Ahhh Jeff...

Your reply was VERY gracious, indeed. How could you possibly think
otherwise.

You are very kind.

Faithe


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

Comments on your comments, see below:

--- 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?
>

My experience is if you try to kill the ego, it just pops up more strongly, but
if one goes with not trying to kill the ego then suffering continues.

>
> > 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?
>

My experience from the 1970s was the seekers were more evolved than the
teachers. The teachers were in it for the power and money. However, I did find
one teacher after I had meditated for 45 minutes per day on average for
twenty-two years who had some real guidance for me at a crucial time.

>
> >
> > 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.

Well, the vast majority of people in India would agree with you completely, that
the spiritual path is not for them, too hard to do at this time so why bother
even thinking about it. Perhaps some other life time, maybe. This path is not
something I can recommend to anyone, friend or foe. For me though, it is the
most important thing in my life by far, the whole 40 years starting since I was
30. You are content so stay the course.

>
> 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.
>

Hello West...

Thanks for your insight. Comments below.


> > Faithe:
> >
> > To attempt to kill or not to kill the ego...is there any difference
> > here?
> >
>
> My experience is if you try to kill the ego, it just pops up more
strongly, but if one goes with not trying to kill the ego then suffering
continues.
>
Faithe:

Could you please give me an example of the "suffering" which you say
incurs when one does not try to kill the ego.

> > 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?
> >
>
> My experience from the 1970s was the seekers were more evolved than
the teachers. The teachers were in it for the power and money. However,
I did find one teacher after I had meditated for 45 minutes per day on
average for twenty-two years who had some real guidance for me at a
crucial time.

Faithe:

The term "more evolved" eludes me. Could you give me a description of
one who is "more evolved"? Who is it that gets to determine whether one
is "more evolved" than others?

Is one who is "more evolved" able to write and speak better than others?
Or, to be "more evolved" must one travel to the hills and live a life
alone experimenting with one's belly button?

>
> Well, the vast majority of people in India would agree with you
completely, that the spiritual path is not for them, too hard to do at
this time so why bother even thinking about it. Perhaps some other life
time, maybe. This path is not something I can recommend to anyone,
friend or foe. For me though, it is the most important thing in my life
by far, the whole 40 years starting since I was 30. You are content so
stay the course.


Faithe:

The spiritual path is harder than living the mundane life? I beg to
differ with you. My experience finds that those seeking spirituality are
attempting to escape mundane life.

Is there a thing --- an essence, if you will,  that can really be
identified as "spiritual"? Can it be that "spiritual" is a mind mirage
as opposed to an optical mirage?

You comment that I am content, so I should stay the course. That is not
it at all. Basically, I am NOT content to run away from learning the
hard lessons of the mundane life by jumping into a spiritual fantasy.

Why is this quest for "spirituality" so important to you...I am musing
here...just a rhetorical question.

So different, we are. That is just the way it is. I respect your quest
for a spiritual life...I just question what it is that makes you think
it is so difficult.

When searching for
Peace of mind leads
To meditation's door
There is no thought
Of the ego's role

It is only when
We approach the
Edge of reason
And ask for silence
That ego protests

And if we persist
The ego freaks out
Declares inner war
With weapons of
Fear and doubt

Only the insatiably
Curious or desperate
Press on undaunted
Risking death
To find new life

Faithe:

>Could you please give me an example of the "suffering" which you say incurs
when one does not try to kill the ego.

The Buddhists have suffering down to a science. Just put the words Buddhist &
suffering in Google. To be specific in my own experience about suffering that
occurs when one does not try to kill the ego, it's not that one should try to
suppress the ego because of guilt. With suppression one cannot look at what
needs working on. What happens is that the ego becomes less and eventually
dissolves, or burns to inert ash because a meditator decides to take up the
discipline needed to change the personality. As for a personal example of
suffering, when I first took up meditation, I found that I had a strong desire
to be dominant with my wife. The wisdom I got from meditation was to always give
way to her, which was a very hard thing for me to do, but I did and that desire
eventually went away. I always got a consistent answer about this with offering
it up, and it did not hurt her. She died of cancer some years later, and my
second wife, who came from a very abusive prior relationship tried to be very
dominant with me. It took a long time, but she eventually learned to trust me. I
must have really had some karma around this issue because it was very hard for
me to deal with.


