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

Highlights of Friday September 8, 2000

Expand Messages
  • Gloria Lee
    POU & DAN Kia Ora and Greetings It is almost as though this awakening in Consciousness at present has to pass through the same stages as the human growth
    Message 1 of 1 , Sep 9, 2000
      POU & DAN

      Kia Ora and Greetings

      It is almost as though this awakening in Consciousness at present has to
      pass through the same stages as the human growth unfolding. i.e. womb,
      mouth, anus, genitals, Oedipus complex, latency puberty into adulthood. It
      is almost like a mapping system where one can see almost where different
      teachers or realsiers are fixated. only of course if you are at the stage
      immediately ahead

      Many teachers today here in Western Europe claim there is no 'i' you can't
      do anything here, there is no one to do it, etc. etc.. For myself my own
      personal understanding is wake up and pay the taxes. We all need to continue
      to grow up and at least bring some degree of awareness to responsibility in
      this game we all play together 'I am here with you'

      The teaching of "no I" is
      only to address fixation
      on an "I".

      There is no intrinsic value
      to teaching "no I" as if
      this were something
      to be given to someone else
      (e.g., "here I give you this
      teaching of "no I", now use
      it well and live by it - LOL).

      So, definitely, the teaching of
      "no I" can be a fixation,
      as can the teaching of "the
      Eightfold Path", or "advaita",
      or anything except my teaching ;-)

      Of course, Pou, this applies to
      the idea of stages unfolding.
      Because it always places someone
      somewhere in an assumed stance
      by which to evaluate "others".
      Even assuming I've reached a stage
      of "nonevaluation", I remain in
      this "stage trap".

      So, which stage is the ending
      of all stages? At what
      "point" in the journey does
      That arise?

      The only "point" for the ending
      of all stages is "no point",
      It is the nonarising of any
      journey at all.

      There's only ...




      Kia Ora

      Yes.. we are all the answer... asking the question.. "Who am I?"

      Why.. because it loves to ask the question, in fact it delights in asking the
      question who am I?" there has never been a point ever where it has not delighted
      in asking the question.. it is really the only question it delights in asking...
      hence why Rumi stated I long to revel in the drunken frenzy of your love and
      one.. two .. three.. "Who am I?" oh octave higher in the key of G major "Who am
      I?" hmmm..

      Quick Mark.. before Love comes before sunrise to chain us all and drag us

      Pou -uoP

      DAVID HODGES sends "Indra, Come home!"

      In the Hindu tradition, Indra is a god who runs the Heavens. One day he
      decided to visit earth. He didn't come back. After a while, the other gods
      got worried. They sent out messengers looking for him.

      At last one of the messengers found him. Indra had become a pig.

      "Indra" cried the messenger. "You must come back. The Heavens are coming

      "Come back?" said Indra, amazed. "I can't come back! I have a she-pig
      and five little piglets!"

      ---from Soul Stories by Gary Zukav

      MARK & DAN

      >So, which one of them is a realized being, and more importantly, who are
      YOU? Yes, the price one pays to be able to let someone run a sword through you
      not blink because you know it is not truly harmful to you is to die first. I
      not done that. It looks to me like a very advanced teaching.
      >Love, Mark

      Hi, Mark.
      I think this teaching was expressed
      quite well by Obiwan Kenobi in
      Star Wars ;-) It is a good story,
      thanks for sharing it.

      If a sword runs through this body,
      and the body blinks, even screams,
      what of it? The body reacts, there's
      nothing inappropriate about that.

      The barbarian is one appearance, a monk
      that doesn't blink is another appearance,
      yet, That in which they appear remains
      "untouched" by either. The barbarian is
      oblivious to That, the monk wants
      to show the power of That to regulate
      a body's reactions, yet That is not
      "in" either the obliviousness of the
      barbarian, nor the monk's "showing"
      of regulation of a response to pain and death.

      That, simply is That, regardless of
      whether a barbarian appears or a monk
      appears (or disappears). It's interesting
      to note that although the monk and
      barbarian initially seem to present with
      very different attitudes, there is a striking
      commonality. Each, in his own way, is being
      "heroic" -- each is very "noticeable" as having
      taken a stance toward life and death. In fact,
      many warriors have prized those among them who
      could "show" that kind of indifference toward
      pain and death that the monk showed. The samurai
      thus adopted Zen, and Viking "berzerkers" version
      of an "ideal barbarian" included such indifference to
      pain and death.

      This "That" isn't heroic or non-heroic, isn't taking
      a particular stance and doesn't interfere with
      the taking of a stance. "That" isn't something other than
      the barbarian or monk, nor is it identified
      as barbarian or monk. Without That,
      no barbarian or monk would seem to be there.

