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

Nondual digest

Expand Messages
  • Melody
    Nondual Digest - for Wednesday, July 7, 1999: To join the Nonduality Salon please go to
    Message 1 of 1 , Jul 8, 1999
    • 0 Attachment
      Nondual Digest - for Wednesday, July 7, 1999:

      To join the Nonduality Salon please go to

      << The ego as form
      >is an attempt to hold onto form
      >so it is not the same form
      >as discussed in "form is emptiness"

      It seems to me from my internal
      view of my mind, that ego is just
      the tendency of identity to maintain

      Ivan: It could be said, yes. I also feel
      that it is the *point-that-pretends-to-be-in-the-dark*.
      In this way it can feign to be the observer.

      Toon: Purified ego would be identity w/out the tendency to maintain.
      Identity is no problem as long as it's ever-changing.


      Has this happened to you?
      It has happened to me.
      Literally in a twinkling of
      my eye, consciousness
      shifted to the Everything.



      At various times on these lists I've confessed that a
      question would be given to me and that I might spend years
      with it, and then one day Everything is the answer.

      What drives that? Is it questioning and doubt? Is it Grace
      coming at the invite of stillness and quiet? Is it both? Or
      may that shift arise out of just living an ordinary life
      with no apparent effort? I think all those possibilities
      exist. Sometimes growth comes only with great effort and
      even suffering, and in other cases with less effort and a
      relatively painless period of acclimation. Some may bring
      Karma into the picture at this point.

      Certainly a hunger to want to penetrate and go beyond
      wherever a person is 'at' will drive growth.


      >>Yes, it seems odd that the one supporting Adi Da would also write Chapter
      >>12 of THE EYE OF SPIRIT, which has become quite beloved in advaita circles.
      >Did anything in particular emerge for you from "EYE"?


      Like a beautiful meditative concerto, gently and lovingly saying what I
      been feeling. My first hearing of it was one evening at a wonderful
      retreat in a rustic house in the woods above Ontario, Canada. That chapter
      had been copied from the book, passed around among friends in the U.S., and
      at this retreat read aloud by a friend, a British schoolteacher with great
      diction, great accent.

      It was, after all, the last chapter in the book. Its profundity, as though
      nothing more need be said, relegated anything else in the book (and his
      other books on similar subjects) to the realm of transpersonal psychology.



      In my view,
      the body indeed partakes of the freedom.
      The thought-resolution
      leads to the body-resolution.
      The body is the seat of the
      thus, the dilemmas of thought,
      when resolved
      return awareness to the body.
      The body's freedom arises
      when itself as process is revealed
      changing and moving
      moment to moment --
      the body dies,
      but through its death
      the eternal shines...


      Petros wrote:

      The Bodhi Tree is really a wonderful store, isn't it?
      I could spend hours just in the advaita section. I
      saw an interesting three-volume biography of Poonjaji
      there called _Nothing Ever Happened_ by David
      Godman. I'm learning about beings I never heard of
      before, like Sunyata, a Norwegian pilgrim who was
      enlightened by a short meeting with Ramana Maharshi.
      I've been spending some time lately browsing through
      a couple of books by Jean Klein such as _I Am_ and
      _Living Truth_. (But what are the bestselling books
      at the Bodhi Tree? _Conversations With God Vol III_,
      __The Celestine Prophecy_, and Jerry Brown's
      _Dialogues_. Also something by Chopra. People come to
      Bodhi Tree for these?)

      Spent some time meditating at the crypt of
      Paramahansa Yogananda today at Forest Lawn. There is
      a bit of a scandal going on as the SRF is trying to
      get his tomb moved up to its headquarters on Mount
      Washington, and the neighbors are raising a ruckus.

      Next week: Sant Thakar Singh in Santa Barbara (a
      Master of the Sant Mat tradition), then yet another
      Poonjaji disciple (!), Yusishtara, again at the Bodhi


      Hello Petros, Wherever You Are:

      (Heck, for that matter where's anyone on this list?

