Here is my reply, delayed... enjoy! (If your right brain has
solidified by this time... )
> From: v <
Sun Aug 5, 2001 1:06 pm
> Subject: Re: [NDS] Val: What is, is
> hello Gene
> > >v: hello - this issue
reminds me of
> > >acceptance
> > >of the "what is"
> > >where is Paul Cote?
> > gene: Missed
> the acceptance of the "what is" - seems
neccessary to know what it is in
> order to accept itS yada yada - maybe
not - putting the cart before the
> horse might work just as well
-Uh, I got that part...
posted several really great articles on acceptance, which i lost,
alasSThat was the part I did not
> > >v: there is the maya - the illusion,
> >okay - i got that -
> > >then there is the "what is"
> > >and is it by it's nature is it permanent
> > >and
stable and unchanging?
> > gene: It could be argued that 'Maya' is
a permanent Þxture of 'what is'.
> that makes sense - just as negative
space is part of the artistic
> composition - the yin and yang - the 'what
is' and the 'what is not' :-)Yes... all form depends
on emptiness. That is the definition of definition!
"What is, is... what
is not, is not".
Is it true 'then' that we know what is, only by what is
not; or, is
it true that we know what is not, only by what is? Or are both
propositions true, or perhaps false? If a philosopher pees in the
forest, does anyone care?
> > gene: However, 'what is'
is (IMO) that the _human_ is like a tunable radio
> > receiver; what is
received, is what is tuned in; to the human, all
> > other stations are
'conceptual entities', to be 'believed only when
> and so you are saying that the other entities are not
part of the 'what is'
> unless one believes in them?? wild! so - let me
get this - to "tune out"
> another conceptual entity is to make them
unreal to one's "what is"? so now
> we all have individualized -
"designer" if you will - "what is's" (pl.)?NO... I
am not saying that. I am saying the opposite; that 'belief'
is the 'dog in
the manger', usurping the place of reality. I say,
kick the beast out (the
dog), but it hangs on doggedly, drooling
> > gene: You, like others, have _heard of_ these
'exclusive' broadcasts, but
> > somehow lack the equipment or decoding
methods to experience them
> > directly. This whole concept, which
lurks as the background
> > assumption of many people, is of course
> oh wellSI guess we're talkin blinders and earplugs
here thenS?No... again, you have somehow transposed
What is bogus, is the assumption that something must be
in-order-to have 'this awareness'. 'This awareness' is the constant
background; humans obsess with the foreground, applying their own
powers in order to (that phrase again!) fix what is 'wrong'. And
thing, this assumption that something is wrong, and that
good/necessary/do-able, is happening because of an
which is an attitudinal sort of learned
imbibed-from-the-culture signal of tribalness, the
The scent of home, is the group consensus that 'something
and the commitment of every family/tribal member, to proceed
to 'fix' what is wrong, a proud and patriotic mass movement of
pre-programmed automatons, doddering their passionate way to the
of the abyss...
> > gene: There is no penalty or fee due for
360-degree, timeless awareness.
> except for perhaps a strait jacket
and padded cell unless of course one has
> the luxury of residing on a
magniÞcent mountaintop or other idyllic
talking cosmic penalty no doubt ?Try for a moment to
pretend that really, nothing is wrong. How
difficult is that to
If you succeed in breaking through to the space of 'nothing is
wrong', to thus establish handshaking with the background, you will
that the mountain top idyl has come to you.
But this is usually
difficult; one cannot imagine, giving up the one
vital marker which
designates tribal membership. Especially, when the
masses of doddering
automata are following the only leader they know,
who is the one who points
out most vociferously, 'what is... wrong!'.
> > gene: All
that is 'required' is to delete the presets/default settings of
> can you go into this a little bit more?Sure. A common type of car-radio has not only a tuning-knob, but
preset-buttons as well. You can tune to a desired station, and then
the button. Whenever that button is pushed, that station is
Similarly, when your buttons have been preset, all someone
has to do
is push your buttons, and the station which they desire, will
your squirming, throbbing brain! Oh, the humiliation!
