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

Highlights Tuesday October 5

Expand Messages
  • andrew macnab
    Petros quotes Nisargadatta: When I recognize that I am nothing, that is wisdom; when I recognize that I am everything, that is love. Between these two points
    Message 1 of 1 , Oct 6, 1999
    • 0 Attachment
      Petros quotes Nisargadatta:

      "When I recognize that I am nothing, that is wisdom; when I recognize
      that I am everything, that is love. Between these two points I live my


      Some people get lost without a map and compass. Some are homing pigeons
      like Dan. Me, I've been known to drive right past the turn to my own
      house because I am daydreaming.


      I once had a girlfriend: everything about her was deep
      mystery. When she poured cream in her coffee, it stayed

      lou Monte wrote:

      friends, i'm the lou that greg goode mentioned and i am hosting a
      gathering at my home on long island on sunday, october 17 from 10am-4pm.
      we do several of the douglas harding experiments which help in the
      discovery of who we really are. it is informal,free and a nice lunch
      will be provided. if you are in the area and would like to attend or
      would like more information, please feel free to contact me at
      loumonte@.... best wishes, lou

      Rainbo and Dan:

      Rainbo (quoting DL):
      "It is in dependence upon sentient beings that one first generates this
      altruistic aspiration to highest enlightenment,

      Highest enlightenment already is the case, and is independent of
      anything - certainly of one's perceived dependence on sentient beings
      or one's altruistic aspiration - - *nonetheless*,the aspiration and
      the enlightenment are not separable from each other - - one's dependence
      sentient beings and enlightenment are not separable...

      Highest enlightenment is already the case for whom? Dalai Lama?

      Highest enlightenment is "light" itself - it is already the case -
      it already "lights" itself - there is no one "for whom" it is the case -
      it is always already the "only" case -- ask not for whom the light
      lights - it lights for thee..

      Independence is a western myth really. A really old and very
      pervasive myth, but nonetheless a myth.

      That which has no other has no dependence - there is nothing outside
      of it on which it could depend - the "myth" is when the "relative self"
      or the "relative mind" tries to act as an independent agent. This
      myth seems to me to be part of the basis for the "aspiration" which
      the DL discussed. Feeling encumbered by dependencies and conditions,
      the desire to be independent leads to awareness of confinement and an
      aspiration to freedom - seeing that all already is free is the only
      fullfillment of this aspiration - so aspiration is fulfilled in

      Dalai Lama:
      and it is in relation to
      sentient beings that one practices the deeds of the path in order to
      achieve enlightenment.

      While being aware there is no path, nothing to achieve, and no sentient
      beings that need rescuing - following simply "aspiration" as it becomes

      There is no path? There are a zillion paths.

      The pathless path is the only One which doesn't lead anywhere -
      therefore the other paths are to be released --

      "nothing to achieve" there is always more ... past the mystic
      experience, past the visions, past the stillpoint, always more

      All this endless "becoming something more" - always the hidden
      comparison between "what was" "what is" and "what will be" only dropping
      all this will bring "nothing to achieve" - peace - the moment that is
      beginningless and endless - that contains all evolutions and devolutions
      while itself not evolving or devolving

      To say "there is no suffering, I"ll have a glass of champagne" (you did
      not say this) is, I cannot think of a nice to phrase it. Let's see,
      when sentient beings much more evolved than I hold a
      dying child, they suffer.

      Famous saying of Herbie (a spokesperson for sentient beings
      everywhere), "when drinking champagne - enjoy, when holding
      a dying child - weep" (Herbie weeps, but he doesn't suffer :-) ))

      To say there is no suffering is to say I have no emotions,

      Only if taken merely intellectually is what you say true. If taken
      "whole" then the reality of "no suffering" is the greatest hope for
      "those who suffer" - and the "no suffering" reality, in my opinion,
      naturally expresses as compassion, acceptance, hope, openness and
      empathy when encountering "one who experiences suffering" - this is
      the most helpful help - when there is "no one who is suffering" such
      help doesn't have to get caught in anxiety, desires to "fix the other,"
      "be the best helper," or "fix the world."

      Dalai Lama upon leaving Tibet collapsed from the visions of pain
      he saw around him. To my knowledge he is the most advanced soul alive
      in the world today. So, this list has people more advanced?