      Thank you for your 'between Satsangs' letter. You mention
      Sunyata, the little known Norwegian, whose name is sometimes
      spelled Shunyata. Funny, he was mentioned in a recent and
      ongoing thread on androgyny. The thread is being stretched
      to include members of marginalized society. Shunyata, though
      he is known for his silence, did write something called
      Memory, which I happen to have. The portion I'm quoting
      below, at length, is an important contribution to the
      androgyny thread. Nonduality, as it may exist as a
      'movement', is open to increasing understanding of and
      welcoming those living their lives on the society's margin,
      and that apparently includes those whose sexual orientation
      is not strictly heterosexual, but of one of any number of

      Before the excerpt from Memory, please note that there is a
      link on my website to a Sunyata page:


      From 'Memory':

      Father never asserted nor preached in words. He was a
      wordless mystic, who simply was. In regard to the rightness
      of fellow-pilgrims who vibrated in a different and even
      contrary rhythm, he lived his truth with the least possible
      fuss and interference. Mother both talked and asserted her
      feminine truth, and the usual subtly willful shakti-business
      in her rhythm, but it was neither vicious nor persistent.
      She could also be clear and silent and still.

      The feminine elements happened to be the most vocal and most
      playful on the surface of things in my childhood setting.
      The women vibrated noisily and I came to accept them and
      learned their language, which is spoken and lived by half of
      our humanity. Two grown up sisters, 12 and 14 years older in
      body than I, wer not 'remembered' until I was about7, though
      they must have been an unconscious influence. There was the
      managing mother and a succession of servant-girls (farmers'
      daughters and considered by my mother our 'equals'). As I
      was not very conscious of sexual differences, for me there
      was no war of the sexes.

      In Viking land, there was co-education and sex equality in
      sharing, play, and work. Although the males were rarely
      found to be rearing children, preparing meals, or serving
      food, and the women joined the miniature army only as
      healers and nurses, there was widespread sex equality. So
      from childhood, the feminine rhythm was no more strange to
      me than was the masculine one, different in quality but not
      in kind, and each individual rhythm varied. I saw each
      person as a beautifully different variation of the same
      life. At school we all shared in games and in lessons, and
      at home we shared in work and in leisure. At one time a
      neighboring girl (also a late and lonely child) was often my
      play-fellow, and for years a city-boy was my intimate
      companion on the farm.

      And so it happened that I was not conscious of any great
      difference between the male and the female rhtythms, which
      in other lands seems not only to be different in degree, but
      also of kind and species. There were no clashes in the
      household because Father did not react impatiently or
      violently, and was not easily provoked; he was easy in
      humoring whims, yet firm and steadfast in hiw own Self when
      essential and important decisions had to be made. He had the
      generosity of strength, and rarely fought and argued; are
      not most of our squabbles due to weakness and ignorance of
      the Self?

      It did not occur to me that there is a feminine truth,
      complementary, but often contrating and seemingly at war
      with the masculine truth. The division was not clear in my
      consciousness. Truly, I felt that the girls and women around
      me were often more noisy with their tongues and desires than
      were the boys and men, more emotional, more volatile, more
      silly, but also more gentle, sensitive and feeling.
      Vicariously I lived in their feminine rhythms, vibrating
      with them in unitive, direct, and un-mental harmonies. I was
      no stranger to their subtly willful passive waiting --
      similar to a cat lying in wait for a mouse -- nor to their
      seemingly insincere play and poses, the flutter and
      wordiness, which often hides their true purpose and meaning.
      Intuitively and vibrationally, I came to 'know' the feminine
      language of being, though I myself had no desire to speak
      Is not the highest type of manhood really that which
      includes womanhood? Are not the feminine and masculine
      rhythms complementary? When the complementary opposite
      rhythms are harmonized and functioning at ease within, the
      individual can be calmly aware of his Individuum. As the
      Bible says: '...and they shall again become one flesh.'
      In the ancient garden of pure consciousness, two falls
      occurred: the first was when man was divided and woman
      formed from his lost rib; and this caused and conditioned
      the second -- when both became self-critical and 'saw that
      they were naked' and divided, and so descended into the play
      of opposites. Good and evil for what?