'presets' are embodied in us, as values; values are determiners
of 'what is
good and what is bad'.
One should know, the subtle differences between
'good and bad' 'right
and wrong' 'correct and incorrect', as categories of
dualities. The (unconscious) repetitive use of these
words/phrases/values makes the dog take residence in the manger, and
reality soon becomes a stranger.
> > >v: I connote in
meditation the other levels,
> > >but still not to that level where
there is a
> > >"what is" which is immutable
> > >and
> > >I only get the visions and the movies.
> > gene: As well you should!
> > 'Other
levels' appear to "us" as analogical symbols; it is possible,
through understanding of that universal symbolism, to navigate*
around our speciÞc blockages/biases/preferences, into what is a
richer and quite evidently alive universe.
> yes - I grok what you say
here! The universe is alive - and will present the
> other levels to one's
conscious "what is" according to the preset
expectations/beliefs/preferences/biases, etc etc.!
> such as in
> and STILL! - how utterly bafþing sometimes - the
movies - the symbolism,
> then. Rather like dreams. More often than not, I
see myself more like a
> Lipton þow-thru teabag, or an antennae picking up
other people's thoughts
> and pictures and movies - such little sense to
me do they make!Have you seen the (sci-fi B-movie)
Only the drug could free the mutant human, from the
barrage of psychic artifacts of the Being-presence of
> > gene: Attachment prevents this from occurring,
citing the need to 'leave
> > behind' the criteria for deciding what is
good and what is bad. This
> > 'armor' of differentiation is perhaps
the most difÞcult thing to
> > deal with.
> okay now - I
am not judgemental either way of what I can now construe along
> with you
as deep universal archetypical symbols, but am very curious how to
more selective of the tuning of the broadcasts! The reception -- what is
picked up.First, give up any idea of immediate gain
Experiment with simply not listening to what you hear, or
you see. Try to avoid forming attachment to any perception;
flow to see you as transparent, as nothing, with no snags or hooks
places to acquire anything at all.
Allow the ever-present
background to show, through what you have been
trained to see; allow the
foreground to become transparent, as
nothing, and thus to see what is
beyond, by making nothing.
As form arises in emptiness, emptiness is the
mother of form; form is
the son of the womb of emptiness, penetrating, yet
embraced in the
most gentle of all grips, so subtle, we do not even
recognize that it
is 'there', in our constant attempt to purloin the fruits
That is why I say, to avoid attachment to any outcome,
ongoing experiments. Give up any thought of fixing, finding a
or of eventually having someone approve of your 'works'. It is the
background which is doing all the 'work' anyway; how can I take
But this is sounding like 'advice', eh? Not my intention...
> > gene: (*actually a form of
conversation consisting of learning a very old
> > language and then
uploading the navigational coordinates into your
> > navigational
> hmmm - lost me here. could you go into this a
little more?A proper translation would take hours,
and be very complicated.
Suffice it to say, that omni and uni are superior
coordinates, for a
formless Being. Those are our 'factory default settings'.
to the chase, as the saying goes.
> > >v:
to me - the nature of everything
> > >is change - and even
> >random chaos, and
> > >I have trained myself to
> >operate according to these
> > >principles, aka "living by
> > gene: Not a bad ad-lib, but it is an
adaptation. To leave behind an
> > adaptation is not hard, if the
evaluation of the situation which
> > provoked the speciÞc adaptation
can be re-framed. This is done in an
> > operation which uses memory in
conjunction with the desire to delete
> > value-assessments which were
originally imprinted into the
> > memory-Þle. It is the layered memory
Þles en masse, which must be
> > bulk-rewritten to delete
value-assessments, to make present freedom
> > an immediate reality.
For this reason, the usual aim is to Þnd the
> > earliest memory, to
which value was written, and to then neutralize
> > that value-Þeld.
All 'downstream' (from past to present) memories
> > will then be
auto-purged of value-assessments.
