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

Wednesday, September 27

Expand Messages
  • umbada@ns.sympatico.ca
    Outer space doesn t care. It will crack you like a toothpick. Just when you re enjoying the beautifully dual view of Gemini from near Orion s Belt, it sends a
    Message 1 of 1 , Sep 28, 2000
    • 0 Attachment
      Outer space doesn't care.
      It will crack you like a toothpick.

      Just when you're enjoying
      the beautifully dual view
      of Gemini from near Orion's Belt,
      it sends a meteor shower.

      Stroll by the Big Dipper and
      suddenly there's a solar flare.

      You just don't get no respect in
      outer space.

      As for Nonduality, it hunches its
      shoulders on the dark side of
      the moon, lurking to panic
      unwary strangers into
      surrendering their
      lunch money.

      -Dan Berkow


      OOOOOOhhhh nature,

      the sunset with warm rays touch my face
      leafes are falling, one by one,
      the smell of leaving, change
      where am I
      who am I

      Sweet smell of roses
      laughing kids
      kiss you so softly
      feeling your .....

      dogs playing
      running water
      sweet surrender
      where are you


      you are always here
      never left
      how can you

      I LOVE YOU



      The computer broke,

      the I was in panic -

      everything gone -

      separation from the Salon -

      remembering the Self

      slowly finding my way back

      to the wave of comunication.

      It is not about me -

      and the river is flowing between us -




      I´ve been blissed out and feeling shitty in non-duality and
      felt every other feeling to be had there-but so what-so
      fuckin´what-I got stuck.Thats what I mean about coming back
      to do the work.HERE on the ground.Now I´m intelligent
      enough to see the point.What´s your experience?Where do you
      hang out?



      Dear friends, God brought me to this Non–Duality-Salon and
      so a simple-minded German good-for –nothing takes the
      challenge to follow this beautiful exchange of spiritual
      intelligentsia. Maybe you can help me with one question: If
      all you can deal with and talk or write about, is mind, and
      mind is built on and feeding on concepts of duality: What
      are you talking or writing about in a Non-Duality-Salon? My
      best wishes, Florian



      Dear Florian, everything and all was just silence. And you
      woke me up! Do you think we all shouldnt write anymore and
      just get lost and disappear into Non-Duality itself? What
      then? How would we know each other? These many parts of
      ourselves? What concept is "Non-Duality"?



      Dear Florian,

      I'm given the gift of talking while I am who I am there may
      be coming only "la la lalla, uh" it can change into "uh,
      alla hu" and after a while it's "allah - hu"

      No way to describe it - but the sound is there!

      Love Lilly



      Dear Florian!

      It is the endless speaking of Love... Ahhhh... I love to
      speak with myself pretending that it is the "other"...
      Ahhhh... I Love myself speaking...Ahhhh...

      Beautiful words written in the sky simply to adorn the
      never ending emptiness.

      Your question is a koan...

      Love Michele


      why, non-duality of course. .......matthew


      Dear Dan,

      I believe in the other, in the work with the other. My
      growth happened and is still happening through people who
      make themselves available for me. It is not necessarily fun
      for them to deal with me. We had a famous politician in the
      70's , Willy Brandt. He kneeled down in Warsaw in the
      former Ghetto to ask for forgiveness for the crimes of
      Nazi-Germany. ( he personally fought against Nazi-Germany
      in the 40ies). As we already discussed in this group, this
      is not the whole truth. But it was an opening, an act of
      healing for humanity from my point of view.

      Now imagine: the American president asking for forgiveness
      fo the crimes against the Red Indians and the Black people.
      Kneeling down.

      I believe we would experience a movement in consciousness.

      Dan, I still believe in a world of brothers and sisters.
      Not without pain but with useful ways to live it and feel
      it and heal it. The clear understanding of no I is the very
      ground for that. No separation. Harry Palmer said, all what
      is separating us are our beliefs. And I can change my
      beliefs, because they are just thoughts appearing in me. I
      believe, the plan right now is to do a jump to the next
      level of consciousness for the whole mankind. I really
      believe that. And the first step is to heal the wounds of
      the past, through admitting the mistakes and atonement.



