don't think so you spew ego
> laden rants that from a position of superiority. Â Now I have been biting my
> tonque with you for the past two years, to be polite but I have had you are
> offensive, combative and easily offended, And I am tired of you you are
> tedious at best! Â You also keep mentioning the war in Afghanistn in a round
> about way You got something you want to say to me come out and say! I've
> heard it all before.Bob I'm sorry about this you have been very supportive
> over
> > the past few years, and I appreciate all you have done for me. Â But I am
> not going to bow wide eyed like an school girl just because a guy has a
> reputation for have cows follow him. I'm fuckin done with this shit thank
> youÂ
> >
> Yo Sean,
> Semi-interesting reaction to Sandeep. I have always
> seen him as "not there". By that I mean he has no
> attachment to name, fame, game, and just presents
> his presents, which come in the form of reminders
> (using reminders to refer to "hey - look at what
> your mind is chattering about"). And for me, he does
> it very well. To me where he is coming from is in the
> non-dual, Advaita, Vedanta and Jhana Yoga traditions,
> and it is said that only 1 seeker in 1,000 will find
> these concepts ones they are comfortable with. No big
> deal about him or the way he presents things. It's not
> a good or bad thing - it's just his way of expressing
> the inexpressible. I think Papajeff is one of the
> most eloquent writers around, and in a very different
> styling, so is Sandeep. If their words don't bring you
> peace, they are no good for you. If they do, they are.
> I'm just pleased they both share so freely. As for you,
> I think you will be amazingly successful when you write
> your book because you reek of passion and your life
> has been extra-ordinary. You're for sure "the real deal".
> Peace and blessings,
> Bob
> > --- On Wed, 2/17/10, Sandeep <sandeep1960@> wrote:
> >
> > From: Sandeep <sandeep1960@>
> > Subject: Re: [Meditation Society of America] Cause and Effect and On-line
> Strategies
> > To: meditationsocietyof
> <mailto:meditationsocietyofamerica%40yahoogroups.com>
> america@yahoogroups.com
> > Date: Wednesday, February 17, 2010, 12:04 AM
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Â
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi Bob,
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > medit8ionsociety wrote:
> > Â
> >
> >
> > Carl Sagan once said that to really find
> >
> > the cause of any effect you have to go back
> >
> > to the Big Bang and work from there.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Why even stop at that minor event?
> >
> >
> >
> > :-)
> >
> >
> >
> > Much though it may seem like........ ..there is no linear cause-effect
> > continuum.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > In a
> >
> > universe that's characterized by adjectives
> >
> > and adverbs like "Chaos", it's interesting
> >
> > that things pop up exactly when they would
> >
> > fit in.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Exactly.
> >
> >
> >
> > Including the arising thought which may of  the nature of bewilderment,
> > anger, agony....... .....as to how can this "pop up" be  seen  to be a
> > fit...
> >
> > .. from any perspective.
> >
> >
> >
> > Aka, earthquakes, tsunamis, innocents getting blown apart in the name
> > of Allah or democracy.
> >
> >
> >
> > Â
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Right after reading Papajeff and
> >
> > Sandeep, both of whom I respect and think
> >
> > are wiser than the average bear, I found this
> >
> > site that deals with strategies that are used
> >
> > in on-line arguments.
> >
> > http://www.jerzeede vil.com/forums/ showthread. php?t=70321
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > LOL
> >
> >
> >
> > Very good.
> >
> >
> >
> > Being on the cyber circuit from the early 80s.....have seen all these
> > variations.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I hope you enjoy what is shareed there even if it
> >
> > doesn't exactly fit with what has been going on
> >
> > in these recent posts. In the case of the last few
> >
> > posts here, I want to say that when I read Sandeep,
> >
> > my mind's chatter often stops and that opens the
> >
> > "doors of perception", and since Swami Chidananda's
> >
> > recent death, I think Sandeep may be the most conscious
> >
> > person in India.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Hey, the geographical spread of that endorsement is too small.
> >
> >
> >
> > Bob, how do you expect me to expand the business, in face of
> > competition ?
> >
> >
> >
> > Be a little more generous, a bit more expansive, will ya!.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Coming back to the subject of effortless effort.
> >
> >
> >
> > In fact, every effort is effortless.
> >
> >
> >
> > Not that reaching an enlightened state makes subsequent efforting as
> > effortless.
> >
> >
> >
> > Effortless effort is already the case.
> >
> >
> >
> > What would effortfull effort be?
> >
> >
> >
> > It would be the enacting of actions, accompanied by a sense of
> > ownership of the action, which as a package deal comes with the sense
> > of stake with the unfolding actions.
> >
> >
> >
> > Doing....... .. with the accompanying halo of "I am the one doing such
> > and such and I am the one who hopes that such and such will get me, the
> > other,
> >
> > society, community, nation, humanity at large, such and such".
> >
> >
> >
> > The halo is all mentation.
> >
> >
> >
> > The presence or absence of the halo of mentation... ......does not in
> > any way effect the nature or content of the moment, which unfolds
> > exactly as it did as the moment.
> >
> >
> >
