The death of a loved one would not be a reason for an enlightened
person to seek solace, in my opinion. The soul is eternal, the loved
one has merely changed shape. The loved one is, in my belief, in a
place where there is no pain and no attachments, only joy. Perhaps
we seek comfort because we have not resolved our attachments and
needs that we ourselves had with that person.
You might want to read the
account of J. Krishnamurti's
response to his brother's
death as related in the
famous Mary Lutyens biography.
There is a great deal of
speculation offered about the
behavior of enlightened folks
and the great bulk of it is
pretty much not worth the
paper or CRT space it takes up,
perhaps because of confusion
between enlightenment and the
Christian-Western notion of
sainthood and/or due to
"attachment" as it applies to
Sadhana Louise posted:
"You can do what you like, as long as you do not take
yourself to be the body and the mind. It is not so
much a question of actual giving up the body and all
that goes with it, as a clear understanding that you
are not the body......"
"Be aware that whatever happens, happens to you, by
you, through you, that you are the creator, enjoyer
and destroyer of all you perceive and you will be unafraid.
Unafraid, you will not be unhappy, nor will you seek happiness."
- Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj
***** Perhaps he was saying that to a specific person for
a specific reason, but as a statement of fact, of truth, he is wrong.
We are not other than these bodies here.
Nothing stands apart or separate. Nothing is excluded.
Everything is included. That is the clear understanding, NOT
that we are separate somehow. There is no such thing as separate.
I'm surrendered you see? I don't pretend to be other than this
limited body and mind. And in this surrender here, there is love,
itself. It is God, it is what is beautiful. I wish you could see it.
I am at your feet you see? Do you see me now? I am not talking to
I am talking to you.
S.L: Love is not "relationship". God is not "relationship".
Judi: ****** It is nothing BUT relationship.
S.L: Relationship requires two.
Judi:****** No. It is relationship Itself.
S.L: When the sense of two-ness drops away, love is.
Judi: ******* Sense has nothing to do with it. That's all in your head.
To drop or not to drop changes nothing.
S.L: God Is.
Judi, I think I see what you are saying, but I don't quite have it.
Would you elaborate on this point: "We are not other than these bodies
here."? I thought we've been saying the body is an illusion as an
getting confused, Larry
Yes, gladly Larry. It's about surrender. In surrendering to our bodies
and our limitations, we find freedom and enjoy understanding.
Freedom is not to be found in our thinking that the body is somehow an
or that life is an illusion and that we need only twist our minds around
in a certain way to see that. No. It is not in our thinking. We find it
in our surrender, in taking our ease here, which is in fact already the
case. You are in fact already surrendered you see? We can't be other
than surrendered, which is right here, right now, this very moment here.
There is no such thing as 'tomorrow'. That is what there is to realize.
Like Dan was just saying, there is 'no way out'. So you can think
whatever you want, it doesn't change the fact of our surrender, of what
is already the case here, one iota.
This *is* Calvary.
citing Dan: "Blessings, Judi, this is the reaction
here to your gentle truth, your lovingness
presenting yourself as yourself to yourself."
What if his words above and below were true not only for Skye, but for
you, and everyone else,
"Stop, look, and listen
(learned as a kid when told how to cross the street).
Really look. Quiet, now. Hush
Let the knot show itself for what it is, to itself.
How can that happen when busy arguing, debating, being "right"?"
Dan: Hi Sadhana Louise, my ears are burning :-)
Where does Judi stop being Judi and begin being you?
Where do you stop being you and begin being me?
Nonetheless, Judi, you, and I are conversing, we can identify
bodies, thought patterns, ways of speaking.
Are we one or many, diverse or united, apart or together or neither?
My words were said to Judi. If you wish to extend such blessings
to each and all, that is perfectly fine here. Judi is each and all,
each and all is Judi, yet each is herself and himself as well.
The words you cited as "below" were never addressed specifically
to Skye or anyone else. Those words were about the "point" I see
Judi often expressing in different ways. As far as taking those
words (about the "knot") to be about you, me, Judi, Skye, Bill Clinton,
Mother Teresa - yes! This is the "knot" of "human being" or "being human".