      I'm not claiming to be advanced, and I'm not claiming there's
      anything wrong with emotions, or with someone collapsing from their
      vision, or gastritis, or anything. From my perspective, I don't see any
      special value in making claims about who is the most advanced soul alive
      (by the way, why do you rule out the Pope? Indeed, why rule out anyone?
      What criteria are you using? How many have been surveyed? Does your
      survey include disincarnate beings?) Further, and more seriously - what
      separates the "soul" of the Dalai Lama from the "soul" of Rainbo, or
      Dan, or anyone? Is "That Which Shines" divided into pieces, with one
      piece "more advanced" than another piece of it??

      Do tell me about your ability to heal others, I am listening.

      There is One healer. The same One who destroys. And this is also
      the One who is being healed and destroyed. Therefore, creation,
      destruction, healing, and decay are all transitory phenomenal
      perceptions/descriptions. The "deepest reality" of the situation of
      birth/death, healing/decay is the Shining mentioned before - and this
      Shining isn't born, created, destroyed, or healed.

      Dan, thank you for the counterpoint, but if you observe a quantum wave,
      your observation upon it, will itself change the measurement of the
      wave, whether it is at that moment a particle or a wave. Therefore
      "there are no objects of observation," makes no sense to me.

      What is, is. Making sense of it is something the relative mind will
      never do. Quantum particles and waves are images we use to "make sense"
      of It. It in itself isn't contained by our images. "No objects of
      observation" is the observation when there is "Itself" alone. This is
      already always the case. We don't need to make it happen, or make it
      make sense. It's when we don't feel a need to add any meaning to "what
      is" that It appears to Itself through us, so to speak, as "all that is."

      I had enough kundalini fire yesterday to dispel any myths i held
      about myself to be at peace and awake and enlightened.

      Glad to hear it - still smiling here. *M*M - Mercy M'lady and L*L*L*
      to you too...

      ~ Rainbo ~

      I grew up with a great-uncle who was the Devil's Advocate to several
      Popes, so, I do not "rule out" the Pope, nor anyone. A sweet story to
      share:.. There was a girl in Germany who claimed to have "the stigmata"
      (the wounds of Christ) my uncle, James, was sent, by the then current
      Pople, to observe the veracity of this claim (the Devil's Advocate's
      qualifications normally include humility (they are normally Franciscans
      who have taken vows of poverty, over a dozen languages and multiple
      Ph.D.'s). He flew from Rome to Germany, took off his fancy Roman
      vestments, put on an old monk's cowl, rubbed dirt in his face and hair
      and went to beg bread from her. She answered him at the gate to her
      home and said, "go away old man, I am awaiting an important dignitary
      from Rome." (Which, was of course, was he.)

      He flew back to Rome, and responded, "there is no saint living there."

      I agree, there is nothing to separate the Souls of ourselves from
      others, and it is this which is the unification of self with Mind, this
      unification we make to Soul.

      Judi posted a poem from Hafiz:

      All day long
      the earth shouts
      "Gee, thanks."

      Such an exuberant gee,
      It starts throwing

      As if God were passing by in a parade encouraging
      Rowdy behavior
      By looking so beautiful -
      That a whole avalanche of mania swoops in!

      I like this idea of throwing things at God,
      And especially - His making us rowdy!

      Thus, as soon as Hafiz is out of bed
      I start stuffing large sacks
      With old shoes, cucumbers

      For the upcoming

      Free-for-all -
      And who knows
      What else.

      ****** Hafiz

      Jerry posts more from
      The Pathway of Nonduality
      by Raphael:

      I'd like to include some entries from The Encylopedia of
      Eastern Philosophy and Religion, that might be helpful,
      before getting into the chapter.

      Darsana: a name for the six doctrines that form the six
      schools of orthdox Hindu philosophy.... All six doctrines
      have the same goal: to liberate the soul from the round of
      births and deaths and to bring about union with God or the
      Absolute. They are all represented in the Bhagavad-Gita.

      Gaudapada: a profound Advaitin. He became well known through
      his commentary (karika) on the Mandukya Upanishad.

