Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Sunday, September 29, 2002

Expand Messages
  • Gloria Lee
    . . . posted by John Metzger at HarshaSatsangh Highlights #1212 Sunday, September 29, 2002 Editor: Gloria Lee Home http://nonduality.com/hlhome.htm MACE
    Message 1 of 1 , Oct 1 6:52 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      posted by John Metzger at HarshaSatsangh
      Highlights #1212
      Sunday, September 29, 2002
      Editor: Gloria Lee

              Polecat Polemetry

         Being ugly, but not too ugly
             discourages those intent on breeding.
             Being foolish, but not too foolish
             discourages those seeking wisdom.
             Being dishonest, but not too dishonest
             discourages those that might consider you
             more than a fraud.
             Being inept, but not too inept,
             discourages those who might think
             that you are skillful.
             "If you want the bed to yourself
             stop bathing."
             Thus effectively providing the peace and
             isolation necessary for practice.
             That is, until you start glowing,
             then all bets are off.



      Beyond the "I am" - Nisargadatta

      Just look away from all that happens in your mind and bring it to
      the  feeling "I am". The "I am" is not a direction. It is the negation
      of all  direction. Ultimately even the "I am" will have to go, for
      you need not  keep on asserting what is obvious. Bringing the
      mind to the feeling "I am"  merely helps in turning the mind away
      from everything else. When the  mind is kept away from its
      preoccupations, it becomes quiet. If you do not  disturb this quiet
      and stay in it, you find that it is permeated with a light  and a love
      you have never known; and yet you recognize it at one as  your
      own nature. Once you have passed through this experience, you 
      will never be the same man again; the unruly mind may break its
      peace  and obliterate its vision; but it is bound to return, provided
      the effort is  sustained; until the day when all bonds are broken,
      delusions and  attachments end, and life becomes supremely
      concentrated in the present. 

      Realization is but the opposite of ignorance. To take the world as
      real and  one's self as unreal is ignorance, the cause of sorrow. To
      know the self as  the only reality and all else as temporal and
      transient is freedom, peace  and joy. It is all very simple. Instead
      of seeing things as imagined, learn to  see them as they are.
      When you can see everything as it is, you will also see yourself
      as you are. It is like cleansing a mirror. The same mirror that 
      shows you the world as it is, will also show you your own face.
      The  thought "I am" is the polishing cloth. Use it. 

      ~Sri Nisargadattaji Maharaj 


      Sufi_Poetry: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Sufi_Poetry


      when you are fragmented and separated
      the world is fragmented and separated

      when you are whole
      the world is whole

      beyond the
      grasp of the senses
      there is Wholeness

      in the Wholeness there is a rhythm
      coming and going
      living and dying
      everything has a reason
      in this rhythm of

      when you are divided
      the reasons are veiled
      when you whole
      the reasons are apparent

      before setting out to
      fix the world
      take a look at yourself

      when you are whole,
      the world is whole.

      (Wahiduddin - "Resurrection" - mystical poems of
       longing, surrender and joy)


      "It is therefore a violence against  nature to attempt to stop the
      mind or body functions." ~Jean Klein

      "Spiritual people can be some of the most violent people you 
      will ever meet. Mostly, they are violent to themselves. They 
      violently try to control their minds, their emotions, and their 
      bodies. They become upset with themselves and beat themselves
      up for  not rising up to the conditioned mind's idea of what it
      believes  enlightenment to be. No one ever became free through
      such violence.  Why is it that so few people are truly free?
      Because they try to  conform to ideas, concepts, and beliefs in
      their heads. They try to  concentrate their way to heaven. But
      Freedom is about the natural  state, the spontaneous and
      un-self-conscious expression of beingness.  If you want to find it,
      see that the very idea of  "a someone who is in control" is a
      concept created by the mind.  Take one step backward into the

      ~ Adyashanti



      Abiding and Depression

      Quite unexpectedly, I received an invitation
      to participate in a conference call with Dr.
      David Hawkins (author of Power vs Force)
      on Saturday.

      I had no expectations when dialing into that
      call.  It was more of a sense of it simply being
      an experience.....something there for me to do.

      I don't know that I could count how many
      shocks this body-mind experienced in the
      space of that one hour. 

      My first impression of him was lukewarm
      at best.  I was struck at first at what seemed
      to be a real lack of enthusiasm in him for speaking
      with us.  :-)    And then I was struck by
      the fact that he didn't come across as
      particularly dynamic (compared to an
      Osho or Sandeep.....those I've gravitated
      towards in the past).

      But man, oh man, did his words speak
      right to the core.  Such a series of
      little shocks..... one after another all in a
      space of an hour.

      For some reason I can't remember
      specifically what he said.....only that
      what he said throughout the call was
      experienced by me as being hit "right
      on target".....striking so many chords
      all at once.

      Right now I only recall the fallout:    a series of
      "ah haa's" happening... one after another....

      being left with a sense of feeling totally opened....
      exposed.....and feeling really, really
      ok with it all.....albeit feeling rather muted
      by it all.