> > (A delving would apperceive that even the physical act as the content
> > of the moment.... is a wiggle in the field of mentation, but let's
> > leave that for the moment)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > So this state of effortless effort( to use some terms for this
> > communication) ........can it ever be reached, attained, realized,
> > achieved?
> >
> >
> >
> > What is not-the-case. ......can be made to be the case.
> >
> >
> >
> > Which obviously needs something to be done by some one.
> >
> >
> >
> > What is already the case........ how can it be made to be the case again?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Now, espying these pixels.....thought immediately comes up......
> >
> >
> >
> > "-that's all neo-advaita bullshit, did not such and such (put in any of
> > your favourite saint sage).....toil for decades, even several past
> > lifetimes... ........to reach salvation, enlightenment.
> >
> >
> >
> > -"When nothing in life, ie.fame, fortune, sex, power can be got without
> > rowing your boat......how can the biggest mazumma be achieved just by
> > sitting on your back-side".
> >
> >
> >
> > Thought may even construct..
> >
> >
> >
> > "- How can such nonsense be allowed to be espoused when I through such
> > exacting and arduous rock climbing have reached the pinnacle of
> > spirituality"
> >
> >
> >
> > "-What would I be left with........ if all that I have done and achieved
> > in the field of spirituality be debunked.... .
> >
> >
> >
> > ....what would I be.....if ......it is all fluff?".
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > In reverse thought may even construct
> >
> >
> >
> > " That is why effort is the very obstruction to realization,
> > enlightenment and must be totally shunned.
> >
> > Â I must hunt down all these doers and negate them on every spiritual
> > lists on cyber space, as well as all physical satsanghs."
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Both schools of thought..... ....are actually the same.
> >
> >
> >
> > What is the difference between believing that something is necessary,
> > that something is the causal requirement for what-is-already- the-case
> > to be reached..... ..
> >
> >
> >
> > ......and .....
> >
> >
> >
> > ..... believing that nothing has to be done........ as the causal
> > requirement. ..... for what-is-already- the-case to be reached.
> >
> >
> >
> > No difference whatsoever.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Which is why......... ...if a specific technique is getting enacted
> > which is held to be meditation, bhakti-japa, self-enquiry. .......coming
> > across a spectacle of need, anguish, suffering and getting moved to do
> > whatever one did in that moment to assuage the spectacle... ...(whether
> > succeeded or not)
> >
> >
> >
> > .......in each of these instances... ......the apperceiving is
> > that........ ...each of the instance was a natural nuance of the
> > moment.....an unfolding play of totality as that very specific act of a
> > multi-act drama......
> >
> >
> >
> > a drama .....which is nothing but a display of what would be it be
> > like, if for example .....meditation, bhakti-japa, self-enquiry,
> > empathy.....
> >
> >
> >
> > ...was ever possible to be.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Similarly, the absence of any of these facets of
> > phenomenality. .......are as much .........a natural nuance of the
> > moment.....as much as acts
> >
> > of the same multi-act drama.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Now what is to be pursued, craved, intended, affirmed?
> >
> >
> >
> > What is to be shunned, avoided, negated?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > The instance.... ... no matter what it's content..... ..... is not a
> > means to another instance.
> >
> >
> >
> > The instance.... .... no matter what its content..... ... is not an
> > obstruction to another instance
> >
> >
> >
> > For no instance has a relation with another instance.
> >
> >
> >
> > Why not?
> >
> >
> >
> > Because each instance, irrespective of the content of that
> > instance.... .....is complete in itself.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > There is no pop-up needing to fit into frame.
> >
> >
> >
> > The pop-up IS the frame.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > In this light of apperception( again a mere term)....... .....where there
> > is no surrounding halo of intentions, will, stakes, hopes.....
> >
> >
> >
> > the apperception that ....the halo IS the very unfolding meditation, if
> > so.
> >
> >
> >
> > the apperception that .....the halo IS the very unfolding of empathy,
> > if so.
> >
> >
> >
> > The apperception that....the halo IS the very unfolding absence of any
> > such activities, if such is the case.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > The apperception that the pervading stillness... .......is not an effect
> > of what is unfolding... ......... ....whether the unfolding happens in
> > the dirt of the gutter
> >
> >
> >
> > or in the pristinity of cathedral towers.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > The light of this apperception .........consumes( to use a
> > term)....... all "other" instances... ...... both the recalled and the
> > projected.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > The consumption of the recall and the projected ............ .is the
> > consumption of even this instance.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > And the apperception that the Big Bang ...
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ..a mere infantile wiggle....
> >
> >
> >
> > .....to display what would it be like...... IF...... something could
> > ever be on display.
> >
>

