There are many circles and there is no way out. We can observe all these
circles, so, these circles are just parts of us. We are not part of the
circles. Wanting to get out is based on the thought that we are in some kind
of circle. There is no way out, because we were never in the circle, we just
thought we were. What do I mean when I say 'we'? Nothing. Could 've used the
words 'I', 'You', etc. Makes no difference, but in words.
Call it Love, God, Parabrahman, Awareness...
~ Yes. All of this story stuff
is past. The question is, what
favorite bits of it are clung to?
Recognition of "who you are" doesn't depend on conditions, it is
spontaneous when conditioning is temporarily forgotten. What happens "next"
depends on how "resumed" conditioning is interpreted. When the joyful
forgetfulness of all conditioning leaves a desire beyond compare, that
could mean the lethal "I" disease has been caught :)
Sadhana Louise and Jerry:
It is surprising however that an enlightened person
would need to seek solace. Over the death of a loved
one, sure maybe. But over a lack of appreciation
Enlightenment sure isn't what it used to be.
Isn't there a certain beauty in an enlightened person
needing solace for lack of appreciation? That lack of
appreciation for Her/Him/God/Reality IS death of a loved
I don't follow this. Sorry.
If the enlightened one is ever depicted with a tear in the
eye, what do you think that tear is for? There is beauty in
the unattached one living in and feeling the world and
welcoming solace, comfort.
The enlightened one is neither a steady gaze nor a beautiful
The enlightened one is not exempt from any particular
feeling nor from any particular need, whether it be sleep,
food, sex or understanding.
... We all always talk to ourselves, don't we.....along the
way our words may provide a mirror to others without intention, without
purpose.....the bird sings not because it has an answer but because it has a
song.....and even birds singing a song of answers are singing to
Dream stuff, that's all we are. Dreaming dreams us.
Dan: Dream stuff is Reality: dreaming us in, dreaming us out,
just like breathing... nowhere to go, not even another
dream - awakeness isn't anything other than dream-stuff
~ Dreaming that this dream stuff is bad stuff
There's the rub.
Dan: And dreaming there's good and bad stuff
coming from somewhere else - that really rubs.
And no where to wake up except the dream stuff itself.
"In order to feel replete, the `intellectual sense' needs to masticate,
digest, and excrete. The intellectual appetite needs to be directed
away from the processed abstractions of philosophical junk-food.
Intellect itself needs to taste the manner in which it functions as a
method of obscuring the nature of Mind. This is where the use of
intellect stops being a pass-time or a conspiratorial battlefield of
conflicting notions. This is where intellect becomes a valuable tool
with which we can begin to prompt interesting departures from the
experiential myopia of the materialistic rationale. This is where we
can give birth to the possibility of looking directly into the nature of
Mind. Through study, through wholesome inquisitive scepticism, we could
arrive at the point where looking directly into the nature of Mind
becomes a feasible proposition. This is known as the development of
>From a forthcoming book "Roaring Silence" by Ngak'chang Rinpoche andKhandro Dechen.
If the above resonates with you checkout the following URL for more:
This quote was posted by Muni on the AlongtheWay list, just thought I'd
I do not negate the world. I see it as appearing in
consciousness, which is the totality of the known in the
immensity of the unknown.
What begins and ends is mere appearance. The world
can be said to appear, but not to "be". The appearance may
last very long on some scale of time, and be very short on
another, but ultimately it comes to the same. Whatever is
time bound is momentary and has no reality.
- Nisargadatta Maharaj
A quick survey doesn't find
*anyone* -- including some of
the "Five-Sarlo" folks with
impressive toolboxes -- all
that effective either.
Influential, yes, but
effective in the sense of
being consistent catalysts to
others' realizations? Very
hard to say one way or
another, even Ramana devotees
generally acknowledged as
realized can be counted on
ones fingers, and that's after
a entire lifetime replete with
near-universal veneration and
A useful observation, Bruce.
As seen from here - it doesn't fit to see
someone as causing someone else's enlightenment.
Enlightenment is the dissolving of thinking
in terms of cause and effect, "me" having
this experience and "you" having that experience.
Sometimes someone happened
to be there, saying the "right" thing at
the right moment. How many enlightenment
experiences have been "initiated" by a bird
chirping? Does this mean a bird-sound is the
cause of enlightenment? The idea that someone
will "make" someone be enlightened just doesn't
fit here. In fact, the word enlightenment itself
is so loaded, it's nearly useless. Like the
words "God," "Love" "Being" - they sound great,
important, wonderful - but the word is never the thing,
and generally just stirs up a lot of images and
associations. Apparently associations with
enlightenment are that it is an experience
that someone has and another doesn't, that someone
can give it to someone else, that someone can get
it from someone else other than who they are already -
quite a divisive concept actually -
a lot like God, Love, Being, etc., so far as that goes.
But still we'll talk about Love, God, enlightenment, etc.
And people will talk about these things in various ways.
Who's talking about them the right way?
Hard to tell - the only thing to do is experience directly.
Then, talk about it as best you can, and
don't be fooled by talk - yours or any one elses.
-- Love (well, what the hell else is there to say here?
Love you All) -- Dan
Interestingly, Ramana didn't seek freedom. He only sought truth. It is
coincidental that truth is freedom. There was apparently no quality of
great dissatisfaction or frustration in his journey. He just really
wanted to "be" at Arunachala. So that's what he did.
"But that formless God takes a thousand forms in the eyes of His creatures;
He is pure and indestructible,
His form is infinite and fathomless,
He dances in rapture, and waves of form arise from His dance,
The body and the mind cannot contain themselves,
When they are touched by His great joy,
He is immersed in all consciousness, all joys, and all sorrows;
He has no beginning and no end;
He holds all within His bliss."
Om Namah Shivaya
Harsha:...and I think Old Hag is a Princess....
~~~Sorry, Harsha dear, that kinda talk won't git you no sway. Old hag
only kisses frogs.....and....a wild man with black, matted hair, an
antelope skin 'cross his shoulder, who dances,.....dances the world