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

Highlights, Fri., Oct. 15

Expand Messages
  • umbada@xx.xxxxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxxxx.xxxxx)
    Dear Sweet Purest Nectur, I know what you mean, in this falling madness of Love we spin around into each in turn and in heart silence speak- hello again! Om as
    Message 1 of 1 , Oct 16, 1999
      Dear Sweet Purest Nectur,

      I know what you mean,
      in this falling madness of Love
      we spin around into each
      in turn
      and in heart silence speak-

      hello again!

      Om as we are!


      TIM G.:

      "I,I" - a freeform poem

      I glow from within, lit by my own radiance.
      The body, the mind, they are not mine.
      Through ignorance I have become associated
      with form, substance, dream. I am not that.
      There is nothing to describe me, no words.
      No thoughts, no symbols.. I wear no clothing.
      Nothing but Eternal peace and bliss, this,
      One very moment... there is no other but I.

      I, the reality, clothed in disguise...
      OM, the bridge across forever.
      I am the clear light of emptiness.
      OM, the bow of the soul, empty of all
      but what is real.
      In me there are no distinctions,
      no past-present-future, no here or there.
      I am everywhere and nowhere, the light
      that shines bright across the heart of Eternity.

      In me is all that ever was, all that has ever been,
      all that ever will be, in one eternal instant devoid of
      I cannot be described, nor thought of, nor dreamed of.
      I cannot be imagined, nor felt, nor seen, nor heard.

      The single timeless Eternal Fact I AM...
      Devoid of form, of time, of causation.

      Cross the bridge of OM to reach me,
      the bridge across the ocean of dream.
      Chant me, the no-chant OM, until
      the dream ends. Until the Reality begins.
      Satchidananda I am, forever bliss-being-love.
      Nowhere and everywhere I am, and you cannot see me.
      You can only be me.



      hi tim!

      happy to hear that you are in your new space.

      here is a house warming present, poem for you. :)

      the blessing of a house
      �I bring this water free from impurity.
      I bring this immortal Fire.
      With these I set my foot within this dwelling
      And take possession of it.�
      --Atharva Veda III,12
      I know there are those who would give
      their left anything
      for the blessing of such a world. . .
      on a barely traveled alleyway, with a little shade
      and a slight prevailing wind to blow
      the cobwebs from their dreams.

      May we be safe in this sacred space--
      Keep it in good repair and cosmic order. . .
      May there be a compassionate cop on the beat,
      And little rain. . .

      Inside the outside is a world--
      Our first take on it.
      Those who roam the cracked walks
      and twisted ribbons of any city�s streets know
      the value of a good shelter, refuge or sanctuary.
      Outside, a good sturdy box: a roof
      and a corrugated view.
      Inside a life can take root: not merely
      of the earth, but part of it.

      And so I bless my new home--
      its stability. My good fortune.
      Shelter. Refuge. Sanctuary.
      I bring water and fire and connect--
      my life beginning to intertwine
      with the roots of its ancient own.

      Outside, a good sturdy house: a roof
      and a view. Outside I
      admire the garden, but love the weeds
      that this old house grew into.

      Bring water and fire. . .again today
      I blessed this house, and if their had been a rat nearby
      I�d have blessed him too.
      --aleks berlin



      reading my mail,
      feeling so comforted,
      reading messages from friends,
      who don't know what they are talking about either.

      Your messages so dear and appreciated,
      between wisdom words,
      light dances,
      office memo's,
      happy days,
      nonduality paths, and
      EO lists,
      I could care less,
      whether I am or not am,
      or whether anyone knows or not knows.