> alrighty - again I need help
here! while I follow you and agree with your
> logic - the original
imprinting being one that the "what is" is akin to
> random chaos - since
there is no other freeing concept with which to replace
> it, where does
it go from there??? ;-)Freedom is the original
default, thus, no work is required to attain
it, unless there is baggage to
be searched, suspects to be rounded
up, and contraband to be confiscated at
the border of awareness.
> > gene: The problem with this,
(which has been widely publicized here) is
> > that the outcome of such
an operation is the essential extinction of
> > the personality known
as 'you'. The container and the memories will
> > remain intact, but
there will be no motive for action or thought,
> > until body-criteria
are exerted by physiologic need, once the
> > value-Þeld of memory has
> oh gee - i see. so this process is one in which
one can purge oneself of
> previous experiential data in a more 'down to
earth' form than what is the
> "what is" - and I've learned it's nature is
change akin to random chaos, is
> this correct?From my POV, there is no 'random chaos' at all. That is a pet
of the tribal sorcerer; pay it no mind.
> Like -
i.e. - someone is afraid of men because of being raped and beaten
on by the father, one can go back and purge the memory and replace it
with neutral energy. (?)Yes, that can be done. I
would prefer to use a less strong example,
such as the fear of bees. That
can be understood. But yes, it can be
done. There are perceivable orders of
magnitude, of impact and of
> Is this done in
conjunction with psychological therapy, or is it possible
> for an
individual to reprogram their consciousness using the extremes of
and internal reprogramming alone?My best answer to
this very important question:
Memory... is retained on the basis of
association... of one thing
with another thing.
If the bond of that
association is of the nature of VALUE, the glue
which is holding the
personality together will become liquid or even
gasify, if basic values are
changed. Memory will be reindexed on
another basis. The most basic
assumptions of a person are thrown
over, in the event of a radical change of
Basically, every event (remembered or not) is tagged with value.
value is entered in the 'value-field' of the memory file. In this
operation, value is the equivalent _of meaning_. So every event 'has
a value which is known' and really, what is known is the 'meaning of
As an example, 'Good' means 'I want it' and bad means 'take it
away from me'.
Whenever a current event (in the now) is associated with a
the experience is of the already-entered value which is the
of the past event. In this way, do people succeed in living in the
past, while being alive in the present.
values, form the basis of our many
tastes, preferences, and criteria for
judgement. People generally do
not wish to purge ALL VALUES, only the ones
which obviously bring
grief. But in our line of work, all values are seen as
foreign to the
field of consciousness.
On the other hand, the values
of the organism (the so-called
'body-mind complex') are built-in, and serve
to protect us from
dangerous levels of damage. Pain, hot and cold,
emanate from the survival-center of the body, and should not
interrupted without good reason.
When the values of the _identity_
(the acquired personality) come
into direct conflict with the values of the
body, we are presented
with the opportunity to observe just how
'psychosomatic illness' is
> and - what's with
the extinction of the personality known as "you"? could
> you please go
into that a little more? :-)
> hum de dum - questions,
questions!'You' are (in the context of this
discussion) a collection of
memories, called a personality, persona, or
Because 'you' are essentially a collection of memories; without
memory, there is no you.
If on the other hand, your memories can be
selectively edited (to
modify the entries in the value-field of significant
will result in a 'change of personality'.
see this as it occurs in the slide into cynicism which
lifetime of living in the combat-zone of duality; we
see it as a bad thing,
when the personality of a loved one sours.
But it also can occur the
other way, causing a revolution within the
person, opening the realm of
possibility, and this is generally seen
as a good thing. It is not uncommon
to hear 'I am a different person
now', when memories have been reframed,
when fear and the expectation
of constant re-injury and victimhood have been
> > v:>please tell me!
> > >IS
THERE some nice stable
> > >"what is" behind the seeming
> >random chaos and
> > >constant change that
>one can aspire to and
> > >eventually relax into?
> > gene: Yes, in a manner of speaking.
Chaos isS the detectable Þeld of what remains of order, similar to
a mud-puddle being the detectable remains of a rainstorm.
