HIGHLIGHTS of Sunday June 19, 2000
- WHAT IT IS
JODY, JERRY, more St. George & GENE
I don't know most of the terms like samadhi let alone
nirvakalpa samadhi, but I think I followed what
you were saying.
Nirvakalpa Samadhi is the state where *all* activity
of the mind ceases. It is the "deepest" state of
consciousness a living body experiences. According
to the swamis, very few people come back from it.
That is, for most who get blessed with Nirvakalpa
Samadhi, there is no coming back. The body drops
off and the person has their Maha-samadhi, which is
the literal death of the body.
Anyways, in my experience, it appears that there
are two basic "ways". 1) That one prepares to be
receptive to grace, so that when it comes one
recognizes its message, or 2) that grace comes and
leaves a couple of big ones, which leads to
figuring out what the heck's going on.
Grace is ongoing in my view. Whether big ones or
little ones, good ones or bad ones, it is always active
in our lives, imo.
Anyways, whichever way, I'm not sure that it
really matters. Whatever happens for each
"individual" is the prescribed medicine.
Which is part of my case to the swamis. Realization
happens to each individual in an individual way.
Some may get it after a period of celibacy, others
make no effort to regulate their sex lives, but end
up getting it too.
With respect to realization, well, I think that's
a hard one. We've seen here that there is quite a
bit of contraversy over what it actually is and
whether there is even anyone here that has
attained such a state. I think that this is
because there are various levels of "realization".
Hmmm. Realization is clearly defined in my view.
Simply, when a jiva (individual life) comes to the
direct, experiential and ongoing revelation that
they are the Self, Sat-chit-ananda, that jiva can be
said to be realized. While there may be many states
which appear to lead somewhere and many realizations
of wisdom and experience, Self realization is an
entirely difference case, imo.
So where does "grace" come in and where does "self effort" play?
Who knows? There appears to be a correllation between
self-effort and realization, but it's not absolute.
That is, we can find many examples of spontaneous
Self realization which don't correllate with long
periods of intense sadhana.
I had long periods between some of these
realizations. I think fortunately for me, my first
experience came (seemingly) involuntarily. I just
out of the blue saw something. What followed was
inquirey. Was that inquirey fired by grace or self
effort? I could have just as well dumped what I
saw and forgotten all about it, I think that
happens a lot. For me actually, a long time
passed. Not much self effort. Grace was strong,
because the first experience was strong enough to
leave serious doubts. Grace again opened the door
to prod me into inquiring a little. A series of
events dropped key material and information into
Grace is with us each step of the way imo, even
when the going gets really rough.
A long time passed, I got into it, I fell out,
blah, blah, but advanced little by little. Finally
I got to where something told me (grace again)
that NOW it was MY turn to make the effort.
Finally after way too long, I had to consciously
and with effort, take up the task of completing
More grace in the form of motivation.
We keep getting to points, where we think we have
the picture clear. We feel this and we feel that,
and there comes a fairly dangerous point, I feel,
where we feel that there's nothing more to do!
Just bask in the glory of nothingness! That's
where a "pure mind" comes in. To get beyond that
point starts requiring purity.
Clarity accures in the mind that exists in the context
of Self realization. When the individual knows they
are nothing, the mind realizes a whole new platform
from which to develop from. Realization comes,
So what does "pure mind" mean. Not thinking about
sex? Not using bad language? How about not being
tied up with routine problems? How about any thing
that places your focus in the illusion? The
illusion is beautiful, but more for it's
connection to the source than for it's "beauty".
I believe for the swamis "pure mind" denotes a
quiet mind, a controlled mind. While such a mind
is truly a blessing to have--and it a worthy goal of
any spiritual practice--it is not a precondition to
realization. Realization can happen in the context
of minds that aren't perfectly controlled, minds
that contain a "normal" amount of chatter.
Lack of purity leaves one open to moving away from
the source. A single crack makes separation
visible. Visible separation makes one feel that it
is OK to be separate.
We are all the Self right now. Self realization
doesn't make us any *more* the Self, It just introduces
a direct awareness of Self to the mind. Claiming that
a pure mind is necessary for one to be realized negates
this fact. There is no where to go. It is not a journey
from scattered to quiet mind, its a simple uncovering,
like moving leaves aside to find a gem.
So we can come a long way. I mean "I" am in heaven
over my realizations, and I have by no means a
pure mind. But I'm beginning to see the depths of
what lay ahead, for want of more purity. That's
the other side of the coin. Once you've seen to a
certain level, can you maintain a stable balance?
Ramakrishna used to say "Dive deep into the Ocean of
Satchitananda." It's a matter of making time in one's
life for one's dips. The more one swims, the longer
one can stay "underwater".
Where is your balance? (rhetorical question, not
directed at you jody :-)
I find it in the woods, sitting in this chair, petting
my cat, at the Vedanta Center.
Can you feel the things that pull you away?
Emotional pain. It is unavoidable sometimes. While
we may have recourse to Pure Being, our bodies and minds
still have to go through it.
I guess it's less important exactly what you do
(sex, agression, marriage), than it is just being
aware of what's real, as much as possible.