      Thank you all,
      for the truth,
      that we cannot put into words,
      but cannot refrain from being either.


      at the still point, there the dance is,
      But neither arrest nor movement.
      And do not call it fixity,
      Where past and future are gathered.
      Neither movement from
      nor towards,
      Neither ascent nor decline.
      Except for the point,
      the still point,
      There would be no dance,
      and there is only the

      T.S. Eliot (sent by Harsha)



      Thanks for the warm welcome.
      I am sorry but I don't know much about Nonduality or Advaita
      in Japan.
      Those words are not popular at all here in Japan.
      There are many Zen in Japan. But I know only little.
      I think the most authentic academic institution in Japan is

      I feel the name of finger point and way of finger pointing
      in Japan are different from "Nonduality" and " Advaita".
      In these days I feel the structure of western ego and that
      of eastern are different. Just intuition. So please do me
      a favor no to ask why and how. :)

      love miki takashi



      Now stating that you know, or that you don't know, may
      nevertheless attract all those who want to know, whether you
      like it or not. You are now excused though, to not know,
      you may send them home, telling them that they will never
      know either, and that they shouldn't even bother to try to,
      for they will never succeed anyway. Not knowing is indeed
      easy and fun and is done 24 hours a day, yet not everybody
      'knows' that.


      To live fully and be wise, may mean to be comfortable with



      As for me, I have fallen in love with Not Knowing.


      Ah Xan,

      Oh great joy to feel you here again.

      Yes, yes, energy is purest when it doesn't take on a form.

      love, skye



      Clarification of the question "Am I?":
      1) It reverses the usual assumptions involved in the belief
      "I am."
      2) It calls all of existence into question.
      3) It calls all knowledge into question.
      4) When knowledge has ceased to be an anchor, and existence
      is no longer assumed as a state, it finally points to
      investigating the "line" that divides being from non-being.



      No one ever said anyone knew. No one ever gave an answer.
      It is closer to truth to say 'I don't know' than to say 'do
      know'. Even closer may be to confess 'I neither know nor
      not know'; it's a slight nudge from 'not knowing' to that,
      but it's like moving a mountain to go to that understanding
      from 'I do know'.

      So knowledge is not conducive to nondual perception. What
      is needed is 'not knowing', and then the confession,
      'neither know nor not know'. That may be called the First
      And then the Second Silence is silence. And out of the
      recesses of the Third Silence you hear that utterance,
      'Wait, I know!' And those words are delivered like a ladder
      upon which one may climb into the Attic of Silence.



      All appearance of or expressed belief in separation is
      merely appearance and expressed belief - appearances and
      beliefs have their place in the scheme of things, and
      reality remains as always. Realizing this, you are free to
      say what you will, assert or deny as you wish.


      Yes, and I remember one of the very first things I thought
      upon realizing this was oh boy, this is right up my alley,
      am I gonna take advantage of this!!
      And I warned everybody. :-)


      If you understand, things are just as they are.
      If you do not understand, things are just are they are.

      Sooooo, besides being free to say anything, what are the
      other "advantages" of thinking you understand?



      Freedom doesn't come cheap you know??? The price is your
      life - really.
      No joke. I pay for it with every breath I take.



      It seems that the popular myth is that once a person is
      'enlightened' suffering is ended.
      Well, I was wondering if it wasn't really the other way
      around. How about once enlightenment, your suffering
      increases because now you can feel the suffering of the
      whole world, not just your own little part. The difference
      is once enlightened, you don't have to hold onto it for dear


      In order to avoid talking about different things, the
      meaning of suffering as given by the dictionary:
      verb, intransitive
      1. To feel pain or distress; sustain loss, injury, harm, or
      2. To tolerate or endure evil, injury, pain, or death. See
      synonyms at BEAR1.
      3. To appear at a disadvantage: "He suffers by comparison
      with his greater contemporary" (Albert C. Baugh).
      verb, transitive
      4. To undergo or sustain (something painful, injurious, or
      unpleasant): "Ordinary men have always had to suffer the
      history their leaders were making" (Herbert J. Muller).

      Regarding 1. there won't be a change; pain remains pain and
      one won't stop crying over lost loved ones, despite knowing
      "Being is one". When pricking an EO with a needle, the EO
      won't proclaim the unity of needle, mind and body but
      exclaim "ouch!!" The change is in 2., 3. and 4.; the notion
      of enduring, advantage/disadvantage and undergoing will
      Knowledge by itself doesn't hurt; the identification
      (imagining the victim's experience ) is what hurts; seeing
      and hearing will establish the identification. The source
      of identification could be called "I"; without the "I", 2.,
      3. and 4. can no longer be remembered. Pain just "is" or
      "isn't" and when the pain is gone, it doesn't leave an
      impression (a memory of having felt pain).

