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

Highlights, Friday, Dec. 10

Expand Messages
  • umbada@xx.xxxxxxxxx.xxxxxxxxxxx.xxxxx)
    CARLOS DWA Once upon a time a magician took a young lion from the wild. A lion that, had it been left in its natural habitat, would eventually have dominated
    Message 1 of 1 , Dec 11, 1999

      Once upon a time a magician took a young lion from the wild.
      A lion that, had it been left in its natural habitat, would
      eventually have dominated the other lions of the savanna.
      The magician turned this beast into a man and
      trained him in the arts of war.
      As you can imagine the lion became a magnificent
      warrior; stoic, heroic, and fierce.
      Then just as the magician was about to send
      his creation forth into the world, he was taken by
      a peculiar notion and decided to train the lion/man
      in the way of being and consciousness and see
      what this warrior would make of such subtle
      instruction. And as one would expect he made
      a weapon of sorts of enlightenment itself
      with which he slayed the minds of learned men.
      Then after some years of this futile endeavor
      the magician came to him again and said
      "Enough of this. You have spent all your time
      cutting things in two either with swords or words.
      Now become a weaver.
      And the Lion/man said I have no interest in weaving.
      "All the better, " said the Magician. "Do something
      that is not in your nature."
      And the Lion said, "Very well, teach me weaving."
      The magician responded, "I can't. It's not something
      that magicians know. So you must teach yourself."
      And the lion did teach himself and eventually learned
      to weave wondrous fabrics, so fine that they where
      much sought after. But strangely, some of the householders
      bought his work found certain threads in them insulting
      and threatening, and were troubled by them.
      One day a shepherd (who was unaware
      of the former relationship between the village weaver
      and the magician) brought a shawl he had purchased to
      the magician because he believed it had an evil spell on it.
      The magician was proud of the lion/man when he saw
      the cloth he had woven. But the householder said
      look here, look at this thread, it is mocking, it is
      threatening me.
      The magician said, "Don't be afraid there is no curse here
      it is just that the weaver has spun this thread of his own
      and mixed it in with the rest and the essence never changes
      throuhout life. It is your essence that recognizes the
      fierce and fiery
      nature of this thread and shies from it. But the weaver has
      given you a great gift in this thread. The wolves who with
      their duplistic
      cunning are
      always bleeding your flocks of the most precious lambs will
      not come
      near if you wear this shawl.
      And it was true. In time the shepherd was able to utilize
      the shawl
      and he lost no more lambs.

      (c) 1999 Carlos Dwa



      One of my all time favorite poets was named Milton Acorn
      (his real name
      not a made up one). I met him a few times and wish I had
      taken the time
      to know him better, he was a hard drinking cigar smoking
      cantankerous crazy wise tortured old man.

      love, andrew

      I shout love in a blizzard's
      scarf of curling cold,
      for my heart's a furred sharp-toothed thing
      that rushes out whimpering
      when pain cries the sign writ on it.

      I shout love into your pain
      when skies crack and fall
      like slivers of mirrors,
      and rounded fingers, blued as a great rake,
      pluck the balled yarn of your brain.

      I shout love at petals peeled open
      by stern nurse fusion-bomb sun,
      terribly like an adhesive bandage,
      for love and pain, love and pain
      are companions in this age.

      June, 1958- Milton Acorn

      I shout love against the proverbs of the damned
      which they pause between clubbings and treacheries
      to quote with wise communicative nods...I know
      they're lies, but I know too
      that if I declared a truce in this war
      they'd turn into pronged truths and disembowel me.

      1958- Milton Acorn



      "anima drag"
      by James Nolan
      If I were a woman
      I would want to be
      a cold beauty like Garbo
      and throw rambunctious
      orgies in fringed cabanas
      by the sea with Turks Greeks
      and tall Negresses in blue

      turbans with many bracelets
      and when the police vans
      arrived at five of dawn
      stare them away
      with the Evil Eye
      like an agate through
      my wrought-iron fence.

      If I were a woman
      I would not lash myself
      to some sea-sick family
      but would give love
      without apology:
      charge in your door
      at 4:00 in the morning

      in green leotards to read
      Blake out loud while you
      defrosted the refrigerator.
      If i were a woman
      i would hate men
      and would probably be
      a lesbain sleeping

      only with young boys
      and older more mature women.
      If i were a woman
      I would sit spaced in all-night
      places in a wide straw hat
      waiting to meet a man like me
      the kind of man that i could be

      if i were loved by a woman like me.