Faithe:

>The term "more evolved" eludes me. Could you give me a description of one who
is "more evolved"? Who is it that gets to determine whether one is "more
evolved" than others?

When I said more evolved, I meant that in looking at my own personality I find I
am much more contented with my life, that I relate better to others. This is my
own perception of myself; however, to give a more general answer, you should
look at the opening of the Bhagavad Gita with commentary by Swami Chidbhavananda
where the forces of good and evil are apposed to each other. There are some very
good comparisons made between good and evil. If you want descriptions of people
who are highly evolved, then read Autobiography of a Yogi by Paramahansa
Yogananda. Finally I should say that of course you cannot just look at someone
and determine if they are enlightened. For that, you need to be enlightened and
then you can compare the experience to see if it is the same.

Faithe:
>Is one who is "more evolved" able to write and speak better than others? Or, to
be "more evolved" must one travel to the hills and live a life alone
experimenting with one's belly button?

Obviously people differ in their ability to talk and write, and I am well aware
that there are people who have the same experiences I have had that can describe
the process better than I. Like any other specialty, the person who has studied
and experienced a specialty can of course expound on it better than one who has
not actually done so.  For instance I would not go to an instructor to learn to
fly an airplane if that person had never been at the controls of an airplane.
And, experience is not everything as some people just have the patience and
ability to describe how something is done better than others with the same
technical ability. As for living the life of a hermit, my own experience is that
if I am not around others, the stimulation I need to bring up the issues I have
to work on is not there and I go sort of inert after a few weeks. I cannot speak
for a person who has resolved all ego issues for themselves. For that take a
look at Saint John of the Cross' book "Dark Night of the Soul". Dark night
refers to the fact that the burning ego issues have gone out, not that one is
having a hard time of it. In that situation in Dark Night of the Soul a person
would then evolve towards God's nature and perhaps a solitary endeavor would be
appropriate I guess, but I am sure a person could continue to live a social life
if they wanted to. As for watching ones belly button, I find I much prefer
watching my breath. I find belly button gazing too stressful on the muscles, but
maybe I should not criticize Hatha Yoga as I do not know that much about it (or
maybe it's not even Hatha Yoga, I don't know much about belly button
experimenting).


Faithe:

>The spiritual path is harder than living the mundane life? I beg to differ with
you. My experience finds that those seeking spirituality are attempting to
escape mundane life. Is there a thing --- an essence, if you will, that can
really be identified as "spiritual"? Can it be that "spiritual" is a mind mirage
as opposed to an optical mirage? You comment that I am content, so I should stay
the course. That is not it at all. Basically, I am NOT content to run away from
learning the hard lessons of the mundane life by jumping into a spiritual
fantasy. Why is this quest for "spirituality" so important to you...I am musing
here...just a rhetorical question.

I cannot speak for your acquaintances, and whether they are trying to escape the
mundane life; however, for myself, I am a householder and I find incorporating
spirituality with the mundane is the way to go. I have chosen the spiritual path
imbedded within the mundane because I prefer it, because my life is better for
it. As for "spiritual essence", this is where it gets difficult to talk about
because I believe you are referring to "enlightenment" and the pat answer for
that is it cannot be described; however, if you will accept a Christian term for
it, then it would be the Holy Spirit, but that is not defined either as near as
I can tell.

Faithe:

>So different, we are. That is just the way it is. I respect your quest for a
spiritual life...I just question what it is that makes you think it is so
difficult.

Well, I just meant that the ego wants to stay with what it knows, even if one
makes the same mistake over and over again. Also, I agree that it takes many
kinds of people to make the World go round.

Question : Can the meditator be affected by
physical disturbances during nirvikalpa samadhi?
My friend and I disagree on this point.
Ramana Maharshi : Both of you are right. One of
you is referring to kevala and the other to sahaja
samadhi. In both cases the mind is immersed in
the bliss of the Self. In the former, physical
movements may cause disturbance to the meditator,
because the mind has not completely died out.
It is still alive and can, as after deep sleep,
at any moment be active again.

It is compared to a bucket, which, although
completely submerged under water, can be pulled
out by a rope which is still attached to it. In
sahaja, the mind has sunk completely into the
Self, like the bucket which has got drowned in
the depths of the well along with its rope. In
sahaja there is nothing left to be disturbed or
pulled back to the world. One's activities then
resemble that of the child who sucks its mother's
milk in sleep, and is hardly aware of the feeding.