      >From an other angle, one IS Sat-Cit-Ananda; this isn't some
      concept but an experiential fact. The transformations,
      mentioned in various disciplines (Patanjali, Mahayana
      Buddhism, Rosicrucianism), simply denote that "after"
      enlightenment, the mortal shell (mind-body) can be
      transformed to Sat-Cit-Ananda as well, in which case one is
      no longer able to feel any pain. Of course this is very

      >From yet another angle, one is living up to the recorded
      impressions of the mind. For someone going through a
      process of dying and giving up everything, the contrast with
      the "first" Sat-Cit-Ananda is the highest conceivable. Such
      a one will like a mad(wo)man "go after it" and nothing could
      stop him/her. It usually means a sequence of samadhis that
      will end with the natural samadhi. In that case, suffering
      can be recognized but any identification is impossible as
      the "I" is no more.

      In the case of Buddha, the last impressions "before" were
      strong impressions of suffering, so the recognition brought
      about a strong contrast between the bliss of the "real
      and the previous suffering. As the Buddha left no doubt
      about "attaining" nirvana and nirvana without substratum, it
      follows that he completed all transformations - no longer
      able to feel any pain.


      B said :"it seems that the popular myth is that once a
      person is 'enlightened' suffering is ended.
      Well, I was wondering if it wasn't really the other way
      around. How about once enlightenment, your suffering
      increases because now you can feel the suffering of the
      whole world, not just your own little part.
      The difference is once enlightened, you don't have to hold
      onto it . . . "

      we need to watch out we can swop ideas till the cows come
      home but in doing so we only make ourselves feel better

      feeling better is not good enough

      enlightened - not enlightened dharama - no dharam suffering
      - non suffering

      . . . people let it all go.

      if we focus on techniques practical stuff that will help us
      look we can learn much more.

      so now this could be an example:
      who knows how to deal with this?
      "the 10,000 things return to the one where does the one

      its a kind of trick hands up (honestly now)
      those people whose first thought was "I don't know".

      I don't know is the starting place and you apply your
      techniqies from there.
      everything else is candy.

      I read most of what is posted most is missing the real "I
      don't know"
      good new and bad news bad news = unless you find the real "I
      don't know", you remain lost the good news = there's stil

      find a technique ask for help about the technique don't say,
      "it might be this"
      or, "they say this"
      ask "how do I look?"

      not many ask this type of question why?



      After a while I stop saying I don't know, it goes without
      saying, how many ways can I say the same thing?
      (I still say I don't know.)

      Look anywhere. Ask around.
      Make up techniques, try them all Get through all those
      techniques Don't pay attention to anything I say.
      Don't pay attention to anything you say.
      Pay attention, you're speaking to me.
      Techniques are like sauces or marinades, I still can't
      swallow or spit.
      Techniques are like sauces or marinades, I still can't
      swallow or spit.
      (I chew)

      One asks, and looks all ways.
      What else is there to do?
      One stops doing, then one starts again.
      The one who starts knows that s'he's not the one who stops,
      but s'he is too.


      ==GENE POOLE==:

      The question of 'a separate self' arises. Usually the
      discussion dips and loops and comes back to the question.

      I have no answers to this one, but a few thoughts. This is
      how it occurs to me.

      I am with another person, I am looking and we are talking.
      Beneath or above the level of conversation, I am remembering
      to observe myself. I am aware that I am observing myself,
      and that I am also observing this other person, who is
      observing me (but is he observing himself?). There is so
      much monitoring going on, so many points being viewed and
      viewed from.

      Suddenly I am aware that the entire process is quite
      effortless, and that what is observing, is awareness. I am
      aware that I am aware of the observational powers of
      awareness, and it is by awareness that I am aware of this.

      For me, in this way, is the question of 'a separate self'
      resolved, in the dynamic of relating, rather than in the
      abstract of 'offline' considering.
      Even now, I find no satisfactory way to express now, what I
      'know' in the moment of actual being-with; so my point is
      that it is one thing to consider this question of 'a
      separate self' as a puzzle, but another to consider it while
      actually being-with another. It is the dynamic
      being-experience which is satisfying to me. In that
      recognition, I realize the benevolence of this 'separate
      self', that it is aware of itself, that it loves itself. In
      this recognition, any sense of separation seems to
      evaporate, leaving only warmth and good feelings.