      "I want to be loved" can be simply another way of saying "I
      don't want to be alone" and " I don't want to feel my

      And giving and getting attention is one way to avoid that
      uncomfortable feeling.

      "Love" ultimately may not be something one can 'get' or
      'give'. In a sense, it is what One IS. The key seems to be:
      in the willingness to fully experience and taste that

      ....to abide loneliness.

      What we try to escape from is often our very door to



      Uncle Joe Mahiques died a couple of nights ago. Now there
      was an arising in consciousness. He was born 92 years ago
      in the province of Galicia in Spain and lived there for
      about nine years before emigrating to the US with his
      parents Pedro and Rosa Mahiques and his five brothers and

      Joe used to tell tales of old Mexico and Pancho Villa ---
      he was a spell-binding story teller and I can remember him
      going on for hours about his adventures. At one time during
      the great depression of the 1930s he used to be a hobo and
      hang out in the hobo jungles. He would tell of riding the
      rails and riding in empty boxcars and being chased by the
      railroad police. He loved to sing Spanish songs.

      He would have loved to have met you all because he loved
      people. He would have wanted a little of his story told.
      The world was richer because of him.

      So long uncle Joe --- I'll miss you lots.




      LARRY: I agree, we do just do it, but I'm not so sure about
      the not believing part. Arn't we (you?) instead
      substituting one belief for another. Do you truely not
      believe in inherent existence or do you believe that you
      don't believe in inherent existence?

      GENE: I recall, that as I was living in my NonDual RV, and
      parked near Grant's Pass, Oregon, watching my little 12VDC
      television, a special newscast, which was live from
      Rajneeshpuram (Antelope, Ore).

      The occasion was Osho, coming out of a prolonged (2-year?)
      silence. News-hounds were in abundance, and had submitted
      to a lottery, to be the first one to ask Osho a question,
      any question of choice. Naturally, the guy who won the
      lottery, was very eager. Finally, Osho appeared, and took
      his place in a big chair.

      With little preamble, the news guy stuck his big microphone
      in Osho's face and said:

      "What I want to know, and what everyone, every American
      wants to know, is this.... DO YOU BELIEVE IN GOD???"

      The newsman waited, it was obvious that he assumed that he
      had really hit the big-time; now, Osho would be FORCED to
      finally reveal himself to all of America, due to this
      incredible, pointed question. Certainly, something profound
      would be forthcoming!

      The room was silent. The camera zoomed in to show Osho's
      face; I could see his eyes begin to water... it was obvious
      that he was having an emotion, but what? As the tears began
      to flow, the camera showed the newsman, also. His face
      betrayed his eagerness to hear the outcome of his
      prosecutorial splendor. The silence was very loud.

      Finally, Osho look directly at the man, and this is what he
      said, in response to the question "Do you believe in God?";

      He said (having difficulty controlling what was now
      obviously great ironic mirth, tears streaming sown his

      Osho: "I do not believe... in belief".

      With this, the newsman recoiled, as if bitten by a snake;
      his face portrayed great shock. Those present, erupted into
      both laughter and loud remarks of every sort. Chaos was
      supreme for a few moments. Osho continued to shed tears,
      now shaking silently in laughter, his face wrinkling,
      finally he showed his teeth, then he wiped his eyes. He
      adjusted his face into a picture of 'seriousness' for a
      moment, but once again succumbed to hilarity.

      For me, this was a perfect scene. I had an epiphany at that
      moment. It was not so much what Osho had said, but how he
      had perfectly 'mastered' the entire scenario. I laughed
      until I cried, and kept laughing for days after.

      What Osho said, did have a profound impact upon me. I
      realized this:


      If something is true or real, I do not have to believe in

      If something is not true or real, I am a fool to believe in

      *** Now, of what use is belief?



      Dearest Gene

      Kia Ora

      It's been a long day and I'm feeling very tired but I will
      attempt here to offer one more viewpoint on this topic of

      Keeping in mind, this is a concept.