Question : How can one function in the world
in such a state?
Ramana Maharshi : One who accustoms himself
naturally to meditation and enjoys the bliss
of meditation will not lose his samadhi state
whatever external work he does, whatever thoughts
may come to him. That is sahaja nirvikalpa. Sahaja
nirvikalpa is nasa [total destruction of the mind]
whereas kevala nirvikalpa is laya [temporary
abeyance of the mind].

Those who are in the laya samadhi state will
have to bring the mind back under control from
time to time. If the mind is destroyed, as it
is in sahaja samadhi, it will never sprout again.
Whatever is done by such people is just incidental,
they will never slide down from their high state.

Those that are in the kevala nirvikalpa state
are not realized, they are still seekers. Those
who are in the sahaja nirvikalpa state are like
a light in a windless place, or the ocean without
waves; that is, there is no movement in them. They
cannot find anything which is different from
themselves. For those who do not reach that state,
everything appears to be different from themselves.

Question : Is the experience of kevala nirvikalpa
the same as that of sahaja, although one comes down
from it to the relative world?
Ramana Maharshi : There is neither coming down nor
going up - he who goes up and down is not real. In
kevala nirvikalpa there is the mental bucket still
in existence under the water, and it can be pulled
out at any moment. Sahaja is like the river that
has linked up with the ocean from which there is
no return. Why do you ask all these questions? Go
on practicing till you have the experience yourself.

Thanks, Bob.

The red flag of ego (mind's)
presence wil be obvious in
one's attempt to say what
Ramana said, "only better".

It is very comforting that
you let the words of Bhagavan
speak for themselves without
feeling the need to add
"your" elucidation.

A silent namaste,

Jeff



--- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, medit8ionsociety
<no_reply@...> wrote:
>
> Question : Can the meditator be affected by
> physical disturbances during nirvikalpa samadhi?
> My friend and I disagree on this point.
> Ramana Maharshi : Both of you are right. One of
> you is referring to kevala and the other to sahaja
> samadhi. In both cases the mind is immersed in
> the bliss of the Self. In the former, physical
> movements may cause disturbance to the meditator,
> because the mind has not completely died out.
> It is still alive and can, as after deep sleep,
> at any moment be active again.
>
> It is compared to a bucket, which, although
> completely submerged under water, can be pulled
> out by a rope which is still attached to it. In
> sahaja, the mind has sunk completely into the
> Self, like the bucket which has got drowned in
> the depths of the well along with its rope. In
> sahaja there is nothing left to be disturbed or
> pulled back to the world. One's activities then
> resemble that of the child who sucks its mother's
> milk in sleep, and is hardly aware of the feeding.
>
> Question : How can one function in the world
> in such a state?
> Ramana Maharshi : One who accustoms himself
> naturally to meditation and enjoys the bliss
> of meditation will not lose his samadhi state
> whatever external work he does, whatever thoughts
> may come to him. That is sahaja nirvikalpa. Sahaja
> nirvikalpa is nasa [total destruction of the mind]
> whereas kevala nirvikalpa is laya [temporary
> abeyance of the mind].
>
> Those who are in the laya samadhi state will
> have to bring the mind back under control from
> time to time. If the mind is destroyed, as it
> is in sahaja samadhi, it will never sprout again.
> Whatever is done by such people is just incidental,
> they will never slide down from their high state.
>
> Those that are in the kevala nirvikalpa state
> are not realized, they are still seekers. Those
> who are in the sahaja nirvikalpa state are like
> a light in a windless place, or the ocean without
> waves; that is, there is no movement in them. They
> cannot find anything which is different from
> themselves. For those who do not reach that state,
> everything appears to be different from themselves.
>
> Question : Is the experience of kevala nirvikalpa
> the same as that of sahaja, although one comes down
> from it to the relative world?
> Ramana Maharshi : There is neither coming down nor
> going up - he who goes up and down is not real. In
> kevala nirvikalpa there is the mental bucket still
> in existence under the water, and it can be pulled
> out at any moment. Sahaja is like the river that
> has linked up with the ocean from which there is
> no return. Why do you ask all these questions? Go
> on practicing till you have the experience yourself.
>

Yo Papajeff,
Thanks, but I'm all for clarifications of the words
of the Saints. Every religion has a tradition of
expounding on what wisdom has been shared by their
Gods or holiest people. And I certainly feel it's a
"good thing" when someone helps point out a position
that lets us gain greater understanding about such an
esoteric subject as non-duality, or whatever we label
Sri Ramana's thoughts (and non-thoughts). Matter of
fact, you (your Self) do this kind of thing superbly!
Peace and blessings,
Bob