      --James Nolan



      i'm hatching some words and thought forms about
      marginalization. glo got me thinking about some stuff
      (thanks glo!) namely, my recent experience in psychotic
      paranoid episode . ..

      there is a stigma attached to mental illness, be it manic
      depressive, psychotic, borderline, "you name it," these are
      words that terrify, separate, and assume. i have in the
      past written about marginalization and gays and lesbians and
      homeless. . .i wish to start a thread about
      marginalization which will include those who have been
      labeled mentally ill. we could discuss

      *medication and prayer!
      *realizers who are "out there!"

      and my own favorite, which i will write about soon-- the
      psych ward. a place where i felt so at home, and so loved!

      myself, have been labeled "psychotic" and also "manic
      depressive." the last couple of episodes. i do not label
      myself any of these things, but if i must, how bout
      "visionary madness? :)" i know i'm in good company.

      meanwhile-- in an effort to eliminate labels, the slogan for
      now is "unity."
      look for the UNION label!

      i love you all you are my self my heart beats madly!
      love, gen
      JAN:One might argue that ignorance is maximum during deep

      TIM G.:One might also that ignorance is at its minimum then,
      depending on the definition of "ignorance."

      JAN: and this is what temporarily prevents not only
      perception, but also recognition of Self (what else is there
      during deep dreamless sleep?:)

      TIM G.:During deep, dreamless sleep, awareness continues
      Only consciousness is temporarily in abeyance. If there was
      no awareness during dreamless sleep, then upon awakening
      there would be no knowing that "I remembered nothing" while
      sleep was taking place. Who can deny that there is some
      kind of a sense of still being alive, even while deeply
      asleep? In fact, there is a faint "memory" of deep,
      comfortable bliss and peace while in the dreamless sleep
      state. And it should be noted that those in deep comas,
      with brain waves almost totally flat, have heard things said
      by their bedsides and reported them accurately upon waking

      JAN: In nirvikalpa samadhi, there is neither thought nor
      perception and breathing will stop; yet it could be called
      the opposite of deep dreamless sleep. The difference is
      attributed to a veil and there are several of them; from
      this perspective, deep dreamless sleep is worthless as a
      reference because the veils are peeled off in a serial
      fashion, one after another.

      JAN: what matters isn't that the universe is projected and
      withdrawn by the mind each day, what matters is the
      potential that makes this possible.

      TIM G.: Of course.

      JAN: both the projection and its withdrawal result from the
      same power of the one consciousness; for the sake of
      argument this power is called its active aspect. When the
      mind-body is completely transformed, this potential no
      longer exists and consequently, both projection and
      withdrawal of the universe don't apply anymore; only Self

      TIM G.: This fact has been denied or minimized in importance
      by more than a few �members of NDS. People seem to want to
      keep one foot in the Absolute, and one foot in the relative,
      as if both could be experienced at the same time.

      JAN: Often, people are innerly divided without knowing it.
      An indication is the division between the path of jnana and
      bhakti. One without the other is like trying to win a
      marathon by running on just one leg. A Bhakta sees God in
      everything and gives love.
      This is an investment; because there is only Self, in the
      course of events the love will "return to sender". By
      giving everything, a Bhakta is free from shame, guilt and
      remorse, as true love can never blame. Without recognition
      of how love "works", one remains trapped in duality; love
      will simply "find its own way" in the form of relations or
      longing for it. I will consider the details known; many
      with just an intellectual understanding have paid the price
      of ignorance (defined as not recognizing a veil and the
      appropriate remedy to dissolve it), and have "enriched" the
      world with rather funny examples and definitions of

      Potential Bhaktas are easily recognized. The "mark" of
      Bhakti is the willingness (or drive) to invest love in a
      creature that will reflect it; if no human is considered
      worthwhile, a pet is adopted, to invest love in, and to be
      found unconditionally worthy of affection by it.

      JAN: Regarding the perceived universe, one could say each
      perceiver has a tiny part of a huge hologram and it is a
      well known fact one can't divide its size ad limitum without
      losing detail; TIM G.: Analogies involving holograms aren't
      my cup of tea; I'll pass on replying to this part.

      JAN: so every perceiver necessarily has a limited,
      "personalized" Version of what is essentially the same.

      TIM G.: What *is* essentially the same? Do you give
      credence to "the universe" as objective phenomena based on
      social agreement?