      Aesthetically the hermaphrodite is a type of perfection, an
      idea or truth, which has haunted the imagination of men like
      Michaelangelo, Shelley, and Whitman. Physiologically we all
      still have the rudiments of the other sex, we have developed
      from some hermaphroditic organism in the dim past, and it
      may be that we are being carried along to some
      hermaphroditic fulfillment in the not too far-off future.
      Meanwhile, those among us to whom the time-scale is not of
      supreme importance, can have glimpses and sensations of
      these past and future states in the present, the Eternal
      Now. Perhaps we cannot stay calm and balanced in unitive
      modes of experiencing unless that harmonious, hermaphroditic
      Wholeness is achieved within. We meet physically
      hermaphroditic types among fellow pilgrims. Are they
      reversions, freaks, or hints of future perfection? Even
      though now they are often pitied, soo they may be envied.

      ... The hermaphroditic psyche seems to be the one thing most
      necessary for inner peace. How easy it would be to avoid the
      war of the sexes and the agonies of readjustment if our
      psyches were whole and did not need to flutter in search of
      their other halves, their lost integral Wholeness! How easy
      to eliminate fears and jealousies, the efforts to bind and
      possess -- if only the individual could find within himSelf
      or herSelf that pearl of great prize: the memory of what and
      of who we really Are!
      The rhythm of inner psychic wholeness is what egos would
      term 'andorgynous.' When the male and female truths function
      in a complementary harmony within one psyche, the body (as a
      tool) will remain male or female, but the psyche will aware
      the harmonious wholeness of itSelf, freely functioning in
      the unitive mode of experiencing.

      Only in the Light of the Whole can memory emerge freely,
      simply, and purely; and is not the (conscious or
      unconscious) aim and purpose, meaning and goal of all of our
      strivings, all our shakti-antics, and all our yoga practices
      to be aware and to remain aware of our integral Wholeness,
      the hermaphrodite androgyne, the mystically united twin
      within our Self? The magic force in the golden unitive
      thread of intuitive memory reveals to us our Self, and leads
      and draws us onward with dharmic speed to the Beyond (which
      is within) of Eternity's ever-present Sunrise.

      >It holds onto things that are moving, imagines itself as a "holder on,"
      >tries to fix things that are not, in reality fixed, attempts to be an
      >"identifier," which can't, in this situation, actually
      >be accomplished. The ego, in this way of defining it, is "resistance to
      >emptiness," rather than a form which is itself emptiness.

      Greg writes:
      This way of defining the ego is perhaps a useful tool in psychology, where
      (a la Wilbur) it helps someone develop a healthy basis from which to view
      the dissolution of the ego.
      But after that, when it comes to the dissolution process itself, the
      enterprise becomes what's usually denoted as spiritual. And part of the
      spiritual enterprise of this dissolution (especially in this non-dual
      approach like jnana yoga) is opening to other definitions of the terms,
      other ways of seeing the "entities" or theoretical constructs, etc.
      Loosening of seeing IS the dissolution. So maybe other ways of thinking
      about the notion seemingly covered by "ego" is a good idea. There are lots
      of alternatives. Eastern paths explain human functionality without such a
      well-developed ego-concept. Several Western philosophical theories account
      for most of our observations of human phenomena without positing a central
      ego-like operator. Not that any of these other theories should be believed
      or taken literally. But seeing things in one way lessens the tendency to
      rely-on or believe other ways of seeing. It sort of de-rigidifies the
      seeing/believing, which can be said to be a way of lessening the attachment
      to intellectual processes.


      >> Your post re: borders, separation, wars, etc.., is
      >> certainly on target. Yet life is founded upon moral
      >> consequences; what we sow, we reap.
      >Only life on the "dualistic plane." Shall we place our attention there?
      >Has ANYTHING mankind ever done helped?