"Papajeff" <jeff@...> wrote:
>
> Thanks, Bob.
>
> The red flag of ego (mind's)
> presence wil be obvious in
> one's attempt to say what
> Ramana said, "only better".
>
> It is very comforting that
> you let the words of Bhagavan
> speak for themselves without
> feeling the need to add
> "your" elucidation.
>
> A silent namaste,
>
> Jeff
>
>
>
> --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, medit8ionsociety
<no_reply@> wrote:
> >
> > Question : Can the meditator be affected by
> > physical disturbances during nirvikalpa samadhi?
> > My friend and I disagree on this point.
> > Ramana Maharshi : Both of you are right. One of
> > you is referring to kevala and the other to sahaja
> > samadhi. In both cases the mind is immersed in
> > the bliss of the Self. In the former, physical
> > movements may cause disturbance to the meditator,
> > because the mind has not completely died out.
> > It is still alive and can, as after deep sleep,
> > at any moment be active again.
> >
> > It is compared to a bucket, which, although
> > completely submerged under water, can be pulled
> > out by a rope which is still attached to it. In
> > sahaja, the mind has sunk completely into the
> > Self, like the bucket which has got drowned in
> > the depths of the well along with its rope. In
> > sahaja there is nothing left to be disturbed or
> > pulled back to the world. One's activities then
> > resemble that of the child who sucks its mother's
> > milk in sleep, and is hardly aware of the feeding.
> >
> > Question : How can one function in the world
> > in such a state?
> > Ramana Maharshi : One who accustoms himself
> > naturally to meditation and enjoys the bliss
> > of meditation will not lose his samadhi state
> > whatever external work he does, whatever thoughts
> > may come to him. That is sahaja nirvikalpa. Sahaja
> > nirvikalpa is nasa [total destruction of the mind]
> > whereas kevala nirvikalpa is laya [temporary
> > abeyance of the mind].
> >
> > Those who are in the laya samadhi state will
> > have to bring the mind back under control from
> > time to time. If the mind is destroyed, as it
> > is in sahaja samadhi, it will never sprout again.
> > Whatever is done by such people is just incidental,
> > they will never slide down from their high state.
> >
> > Those that are in the kevala nirvikalpa state
> > are not realized, they are still seekers. Those
> > who are in the sahaja nirvikalpa state are like
> > a light in a windless place, or the ocean without
> > waves; that is, there is no movement in them. They
> > cannot find anything which is different from
> > themselves. For those who do not reach that state,
> > everything appears to be different from themselves.
> >
> > Question : Is the experience of kevala nirvikalpa
> > the same as that of sahaja, although one comes down
> > from it to the relative world?
> > Ramana Maharshi : There is neither coming down nor
> > going up - he who goes up and down is not real. In
> > kevala nirvikalpa there is the mental bucket still
> > in existence under the water, and it can be pulled
> > out at any moment. Sahaja is like the river that
> > has linked up with the ocean from which there is
> > no return. Why do you ask all these questions? Go
> > on practicing till you have the experience yourself.
> >
>

Mental Power

"The real Yoga is when you rise above the
good and bad. From that level, you see that
both are necessary; then, you can never call
a thing evil, because it's only a shadow. As
long as we feel that something is good, we
must always also accept something bad, until
neutrality comes. These dualities are always
there. There are always both sides, positive
and negative, light and shade. The good and
the absence of good are permitted, just as you
say it's day and it's night. What is it that
becomes the night? Temporarily, the sun is away
or hidden, so you call the absence of daylight
"night." The night is not always there; it is
always the day. The light is there always, only,
temporarily, it gets hidden.

"God bless you. OM Shanti, Shanti, Shanti."

For more by and about Swami Satchidananda:
http://yogaandpeace.org/

We are an integral part
of all of nature and all
of the cosmos. Our "entrance"
into time and space as
a member of the human race
necessitates a socialization
and therefore a sense of
separation and individuation.

What we gain in awareness
and self-consciousness is
offset by what we lose in
integral awareness. As a
matter of fact, it is a
lousy bargain - but one that
somehow seems a necessary
passage or grade level in
this "school" of life.