      So many echoes remain from that call,
      not the least of which is the sense of
      wonder for Life.


      The sense of unbalance remains - in being stuck
      in the 'downs'.  What's different is a sense of
      feeling way ok in admitting that.
      Funny, I didn't know until after our talk
      that Dr Hawkins was an MD, and not PhD....
      and that his specialty before becoming
      well known as an author  was psychiatry....
      having specialized for a time in SSRI's
      and brain chemistry.
      That's the wonder of Life I was referring
      to!    The way it perfectly orchestrated
      our connection at that very moment.   :-)
      And that he could speak to me on
      so many different levels at once really
      knocked me out.



             roger isaacs" wrote:
             " What's the relationship between nothing and everything?"

      Everything requires no-thing to be,
        but no-thing doesn't require everything,
        because it is neither being nor nonbeing.

      Everything is no-thing, but understood as
        if something existing in relation, as

      Everything is relationship, no-thing
        is not in relationship.

      There is only relationship between
        the idea of nothing and the idea of everything.

      No-thing is not in relationship to anything,
        everything, something, nor the idea of nothing.

      -- Dan



      THIS we have now
      is not imagination

      This is not grief or joy

      not a judging state,
      or an elation,
      or sadness.

      Those come and go


      It's dawn my friend
      here in the splendor of coral
      inside the Friend, in simple truth
      of what Hallaj said

      What else do human beings want?

      when grapes turn to wine
      they are wanting
      when the nightsky pours by
      its really a crowd of beggars
      and they all want some of

      that we are now
      created body , cell by cell, like bees building a honeycomb

      the human body and the universe grew
      from THIS

      not THIS  from the universe and the human body.


      translation by coleman barks


      Re: Why Jung did not meet Ramana


      Today I went to a football match.
      Above the players
      in the sunshine
      I saw the silver thread
      of a spider,
      floating in the air
      attached to nothing.
      With regards to his interest in syncronicity it was probably a pity
      Jung did not meet Ramana.
      Two days ago I wrote this sentence as a reply to this thread, as I
      thought about Jung and his patient's experience with a beetle
      making him discover syncronicity.
      I did not continue on this line of thought, but went for a walk in
      the forest instead. I found something I have never seen before. I
      put the picture at the bottom of the page (only for the very
      interested!) I actually had to use a stick to see if there were
      beetles inside as well. It is something coming out of an animal
      just crazy about beetles. I dont know what this is supposed to tell
      me about his theory, or rebirth : )
      The most famous example he gives is that of the golden scarab.
      As a patient detailed her dream of an unusual image, a golden
      scarab, there was a tapping at the window. Jung opened the
      window and a rose chafer, or Cetonia aureate, flew in, the beetle
      which could be said to be the closest to the golden scarab,
      Egyptian symbol of rebirth. The patient, needless to say, made
      great progress with her problem of excessive rationality.
      In Jungs model of syncronicity , this is the first of his two
      fundametal types.
      One in which the compensatory activity of the archetype is 
      experienced both inwardly and outwardly. [the event seems to
      emerge  from the subconscious with access to absolute
      knowledge, which  cannot be consciously known] 





      Melody wrote: My sense is, Roger, that you seem to already
      know the answers to the  questions you just asked. 

      The question "what is the relationship between nothing and everything"
      (or whatever it was) came up in me regarding someone's post on the Paul
      Brunton email list:

      "Psychologically the void trance is deeper than the 
      world-knowing insight, but metaphysically it is not.
      For in both cases one and the same Reality is seen." (PB) 

      After holding that for a day or so it occurred to me "'Nothing' which
      excludes 'everything' is duality". Although I might hold that to see if
      it evaporates and reveals something else... or perhaps nothing! This may
      only be true on some level, it might only be another perspective... and
      it may not even be an interesting question at all.

      I'm not sure what you are proposing: On raising a question one should
      not participate in further discussion? This the standard to which you
      wish to be held?

      If you say you don't like the way I express myself... well, that's open
      for discussion too, I'm not sure I'm always comfortable with my
      expression either. It's natural for me to challenge others when I feel
      "NOT THIS!"... having done so here I suppose it's inevitable to be on
      the receiving side. But in this case your accusation, your "sense", that
      I am intentionally manipulating the conversation is false.

      You imply my answer is the correct one and I certainly wouldn't make
      that claim.

      Soon I will finish my studies at the Festus Hagan (character from the
      old Gunsmoke TV series) school of English grammar. The arrival of this
      achievement may herald improvement in my expression!

      These comments are like passing clouds in the sky which have no more
      substantive weight. Hey, it's a fall afternoon and the sun is out! A
      walk in the park beckons!!! Maybe later some Mexican food with a dark




      Hi Roger,

      It seems you and I are talking about two
      different things.   When I responded earlier
      today to the thought,

       "Is your premise also your conclusion?"

      that was all I was responding to.  Not to
      the full thread of discussions these past
      few days.   (I tried to make that clear by
      only including that one sentence in my
      response.   Sorry if it was misleading to


    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.