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


Expand Messages
  • umbada@ns.sympatico.ca
    Hi folks! Guess what? I forgot to submit the highlights for Mon, March 27. I ll get them out later today! Jerry
    Message 1 of 1 , Mar 29, 2000
      Hi folks! Guess what? I forgot to submit the highlights for
      Mon, March 27. I'll get them out later today!



      There is a wonderful song by Van Morrison on his album
      "Common One" called "When Heart Is Open". I wish I could
      play it for you. "When there's no coming and there's no
      goin..." Mmmmmm.... I dunno, it may sound soppy, but we
      ARE flowers opening. (and being source for bee happiness,
      and wilting and dying and being fertilizer for new plants,
      and, and, and... and maybe it just is and we can just be.)
      I am enjoying the opening and I'm in no hurry to be "fully
      open", whether such a state exists or doesn't exist, or both
      or neither. Words are words and experience is experience,
      and if you like the words and the experience, then enjoy
      them and benefit, and if you don't like the words and the
      experience, then know it for what it is and benefit from
      it. Give benefit and you'll receive benefit. Demand
      benefit and you will most likely be disappointed. If you
      are a flower, open. If someone says you are not a flower,
      open anyway and don't be surprised if it fails to prove to
      them that they are wrong. They are busy being closed, and
      that won't change until they change it. You can only open
      one person, and by opening that one person, you open it all
      because you ARE it all.

      And when heart is open
      And when heart is open
      You will change just like a flower slowly openin'
      And when heart is open
      You will change just like a flower slowly openin'
      When there's no comin'
      And there's no goin'
      And when heart is open
      You will meet your lover

      Morrison's songs tend to
      have strong mystical (if
      not always explicitly
      nondual) implications.
      Even on sessions that
      largely comprise
      material written by
      others, he has the
      uncanny ability to
      confer that mystic
      quality -- I strongly
      recommend is project
      with The Chieftains,
      "Irish Heartbeat."


      ...as we see demonstrated here on the list, the never ending
      trips up and down the stairs to the costume department. :-)
      You think they'd be embarrased, but are they....noooooo.
      :-) Makes me wonder what kind of list I'm on here??? I mean
      what the heck is this, a weird kind of a talent show or
      what? ;-) Sheesh.

      It's what it is - a talent show with several basic

      1. Whistling a happy tune.
      2. Thinking happy thoughts.
      3. Everyone is beautiful in their own way.
      4. All you need is love.
      5. I'm as much here and now as anyone else,
      probably more than you.
      6. Here's my path and welcome to it.
      7. Why I know what I'm talking about and
      you don't.
      8. Why no one knows what they're talking
      about, including me.
      9. Why none of this talk is worth anything.
      10. Why this doesn't exist.
      11. Why no one's here.


      Why do you reach out to grab on to something to keep
      yourself from falling? Everything is falling...

      You might enjoy:



      "Salutations to the Devi who exists in the form of desire!
      Namo Namaha!"
      --from the Devi Mahatmyam

      Desire as a force is the primary engine of evolution.
      It is Shakti built into each of us, directing us along our
      life paths as Her playthings.

      We are all on this list for a reason. We desire to be.
      We all have a desire for greater understanding.

      All famous masters had a desire to teach. They also had the
      desire to eat and quite a few of them ended up dealing with
      their repressed desire for sex.

      Desire cannot be eliminated if one is to function in the
      world. Even an ascetic has the desire to eliminate desire.

      Masters who teach asceticism are from ascetic lineages.
      It is a choice one makes. It is not mandatory by any
      means. Realization comes to those who Shakti blesses.
      She exists in the form of desire.

      What is there to worry about?

      ~ And therein lies illusion!
      What you think you really are is not what you are. What
      appears to be a personality within a skin is just an idea,
      or collection of ideas.

      LARRY I agree, but if I understand this correctly,
      everything is still real in the sense that misunderstandings
      are real misunderstandings and realness itself is to some
      extent a misunderstanding but also not. Or something like
      that, I think?

      ~ Yes, stuff happens, no doubt about it.
      The mind thinks, understands, thinks it understands ......
      What do you identify as yourself?

      MATTHEW let's see........if i say i identify myself as
      everything then i can be sure someone will argue that
      dharmic point. If i say i identify as nothing then someone
      else (or perhaps even the same person)will argue that
      point. If I say I identify as any particular this that or
      the other thing then that can easily be proven "illusory".
      So i'm wrong any way you look at it. I just can't win.(and
      winning is what it's all about isnt it?) I'm so confused i
      don't know whether to shit or go blind. But i sure do enjoy
      this "philosophy-go-round" anyway.

