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

Highlights for Monday may 29th

Expand Messages
  • andrew macnab
    _____________________________________________________________________________________ Connections I, the beholder, The one I behold, The beholding itself Do
    Message 1 of 1 , May 30, 2000


      I, the beholder,
      The one I behold,
      The beholding itself
      Do not connect with one another-

      Just as I who desire,
      The one I desire,
      The desiring itself,
      Do not connect.

      We do not connect
      Because we are not
      Apart from one another;
      We would not be together

      If we were apart.
      I am other than you
      In relation to you;
      I could not be your other without you.

      Were I other than you,
      Then even without you
      I would be someone else;
      I cannot be your other without you.

      There is no otherness
      In either you or me;
      Without otherness,
      There is no me or you.

      I do not connect with me
      Nor do I connect with you-
      No connecting, no
      Connections, no connectors.


      >if the "what" that is changing is said to be "everything",
      >then reality (existence) is everything, and illusions are

      Dan: Once you say that this "what" is something, even
      "everything", you have defined it. In defining
      it, you place yourself outside of it, in a position
      to give it a definition. As it has no outside, it
      has no inside. You can't be outside of it defining
      it, nor are you inside of it.

      An interesting thing to me about memory is
      that it can only occur "now".
      It purports to include
      content about a "then",
      but this content
      only has its existence "now".
      The content pretends it can
      re-present something
      that is not, and which
      exists nowhere, and this
      means that memory
      is a fiction, and reality
      that is based on memory
      is fictional. The contentless
      nowness to which memory's contents
      are unable to refer remains
      the only Real here.

      An interesting question here is
      if the past isn't, and memory's
      contents have no "existing"
      or "true" reference, then
      on what is based the entire
      circle of memory, thought, and
      recollected perception through which all human
      personalities, languages, cultures, organized religions,
      histories, and goals are given form?

      In answering this question, I find
      only a self-perpetuating
      and self-referencing loop that
      never refers to anything outside
      of its own constructions, yet
      which continually formulates constructions
      as if they referred to something "real"
      that exists, involving
      plenty of energy, emotion, and interpersonal
      destructiveness in the process.

      If memory's contents are seen as not
      referring to anything real, and Reality
      as omnipresent Nowness *is*, then
      living as Nowness is Alone, reality.
      The continuing emotionally reactive patterns,
      the "past-focused" understanding of reality,
      the interpersonal destructiveness of
      "dichotomization" will drop "automatically".

      Now, if one is presenting a case in court,
      it will be far more useful and coherent to produce
      witnesses who can use memory to attest
      that one was not at the scene of the crime
      when it occurred, as contrasted with telling the judge
      and jury that the past doesn't exist.

      When in Rome, do as the Romans.
      When "playing one's part" in a fictional
      reality through which is structured
      social interaction, play one's part "honestly"
      and without obfuscation.
      Render unto Caesar that which is
      Caesar's and unto God, that which
      is God's.

      'That which is God's' is the glory,
      which is the only Nowness that is,
      in which there is none 'other'
      (the word 'God' [or emptiness,
      or whatever] being useful only
      in the appropriate fictional

      "Consider the lilies of the field,
      which toil not"...


      Xan posted:

      where does willingness come from
      willing to do anything
      although nothing can be done
      willing to surrender everything
      although nothing is mine
      willing to be exposed
      although there is nothing to hide

      where does lovingness come from
      loving the flaws in us
      although we are perfect
      loving the simplicity
      although feelings are so complex
      loving you
      although no one is there

      where does gratefulness come from
      grateful for the laughter
      although the joke is on me
      grateful for the beauty
      although eyes cannot truly see
      grateful for the bounty
      although hands are forever empty


      Tim: Discussing the Undiscussable

      Standard Version:

      "When discussing the undiscussable, always speak very poetically. That
      way, even though the words might not make sense, at least they SOUND good."

      Buddhist Version:

      "When eating, eat. When drinking, drink. When discussing the
      undiscussable, discuss the undiscussable."

      "Buddhists Against Teenage Sex" (BATS) Version:

      "Just Say MU!"

      I once had a rather minor spiritual experience which I have since
      forgotten except for one little part. A very heavy thought came into my
      mind that said "this is indescribable." It wasn't any more indescribable
      than anything else but this thought was very forceful. So beware of
      invader thoughts! :)


      The secret of life is enjoying the passage of time
      Any fool can do it
      There ain't nothing to it
      Might as well show some style
      Give us a smile

      Planets spinning through space
      The smile upon your face
      Welcome to the human race

      Now the secret of life is enjoying the passage of time. :-)

      Judi :-)
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.