In case he tunes in,
today is Sean's birthday.

Happy Birthday.

Preface: The writing of
another book has been in
process for almost 10 years.
Can't seem to wrap it up.
Here's an excerpt about my very
first experience in "formal"
meditation (after years and
years of reading, inquiry
and listening to many
teachers):


In the midst of meditation,
one July day, simply focusing my
attention on my breathing -
noticing when I was inhaling
and when I was exhaling...
something happened that brought
John Keats words came to mind:

I felt like some watcher of the skies,
When a new planet swims into his ken.
                   ––John Keats

There was no seeking of this
metaphorical "new planet". What
swam into my consciousness was
something brand new, beyond my
ken before this startling moment.

In an instant, out of blue,
in the silence of meditation,
it was as if a marvelous light
suddenly came on and in
one mind-blossoming instant
removed all fear and doubt
and darkness within me.
And what replaced it was
a perfect peace of mind,
the likes of which
I had never known.

All dark disturbing guilt
was dispersed in a flash.
The heavy questions that I
had dragged around like a
bag of rocks for years were
either answered in totality
or they vanished into nothing.

A heavy weight was lifted.
My conscience was reset
to zero. I was "made whole",
brand new, cleansed, ecstatic.

I was enveloped in what I
can only describe as Divine
Love.

I was on a new planet.

I could not have sought this
new event that was to change
my life ever after; end my former
life as I knew it. How can one
seek what is beyond their ken?

My decision to sit in meditation
was not prompted by an attempt
at becoming "enlightened".

How could I, or anyone
seek enlightenment before we
know, experientially, this
new clarity and understanding
and realization for ourselves,
this, "peace that passes
all understanding," this,
"joy unspeakable."?

The purpose of my meditation
was only to be still and silent,
to enjoy a relaxing quiet time;
no goals or expectations other
than these. I was simply taking
a break from stress.

But within this silence arose
an entirely new "planet" and
a new "Jeff" now residing on it.

Now, it may not be meditation,
necessarily, that opens the
door to this life-changing event,
but it certainly is a common thread,
a common activity, found within
many reports such as this.

If meditation is not the key,
it is at the very least one pathway
to the doorstep of enlightenment.

It may be Grace that opens
the door, yet for me and
for many others whose report
I have read, this Grace was
accessed through the miraculously
simple art of meditation.

Don't tell me there's no way,
no method, nothing to discover.
True, it is impossible to
describe the wonder of this
pot of gold that was
waiting for me at the end
(and/or the beginning)
of this meditation rainbow...
joyfully discovered on
that first day, and brand new
every morning since that
day. But...

Meditation is one of the
most amazing and beneficial
activities ever devised by
man, or inspired by God.

And there is a discovery
(or rediscovery) to be found
in the midst (mist) of
meditation.

It is my wish that for
whatever reason you may
look at meditation and
want to learn meditation
techniques, that you
may be so incredibly blessed
as to be a watcher one
starry night, when a new planet
swims into your inner view.

And with it, may you fully
return to what I believe to be
our natural estate - an
unshakable knowledge of our
inseparability from a kind
creator, a realization that
our entire being is totally and
wholly within God, that this
experience of life is all a play
of consciousness.

May you run in a field
of joy, laugh at the divine
comedy - come to perfect
peace - discover your true home.

If you've been blessed
with this discovery, there
is no doubt that you
you love to share your
gift in celebration.

So...

A toast to meditation.