      Consciousness that 'I am' in order to experience itself
      here in the phenomenal world, does so through belief
      filters. Many of these filters are transparent, in other
      words, consciousness that 'I am' may not be necessarily
      aware of the filter(s) that it is experiencing the
      objective world through.

      I'm sure you agree or at least understand, the objective
      world in itself is utterly meaningless until 'I' assign a
      meaning to it.Even if I decide not to assign meaning really
      that is still a meaning. How I as consciousness view the
      objective world is through beliefs and the belief that I
      choose to see it is how I as consciousness here in the
      Leela will experience the chosen desire. In this play of
      consciousness, the endless continuous rising of the
      phenomenal form arising out of the nominal also desires to

      Any desired experience that is denied creates the
      experience of Samsara or suffering and consciousness enters
      into a creation as you and I are in right now. The way I
      see it is that consciousness that I am is able to
      consciously enter into creation and play. If it is not
      conscious of entering into any creation it then experiences
      the state of denial, and you know Gene, none of us can
      overestimate the power of denial can we? You're a lawyer
      aren't you?

      So Gene, do you get my drift? Consciousness at rest is not
      aware of its own self. In order to experience itself which
      is an unexplainable determination creates itself in form
      and manifests as you and me here in the phenomenal form.
      Deliberately identifies in the objective world as
      subject/object and loses itself delightfully.

      Gene, if you've even got this far I would imagine that you
      know all this stuff already. So now we both agree that you
      and I experience all through what we decide to believe.
      This too being a belief. By the way, do you know anything
      that's not a belief?



      You are your own way out. You *are* the way itself. I *am*
      the way, the truth and the life. Ever heard that? There is
      no escape from life - you *are* life. The only escape there
      is is from your own mind prison. Stop trying to make
      yourself and life into something 'other', something 'holy'
      that it's not. There is the understanding of this, which is
      surrender itself, acceptance. Love.



      When I found my teacher I was not thinking about how long
      are 10, 20 years (or a lifetime) and if I am under someone
      who is telling me what to do. There is still just this
      feeling of expanding more and more and the immense wish to
      come closer more and more. A teacher is a mirror for me -
      it's myself outside of me with another point of few. - that
      helps a lot in expanding. There was and is never a point of
      doing what someone else is telling me - that's always what
      "I" want - and if not - time to say it, and take the risk
      and the consequences. .

      I think friends are also my teachers and to some of them I
      feel committed too. Same thing, I am offering them honesty,
      courage and trust. And I stay to them even its getting

      You see for me its no question about being that free - its
      a question falling in love.


      VALHARDING: Dear Harsh, I have heard it said You have to
      steal from the Master, could you explain what this means?
      Greetings Valharding.

      HARSHA: There is nothing to steal dear Valharding. There is
      nothing to give. The transmission from the Master is based
      on hearing the Truth, reflecting on the Truth, and
      understanding the Truth to Be One's Own Being. The
      transmission is part of the dream.

      The True Beauty of the Guru Principle is this. The Guru
      appears in your dream as Love and tells you that You are
      the Self, The Heart, The Love It Self. In the dream, you
      believe the Guru. You have faith. Why you believe the Guru
      or have faith is hard to say. But you do and you believe.
      Then the dream along with the Guru disappears and you are
      Fully Awake. You Recognize that You are the Guru, Self,
      Heart, and Love and the whole universe exists in you only.
      When the Guru appears in the dream with overwhelming
      beauty, power, love, and compassion, know that the time of
      awakening has come.



      GENE POOLE: Greetings, friend David... I am replying to
      your brilliant and masterful reply to my quasi-humorous
      question of breath. I would have quoted some of it here,
      but I cannot locate that letter on my HD.

      Your perception of the reality of context, how that reality
      itself presets or biases our assumptions, set me to
      thinking (a dangerous thing in itself, sometimes) along
      certain lines, upon which I had previously pondered. This
      is the switching of contexts between 'I' and 'You', as
      signaled by speech, and also as conducted as thought. So I
      will jot off a few cogent points here and ask you to ponder
      a bit, if you would. No hurry.