      JAN: The "game of life" comes with a start condition and
      various "gaming tools" like intuition or intelligence.
      After completing the game, which is only possible when using
      *all* gaming tools one will +know+ "what is essentially the
      same"; it cannot be conveyed in words.


      Emptiness being form - this is the Buddhist way of looking
      at it, and isn't really translatable into advaita-vedantic
      terms. There's no analogue of background consciousness, of
      nirguna Brahman in Buddhism (maybe in Dzogchen). Hence the
      long-standing debates. Many Buddhists take advaitins for
      eternalists, and advaitins take Buddhists for nihilists.


      The first 500 hundred years after Buddha's Parinirvana is
      the period called Hinayana (Small Vehicle) which emphazises
      the individual liberation. The hero is an Arahant who seeks
      for his own liberation.
      This is now represented by the Theravada school.

      The next 500 hundred years is the period of Mahayana (Great
      Vehicle) characterized by the universal liberation. The new
      hero is a Bodhisattva who vows to save all sentient beings
      before his own entering into Nirvana.

      Mahayana has two main schools: the Madhyamika with the
      theory of universal emptiness (emptiness of self-nature of
      the person as well as of all phenomena) and the Yogacara (or
      Mind Only school) with the theory of the store-house
      consciousness (Alayavijnana). Yogacara states that "All is
      Consciousness", exactly like Advaita Vedanta. It is told
      that Shankara entered the Buddhist monastery Nalanda to
      study all Buddhist teachings for the purpose to refute them
      afterwards! :-)

      This Consciousness stated by the Yogacara has other names:
      Tathagatagarba (embryo of Tathagata or Buddha), Buddha
      Natute, Mind, etc. In a Mahayana sutra called Parinirvana
      Sutra, the Buddha declares that the Budha Nature has four
      permanence, pleasure (or bliss), self, calm.
      This Buddha Nature is the aim of the Ch'an school (or Zen)
      developed in China.

      A third period of Buddhist development is called Vajrayana
      or Diamond Vehicle. This is the Buddhist Tantrism and is
      now found almost exclusively in Tibetan Buddhism.
      (there is also a Mantra school ('true word')
      in Chinese Buddhism, which is the Shingon school in Japanese

      Dzogchen is considered as the highest teaching of Tibetan
      Buddhism and states that our 'Primordial State' is indeed
      the 'Self-Perfected State'. Dzogchen and Mahamudra in
      Tibetan Buddhism are the equivalence of Ch'an in Chinese


      Here is the Parinirvana Sutra:

      O bhikshus! Do not grieve! Even if I were to live in the
      world for as long as a kalpa, our coming together would have
      to end.

      You should know that all things in the world are
      impermanent; coming together inevitably means parting. Do
      not be troubled, for this is the nature of life. Diligently
      practicing right effort, you must seek liberation
      Within the light of wisdom, destroy the darkness of
      ignorance. Nothing is secure. Everything in this life is

      Always wholeheartedly seek the way of liberation. All
      things in the world, whether moving or non-moving, are
      characterized by disappearance and instability.

      Stop now! Do not speak! Time is passing. I am about to
      cross over. This is my final teaching.



      Buddha meets Shankara

      One day, in a place outside of time, Adi Shankara met
      Gautama Buddha walking on a road. There was an instant
      shock of recognition between the two sages.

      Said Buddha, with a smile on his face, "Greetings. You are
      awake, as I am.
      It is rare that I meet one so wide awake in my travels."

      Shankara said, "You are mistaken, sir. I am not awake, but
      rest forever in Brahman. I am Brahman. I am beyond
      sleeping and waking, beyond the world."

      Said Buddha, "There is no mistaking a man who is awake. You
      are clearly awake and know your own nature, and you are
      walking in the world."

      Shankara replied, "And you, sir, there is no mistaking you.
      You are the Supreme Reality Itself, and clearly understand
      it. What does this have to do with being awake?

      Buddha replied, "There is no Supreme. There is only
      awakening. There is only emptiness."

      Shankara said, "But I rest in Nirguna Brahman. And it is
      clear you do as well. Brahman is infinite fullness,
      infinite peace."

      Replied Buddha, "No, I am awake, and in infinite emptiness,
      infinite peace."

      Said Shankara, "Emptiness and fullness are One."

      Buddha replied, "It is true."

      Said Shankara, "Very well sir, I am awake as you are."

      Buddha replied, "I must be resting in this Nirguna Brahman
      of which you speak."

