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

Highlights for Thursday, August 24

Expand Messages
  • Melody
    It s all about fun ............ SKY: When I decide to have fun, I loose all anxiety and boredom and feel blissful. So I m thinking that enlightenment is just
    Message 1 of 1 , Aug 26, 2000
    • 0 Attachment
      It's all about 'fun'............



      SKY:

      When I decide to have fun, I loose all anxiety and boredom and
      feel blissful. So I'm thinking that enlightenment is just "fun." I
      feel stoned all the time now. So, I'm wondering why we have to go
      through all kinds of convoluted processes, when we could just
      consciously decide to just have fun all the time. I know this sounds
      incredibly naive and childish, but I'm 51, and this has never really
      occurred to me. I mean, "awarenes," and "compassion," and "freedom,"
      don't really do it for me. But "fun," really does it, like totally,
      for me. So what the hell's been going on? Yes, I'm generally a
      blissful person. But not like THIS! And all I did was just glom onto
      a word that DOES IT for me. So, until I get some better perspective,
      I'm putting this question out: WHO WANTS TO TELL ME THAT FUN
      AND ENLIGHTENMENT ARE DIFFERENT? OK, sure, "fun" seems
      more temporary. But, as far as I can tell, "enlightenment" is really
      just total commitment to permanent fun. So, it's just a question of
      relative "stubbornness,"or, as I say, "commitment."


      CHAZ:
      Sounds perfect to me. I have found uncomplex, happy harmless
      fun to be way more gutsy, enduring and real than that old "life is
      suffering" concept those enlightened ones keep whining about.

      Pleasure to meet another blissful one.


      JERRY:
      All existence is fun, yes, as long as one's awareness is
      that the amusement park is dust in the wind. All existence
      is a roller coaster. You will get stuck many times,
      sometimes hanging upside down. Eventually you will get
      thrown out of this roller coaster. You will get killed on
      this roller coaster. As long as fun-consciousness is held
      throughout that, you're in good shape. Because -- 'gulp' --
      it IS fun! (Isn't it??) Can you feel excitement for the
      unknown rather than fear? Can you hold awareness while being
      thrown from the coaster? If you can have fun while doing
      time in prison or facing terminal disease, stuff like that,
      you got it made in the shade


      MICHAEL:

      Hey! Why do you think I laugh all the time? The whole darn
      everything is laughing! And having a GREAT TIME being alive,
      aware and everwhere!

      Suffering? Ah that old bugaboo is just an appetizer that sets up
      the digestive system for the main course!


      DAN:

      Opening only
      always as Unknown,
      and Unknowable -
      that is "knowing".

      There is "someone"
      who wants to
      have enlightenment,
      have compassion,
      have fun.

      The last thing that
      "someone" wants
      is to be the
      bonfire of its
      own cremation.

      If "fun" means
      being that bonfire,
      then "fun" is
      what we're having,
      "really".


      CEE:

      difference between fun and bliss:
      nobody's having it


      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

      GREG:

      What Aziz says about Buddhist practitioners can be said about aspirants in
      *every* tradition. He says that many Buddhist practitioners practice hard
      but don't seek the ultimate. This might be true, but so what? Every
      tradition is like that. Every tradition has a progressive model of
      success, and according to that, every tradition is aware that only a very
      very few go through that last pinhole, leaving nothing behind. Some
      Buddhist practitioners do practice hard. It's not different from anything
      else. Some advaita followers practice hard at not practicing, since there
      is the teaching to "drop all practices."

      Aziz implies that Buddhists should seek the I AM, though he also states
      that this is inconsistent with their philosophy, which has them seeking the
      I-AM-NOT. He says that the Buddhist philosophy is valid, but it prevents
      them from an amazing awakening to their own self. This preference for the
      I-AM may be a personal inclination of Aziz's. The amazing awakening he is
      encouraging Buddhists to pursue is just as available in I-AM-NOT terms. It
      happens when koans are broken through, in vipassana meditation and zazen,
      in sutra chanting, and in other Buddhist forms. What about the examples of
      Hui Neng, Bankei, Shinran Shonin, and many Zen masters like Han-Shan,
      Yung-Ming, Chu-Hung, Tsung-pen, Ou-I, and others who have taught
      Buddha-recitation and the breakthroughs that occur this way?

      Great teachings like Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta and Hinduism and
      Christianity and Judaism and Islam and Nagual and Sihkism and and Shamanism
      and others -- are great teachings partly because they are vast enough to
      suit the vast variety of people according to their inclinations. Some
      don't seek the ultimate, but isn't it better that they are seeking
      something rather than nothing? There is a very wonderful sense in which
      everyone is now doing the best they can.

      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

      MANCHINE:

      Sea crashing.

      Sun setting and rising

      Volcanoes erupting

      Galaxies rotating

      Gases condensing

      Atoms forming

      An Idea

      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`

      MARCIA:

      I was laying in bed this morning drifting in that space
      between waking and sleeping and several things occurred
      to me. I was looking at the techniques of 'stopping thoughts'
      and 'following the thought'. I was momentarily in that
      place/space of pure seeing. Tarthang Tulku talks in one
      of his books about how one can try the method of
      stopping thoughts but that can take many lifetimes.
      As a shortcut he suggests a technique of 'following the
      thought'. I tried this before. It consists of holding whatever
      thought is problematical in one's mind like an anchor and
      watching all the reactions/responses that come up. It is
      really a mind blower to see all the different identities
      march, run, parade on by. The thought/anchor allows
      one to see the variety of personalities that one would
      feel as if were one i.e. a unified being if the anchor/thought
      wasn't creating a bit of separation.

      DAVE:
      I agree with you Marcia, this is a very valuable excercize.
      The space between waking and sleeping is where the the most
      direct portal to the non-physical dimension lies.