      Many people, of myriad religious (and non-aligned) communities,
      have devoted their lives to helping others in need; helping
      the earth to breath; helping themselves to grow into more
      compassionate and vital forces for human harmony.

      So, I would offer an emphatic YES: there are many things mankind
      has done to help this planet and those who dwell upon it. And
      doesn't this point to the reality of darkness and light? Or
      are compassionate actions and destructive actions irrelevant
      to the cause of non-duality?

      >We are as or more barbaric than we
      >were a thousand years ago. Now we can kill all life on the planet by
      >pushing a single red button.

      I doubt that we're any more or less barbaric than at any
      time in human history -- we've simply evolved more sublime
      methods for expression. Like ==Gene Poole=='s recent allegory
      on the Princess and Pea; we seem to have this persistent
      seed that, no matter how many mattresses we use to hide it, it

      >> If one action leads to
      >> greater unity (less duality),
      >Less duality? There is either duality, or no duality. I didn't know
      >duality came in "degrees."

      A good question. I don't know, either, but I think most religions
      would tell us that there are indeed degrees towards unity with
      one's beloved goal, e.g., that one is "closer" to one's goal (in time)
      than before. This might be expressed by a Hindu as greater degrees
      of Karmic freedom, by a Bdst as taking rebirth in a higher realm, etc..

      >> and the other to greater
      >> dis-unity, doesn't this imply objectively a "right path"
      >> and a "wrong path?"
      >Focus on opposites like "right" and "wrong," and you are lost.

      Fail to heed the distinctions of right and wrong and
      you are dead.

      I respect your idealic position, Tim, and know where
      you're coming from (I believe), but valid ideals (any ideals)
      are true always. Find an example where an ideal contradicts
      and you're back to the drawing board (or the journal, or the
      pillow, or the lab, or wherever you go when a new paradigm
      is required.)

      > This is
      >Dvaita (duality). Nothing is objective, and nothing that "I" can see here
      >implies that duality ("right, wrong, good, evil, rich, poor.........") is
      >the "true" perspective.

      Yet, we use the sense of right and wrong in every
      life choice, from the most mundane, to the most
      sublime. Even these email posts are saturated with
      the choice of right versus wrong.

      How does one transcend duality with dualistic tools?

      JL, I liked your question a lot, so I hope you don't
      mind me offering an observation.
      Transcending duality through duality
      doesn't seem possible to me - I think this is an excellent point.
      So if dualistic tools won't do it, this includes the tool of "choice."
      With all dualistic tools eliminated, this seems to me to leave
      only choiceless awareness, unfragmented,
      as the "transcendent."


      "I don't exist," we say, existentially.

      The world of form is not real, we realize.

      Non-duality is all there is we argue.

      There is no one here to know, we learn.

      Objects are fictional, we objectify.

      There is no 'here and there', we send.

      "Silence is all there is!", we shout.

      "Words have no meaning," we say meaningfully.

      "I am free of desires," we wish.

      I plan to be completely spontaneous.

      Tomorrow I will be here and now.

      I am completely independent, I breathe.

      I am aware that awareness cannot be aware of itself.


      If you meet the Buddha, kill him.


      If you meet the Buddha, let him kill you.


      If you meet Budha, you are dead.


      Tim Harris:

      <I should like to hear more about the no 'I' as it relates to the unique
      experiences and circumstances of perceived existence.

      My first response to this intriguing point:

      My personal experience is there is less and less density in my body/mind
      location, and thoughts and feelings seem less and
      less like Mine. As the holding aspect of ego-self (that other thread)
      softens and melts, stuff moves through my window of awareness more flowingly
      and always in the context of the background/foreground of Silent Presence.

      I raised a question about "I" in your dream becuase as I recall you asked
      something like "Was I really there?" Well, obviously you were not Not there
      because it is in your memory and in no one
      else's. I should have asked, and ask now, What did you mean
      by that?