      And the two sages, with a warm smile and an embrace, turned
      and continued upon their journeys across the length and
      breadth of India.


      So, here I sit, writing, thinking, wondering and writing
      some 'more'. Proving and disproving, clearifying and
      muddying the waters of existence and non-existence.

      Fighting with God's and voids, science and religions.
      Trying on old and new hats, crafting my own coats while
      wearing the same old boots of life.

      Searching under rocks, over hills, moving mountains,
      climbing trees, swimming oceans, reaching for stars, and
      looking for shapes in clouds.

      'Basically' looking for anything that even closely resembles
      the question that I have found the answer for and then, it
      occurs to me... what was the question in 'the' first
      place? Do you remember?

      "Who farted?" always comes to mind.



      It is self-inquiry, spreading out through the world, which
      makes me happy. Ramana Maharshi's gift to all who are drawn
      to this simple and direct way of awakening in Self.


      Thank you for expressing this awareness, Xan.
      The human community, the "world of appearances" is
      self-inquiry in process, until that process has no
      foundation to arise. Ramana gave this ongoing self-inquiry a
      particular form, tone, language, and emphasis. Very
      useful. And there are so many ways it takes form and is
      "worked through".

      This entire universe of "appearances" is a great koan.
      There is no "apparent being" anywhere who is not
      "self-inquiry" in process. There is no "apparent event"
      that does not arise from Self, reveal/conceal Self, and
      return to Self.

      The end of self-inquiry is when the question cannot be asked
      because the assumption isn't there. Then, the entire
      "universe of appearances" transforms from koan to "simple
      awareness/pure unknown".

      No self has ever arisen to begin a process of self-inquiry.
      -- all love for the beauty of Self-expression occuring
      "here" --


      Who is inquiring? Indeed.

      Yet so many in this world of Koan are Lookin' for love in
      all the wrong places.
      It pulls at my heart.


      This universe, exactly as it is, is Buddha, is Brahman.
      Form is emptiness and emptiness form.
      Appearance is Reality, and Reality is Appearance.

      One position refutes another, and this is Appearance.
      I don't chose one position against the other, so for me,
      Reality is Appearance. I take a position, thus, for me,
      Appearance is Reality.

      Ha! I laugh. What else is there to do?


      "No-mind" as described in previous posts, is clearly going
      beyond the mind entirely. However, it should be pointed out
      that a quiet mind (relatively empty of thought) is more
      conducive to "no-mind" occurring than a noisy mind. When
      the mind is constantly chattering, it's more difficult to
      remain in the witness state, watching thoughts. There's a
      strong pull or temptation to get involved in thoughts when
      they are chattering loudly.

      When the mind is quiet, this temptation is not present. So
      I postulate that "no-mind" is possible in any mental state,
      but much easier to "achieve" when the mind is quiet, when
      there are few thoughts present to be tempted to get involved



      Student: Are you saying that 'no thinking' is also a

      Papaji: 'Thinking and no thinking are both normal functions
      of the mind'. A mind that doesn't think thoughts, which is
      free of the idea of no thought as well, can be called a
      free-mind'. Thought and no thought exist in relation to
      each other. They are both properties of the mind. 'No-mind'
      is something else. It has no connection with anything.
      When the mind is so undressed that it is free even of
      no-thinking, there will be nothing left of mind. While
      there is the mental state of no-thought, there is still a
      place where objects can land; but when no-thought is thrown
      away, leaving only 'no-mind', objects cannot land anymore.
      In fact, in that state there are no objects at all.


      A useful statement, pointing to awareness without an outside
      and therefore no inside. "No-mind" : with no outside, it
      can't call itself anything - not even "awareness". With no
      inside, it can't retain images of "things", which it can't
      perceive as "outside" anyway.

      To me, this "no-mind" awareness isn't a state. It's the
      nature of who we are - I'm sure Papaji agrees with this,
      based on other statements shared here. Calling it a "state"
      might imply something is "entered" by "leaving" another
      state. Saying it's not-a-state indicates it's simply the
      way things are, this moment. So this "no-mind" awareness
      with no "things" is nothing other than exactly "this" "here"

      The apparent "thingness" of reality isn't really apparent.
      It sometimes appears to be apparent, but this appearance
      turns out to be fully unreal - never was, never could appear
      that way.


      Yes. I love the Dzogchen name for the un-namable:

      The Great Natural Perfection



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