      Samkhya: one of the six ... darsanas. Founded by Kapila, it
      teaches that the universe arises through the union of
      prakriti (nature) with purusha (consciousness). According to
      Samkhya, there are as many souls and units of consciousness
      (purushas) as there are living beings.

      The Pathway of Nonduality

      by Raphael

      Chapter 3

      Ajativada and Asparsavada

      Q. In the Mandukyakarika of Gaudapada, Ajativada and
      Asparsavada are spoken of. But what are Ajativada and

      A. In order to understand this metaphysical vision it is
      necessary first of all to comprehend the philosophical
      attitude of the Vedanta in general.

      In the Hindu tradition, connected to the Vedas, there are
      six darsanas which, unlike the Western kind of philosophical
      systems (being the result of mere individual speculations of
      single philosphers using the manas-mind), represent 'points
      of view', 'visions' or 'perspectives' regarding Vedic

      It must also be kept in mind that in the East, philosophy
      and religion -- in the purest sense -- are united;
      philosophy is a 'way of being', it is a consciential and not
      a simple mental attitude. In other words, philosophy implies
      realization: to know is to be. Therefore, when we speak of
      philosophy and metaphysics we intend them in their purest
      traditional sense.

      We could also speak of realizative philosophy and
      metaphysics; those of Pythagoras, Plato, Plotinus, for
      example, are realizative philosophies because they involve
      the very consciousness of the being, not merely its mind as
      a simple discoursive factor.

      To grasp the Real, the darsanas, being points of view, start
      from certain perspectives that may be more or less complete,
      inclusive and universal. Thus, for example, the
      Samkhyadarsana (samkhya means 'numeration') starts from the
      empirical outlook rather than from the metaphysical one; it
      counts all the 'modifications' that substance undergoes from
      the primordial matter (prakrti) -- under the impulse of
      purusa -- to gross physical matter.

      Without any doubt this is a valid point of view which
      considers becoming rather than Being. But, we must point
      out, it is not a materialistic darsana, because the aim of
      the Samkhya is to free purusa from the modifications of
      prakrti. Purusa and prakrti correspond in an approximate
      manner to essence and substance, or to spirit and matter, in
      the Western sense.

      We may say, however, that it is a dualistic point of view in
      that it presents the two poles, purusa and prakrti, as
      co-eternal. This does not mean that it opposes monism; only
      that Kapila, codifier of the Samkhya, begins his treatise on
      the One when it is already differentiated or polarized. For
      example, we can study dense physical matter from the
      molecular, atomic or sub-atomic point of view. It is obvious
      that, according to the branch of studies, the point of view
      changes, although there is no contradiction between one
      field and the others.

      If, therefore, we grasp the fact that the darsanas are
      'points of view', we realize that the various authors,
      codifiers of the darsanas, 'saw' Reality from different
      consciential viewpoints which are the states of
      consciousness reached by them, the positions realized by
      them. Gaudapada -- to use the analogy mentioned before --
      goes beyond the substantial texture, beyond the molecular
      condition, beyond the atomic state, to touch the state of
      elementary essence, beyond all manifested factors.

      It is obvious, therefore, that Gaudapada (codifier of
      Ajativada) and Kapila (codifier of the Samkhyavada),
      starting from different standpoints, arrive at different
      conclusions which are not opposed or excluding each other.
      We should underline, however, that the molecular point of
      view, compared with the elementary one, is characterized by
      its relativity and non-absoluteness. The molecules are born,
      they develop and disappear, while the elementary state
      subsists. And indeed, the molecules dissolve into the
      elementary state because they are non-absolute,
      non-constant. The mass (body-compound) dissolves into
      energy. In this perspective, and transposing the whole on to
      a metaphysical level, Ajativada presents the characteristic
      of absoluteness and universality as compered with
      Samkhyavada which, however, valid, nonetheless reductive.

      Q. Did Gaudapada 'see' Reality in its ultimate

      A. Yes. Gaudapada, by adopting the perspective of the
      Absolute as such, or of the pure Being (Advaita) was able to
      say, rightly, that in It there is no birth or generation or
      modification. Pure Being was never born, therefore it cannot
      die or cease to be. And if it was not born there can be no
      real manifestation. If the Absolute Being cannot transform
      Itself or become multiple then, Gaudapada asks, what is it
      that we see? This is the admirable metaphysical or Advaita
      perspective of Gaudpada's Ajativada.