While the fact of our integrity
within All, our Oneness, is
never lost...our awareness of
It is. And we go through all
sorts of mental Olympics in
an effort to overcome an inner
emptiness and "Know" this
Oneness.

But even with what the world
would call success (on any
and every level)...in the quiet
of our own sense of separation,
we feel the gnaw of something
missing or something lost, or
something not quite "right".

This emptiness will remain
with us our entire lives,
fortunately sprinkled with
moments (sometimes months)
of worldly and genuine joy,
unless we turn (change our
mind - "repent" in dramatic
terms) and face the feeling
of emptiness head-on.

Many, if not most, of us
do turn to face the emptiness
over and over, but turn away
in fear, at a crucial point...an
understandable turning away.

We turn back when the emptiness
beckons from the unknown -
from what has been called
in desperate terms, "the dark
night of the soul."

We turn back when the separate
identity with which we have
become identified and reconciled
as "us", feels threatened
with what feels like death
or extinction.

With meditation we can enjoy
an enhanced sense of quiet
and improved, or at least
prolonged, peace of mind...
and handle situations that
may have been stressful, now
as a practitioner of the
meditation lifestyle,
with greater ease.

And this is the appeal for most
people who come to meditation
class. But on occasion someone
comes who admits to wanting more,
wanting to face the emptiness
and overcome it, and enjoy the
blissful and perfect peace of
mind that awakened teachers
speak of in such glowing (if
not vague)terms. At least,
intellectually or emotionally,
that is what they want to do.

And while there are many, many
models or paradigms for moving
in this direction...they all
lead to the same place: facing
what feels very much like
impending death.

Here it takes great faith in
the authenticity of the teacher
who says, if you are thirsty
and hungry enough - press on,
or it takes a desperation so
intense that we are willing to
risk our life as we know it...
and jump into the emptiness...

to reintegration (or what, to
our consciousness, feels like
reintegration) and a welcome
home into the arms of Love -
One Love, our True Home.

One Love,

Jeff

Myth #4 = Enlightenment
is nothing special.

Recently someone quoted a
teacher who expounded about
how, "Enlightenment is nothing
special." The distinction was
made that if someone feels
and/or talks about being special
because they have been graced
with enlightenment, they are
not enlightened. The distinction
may be accurate enough, because
enlightenment brings a profound
gratitude and humility, but to
say that enlightenment is
nothing special is like...

someone giving a discourse
on oranges who never tasted
an orange - they have only
studied about them and been in
the company of oranges for so
long that they feel qualified
to speak about oranges...

and they conclude that...

oranges have no taste. They
are nothing special. What?!!!!

Enlightenment is beyond special,
beyond awesome, juicier than
the best orange we have ever
tasted, beyond anything
we can think or imagine...

It is incredibly and superbly
special...a peace that passes
understanding, a joy beyond
words, the truth that sets us
free from fear and doubt and
shines a whole new light on
life.


Myth #5

If you're truly enlightened,
there is no one left to experience
the enlightenment.

This is more neo-advaita shuffling,
or what is called the mind screw.

Of course, there is something there
to experience the enlightenment -
the new person that enlightenment
creates, the Self, the One filled
with joy, who now experiences perfect
peace of mind, and who is ecstatic
about the amazing gift that has
been received, and whose heart
now swells with love, kindness
and compassion for everyone -
because the Self and the potential
for awakening to Self is seen in
every other person.

If there were truly no one there
to experience the enlightenment,
there would be no one there to
make such an absurd statement
as Myth #5.

Myth #6

If someone says they are enlightened,
they are not.

With enlightenment comes a compelling
urge to shout it out and share the
good news of its delight. Everyone
who has authentically awakened sees
enlightenment as the destiny of
humankind - and knows that they have
been 'called' to declare it because
of the thunderbolt of insight that
comes with enlightenment.

What do you think Buddha, or Jesus,
or Ramana would say about this myth?

This myth is a warped interpretation
of the statements about the inability
to express enlightenment in words
that will convey its truth.

This cannot be done...anymore than
anyone can convey the taste of an
orange in words. But it does not mean
that enlightenment or oranges have
not been experienced by those who
declare to know them - or that neither
are incredibly sweet.

By their fruits you shall know them.