      So here is what I see: A person uses the words 'I' and
      'You' quite easily, in conversation. If I say 'I', I mean
      'me', and if I say 'you', I am referring to somebody else.
      This is the common pattern. But when I _hear_ the word 'I',
      I somehow translate that into 'you'. I mean, if someone
      else is speaking, and the word 'I' is used, the common
      behaviour (and it is very automatic) is to assume that the
      'I' referred to is not 'me', but 'you'.

      So it goes like this: When you say 'I', you mean 'you'. Or
      is it, that when you say 'I', I mean you? So here I am,
      putting a meaning on a word we all use rather
      automatically, differing only in who is saying it. In fact,
      I can say 'I' and 'you' and they both mean the same thing,
      but those meanings are automatically switched, due to
      assumed _context_. In one context, I am I, and in another
      context, I is you. That is, the context being that you are
      the one talking, and saying 'I'.

      Now, it seems easy to assume that the context is actual;
      that if someone other than I says 'I' that they are not
      referring to me, but to 'the other who is speaking'. But I
      suspect that on some level of awareness, the I and you are
      indeed interchangable, so that I am every you and you are
      every I. The problems arise from the assumption that
      context somehow automatically changes meanings, like,
      perceived context actually is an objective reality,
      determining exactly how we should hear and understand.

      Perhaps we could experiment with disabling the
      context-switcher. I would not know, and perhaps would not
      even care, who I is and who you is. There would then be no
      need for any 'you', because I would serve in both
      instances, due to the dissolution of 'ruling' context.

      The next step would be to undermine the basis of what
      perceives context. This could be difficult; but many places
      already serve breakfast around the clock, so that context
      has been abolished. We continue to call sunrise 'morning',
      even though morning is also when we wake up, regardless of
      the many people who arise late in the day, and thus have a
      morning out of the context of sunrise.

      Context is a fascinating study, especially if we consider
      that the assigning of context is so automatic. Could it be,
      that a study of context (and the automatic assignment of
      context), could reveal exactly how our 'assumption of
      separation' arises?

      As far-fetched as it may seem, it may be that language
      itself, forms the basis of most context. If this is at all
      true, it would mean (among other things) that we could
      utterly change our world, especially our world of
      common-contexts (the world-dream) by simply reworking how
      language is used.


      Context \Con"text\, n. [L. contextus; cf. F. contexte .]
      The part or parts of something written or printed, as of
      Scripture, which precede or follow a text or quoted
      sentence, or are so intimately associated with it as to
      throw light upon its meaning.

      According to all the light that the contexts afford.


      Context \Con*text"\, v. t. To knit or bind together; to
      unite closely. [Obs.] --Feltham.

      The whole world's frame, which is contexted only by
      commerce and contracts. --R. Junius.


      Context \Con*text"\, a. [L. contextus, p. p. of contexere
      to weave, to unite; con- + texere to weave. See {Text}.]
      Knit or woven together; close; firm. [Obs.]

      The coats, without, are context and callous. --Derham.


      DAVID HODGES: I loved your example of the removal of
      context: places that serve breakfast throughout the day!
      Other examples: banks where you can buy and sell stocks.
      Workplaces that have day care centers and rec rooms.

      I appreciated the various definitions of "context" that you
      provided. I wish I could find an exact definition, from
      computer science, of context switching. I remember the
      delight with which, when I was studying operating system
      theory, I realized that a computer could switch user's
      entire address spaces in and out of memory many times a
      second, this including their current set of running
      programs, stack space, display space (i.e. the contents of
      their screen), interrupt vectors, etc etc. And then to
      encounter IBM's operating system (now ancient history)
      called "VM" for Virtual Machine, which gave each user the
      illusion of having an entire 370 at his or her disposal!

      This leads me to further thoughts. The *speed* at which
      contexts are switched creates different effects.

      1. In written or spoken discourse, when one consciously
      manipulates context for effect, it is called "irony". For
      example, in yesterday's post which I wrote in response to
      Polar's "Duality in New York City", I was in full "irony"
      mode, otherwise known as "tongue in cheek" - knowing full
      well that some would not get the context switch I was doing
      and take it "straight". That is part of the game of being a
      poet, I suppose. Being misunderstood or understood in a way
      not intended is not an occasion for taking umbrage, it is
      an occasion for the pleasure the puppeteer gets when his
      puppet starts to walk on its own.