      HANS Hey Matthew, my advice would be : both or neither one.
      If you do that, all your problems will be gone :)


      "The first day I thought it was hilarious.
      Yesterday for a couple of hours it hurt like hell. I did
      some 'active meditations' to dive right into the hurt last

      This afternoon I return to the computer, and find all the
      'jabbings' aimed at me sound just like 'noise'....
      (Or like Marcia says, 'blah, blah, blah'. )

      Who knows what it'll sound like tomorrow?

      And.... who cares?

      And why do they do it? It's great to have the attitude
      today that says

      "who cares" and "so what?"

      HANS Hi Melody, this posting of yours made me think. and
      that was wrong. I looked up the posting you are referring
      to and you know what, I think it is quite hilarious because
      today i am thinking like hell. I will have a look again
      tomorrow :) Just kidding. But it's true in a way. It
      happens all the time, when i've sent a message and i reread
      it, i sometimes wonder if it was me who wrote it. There's
      only one solution to this problem as far as i can see it :
      never reread your messages :)

      who cares ?

      I always thought it was because he could and as he stated on
      the phone call he was going to show everyone what the world
      really is.


      --- Hi Neo,

      I'm grateful to you in ways you don't know.

      The Matrix. I've seen the movie three times in the theater
      and I think it's time to see it on video. What you're
      saying sounds like what it is to be self-actualized. To be
      self-realized implies abidance. The person who is engaged
      in a doing that arises out of abidance seems to be referred
      to as self-actualized.

      How can abidance itself be shown in a mainstream movie?
      It's a moment in a movie when a person finds himself moving
      toward abidance or the center point around which all things
      bend, such as the white space in Matrix, or the plastic bag
      blowing in American Beauty. It's a moment of truth. Matrix
      had many. Knowing that moment of truth, a person becomes
      self-actualized. She or he can fly. Pushed off the cliff,
      or weary, weary in the legs -- I'm thinking of two poems
      recently posted -- one finds flight.

      Great movies -- especially Academy Award winning movies --
      make a person feel they are or can be self-actualized. And
      they always contain those moments of abidance or
      truth-tasting. They entail risking it all, abidance or
      tasting truth, and then flying on one's own.

      Future episodes of Matrix will have to go deeper into
      self-realization and further into self-actualization in
      order to be truly successful, I feel. And they can. But
      will they?

      deeper and further


      You are correct. There is no difference between my pain and
      the other because there is no other, there is only one of
      us. So you are correct again that I must deal with it. The
      question is how?

      HANS Neo, I honestly do not know. I learned one thing
      though, there is no "how ?"
      because this would imply that there is an answer and there
      isn't. It's a process which is something quite different
      than an answer.

      At the Oscars, the writer who won the Oscar for American
      Beauty actually thanked the plastic bag that he saw blowing
      in the breeze one day at the foot of the World Trade Center
      in New York. Now that's a first! What if everyone at the
      Oscars thanked the really important things that go into
      their creative or professional lives, rather than the usual
      litany of producers, family, friends, etc.?

      Speaking of which, one of the producers of American Beauty,
      in his acceptance speech, talked about reading the script
      for the first time, about two totally disfunctional families
      in the middle of which is a character, Ricky Fits, who says,
      "There is so much beauty in the world I can't stand it".

      Lama Surya Das says:

      "One need not travel to distant lands, seek exotic mystical
      experiences, master esoteric mantras and treatises, or cul-
      tivate extraordinary states of mind in order to experience a
      radical change of heart and inner transformation. Spiri-
      tually speaking, everything that one wants, and aspires to,
      and needs is ever-present, accessible here and now - for
      those with eyes to see. It's the old adage all over again:
      You don't need to see different things, but rather to see
      things differently.

      ( from "Awakening the Buddha Within" page 47 )."

      Striking and beautiful Gloria and thanks for sharing.

      We might indeed be destined to see many things and
      experience many events.

      At some point, we might be inclined to look at and examine
      the nature of seeing itself. There is a certain subtlety to
      that seeing which diffuses itself over a range of perception
      and sees nothing in particular and is content and at peace
      with the absence of content in its own nothingness.

      Remember once you posted T.S. Eliot's verse which spoke to
      this. Something like after much travel, we return home, and
      see it as if for the very first time.


      Passing on Sri Frank-Ji's wisdom.
      Frankji is one of the most remarkable exponents of
      nonduality of our times.