One Sweet Juicy Special Love,

Jeff

An inner wisdom
That came with
The wind of Spirit
In our first breath
Abides quietly
Directs our paths

At times we listen
Mostly we do not
Ego overrides the
Still small voice
That whispers 'no'
To that bag of Oreos

Quiet awareness
Breath awareness
Heart awareness
Gently brings
Attention back
And we hear it

Go green it says
Have a Granny Smith
Take a walk
Turn to the left
Turn to the right
Pass by those cookies

Each time we heed
The whisper wisdom
We gain great strength
To control the ego
Defeat self sabotage
Achieve our ideal weight

One Healthy Love,

Jeff
http://www.livingatwow.com
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mysticheartmeditation

I lost 40 pounds a few years ago and have kept the weight off. Although I did
not actually meditate about weight loss because there did not seem to be any
emotional component to it, I think being a meditator did help because I was used
to the decipline of proper behavior as directed by meditation. So I could say,
gee am I really hungry or is this eating just a compulsion of my body wanting to
make sure there is enough fat for the next diet.

--- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "Papajeff" <jeff@...> wrote:
>
> An inner wisdom
> That came with
> The wind of Spirit
> In our first breath
> Abides quietly
> Directs our paths
>
> At times we listen
> Mostly we do not
> Ego overrides the
> Still small voice
> That whispers 'no'
> To that bag of Oreos
>
> Quiet awareness
> Breath awareness
> Heart awareness
> Gently brings
> Attention back
> And we hear it
>
> Go green it says
> Have a Granny Smith
> Take a walk
> Turn to the left
> Turn to the right
> Pass by those cookies
>
> Each time we heed
> The whisper wisdom
> We gain great strength
> To control the ego
> Defeat self sabotage
> Achieve our ideal weight
>
> One Healthy Love,
>
> Jeff
> http://www.livingatwow.com
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mysticheartmeditation
>

Faith and Fear

"Fear is not going to help us in any way.
Fear makes the mind lose all its strength.
Remember, even to have fear, you must have
faith in your fear. You have faith in your
fear, and that's why you are afraid. But you
should know that fear is not going to bring
you any benefit. Faith and fear don't go
together. Either you have faith, or you have
fear. You know that you are alive now. Why
don't you enjoy the now, rather than worry
about the future? Enjoy both getting and
losing. So, if you know the ultimate truth,
there's no reason to fear. Don't let that
fear come near you at any time. Learn to live
in the golden present.

"God bless you. OM Shanti, Shanti, Shanti."

For more by and about Swami Satchidananda:
http://yogaandpeace.org/

We all have a predisposition to react either
physically, emotionally, or intellectually.
This makes us unbalanced, habitual, compulsive,
and slave-like in our reactivity. A good
Meditation teacher will be able to advise
us how to recognize which of these characteristics
is our most predominate and suggest ("prescribe")
meditation techniques that help us gain control
over our primary reactivity, and others that
strengthen the other 2 aspects of our nature.
The end result is being well balanced with Self
knowledge and Self control. As an example, let's
say that we are primarily reactive emotionally.
Our meditative task would be to gain control
over our emotional reactivity, and to strengthen
our physical and intellectual awareness and
reactions to the strength level of our emotions.
This will leave us well balanced. So, for example,
the emotionally reactive person, who is trying
to get this reactivity under control, may do well
to do meditation techniques that emphasize
dispassion, while doing intellectual techniques
like pondering the ancient formula of "I am not
my body, I am not my mind, I am not my emotions",
as well as doing physical awareness exercises
such as the Zen tea ceremony. In some traditions,
like the Sufi, or "4th way" of Gurdjieff, it is
only the person who has achieved this balanced,
Self controlled state who is able to act. Until
that point is reached, the teaching is that we
are merely in a robot-like dream state, and cannot
"do" anything. And our life is just one reaction
after another.

Meditation is the methodology that shines the light
of our inner Witness and wakes us up from our dream.

"What is the secret of your serenity?"
Said the Master, "Wholehearted cooperation with the inevitable."

Wholehearted cooperation with the inevitable
is the natural result of enlightenment, rather
than a prescription for awakening. The ego
will not subscribe wholeheartedly in advance.

--- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, WestWindWood
<westwindwood2003@...> wrote:
>
> "Wholehearted cooperation with the inevitable." This is the key to
enlightenment, the just offering the problems up, or also a total letting go and
taking whatever comes within the meditaiton experience.
>
> --- On Sun, 3/7/10, medit8ionsociety <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>
>
> From: medit8ionsociety <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Meditation Society of America] Mullah Nasrudin's Secret
> To: meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Sunday, March 7, 2010, 5:30 AM
>
>
>  
>
>
>
> "What is the secret of your serenity?"
> Said the Master, "Wholehearted cooperation with the inevitable."
>

Very, Very, True!
When a person has not yet experienced their own enlightenment, they must depend
on the guidance of a teacher who understands their propensities. After
enlightenment "when we truly become the devotee of the almighty Lord" the
guidance comes directly from the Lord to the devotee. At that point the duties
of the teacher shift to assuring the devotee that the almighty experience is as
it should be and to keep it up. However; before making the shift, the teacher
here has to carefully quiz the devotee to determine that in fact the devotee has
experienced what Buddhists say is beginners mind, or enlightenment.


--- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, suman sk <sumansk@...> wrote:
>
> Very true!
> But I feel when we truly become the devotee of the almightly Lord, by the
chants or being always an oberver, everything else starts to fall in place.The
balance, peace, love, gratitude and life starts to get sorrounded by these
things.The reactivity converts to observation, the truth starts to get instilled
that I am a pure awareness and not this body.The pure awareness is always
blissful and nothing material ever can touch it.
>  
> so just awnted to share my experiences !!
>  
> PEACE AND LOVE
>  
> Surendra
>
>
>
> --- On Sat, 3/6/10, medit8ionsociety <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>
>
> From: medit8ionsociety <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Meditation Society of America] Becoming Well Balanced
> To: meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Saturday, March 6, 2010, 6:57 AM
>
>
>  
>
>
>
> We all have a predisposition to react either
> physically, emotionally, or intellectually.
> This makes us unbalanced, habitual, compulsive,
> and slave-like in our reactivity. A good
> Meditation teacher will be able to advise
> us how to recognize which of these characteristics
> is our most predominate and suggest ("prescribe" )
> meditation techniques that help us gain control
> over our primary reactivity, and others that
> strengthen the other 2 aspects of our nature.
> The end result is being well balanced with Self
> knowledge and Self control. As an example, let's
> say that we are primarily reactive emotionally.
> Our meditative task would be to gain control
> over our emotional reactivity, and to strengthen
> our physical and intellectual awareness and
> reactions to the strength level of our emotions.
> This will leave us well balanced. So, for example,
> the emotionally reactive person, who is trying
> to get this reactivity under control, may do well
> to do meditation techniques that emphasize
> dispassion, while doing intellectual techniques
> like pondering the ancient formula of "I am not
> my body, I am not my mind, I am not my emotions",
> as well as doing physical awareness exercises
> such as the Zen tea ceremony. In some traditions,
> like the Sufi, or "4th way" of Gurdjieff, it is
> only the person who has achieved this balanced,
> Self controlled state who is able to act. Until
> that point is reached, the teaching is that we
> are merely in a robot-like dream state, and cannot
> "do" anything. And our life is just one reaction
> after another.
>
> Meditation is the methodology that shines the light
> of our inner Witness and wakes us up from our dream.
>

"Where there is sadness, let me bring
joy." That is the sublime, noble prayer of Saint
Francis. When we pray "May not sorrow fall
to the lot of any one," then we should work in
the way indicated by the simple prayer of St.
Francis. "O Lord, where there is sadness, let
me bring joy. Make me an instrument of joy to
the lives of others. Make mean instrument of
removing the sadness of others." Axiomati -
cally it means that if we wish happiness for
others, joy for others, then we have to do
some thing positively to bring joy to others; we
have to also, simultaneously, engage in doing
acts that remove the sorrow of others, lessen
the grief of others, make people less sad.
This is implied in this line from the simple
prayer of St. Francis.
Apart from this, that such prayer is an in -
dication of what we should work, live and act
for, of what our great ancients have placed
before us as an ideal for our life and the living
of it, it also has still an other aspect. By con -
stantly thinking in such a positive manner of
the happiness, welfare and peace of others, it
brings about a change in our nature. Gradu -
ally we become so disposed to act in such a
way, to live in such a way, that we become a
center of good will towards others, a center of
compassion and kindness towards others, a
center of peace for others. The constant rep -
etition of such prayer, the constant dwelling
upon these thoughts, and the constant har -
bouring of these feelings in our heart have a
transforming effect upon our own nature. It
tends to gradually make us grow in this qual -
ity of good will towards all, of ill-will towards
none, of compassion and kindness towards
all, of prayer fully ever wanting to live in order
to bring peace, solace, happiness and comfort
to every one.