      The atom on the gross-physical level is the first
      determination from which the various physical compounds
      arise, but beyond the atom there is no body-form, there is
      only 'formless' energy; in other words, there is no
      manifestation as we know it. Gaudapada, by going on to the
      metaphysical level, went beyond the first
      Determination-Being from which the formal universes arise,
      but beyond the first Determination there is no universe, no
      form, no compound, either atomic or molecular. We can say
      that beyond the first Determination there is the
      non-qualified (nirguna), non-caused state.

      The Ajativada, seen within the perspective of the manifest
      -- and the manifest includes the gross-physical, the subtle
      and the causal-germinal states -- might seem a logical
      absurdity and a pragmatic impossibility, but this is
      understandable. The identification and assimilation with one
      consciential state excludes the comprehension of another
      state. If the individual, for example, identifies with the
      formal becoming (dualism in general), he will never be able
      to understand a point of view that goes beyond duality. If
      the individual identifies with his physical body
      (substance), he will never be able to understand himself in
      terms of pure Being that is never born, never grows and is
      never caused.

      A metaphysical 'Vision' implies going beyond the
      space-time-cause perspective; space, time and cause are
      determinations inherent in form, in compounds, in phenomena.
      The more the consciousness identifies with the formal
      aspect, the greater will be the difficulty of going beyond
      this perspective.

      Q. Gaudapada also spoke of Asparsavada. What is this?

      A. All told, Ajativada and Asparsavada are one and the same
      thing. A-jati means non-generation or non-birth and jati
      means birth, generation -- taken to mean the passage from
      Non-being to Being. Asparsa is the yoga or the path that
      leads to the non-generated state of pure Being. Besides,
      sparsa means contact, relation, and a-sparsa means
      non-contact, non-relation. Now the Absolute Being is often
      considered as without relation, without contact with
      anything because, being one without a second (Advaita), It
      could establish a relation or have a contact with nothing.

      Q. Asparsavada is also called the path without supports.

      A. The support of the 'ego', which is relativity, is based
      on the form-manifestation aspect and on the qualities
      (gunas) which the substance expresses. Asparsa, being a vada
      of a metaphysical nature, tends to remove all supports
      inherent in being. By eliminating all formal supports the
      'reflection or ray of consciousness' falls into That which
      is pure Being without supports, without relations or
      duality. From a philosophical point of view we could say
      that Asparsavada tends to eliminate the time-space-cause
      support which is the qualification of the phenomenon but not
      of the noumenon.

      Q. Is that why the path appears difficult?

      A. Yes, because it is a realizative metaphysics that tends
      to solve all the determinations of Being. The 'ego', in that
      it is a manifested object, fears its annihilation because it
      cannot imagine itself without form, without time or
      determination. On the other hand this is right: the
      molecular 'ego' could never conceive itself as an atomic
      self because this belongs to another dimension.

      Gaudapada in chapter III, karika 39, says:

      "This yoga called asparsa is very difficult for many yogins
      to understand because they, feeling fear where there is
      none, are afraid of it."

      And Samkara explaining this karika declares that this
      metaphysical yoga is hard to be attained by yogins lacking
      in true knowledge. "The yogins," say Samkara, "are afraid
      (of this yoga) while they should not be. The
      non-discriminating fear, while practicing this yoga, arises
      out of the extinction of their individuality, although
      (asparsa) is beyond all fear.

      And again, in karika 2, chapter IV, it is stated:

      "I bow to this yoga -- taught by the Scriptures -- well
      known as asparsa, free from relations, beneficial, generator
      of beatitude for all beings and free from oppositions and

      Why free from contradictions? Because a contradiction or an
      opposition can be had only on the plane of duality. An
      empirical experience can be contradicted by another
      empirical experience. For example, the experience of waking
      by dreaming, that of dreaming by waking, and both are
      contradicted by deep dreamless sleep. But in Turiya (the
      metaphysical state of pure Being) there can be no
      contradiction, because in it the experiencer and the
      experienced, or subject and object, do not exist.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.