      With regards to Hitler. Hitler appears in
      That and is oblivious. Others appear in That
      and feel empathy toward the victims. Some
      others appear in That and suggest that even
      Hitler can be accepted, as to be Reality is
      to exlude nothing. However, That isn't "in"
      the obliviousness, the empathy, or the acceptance.
      That has never not been That, regardless of what
      seems to be appearing. As we struggle to formulate
      attitudes toward violence, pain, death, people who
      use terror to achieve ends, people who don't have
      ends to achieve, That remains as is.

      It's funny to try to speak about This. Words
      sometimes seem quite humorous. Yet, what's a poor
      boy to do? Words, distorting as they are, are what
      we have to play with on this computer screen.

      POU & DAN on conscious suffering

      Some of the Zen Masters have also stated 'awakening in its mature stages has
      the ability to adopt any view point', and I stress the word 'any'

      Our path up the Mountain is strewn with many fixations of attention, simple
      to maintain the focus required to climb yet still higher, in the
      metaphorical sense of understanding Journey of the Hero..ess

      I belief if one is still long enough, to feel, and recognize, any fixation
      of attention within one Self, there will be found to be also an accomplice
      belief system.
      Yes, indeed, Pou. Freud did want
      to understand the fixations
      by which human energy becomes
      bound, often outside
      of the conscious awareness.
      Our culture supports affirmation of a "me" that is
      supposedly self-sufficient, self-determining,
      and free to choose. That "me" is merely
      a construction that is not at all independent,
      is, in fact, completely dependent on society,
      language, the past, and biological constraints.

      Freud made the point that we are not the
      master in our own house that we wish
      to believe ourselves to be; that "master" is
      essentially a self-constructed image that depends
      upon the exlusion of the evidence that would expose
      its lack of grounding.

      As for "neurosis", it's a useful term
      to place the one who defines "neurosis"
      in a one-up position. After all, if I
      can explain neurosis, I must be beyond it.

      I sometimes find it useful to look at "neurosis" as
      "the intrusion of reality". Neurosis
      is then a gift, a potential opening
      for awareness. Neurosis says "I won't
      be ignored. Try to ignore me and I will
      show up in your life anyway."

      As for psychosis, that is a very risky teacher.
      Psychosis is a swamp of disorganization
      that conceals a pearl of great price.

      Beyond neurosis, psychosis, and normalcy "I am".

      If you ask me who I am, I may reply "not this, not
      that". Or I may reply "I am the air you are breathing,
      the space in which these words appear."


      The Overseer sees Self, self, the map, and the entire matrix; many
      organisms are actually one 'big' organism; this Overself is the
      entire environment in which all of this is taking place, and we
      'know' it as SPACE. All activities in space, do not affect space;
      space is the parent of all activities, and it is space which (in a
      seemingly neutral way) connects and enables them all. Space is the
      cradle of matter and energy, and of all possibility.

      Space is synonymous with 'awareness'; everything is available both in
      space, and in awareness.

      The human is not a tiny dot in an infinite universe; the universe is
      a tiny dot in space/awareness.

      Virtual self is aware of none of this, although it may reference
      these concepts; it may access these concepts, but only to the depth
      necessary to maintain the virtual self. Self is aware of Self and
      self; Self need not reference any of these concepts, but it may do so
      if it wishes. It may do so for the purpose of gently pointing to a
      mechanism which acts as though it has 'independent existence', when
      in fact this mechanism is a dynamically-maintained _function_ of
      Self; like a light-bulb, it will not shine without external power
      being supplied.

      During deep sleep, the power to the 'virtual self' is turned off;
      upon awakening, the 'virtual self' is re-initialized, based upon
      stored vector-memories, and is once again steered out into the map of
      social inter-competition. Virtual self has no memory of being 'turned
      off' or of being re-initialized.

      Virtual self has no autonomy; for Self, autonomy is moot, because for
      Self, there is no field in which to be autonomous; Self is itself,
      that very field; and it is called space, or awareness.

      BRUCE sends more Krishnamurti

      Comment: I find it impossible to be aware all the time.

      K: Don't be aware all the time. Just be aware in little bits.
      Please, there is no being aware all the time -- that is a
      dreadful idea. It is a nightmare, this terrible desire for
      continuity. Just be aware for one minute, for one second,
      and in that one second of awareness you can see the whole
      universe. That is not a poetic phrase. We see things in a
      flash, in a single moment; but having seen something, we
      want to capture, to hold it, give it continuity. That is not
      being aware at all. When you say, "I must be aware all the
      time," you have made a problem of it, and then you should
      really find out why you want to be aware all the time --
      see the greed it implies, the desire to acquire. And to say,
      "Well, I am aware all the time," means nothing.

      Is love, like marriage, for ever and ever? Are marriages
      for ever and ever? You know better than I do. Is love for
      ever and ever, or is it something totally stripped of time?

      J. Krishnamurti, June 10, 1962, London, England

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