One Love,

Jeff

When
I am
Of highest capacity
It flows through me

When
I am
Of middling capacity
I write poems about the flowing

When
I am
Of low capacity
The flow irritates me

St. Timothy Leary
Psychedelic Prayers 1966
----------------------------------------------------
FAIR USE NOTICE
This site contains copyrighted material the
use of which has not always been specifically
authorized by the copyright owner. We are
making such material available in our efforts
to advance understanding of environmental,
political, human rights, economic, democracy,
scientific, spiritual, and social justice issues,
etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use'
of any such copyrighted material as provided
for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107,
the material on this site is distributed
without profit to those who have expressed a
prior interest in receiving the included information
for research and educational purposes. For more
information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this
site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use',
you must obtain permission from the copyright owner

There was once a small boy who banged a drum all day...
and loved every moment of it. He would not be quiet,
no matter what anyone else said or did. Various people
who called themselves Sufis, and other well-wishers,
were called in by neighbors and asked to do something
about the child.

The first so-called Sufi told the boy that he would,
if he continued to make so much noise, perforate his
eardrums; this reasoning was too advanced for the
child, who was neither a scientist nor a scholar. The
second told him that drum beating was a sacred
activity and should be carried out only on special
occasions. The third offered the neighbors plugs for
their ears; the fourth gave the boy a book; the fifth
gave the neighbors books that described a method of
controlling anger through biofeedback; the sixth gave
the boy meditation exercises to make him placid and
explained that all reality was imagination. Like all
placebos, each of these remedies worked for a short
while, but none worked for very long.

Eventually, Mullah Nasrudein came along. He looked at
the situation, handed the boy a hammer and chisel, and
said, "I wonder what is INSIDE the drum?"

"Too difficult is it to sacrifice the ego, but unless
it is sacrificed, no vision of truth and no sight of
God is possible of revelation. Sell away your lower
self and purchase the Supreme Self. Withdraw your mind
from justifying your position; serve your enemies;
sacrifice all your rights if you wish to rule; love
those who hate you; resist not if you wish to conquer;
sacrifice all that you feel belongs to you. Seek
nothing if you wish to have everything. Conquer
yourself if you wish to have the Highest Freedom. Take
no shelter under ego if you wish to be protected by
the Supreme Power, the Almighty God."
Swami Sivananda

http://tinyurl.com/yecep7w

This is an excerpt of an article titled Cast Off This
Ego in a chapter from the book Yoga And Realization.
by Swami Sivananda

The man of ego is ruled by vanity, he is
governed by utter pride; hatred grips him,
folly sways him, delusion sits in his very intelligence,
evils hover round him and his steps lead him into the
realms of denser ignorance and ruin. But his
understanding being clouded and his discrimination
being obscured by his own prejudiced preconceptions,
he is unaware of his own sorry state. On the
contrary, he feels himself well off and all
knowing and surveys the rest of humanity with
condescending eye as unfortunate creatures
toiling foolishly far below him in evolution's
scale. Such is the self delusion of the ego.
Where the egotism is not, there is all blessedness,
all goodness, all glory and there can one find God.

To the one devoid of ego, the whole world is
a haven of rest, a realm of peace and kingdom
of abounding all happiness. For him there is
no more distress. He is purified, exalted and
illumined. He sees no sin anywhere and no evil
can come near him. Nothing is hidden from him;
the Truth stands before him in all its splendour
and radiance; the mysteries are revealed to him
and all the secret workings of the universe are
made known to him. He who has no ego and who has
surrendered himself to God is the master of every
power and force that there is, for all powers and
forces are under God. Egoless man's is the supreme
freedom and perfection.

Well, after being on a recent "kill the ego"
posting trip, I now find that Google (at least
as of 8:57 this morning - these things change
often) rated our web site, Meditation Station
http://www.meditationsociety.com
as #1 in the world for Meditation. And as you can
see, here I'm boasting about it. Oh well!

Good job, Bob. Recently heard
that genius was originally
considered something someone
"has" rather than what someone
is...so, meditation brought
you a genius for organizing
and promoting meditation
information at a place called
The Meditation Station.
Ego doesn't get the
credit. Ergo, no hypocrite.

--- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, medit8ionsociety
<no_reply@...> wrote:
>
> Well, after being on a recent "kill the ego"
> posting trip, I now find that Google (at least
> as of 8:57 this morning - these things change
> often) rated our web site, Meditation Station
> http://www.meditationsociety.com
> as #1 in the world for Meditation. And as you can
> see, here I'm boasting about it. Oh well!
>

Bob, you have to also consider the nature of your intention. Your intention is
certainly good and it is beneficial to have a blog where people can share
thoughts and feelings about meditation. You also take all comers. I do not think
you have censored anyone because your own ego thought what was being posted was
improper. For instance we recently had a kick-up between several folks here
about having compassion for others and things somehow got a little heated and
some egos were involved I believe. However, as a group here, we would have lost
something, the right to express who we are and perhaps later to stand back and
the participants who had the contretemps could meditate about their behavior.
With censorship it would be sterile and no growth would take place. Think of the
Bhagavad Gita here, a war is taking place. Bob, at your own time and place on
this Blog, you have a battlefield and it is right that it should be this way.
And, you deserve your high ranking because with no censorship, there would be
fewer messages and you would rank lower on Google.

--- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, medit8ionsociety
<no_reply@...> wrote:
>
> Well, after being on a recent "kill the ego"

I wanted to elaborate on the "kill the ego" idea. Ego issues are specific to the
person. My fate is based on my past karma, my past actions, and that has to
frame my ongoing experience to live.  I could say I do not know God's plan and
just go with fate, but I do have free will in this enfolding life to go with
God's suggestions about how I should work out karma.  In the past lives and this
one I did certain things and that has made me what I am, my personality.  The
situation I am in moment to moment comes into awareness with meditation. I can
discern what that is and get answers on how to proceed. For instance, in the
beginning when I first started meditating, I had a very strong feeling to be
dominant with my wife. I did not even realize I had this propensity, but when I
meditated, that's what came up out of my subconscious. Well my meditation told
me to give way to my wife. I thought I was dying by inches doing this, but in
the end this desire just evaporated because of the work I did on myself. By the
way my first wife died and my second wife for a number of years was dominant
with me, very stressful. I sure have some karma on this issue.

> --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, medit8ionsociety
<no_reply@> wrote:
> >
> > Well, after being on a recent "kill the ego"
>

Do not be afraid to go forth to do your spiritual work, as Arjuna was afraid in
the beginning of the Bhagavad Gita, afraid that you will hurt others in the
battle. Just let Krishna show you the way, meditating and then following right
behavior from that wisdom found by offering up your problems to the light found
therein.

There is the problem where one thinks they are guided by meditation, but it is
really their own ego. If a person meditates and thinks they get an answer to a
problem, but the answer is not consistent from session to session, then it is
the ego. Also, the behavior to follow, derived from meditation, invariably makes
a person grow spiritually and is difficult as it runs counter to the ego. I
don't think this was what was bothering Arjuna, but maybe someone could correct
me on that if my take runs counter to Hindu beliefs.

--- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "westwindwood2003"
<westwindwood2003@...> wrote:
>
> Do not be afraid to go forth to do your spiritual work, as Arjuna was afraid
in the beginning of the Bhagavad Gita, afraid that you will hurt others in the
battle. Just let Krishna show you the way, meditating and then following right
behavior from that wisdom found by offering up your problems to the light found
therein.
>

Thanks so much for this post!
This reminds me of Jill Bolte Taylors Stroke of Insight.
She wrote a book about her experience with a stroke.. and being a neurologist..
she got to see things from both perspectives!
She had a revelational spiritual experience that brought her to tears when she
spoke about it on Ted t.v.
ted.com has her account.
-Rae

--- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, medit8ionsociety
<no_reply@...> wrote:
>
> ScienceDaily (Feb. 11, 2010)
> New research provides fascinating insight into
> brain changes that might underlie alterations
> in spiritual and religious attitudes. The study,
> published by Cell Press in the February 11
> issue of the journal Neuron, explores the neural
> basis of spirituality by studying patients before
> and after surgery to remove a brain tumor.
>
> Although it is well established that all behaviors
> and experiences, spiritual or otherwise, must
> originate in the brain, true empirical exploration
> of the neural underpinnings of spirituality has been
> challenging. However, recent advances in neuroscience
> have started to make the complex mental processes
> associated with religion and spirituality more accessible.
>
> "Neuroimaging studies have linked activity within
> a large network in the brain that connects the frontal,
> parietal, and temporal cortexes with spiritual
> experiences, but information on the causative link
> between such a network and spirituality is lacking,"
> explains lead study author, Dr. Cosimo Urgesi from
> the University of Udine in Italy.
>
> Dr. Urgesi and colleagues were interested in making
> a direct link between brain activity and spirituality.
> They focused specifically on the personality trait
> called self-transcendence (ST), which is thought to
> be a measure of spiritual feeling, thinking, and
> behaviors in humans. ST reflects a decreased sense
> of self and an ability to identify one's self as an
> integral part of the universe as a whole.
>
> The researchers combined analysis of ST scores
> obtained from brain tumor patients before and after
> they had surgery to remove their tumor, with advanced
> techniques for mapping the exact location of the
> brain lesions after surgery. "This approach allowed
> us to explore the possible changes of ST induced by
> specific brain lesions and the causative role played
> by frontal, temporal, and parietal structures in
> supporting interindividual differences in ST," says
> researcher Dr. Franco Fabbro from the University of
> Udine.
>
> The group found that selective damage to the left
> and right posterior parietal regions induced a specific
> increase in ST. "Our symptom-lesion mapping study is
> the first demonstration of a causative link between
> brain functioning and ST," offers Dr. Urgesi. "Damage
> to posterior parietal areas induced unusually fast
> changes of a stable personality dimension related to
> transcendental self-referential awareness. Thus,
> dysfunctional parietal neural activity may underpin
> altered spiritual and religious attitudes and behaviors."
>
> These results may even lead to new strategies for
> treating some forms of mental illness. "If a stable
> personality trait like ST can undergo fast changes
> as a consequence of brain lesions, it would indicate
> that at least some personality dimensions may be
> modified by influencing neural activity in specific
> areas," suggests Dr. Salvatore M. Aglioti from
> Sapienza University of Rome. "Perhaps novel approaches
> aimed at modulating neural activity might ultimately
> pave the way to new treatments of personality disorders."
>
> The researchers include Cosimo Urgesi, Universita` di Udine, Udine, Italy,
Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico Eugenio Medea, Pordenone,
Italy; Salvatore M. Aglioti, Sapienza Universita` di Roma, Roma, Italy, Istituto
di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico Fondazione S. Lucia, Roma, Italy;
Miran Skrap, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Santa Maria della Misericordia,
Udine, Italy; and Franco Fabbro, Universita` di Udine, Udine, Italy, Istituto di
Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico Eugenio Medea, Pordenone, Italy.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> This article was published on the Science Daily
> web site and is being used in compliance with the Fair Use
> statutes and not for any commercial purposes
>

Myth #1: You must kill
the ego in order to achieve
enlightenment.

Myth #2: You must not
seek enlightenment - because
seeking perpetuates the sense
of separation.

Myth #3: We are all already
enlightened, so just get on
with your life.

Response to Myth #1: If
you kill the ego, you have
no self to enjoy the Realized
Self in the material world.
The ego must be silenced and
sent to a corner for a time
out, but enlightenment brings
the ego instant relief of not
having to be "on" 24/7 and
presents the startled ego with
a new playmate - a new Captain
of The Ship (of consciousness) -
who dispels the ego's fear
and doubt...and as they say
in advertising - much, much more.

But the ego lives on as a
tenured resident of this
temporal life. And some would
say, plots mutiny once again,
after a while. Meditation can
be a good crimestopper. But
that's another story.

Response to Myth #2: The is
trickier. It is a matter of
timing. All 'teachers' who
parrot the "You must not seek"
admonishment eventually, if they
go on long enough, replace
the word seek with a synonym
of some sort (like: inquire,
for instance). And their personal
stories ALWAYS have some reference
to seeking (a rose by any other
name). It is true that absolute
surrender opens the door, but...

seeking ALWAYS precedes the
point of surrender. We don't
need anything else to perpetuate
the feeling of separation - we
were already socially coerced
into it before any thought of
seeking occurred to us. And
we don't come to feel the intuitive
stirring at some point in our
lives, and immediately flop down
in complete and absolute surrender.

It is only after a time of seeking,
listening, reading, questioning,
sitting in meditation, sitting
in satsang, pleading for
deliverance from despair and such
(and for some, this goes on for
a very long time - and for
others, no time is long enough
in their present lifetime) that
the seeking gives way to utter
surrender - and with grace,
enlightenment.

Effort precedes grace.

Response to Myth #3: Much like
Myth #2, all professed 'teachers'
who parrot the "We're already
all enlightened" line eventually,
if they are authentically (or
poetically) enlightened, and
go on long enough, relate
personal stories that ALWAYS
have some reference to their
awakening/realization/shift
in perspective, ...

at a specific point in time.
Otherwise, they wouldn't have
anything to say - negation or
propagation - about enlightenment.

To parrot this,"We're
already all enlightened," pat
phrase is to discourage the
sincere seeker (who must one
day surrender utterly if they
ever hope to experience
enlightenment).

My 3-Myths worth.

Jeff

Hi Jeff.

Thank you for this post. I now add a little of my own nonsense to what
you offer.


--- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "Papajeff" <jeff@...>
wrote:
<snip>


> Response to Myth #1: If
> you kill the ego, you have
> no self to enjoy the Realized
> Self in the material world.
> The ego must be silenced and
> sent to a corner for a time
> out, but enlightenment brings
> the ego instant relief of not
> having to be "on" 24/7 and
> presents the startled ego with
> a new playmate - a new Captain
> of The Ship (of consciousness) -
> who dispels the ego's fear
> and doubt...and as they say
> in advertising - much, much more.
>
> But the ego lives on as a
> tenured resident of this
> temporal life. And some would
> say, plots mutiny once again,
> after a while. Meditation can
> be a good crimestopper. But
> that's another story.
>

Faithe:

To attempt to kill or not to kill the ego...is there any difference
here?


> Response to Myth #2: The is
> trickier. It is a matter of
> timing. All 'teachers' who
> parrot the "You must not seek"
> admonishment eventually, if they
> go on long enough, replace
> the word seek with a synonym
> of some sort (like: inquire,
> for instance). And their personal
> stories ALWAYS have some reference
> to seeking (a rose by any other
> name). It is true that absolute
> surrender opens the door, but...
>
> seeking ALWAYS precedes the
> point of surrender. We don't
> need anything else to perpetuate
> the feeling of separation - we
> were already socially coerced
> into it before any thought of
> seeking occurred to us. And
> we don't come to feel the intuitive
> stirring at some point in our
> lives, and immediately flop down
> in complete and absolute surrender.
>
> It is only after a time of seeking,
> listening, reading, questioning,
> sitting in meditation, sitting
> in satsang, pleading for
> deliverance from despair and such
> (and for some, this goes on for
> a very long time - and for
> others, no time is long enough
> in their present lifetime) that
> the seeking gives way to utter
> surrender - and with grace,
> enlightenment.
>
> Effort precedes grace.

Faithe:

Is there any difference between the "teacher" and the "seeker". Is not
the "teacher" just another person that is seeking to change another
whether it be through repeating "lofty messages with hidden meaning" or
encouragement through offering comforting words to make one feel good
themselves?

Could it be that the "teacher" is actually the "ultimate seeker" -
seeking others in order to keep their own beliefs afloat within
themselves?


>
> Response to Myth #3: Much like
> Myth #2, all professed 'teachers'
> who parrot the "We're already
> all enlightened" line eventually,
> if they are authentically (or
> poetically) enlightened, and
> go on long enough, relate
> personal stories that ALWAYS
> have some reference to their
> awakening/realization/shift
> in perspective, ...
>
> at a specific point in time.
> Otherwise, they wouldn't have
> anything to say - negation or
> propagation - about enlightenment.
>
> To parrot this,"We're
> already all enlightened," pat
> phrase is to discourage the
> sincere seeker (who must one
> day surrender utterly if they
> ever hope to experience
> enlightenment).
>
> My 3-Myths worth.
>
> Jeff

Faithe:

Is there is any purpose to having or not having this "enlightenment"?
Does it really, really make any difference? Is there any difference in
this concept of enlightenment or for instance reading a great novel and
feeling sooooooooo good afterwards...even if just for a fraction of
time? At least one can clearly remember the novel!!!

It amazes me what the human mind can conjure up to make itself feel like
there is some great spiritual achievement to attain. It's similar to
dying...as I approach (in fact if I take a hard, cold analytical look,
realize I am not approaching but am in it) my elderly years and look
back on my life, I ponder upon the "worth" of my life. I worked hard,
have a family, garden, repair my home, have my animals. played with
religion, spirituality, non-duality (which is just another fancy name
for religion), yoga, sports, meditation...and now, so what? Would I
change any of it? Nope, not one bit. I have tasted this mundane life. I
have learned much. The most important thing learned is that no one has
the answers to "all that IS", and I best spend what little time I have
left working on understanding more on the mundane and less on the
spiritual to which one can only imagine answers, answers depending on
the current status of the mundane life surrounding one.

Imagine what could be accomplished on the mundane level if the illusive
spiritual could be understand for what it is.

Thanks again, Jeff.

Faithe


PS:  Hello Bob, it has been a LONG, LONG time! Glad to see you are OK
and that this meditation work project of yours receives such high
acclaim.

Faithe,

Try as I might to come up
with a gracious reply to
your "nonsense"...it was
not found possible for me.

Rather than let sarcasm and
insult prevail, my choice
is this simple acknowledgment:

Enjoy your mundane life.