> FormS is mutable, always. What is unchanging, is the space in which
> form changes. All change will eventually deteriorate into chaos;
> > organization will eventually decay into 'random particles'.
> > unchanging is the stage upon which this takes place, which
> > emptiness, space, or most relevantly, awareness. All
things occur in
> > space (awareness).
> ah soSare we
talking black holes, or hyper space or some advanced physics
> term which
requires us to twist our brains into squishy little balls in
> order to
compute?? ;-)No. Right now, there is a space between
your eyes and the screen of
the computer. It is that very space. And that
space is identical with
all space; it is in that space, that all things take
> > v: >you know i am
> > >just seeking attention!
> > >I have had a past
> > >an eminent court musician
> > >if i could i
would for certes
> > >serenade you
> > >and i am certain
that i have
> > >also been the court fool.
> > >so maybe
it is lucky i am here
> > >to ask such foolish questions.
> > gene: You fool! Everyone here knows the answers!
> > "Neurotics have problems; psychotics have answers".
> > "You have to recognize that every out-front maneuver
> > make is going to be lonely. But if you feel entirely
> comfortable, then you are not far enough ahead to do any
> > good.
That warm sense of everything going well is usually
> > the body
temperature at the center of the herd." -John
> > Masters
LOL! Thanx! *slap slap!* I needed that! :-)My
> > v: >Today I understood that
> >one must accept the "what is"
> > >of "what is" instead of
> > >to change
> > >it 's nature -
> > gene: Yes, andS can you accept that you are overtly
or subtly trying to
> > change 'what is', and that, itself is thus
'what is'? THAT is the
> > actual question! Bwahahaha!
the changing or not changing of "what is" is what is "what is"
is???Yup. Simple, eh?
> ouch! my
right temporal lobe is twitching!Perhaps you can
learn to enjoy that.
> > v: >But, what is the nature of
> > >*beyond* what we are
> > >capable of accepting
> > gene: Ultimately, it is self-acceptanceS the
puny phrase, 'accepting
> > other as self' can lead toS
> S MahaMudraS letting the entire Living Universe have sex with
you, all at once, and the discipline of staying openS
> > continuallyS
(Caution: May lead to Photonic Orgasm!)
> but but but S what about
the children??? ;-)That is the question, is it
> > v: >Is there the immutable and
>unchanging "what is" back beyond
> > >the horizon awaiting
> > >somewhere?
> > gene: Yes.
> It is called 'you' if you know yourself as 'self', as self is known
> as is 'all that is', and is 'what is'. Even the so-called 'sense of
> separation' is a 'sacred aspect' of self-as-what-is. Devotion is
> > continual celebration of this awareness.
now - here's the Þfty thousand dollar question!Oh,
boy. Check, money order, or cash?
> why is our "self" if we are
"what is" sacred "all that is" and so on -
> why are we trapped inside
these puny arse leetle mortal bodies with
> leetle mortal brains, and
leetle mortal pinhead consciousnesses which we
> must spend lifetimes
seeking to evade and/or escape???
> what's the point?The point is to experience ALL of that, in passing, while learning
focus on the Big Picture. You do not pass 'GO' or collect $200, until
you let go. Then you can see and say, "I am the Big
> i mean, the *higher intelligence* seems really
cruel to do this to us!Yes, this is a common
complaint. The key to understanding is the word
'seems'. Seems like... a
good or a bad thing. Seems like... something
I remember, some association
from memory, called cruelty, injustice,
etc. And to whom, I ask, is this
seeming? Why, to an identity made of
memories, all of which have value-field
entries which prejudice
> > >or is it
> > >oh please tell me do
> > >if you
understand this question?
> > >all my best,
> > Enjoy yourself!
> > ==Gene
> aaarg, my right brain!!!
awake only)It is a process.
In Nirvikalpa Samadhi, one is in deep sleep and yet fully awake. Have
read my post on The Deep Awake? Ramana Maharshi has addressed these
clearly. Intellect can only go up to a