      Perhaps... this has something to do with the typical Hindu
      prescription of a living Guru, as the ultimate and necessary
      step of resolution in these matters. Perhaps it is the
      living Guru who can recognize and thus share, the living
      'truth' of Being. Perhaps also, this is how it is resolved
      to overcome scriptures, with knowing.



      Hi all that is :-)

      Well I read 'Collision with the Infinite' by Suzanne Segal
      in two spaced out days! My goodness. Then I gave Shojiro a
      quick run down on the story and he said; there was a young
      Japanese boy who was known to have experienced a similar
      enlightening emptyness(what I call spontaneous combustion)
      of the self but died early of unknown causes. After his
      death the autopsy revealed he had died of a 'brain tumor'.
      I'll see if I can get more info when Shojiro gets back.

      When I commented on cancer way back I had no idea of her

      I have now begun Nisagadatta's 'I Am That' (a most
      appropriate sequence it seems!) and have now fallen
      madly/passionately in love with it. I have to laugh, here I
      am loving to learn, 'Am I?' nothing (thanks Dan) and
      everything and nothing and.....but why is there no pain? I
      guess its all still safely tucked into my conceptual self.

      I find myself in a quizzicle state often saying strange
      things out loud like; 'oh shit!' and 'well I never!' or
      laughing out loud when I see my ego trying to have a
      tantrum....yawn, yawn ;-). Very strange, enlightenment
      seems to be like meeting yourself on the road and
      recognizing it is you. A meeting of the ridiculous and the
      divine, an embracing of the best and worst in myself. What
      is this divine illusion being played on this great clear
      empty expanse with all the passion I can muster? ;-)


      The Pathway of Nonduality

      by Raphael

      Chapter 5

      ADVAITA VEDANTA (conclusion)

      In the West, especially in the modern West, philosophy is
      reserved to those who wish to 'demonstrate', through mental
      and discoursive dialects, their own vision of the world and
      of Being. In other words, one tries to 'demonstrate' truth
      using discoursive reasoning, but we know that mental
      discourse has its limits because it can only operate on the
      plane of the objective and contingent. A rational,
      empirical 'demonstration' of Being, for example, implies
      setting oneself upon the plane of duality which, in turn,
      precludes not only the 'demonstration' itself but also the
      true knowledge of Being.

      One may say that in the West philosophy suffers from the
      typically Western consciential attitude of looking at things
      from a dualistic, objective standpoint. It aims at knowing
      the external object while oriental thinking aims at knowing
      him who wants to know the external object.

      Western philosophy is one of simple mental 'demonstration',
      Eastern philosophy is one of realization.

      Besides, while the Western philosopher has produced a
      philosophical system of his own, often in contrast with and
      in opposition to the systems of other philosophers, the
      Eastern philosopher has not produced a system nor has he
      claimed ownership of his enunciations.

      The Advaita Vedanta (like all other darsanas) is a darsana
      stemming from the Vedas, drawing from the Vedas, which
      develops a 'perspective' or 'point of view' that already
      existed in germ form in the Vedas. The word darsana, in
      fact, is not indicative of a closed philosophical system of
      thought by some solitary thinker-philosopher; its
      etymological meaning is 'to look', 'to observe', 'point of
      view' concerning the Vedic Scriptures, i.e., Vedas and
      Upananishads Sruti). But even Greek philosophy, in its
      precise meaning, was a philosophy which derived its content
      from the Mysteries. The Mysteries are a branch of that
      eternal Doctrine which we have called Sanatanadharma.
      Orpheus, Pythagoras, Plato, Plotinus -- to name a few -- all
      drew from the Mysteries. And Christianity, while availing
      of the Sacred Mysteries (in the Mass, in fact, the statement
      'let us celebrate the Sacred Mysteries' is made) has refused
      and repudiated them. Thus, when we speak of philosophy we
      refer to that Philosophia Perennis which has no history and
      was not formulated by a human mind.


      Nonduality Salon Website
      Nonduality Salon Email Forum
      Nonduality Salon Chat
      Nonduality Salon List of Nondual People
      Encyclopedia of Nonduality
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.