      Love to all Harsha

      hariH OM!

      vedic sruti states "all this, verily, is brahman."
      therefore, we can make no mistake that the world that we
      see, experienced through the six indriyas (senses) is in
      fact real; however, as we also know, there is an unreal
      component within it, and this is where we have to apply
      viveka, to discriminate and find out those aspects that are
      unreal. and such [unreal] components lie *exclusively*
      within one's perception. therefore, it's how we SEE the
      world that creates or not such unreal aspects.

      we have to bear in mind that *all* nondual philosophies are
      applicable only to a point---their purpose basically being
      to simplify the relative mind and its thought process
      [enabling one to thus eventually become an apt receiving
      mechanism for the ineffable Absolute]. however, once [this
      certain point] is reached where the mind is sufficiently
      purified, then these systems of [nondual] thinking tend to
      become an attachment and therefore a trap, and this is what
      has to be understood at the *right* moment in time. for
      there and then it needs to be released, because otherwise
      the mind will continously focus on the methodology rather
      than the essence of what it is attempting to
      "experientially" impart. and this is where the metaphor of
      the finger pointing to the moon comes in, where the finger
      itself is not the real but that which it is pointing to
      [i.e. the moon].

      regarding teachings and gurus, it's important to bear in
      mind that virtually *any* path is appropriate regarding the
      the unique temperament of the individual

      in question. where, for example, j krishnamurthi's idea
      that really no-one needs a guru outside one's own Self
      within the Heart, needs to be respected and understood for
      such individuals. this is also true of someone like u.g.
      krishnamurthi's very radical approach [being appropriate for
      certain other personality types].

      and this can be said about virtually any teacher and
      teaching method. from osho to sai baba, to nisargadatta,
      poonjaji, gangaji, ramesh. (all of these were/are, in my
      view, very effective teachers. and they all in fact are a
      product of the lineage of bhagavan ramana, with the
      exception of osho and sai baba [who both enthusiastically
      acknowledged sri ramana as well]. however, the important
      thing is that we should withhold judgment of others, the
      path they [evidently *must*] follow, as well as their
      teachers. in light of this, for example, although it never
      suited my personality type, i would never claim that the
      traditional approach isn't appropriate... there are many who
      can truly benefit from it. on the other hand, the
      unorthodox approach can also be just as right for others.
      so to have judgments re the 'right' approach that
      [presumably everyone] should adopt, is really delimiting and

      judgments of others, and even *more* significantly,
      judgments of oneself, cause unfathomable bondage to the one
      harboring the judgment.

      that aspect of the axiom, 'mind is the slayer of the real'
      especially has to do with this matter--not re discrimination
      or even ideological criticism--but the reckless habit of

      all is brahman's leela, perfect in its relative
      perfection/imperfection. realize this and release the
      myriad egoic shards of contraction.

      in fact....don't realize this at all!
      what is there to realize?
      Self-realization can neither be created nor destroyed.



      Jerry: "I don't see any intent in this particular email
      community, no course of action that we intend to follow."

      "I think we live with implied intentions, yes. "

      Jody: Desire as a force is the primary engine of evolution.
      It is Shakti built into each of us, directing us along our
      life paths as Her playthings.

      We are all on this list for a reason. We desire to be.
      We all have a desire for greater understanding.
      Ok, Jerry.. (thank you Dan and Jody)

      Perhaps 'intention' is used these days more as a directive
      towards an outcome. "Intend" meaning a direction of mind.
      As I understand this forum it is more a direction to
      undermine mind individualized.. to see through the land
      mines of mind.

      Yet we each come here writing, with mind quite evident as
      words flow forth. The locus of the seat of awareness seems
      to come from many vantage points. There appears to be
      educated mind, emotive mind, rational mind, defensive mind,
      mind of heart, habit mind, idea-bound mind and on rare
      occasions a free mind appears. Please know that I am using
      these relative differences metaphorically as I understand
      them all as facets of One mind. (Using the definition of
      mind as 'to become aware of').

      A community such as this one is maintained, as Jody says, by
      a desire to deepen understanding. This desire is apparently
      predicated upon an understanding that through fellowship..
      communion.. we each learn and share; expand and collapse.
      If we didn't 'desire' this, we'd be in our solitariness
      reading books, meditating or walking in nature silently.

      I am simply proposing that since we are here as persons
      within a community, that there may be a way of listening to
      each other, as well as to what arises amongst us, from a
      point of awareness which as Dan says (below), subsumes 'the
      attempting-to-exist-entity that wants to be known as an
      individual and wants to lose itself in the collective'.
      Dan: Freedom is neither individual nor collective, but is
      the ending of reliance on the attempting-to-exist-entity
      that wants to be known as an individual and wants to lose
      itself in the collective. The attempts of this fictional
      entity to establish its nonexistent reality as its "own"
      Reality, and to perpetuate itself in subtle or obvious ways
      is the only thing distracting from the 'voice beyond the
      personal.' There is no one to hear that voice, as it is a
      sound resonating within its own infinity. It is neither a
      monologue or a dialogue, although the appearance of
      incredibly diverse conversations arise within it.