"being aware of what's real, as much as possible." you say.
Everything's being spun, spiralled, whirlpooled, at once
into and out of the Source. They are Source. Attention can
lie anywhere while it too spirals and whirls and is always
coming out of Source, and it is Source; even as the Sun
throws flares and prominences that are pure Sun.
The sun is pure consciousness. A person is pure
consciousness. Everything is pure consciousness. A rock is
pure consciousness. Here's an inquiry: Pure consciousness?
It can be uttered when walking along Ed Arrons' St. George
GENE, recapitulating Ed's St George Street of Saturday:
Ed, you wrote:
Strolling on St. George St.,
4 levels of awareness are noticed:
1) when 'individuals' and self are perceived and experienced as
separate. Conversations occur but the feeling of separateness
persist; there are moments of alienation, moments of horniness,
and moments wanting to rise above it all.
G: I would add, that interspersed, are moments of longing for #2, below.
2) when the self and other become a whole; this is Pure Awareness;
there is no inner or outer; no self; the 'other' appears unreal or
dream-like; the Now seems absolute and unchanging...until it is
suddenly dissolved by some compelling necessity or suppressed
My experiences on this 'level' show 'self' and 'other' to be 'tonal
harmonics' of a vast, eternal continuum; each has no choice but to
participate, conscious or not. If conscious, there is 'empathy beyond
3) when self and other seem connected by words and thoughts yet
'knowing' that the words and thoughts are ultimately meaningless;
it is all very intellectual; ideas come and go disguised as non-ideas
or dream-states; the "I" doesn't really exist; a persistent voice
keeps saying "nothing really exists" as if to convince itself it is
Pure Awareness. (This sometimes happens when writing to NDS :-))
G: Similar to borrowing your friend's set of keys, to open your own
door, and then lending yours; this is strange, but in the moment,
normal. It is 'proof' that "things are not as they seem, nor are they
4) when self and other seem real and connected by feelings of
resonance; everything seems alive with beauty and joy; mergings
take place and dissolve; there is a Now that flows from event to
event; there is no beginning, no end, yet somehow it gets lost,
almost imperceptibly, in separation.
G: A child's reality.
These states come and go without choice, though it often seems as
if will activates them. There is always a compelling motive for
any 'choice'...which is seen upon reflection to be of prior existence.
Which state of awareness will prevail is anybody's guess.
Take a stroll on St. George St. sometime and...
Be kind to yourself .
G: Once one has consciously been there, one may return.
From the vastness of being
Condensed to the apparent
Easy to see
Hidden from view
Exactly the same everywhere
Dining on joy
Imbibing of misery
This is my play
I never tire of it.
HAHAHAH and HOHOHO!
Peace - Walking in Wonder - Michael
MARY and ANDREW
Here and now is existence, if it isn't here now it doesn't exist.
If it exists it's here now.
Here is where I am.
I have this awarenss.
I am everywhere.
I understand this. I understand intellectually that Mind is
everywhere and nowhere; it is non-local. And I understand that
wherever I , as Mary, go, there I am. What I haven't had, was the "
experience" of being everywhere at the same time, that experience of
being one with all.
It has been my experience that the self that wants the experience
is the self that can never have it. That self, trying to have the
experience, is like "trying to pick up the board you are standing on."
Mary, I think you're more realized than you realize.
Experience is experience, whether it is understood as
universal or not is just a matter of mental habits. Many
traditions regard extraordinary states and experiences
as worthless distractions. There's a Chan story of this
monk who's hiking along one day and he meets this guy,
and they walk along together, having a great time
discussing stuff until they get to a deep river, and the
guy walks across the river on the water and stands on the
other shore saying "come on why don't you" and the monk
looks at him and says "I thought you had some real
understanding but you're just a plain old worker of miracles"
and heads off upstream to find a shallow place to wade
PAPAJI (contributed by xan)
Is it really so simple? Yes.
When you know it then only you will laugh.
Everybody who is making efforts to get it for
millions of years will have a laugh that this is
done through no effort: 'I got it. I was already
all right.' So one laughs at it.
So only then you say: 'Was it so simple?' Yes,
it is very simple. And it is difficult because it so
simple. What is so simple cannot be understood.
What is so near cannot be seen. As the eye sees
everything, it cannot see itself. Was the difficulty
too much nearness? I cannot see eyes themselves
because they are too near to themselves. And it
doesn't need seeing at all. Therefore, you don't
need to see something. Only need is to be and
not to see.
Therefore, being is very simple. And you cannot
have it with any kind of effort. Being is being.
So it is so simple that people who have to go
to mountain caves and for years perform tapas,
they will achieve some powers for many years,
practices, but still they cannot know being. It's
just being here and now this very instant. Who
believes? He will know it. He will laugh.
He will call it, 'It's so easy!'
CEE not seeing things:
who sees the moon anyway?
if i am seeing it
i am so much more (and less)
than i think i am.
stop seeing things!
let your vision be non objective
divisions, lines, and circles are imaginary playthings
relax your brilliant attention
let it rest at the source
so vast, so complete
nothing to see!
the blessed feet of
love and kisses,