      I may as well mention the out-of-body issue that was mentioned by a few
      people. As for me I have had considerable OBE but I have no understanding
      yet of what goes out of the body. It would seem to indicate an
      individualized awareness unit that can travel. I know that non-dualists
      generally do not like the idea of an individual soul, but the question is
      still open as far as I am concerned. Some people I talk to say there is only
      this body/mind fictional existence and the real, undifferentiated Self.
      I've been aware of many dimensions of existence between those. I believe not
      all the information is in but I don't think about it much. I just welcome
      understandings when they ambush me.


      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~here are some words
      re: masks/ and those things we do-- i bow to the
      poet/philosopher. methinks, i should like to be shakespeare's fool in this
      court. . .
      i had buried myself
      in grief again.
      but from my tomb
      recognized that even there,
      all was filled with sky.
      and in that instant the
      was infinately real.
      perceived attacks on my person
      were no more than phantoms
      stepping on my shadows. smoke.
      no light.
      symbolic burning of old ways & words
      was a mere spark. . .
      ritualistic burial of companions and
      my soul's mates a flicker. nothing, nothing. . .
      when all the books and records are told,
      and buried beyond capture--
      when grief gazes at itself and
      that grief dissolves into itself--
      i am free to hold rapt attention to the sky
      and to what is truly burning.
      reduced to ash.

      good morning blessings,
      from morning on the left coast!
      sister aleks

      At first everything was "out there". Then I learned
      about projection and everything became "in here".
      That is still duality. Then one day Gene said something
      about a "nondual living observer". Now Gene may not
      have meant this at all but I "saw" that it is the observer
      which/who is nondual not what is being looked at.
      Make sense?

      Last night I was walking my dog. We walked for a long,
      long time out in the state park by our house. It was nearing
      dusk. I was struggling with a question I have. He was
      sniffing and doing a marvelous job of being a dog.
      Suddenly everything seemed so alive and what I was looking
      at was looking back at me. The trees, the land, the air and so
      forth. I was struggling with the idea that there isn't any subject
      or object. I said I am looking out at this stuff and it is looking
      back at me. The thought of identification entered my mind.
      I said well maybe it isn't that there isn't any me or you but that
      the identification is the issues. I mean consciousness touches
      down through an individual awareness. Then I remembered
      my experience of my friend and I peeping through a peephole
      and seeing ourselves. I realized that where we were peeping
      from was the same and what we were peeping at was the same
      but we were looking through our own peephole not the same
      peephole. God has an infinite number of eyes and each one of
      us is One. Make sense?


      For a short definition, I like Wayne Dyer's -- the ego is
      just an idea we have of ourselves. So the well-entrenched Western concept
      of ego might create more problems than it solves, because it rigidifies the
      idea we have of ourselves. The Buddhist notion is lots lighter.

      One Buddhist concept I really is that of the lifestream. When it comes to
      re-indentifying it over time, it is neither the same thing at time T-one as
      it was at time T-zero, nor is it different.


      >Question: is there a psichological
      >difference between a mind/body that have had several insights
      >(simply speaking here), and another that never had one?


      What does it matter? It is usually said that after insights there is more
      phenomenal peace and tranquility. More harmonious vibrations, more theta
      waves (or whatever range) in the brain area. Swami Rama of the Himalayan
      Institute underwent some physiological tests and it was found that his
      various waves were this way.

      But can you ever find a one-to-one, rigid correspondence between certain
      physiological descriptions and the history of insights? This will never
      happen. Let's say you find a really chilled-out person. Is there a
      guarantee that that person had insights? Or, can you mimic the effect of
      insights if you somehow bring upon yourself the physiological states? No.
      On the other side: let's say you find a person with lots of wisdom, lots
      of experiences. He might appear very agitated. Nisargadatta, have you
      seen the video of him?

      So what does it matter?

      Also, one of the insights is that there is no one to have insights, so the
      very basis of comparison sort of disappears under our feet...

      Tim G:

      When there is an experience of "becoming" something or being something
      other than oneself (and the "me" is absent), this is the state called
      samadhi, or "ecstatic absorption." It is not moksha, but when samadhi
      begins to appear more and more often, it can be said that ignorance
      (duality) is thinning out rapidly.

    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.