      It seems to me that pure listening itself is the answer to
      any questions that arise from not hearing clearly. It also
      seems to me that listening, really listening, takes all of
      the energy of who one is.

      Dan, and yet the 'sound resonating within it's own infinity
      appearing as diverse conversations arising within it'
      arising within each of us as 'no choice'... is met (or not
      met) within the *moment* each of us place our hands on a
      keyboard to offer whatever tidbit is moving through us to
      better see or share. "Really listening" indeed is a
      different use of energy. Do you see this differently?


      Jesus dying on the cross....this is they symbol of all the
      world does to keep us from the truth which is resurrection
      ..... freedom.......it is the symbol of man's errors and
      lack of vision ....it is what he does...crucify...until he
      learns that he is not the crucifixtion.....but the
      resurrection.....Oh, I do so hate it that Christianity and
      religion have made the beauty of the metaphor so

      ~ What puzzles me is why there is so little interest in the
      What is it's symbolic meaning?

      If the crucifixtion is the symbol of man's errors, of the
      errors in his way of thinking...then the resurrection is the
      symbol of God's way of thinking...."his thoughts are higher
      than ours." The anthropomorphization (is there such a word)
      of God and the personalizing of HIm in relationship to us
      serves, IMO, the function of reminding us that we find Him
      in our relationships to others....It has, however, taken on
      the cultural tones of western, moderne cultures that reflect
      fundamentally on power...the power over others...and so, we
      interpret the language of christianity through the
      understandings of words that are culturally based and not
      spiritually based. This is unfortunate...as it perpetuates
      cultural norms rather than advancing the teachings of a
      great master.....a master who came uniquely prepared to
      converse with a particular culture at a particular place and

      The ascension suggests that the body is not the determining
      factor in "aliveness" or in the experience of
      being........it also suggests the very mundane grace of
      second chances and of absolution. If one re-interprets the
      notion that Christ died for our sins.....away from the
      concrete and literal notion, into the abstraction, that the
      worldly self in us must be "dead" in order for the spiritual
      self to live...."you must grow smaller that I may grow
      greater in you," it is not such a barbaric or outlandish
      proposition. Further, if guilt is the flip side of the coin
      of anger, and if anger or judgement is what keeps us from
      knowing our brother.....than to the literal minded....the
      fact that Christ died for "my" sins leaves one knowing that
      one is redeemable.....a first step, perhaps, in detachment,
      or in the capacity to watch one's actions rather than
      identifying with them.

      Christianity is the language of self in relation to
      others...it seeks to teach a path toward realization founded
      not in the self's identity as a separate entity but in the
      self's identity as part of a relational whole. The
      crucifixition is the antithesis of this...for only in those
      with the capacity and belief in the rightfulness of
      judgement and condemnation could Christ be condemned...and
      we condemn him time and time again in our brothers. The
      invitation to recognize Christ and accept the redemptive
      value of Christ, is the accept wholeness in ourselves and
      others. It is the invitation to recognize Self....not of
      personality....but of wholeness and to seek to know that,
      and see that and only that, in others. In a western culture
      steeped in then norms of the discrete personality,
      individuation, and patriarchal power....these are compelling
      and demanding teachings.....to look within for mercy....and
      to surrender the ego to the wisdom of awareness...these
      cannot be compelled or coerced at will.....but they can be
      opened to and revealed.

      That's why I trip on the resurrection!


      is there not a difference between honest disagreement
      forthrightly stated and gratuitous insults?? i think so..
      when little protestant kids first toddle off to sunday
      school at 3 or 4, what is their very first lesson? you know
      it is "God is Love" after all the intellectualizing
      sometimes the simplest and most elementary truths are the
      most powerful...


      What is temporary desires satisfaction from the temporary.
      One gets caught within a dream of starvation, believing the
      smorgasbord of objects, relationships, meanings, and roles
      is all that is available to fill the craving.
      Once one knows their wholeness, all this can be tasted and
      enjoyed, not from hunger.

      It has been said that if you have a good laugh, the whole
      Universe is laughing and i guess that if we are sad the
      whole Universe is sweetly smiling at us. It understands.

      smiling sadly,

      it has been said that all you have to do is give up your
      life :) Okay, i agree, it's all nondual nonsense.

      dead-end street,


      JODYR: "Why are you worried about me Hans?"

      I was worried about you because you said you have nothing to
      worry about but now that you are worried because i was
      worried about you i am not worried about you anymore.

      world upside down,


      IT's all one juice...fruit punch! No good juice, bad juice,
      it's all mixed up into one, swirling with lines crossing
      every which way. PhD's and know-nothings, actors and
      critics, watchers and do-ers...coffee-achievers!!
      Email Forum
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.