      This is actually a serious point, since, as many of us know
      the physical world is an elaborate state of experience, within
      a non-physical environment.

      From this point, as you experienced, a much better understanding of
      consciousness can be seen, and in a form "more than just conceptual".

      It is a relatively simple step from this point to direct
      conscious entry into directed dreams. Directed dreams, when used as
      tools for exploration of consciousness, will provide you with
      insights not otherwise possible with pure intellect alone.


      M:
      Question: Okay, so far. I am wondering if somewhere inthis comes the
      admonition about power. It feels to me
      as if I could learn to maneuver as you suggest. But
      my question is.....where does the heart enter? Many
      admonitions about use of power without heart. Gurdjieff
      set outside himself his power to hypnotize people.
      Do you know what I am talking about?


      DAN:

      -
      When Tarthang Tulku suggests a technique,
      (and I agree this is an interesting one)
      a "doer" is implied, as you say.
      Who else would be executing the technique,
      if not a "doer".

      Techniques can help construct alterations
      in the program of the computer.
      Techniques cannot bring about the awareness
      in which there is no computer as
      basis of reality, no "me" as center of being.

      If you see that it is impossible to get
      to the place of no-doer, your mind will
      stop. It will stop because it will be
      confronted with a program that it must
      execute but cannot implement. We might
      describe that program as "live without
      being based on the past". As soon as
      there is the attempt to implement the
      program, there is activity based on the
      past, for what else is that program
      but the past being maintained and carried?

      If awareness "sees" that living must be
      living not based on the past, then
      its "seeing" creates a program that
      cannot be executed. The computer
      not only stops, it ceases to exist
      (as an independent reality, as the
      basis for reality-construction).

      As awareness is present, the mind stops.
      As the mind stops, the "doer" is not.
      Indeed, there is not at this point
      even a "mind" to be found anywhere,
      not even "activity" or "nonactivity"
      to be described as states of being.

      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

      SKY:

      My faith is that people who feel good BEING don't feel good hurting others. And that's what I'm talking about. A BEING state,
      not a DOING SOMETHING in particular state. So, for me, when I say "fun," I don't mean ME HAVING the fun. I meanWE ALL BEING FUN.
      As in, IT is fun or HE/SHE/THEY ARE FUN. In the fun state, call it bliss, ecstasy, enlightenment, there is no past, present or
      future. There is only eternity. I'd say that even worrying about consequences is not fun. Seeing them as opportunities, however,
      yes. I'm talking mainly about FEELING states, not about object oriented outcomes. Am I making any sense?


      GLORIA:

      Makes sense to me, sky.
      This song always seemed to me to describe that "feeling good just being alive" feeling.


      The 59th Street Bridge Song (Feelin' Groovy)
      Written by Paul in June 1966


      Paul:

      'I knew that record was a hit as soon as I wrote it.'


      'I came back from England to the United States in December of 1965. The Sounds of Silence had become a big hit and when I returned I
      had to make this transition from being relatively unknown in England to a sort of semi-famous over here. I didn't adjust well. It
      was always slightly embarrassing to me, teeny-bops etc. So I used to think all my sweets are gone, good times gone, left over in
      England. All the songs I was writing were very down type of songs, nothing happy. Until about last June, for some reason last June I
      started to come out of it, I started to get into a good mood, I don't know why. One day I was riding along in my Aston Martin and I
      said to myself.... no I really don't have an Aston Martin, in fact I don't have a car at all. I was the type of kid when I was in
      Paris, we'd sit on the side of the Seine, in Paris, and when the tourist boats go by, you know? I would yell out "Capitalist pig!".
      So here I am getting into this pleasant frame of mind and I was coming home one morning, about six o'clock in the morning and coming
      over the 59th Street bridge in New York and what a groovy day it was, a really good one, and one of those times when you know you're
      not really going to be tired for about an hour. So I started writing a song which later became the 59th Street Bridge song or
      Feelin' Groovy.'Tufts 66


      @SONG The 59th Street Bridge Song (Feelin' Groovy)


      Slow down, you move too fast.
      You got to make the morning last. Just kicking down the cobble stones. Looking for fun and feelin' groovy.


      Hello lamppost,
      What cha knowing? I've come to watch your flowers growing. Ain't cha got no rhymes for me? Doot-in' doo-doo, Feelin' groovy.


      Got no deeds to do,
      No promises to keep. I'm dappled and drowsy and ready to sleep. Let the morning time drop all its petals on me. Life, I love you,
      All is groovy.

      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

      GREG welcomes ROYAL:

      You do seem quite serious about avoiding seriousness. Can you say it
      jovially, with light, humor and laughter?

      Reminds me of a story....

      There was a detective named Philo Vance in 1930's movies and novels. He was
      unbearably pompous, arrogant, conceited, and erudite. The pre-WWII days
      were the days of detectives with almost supernatural powers of "deduction"
      and knowledge of trivia and minutiae. Most of the action was among the
      upper classes, and set in drawing rooms and posh clubs. You get the
      idea... The Philo Vance books themselves were pretty boringly written, and
      he wasn't a nice guy. One popular reviewer of the time wrote:

      Philo Vance
      Needs a kick in the pants.

      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

      MARK:

      war is a contraction (and a serious one at that) of "we are." golly,
      but the need to prove it is sooo strong sometimes, huh?

      SKY:

      Playful Otter,If "war" is a contractionof "we are," then "contraction"is itself a contraction of"contradiction." What, then,
      is theextension of the "human condition"?

      MARK:

      contra diction is, of course, the enunciation of leftist south american
      dance dogma. Human condition expands into "hunger demanding contractual
      dimensionalization." see through the hunger and you collapse in
      gratitude. (and be-attitude)
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.