Let the knot show itself - stop, look, listen! Getting into "who" is
really the one with a knot, and who's knot is undone, and who's knot is
bigger - all that is beside the point as seen from here. The point is
stop, look, and listen - just like they told me when I was a kid
learning to cross the street! (Generally more useful advice than what they
said during the "A-bomb Drills" -- "duck and cover!" But sometimes,
what else is there to do? :-)
-- Love -- Dan
What i (and perhaps others here) am addressing
is Judi's qualifications to offer advice/guidance.
She lives... and breaths...
what other qualifications are necessary?
( /\ )
This from OH:
Hello all dears: ,^))
Here is a quote from al-Ghazali, an 11th Century Sufi:
"Whoever leaves the world behind him passes away from mortality, and
when she has passed away from mortality, then she attains to
immortality. If thou findest thyself bewildered, o heart, pass over the
bridge (which is thinner than a hair, sharper than a knife-edge) that
spans the burning fires of hell. Grieve not, for the flames from the
oil in the lamp give forth smoke black as an old crow, but when the oil
has been consumed by the flame, it has ceased to exist as oil.
If thou dost desire to reach the abode of immortality, and to attain to
this exalted station, divest thyself first of self,
then summon a winged steed out of nothingness to bear thee aloft.
Clothe thyself in the garment of nothingness, and draw over they head
the robe of non-existence.
Set thy foot in the stirrup of complete renunciation and, looking
straight before thee, ride the steed of non-being to the place where
Thou wilt be lost again and again.
Yet go on thy way in tranquility,
until at last thou shalt reach the world where thou art lost altogether
Victor on the perfect googoliferous multiplicity of That:
Googols and googols of points and waves of light changing moment by moment,
easily seen but indescribable.
Googols and googols of sound waves changing monent by moment, easily heard
Googols and googols of pressure points changing moment by moment, easily
experienced but indescribable.
Googols and googols of flavors changing moment to moment, easily experienced
Googols and googols of odors changing moment to moment, easily experienced
Googols and googols of combinations of seeing, hearing, touching, tasting,
and smelling all interpenetrating and changing from moment to moment, easily
experienced but indescribable.
We in our hubris think we can describe and improve on that "that".
Just be in "that".
This morning while doing my laundry I was thinking about
how to make the shift from recognizing "not me" to "being" Self. It
occurred to me that if the "problem" is not me then the shift doesn't
matter. Is this correct (advisable) or am I in danger of getting stuck
in an inferior realization?
"~ It is only a shift of attention from the identity of "me" or "not me"
to Self. There is always danger of getting stuck in any idea. Hence the
need for vigilance.
so you are saying I could make a career of "analysis" and
cultivate all sorts of experiences of release, but that's not it. Is it
a matter of looking "in" without a point of view? without analysis?
"How" relates to doing. Whatever doing there is is not working. I can no
more tell you how to release, than I can tell you how to go to sleep when
the body needs rest. The body-mind knows "how", That which you are can
handle the release. The answer arrives at the right moment. It is just:
giving up what you think you are, and What you are shines. In a moment
when the mind is at rest and not worrying over doubts and opinions, what
are you? That's the ticket.
Chuck on satsang with Amber:
Last evening, I finished up the last of four satsangs that
Amber Terrell held here in my home town of Ojai, California. It was truly
a beautiful meeting of heart, music and the Love-that-Is. Amber is very
articulate, centered and her lilting voice singing her own songs of Truth
moved me to tears.
We've had many advaita teachers hold satsangs here in Ojai (e.g.
Francis Lucille, Yukio Ramana, Arjuna, Adyshanti, Prasad, Prajnaji, Carlos,
Neelam) but Amber's presence moved me the deepest. This week, (and for the
first time), I'm going down to San Diego to sit with her guru, Gangaji.
Larry you're an idiot. This meaningless drivel is worthless. It's not
about philosophy or what's what. It's about letting go of what you are
holding on to. It's not worth it. Look at yourself. Whatever you see,
LET IT GO.
your friend, Larry
Aaah, I think you're on to something Ollie!! :-)
I'm right here with you Larry, absolutely and totally.
Just whatever you see, accept it and let it be.
No need for judging whatsoever, just accept yourself
and everything you see. Everything is fine.
And everything will, in short order be made very clear.