Jeff

--- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "tarah513" <faithearden@...>
wrote:
>
>
> Hi Jeff.
>
> Thank you for this post. I now add a little of my own nonsense to what
> you offer.
>
>
> --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "Papajeff" <jeff@>
> wrote:
> <snip>
>
>
> > Response to Myth #1: If
> > you kill the ego, you have
> > no self to enjoy the Realized
> > Self in the material world.
> > The ego must be silenced and
> > sent to a corner for a time
> > out, but enlightenment brings
> > the ego instant relief of not
> > having to be "on" 24/7 and
> > presents the startled ego with
> > a new playmate - a new Captain
> > of The Ship (of consciousness) -
> > who dispels the ego's fear
> > and doubt...and as they say
> > in advertising - much, much more.
> >
> > But the ego lives on as a
> > tenured resident of this
> > temporal life. And some would
> > say, plots mutiny once again,
> > after a while. Meditation can
> > be a good crimestopper. But
> > that's another story.
> >
>
> Faithe:
>
> To attempt to kill or not to kill the ego...is there any difference
> here?
>
>
> > Response to Myth #2: The is
> > trickier. It is a matter of
> > timing. All 'teachers' who
> > parrot the "You must not seek"
> > admonishment eventually, if they
> > go on long enough, replace
> > the word seek with a synonym
> > of some sort (like: inquire,
> > for instance). And their personal
> > stories ALWAYS have some reference
> > to seeking (a rose by any other
> > name). It is true that absolute
> > surrender opens the door, but...
> >
> > seeking ALWAYS precedes the
> > point of surrender. We don't
> > need anything else to perpetuate
> > the feeling of separation - we
> > were already socially coerced
> > into it before any thought of
> > seeking occurred to us. And
> > we don't come to feel the intuitive
> > stirring at some point in our
> > lives, and immediately flop down
> > in complete and absolute surrender.
> >
> > It is only after a time of seeking,
> > listening, reading, questioning,
> > sitting in meditation, sitting
> > in satsang, pleading for
> > deliverance from despair and such
> > (and for some, this goes on for
> > a very long time - and for
> > others, no time is long enough
> > in their present lifetime) that
> > the seeking gives way to utter
> > surrender - and with grace,
> > enlightenment.
> >
> > Effort precedes grace.
>
> Faithe:
>
> Is there any difference between the "teacher" and the "seeker". Is not
> the "teacher" just another person that is seeking to change another
> whether it be through repeating "lofty messages with hidden meaning" or
> encouragement through offering comforting words to make one feel good
> themselves?
>
> Could it be that the "teacher" is actually the "ultimate seeker" -
> seeking others in order to keep their own beliefs afloat within
> themselves?
>
>
> >
> > Response to Myth #3: Much like
> > Myth #2, all professed 'teachers'
> > who parrot the "We're already
> > all enlightened" line eventually,
> > if they are authentically (or
> > poetically) enlightened, and
> > go on long enough, relate
> > personal stories that ALWAYS
> > have some reference to their
> > awakening/realization/shift
> > in perspective, ...
> >
> > at a specific point in time.
> > Otherwise, they wouldn't have
> > anything to say - negation or
> > propagation - about enlightenment.
> >
> > To parrot this,"We're
> > already all enlightened," pat
> > phrase is to discourage the
> > sincere seeker (who must one
> > day surrender utterly if they
> > ever hope to experience
> > enlightenment).
> >
> > My 3-Myths worth.
> >
> > Jeff
>
> Faithe:
>
> Is there is any purpose to having or not having this "enlightenment"?
> Does it really, really make any difference? Is there any difference in
> this concept of enlightenment or for instance reading a great novel and
> feeling sooooooooo good afterwards...even if just for a fraction of
> time? At least one can clearly remember the novel!!!
>
> It amazes me what the human mind can conjure up to make itself feel like
> there is some great spiritual achievement to attain. It's similar to
> dying...as I approach (in fact if I take a hard, cold analytical look,
> realize I am not approaching but am in it) my elderly years and look
> back on my life, I ponder upon the "worth" of my life. I worked hard,
> have a family, garden, repair my home, have my animals. played with
> religion, spirituality, non-duality (which is just another fancy name
> for religion), yoga, sports, meditation...and now, so what? Would I
> change any of it? Nope, not one bit. I have tasted this mundane life. I
> have learned much. The most important thing learned is that no one has
> the answers to "all that IS", and I best spend what little time I have
> left working on understanding more on the mundane and less on the
> spiritual to which one can only imagine answers, answers depending on
> the current status of the mundane life surrounding one.
>
> Imagine what could be accomplished on the mundane level if the illusive
> spiritual could be understand for what it is.
>
> Thanks again, Jeff.
>
> Faithe
>
>
> PS:  Hello Bob, it has been a LONG, LONG time! Glad to see you are OK
> and that this meditation work project of yours receives such high
> acclaim.
>