Well, I'll be displaying my hand made knives
again at the Valley Forge Gun Show at the
Valley Forge Convention Center this weekend.
Thousands of "gun nuts" will be there to buy every type
weapon that anyone could ever use. I also expect
to be touching base with the many meditators who
often stop by at the show to say hello and chat for
a while. It's pretty interesting to be discussing Non-duality,
higher states of consciousness and techniques for
experiencing them, and other similar esoteric concepts
in the midst of so much "how can we kill or be killed"
energy. Oh well - that's part of why this time to be
incarnated is so unique. Similarly, there will also
be a baseball card show going on that will have Bob Feller,
Carl Ripkin, Jim Palmer and lots of other baseball heroes.
On Sunday, they will also have Eagle players. So I expect
that we'll also see lots of examples of "I gotta have
that-ism", not just from the gun/rifle/knife
collectors, but from the many sports collectors. It's a
"desire causes suffering" display that's a "detachment
is the way to freedom from desire caused suffering"
lesson that's obvious and illuminating.
In any event, if you're in the area, Highest Power
willing, I will be too, so stop in and say "What the
heck is all this about" or whatever else you feel!
BTW the knives can be seen at
http://www.bobroseknives.com
Peace and blessings,
Bob

THE THOUSANDS
From: The Buddha's Way of Virtue, by W.D.C Wagiswara
and K.J. Saunders, [1920]
100. Better than a thousand empty words is
  one pregnant word, which brings the hearer peace.

101. Better than a thousand idle songs is a
single song, which brings the hearer peace.

102. Better it is to chant one verse of the law,
that brings the hearer peace, than to chant a
hundred empty songs.

103. If one were to conquer a thousand thousand
in the battle—he who conquers self is the greatest warrior.

104, 105. Self-conquest is better than other
victories: neither god nor demi-god, neither
Mara nor Brahma, can undo the victory of such
a one, who is self-controlled and always calm.

106. If month by month throughout a hundred years
one were to offer sacrifices costing thousands,
and if for a moment another were to reverence the self-controlled—this is the
better worship.

107. If one for a hundred years tended the
sacred fire in the glade, and another for a
moment reverenced the self-controlled, this
is the better worship.

108. Whatsoever sacrifice or offering a man makes
for a full year in hope of benefits, all is not
worth a quarter of that better offering—reverence
to the upright.

109. In him who is trained in constant courtesy
and reverence to the old, four qualities increase:
length of days, beauty, gladness, and strength.

110. Better than a hundred years of impure and
intemperate existence is a single day of moral,
contemplative life.

111. Better is one day of wise and contemplative
life than a thousand years of folly and intemperance.

112. Better one day of earnest energy than a
hundred years of sloth and lassitude.

113. Better one day of insight into the fleeting
nature of the things of sense, than a hundred
years of blindness to this transiency.

114. Better one day of insight into the deathless
state (Nirvāna), than a hundred years of blindness
to this immortality.

115. Better one day of insight into the Supreme Law,
than a hundred years of blindness to that Law.

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

For the most fortunate
practitioner of meditation,
quiet awareness as a separate
ego is, one day - out of the
blue, eclipsed by a startling
rush of new wisdom that is
beyond words to express.
Then, no separation, simply
pure blissful Quiet Awareness.

What is really beautiful
about this enlightened
Quiet Awareness is that we
become more fully functional
in the world - without the
fear, doubt and limited
self-worth. It is freedom
of the highest order.

"You shall know the truth and
the truth shall set you free."

One Love,

Jeff

When Mullah Nasrudin was in college, he was in a Logic
class where a discussion about whether or not God exists
took place. The professor had the following logic:

"Has anyone in this class heard God?" Nobody spoke.
"Has anyone in this class touched God?" Again, nobody
spoke.
"Has anyone in this class seen God?"
When nobody spoke for the 3rd time, he simply stated,
"Then there is no GOD!"

Nasrudin did not like the sound of this at all, and
asked for permission to speak. The professor granted it,
and the Mullah stood up and asked  the  following
questions of his classmates:

"Has anyone in this class heard our professor's brain?"
Silence.
"Has anyone in this class touched our professor's brain?"
Absolute silence.
"Has anyone in this class seen our professor's brain?"
When nobody in the class dared to speak, Nasrudin
concluded,
"Then, according to our professor's logic,
it must be true  that our professor has no brain!"