      2. This leads to a more sustained context switching which
      is called "art". When actors get up on stage and create a
      context switched environment it is called "theater". When
      painters put different colored paints on a canvas in such a
      way as to suggest some other context, like, for example, an
      image of a woman called "Mona Lisa", it is, again, called
      "art". When a writer puts down words that create a made-up
      sequence of effects tied together by cause and effect it is
      called "fiction". And so on.

      The philosopher Susanne Langer created a term for this in
      the early 50's, well before the computer era took hold.

      She called it "virtual experience". Her book "Feeling and
      Form" is highly recommended in this regard.

      In the case of the arts the context switch is easily
      discerned. We can look away from the stage or screen, put
      down the book, etc., at will, and then rejoin the context
      again when ready. And the context switch, or virtual
      experience, gives us pleasure. The gap between what we
      consider to be "Reality" and what the artist is presenting
      to us as a model of reality creates a frisson of enjoyment.
      This is called "aesthetic pleasure".

      It is on this level that what you said about language is
      true. Language creates a virtual experience and a virtual
      environment which is pervasive, controlling, and usually
      unquestioned. As a "language engineer" (i.e. poet) this is
      the virtual environment in which I like to play the most.
      Politicians play consciously in this arena, as do
      marketers, managers, public relations specialists, lawyers,
      psychiatrists, and on and on.

      3. The arts create virtual experience at human speed.
      Computers create virtual experiences at machine-speed. This
      is called "virtual reality." Last summer's movie "The
      Matrix" was a brilliant demonstration of a virtual reality
      scenario. In such cases the context switch is sustained so
      quickly that the human subject cannot easily see the Gap
      between the context switches. The frisson of enjoyment of
      VR is wearing off quickly, though. A few years ago people
      thought virtual reality was "cool" just because the gap
      wasn't apparent. Now there's a kind of "so what" about VR
      which will last until its uses become more pervasive and

      4. The next order of speed-up of context switching, or
      virtual experience, is what humans normally just call
      "reality". Because the level of switching is so fast, and
      because the "switcher" is not apparent to the physical
      senses (unlike the computer which is always somewhere under
      the desk or in the next room), "reality" is taken for
      reality, behind which there is no other referent. However,
      the fact that there may be other contexts besides the one
      you are in is an awareness that is available to some
      people. People such as shamans and schizophrenics
      experience multiple contexts. In the case of the former, it
      is with curiosity. In the case of the latter, it is with

      5. The level beyond this is the quantum level. Since I am
      not a scientist I will not attempt to state whether this is
      the final level or not. However I do know that current
      theory points to context switching that occurs even here,
      as when a particle disappears and reappears somewhere else
      instantaneously, leading to speculation about possible
      applications to time/space travel and such.

      Getting back to the level of virtual experiences created at
      human speed, I return to the original basis of your
      statement about language, and I quote:

      "Context is a fascinating study, especially if we consider
      that the assigning of context is so automatic. Could it be,
      that a study of context (and the automatic assignment of
      context), could reveal exactly how our 'assumption of
      separation' arises?"

      Yes, I agree. I think that Ramana's self-inquiry method
      does exactly that, it forces one to look at context and
      deconstruct the things that we have taken for granted about
      our identity. This makes me wonder if there might not be
      other means or technologies available for effectively
      accomplishing the same thing.

      "As far-fetched as it may seem, it may be that language
      itself, forms the basis of most context. If this is at all
      true, it would mean (among other things) that we could
      utterly change our world, especially our world of
      common-contexts (the world-dream) by simply reworking how
      language is used."

      I don't think that is far-fetched at all. Language creates
      an all-encompassing sphere of significance in which most of
      human society moves and lives and has its being. I myself
      woke up to the "virtual" nature of language long before I
      took it the next step to the "virtual" nature of identity.
      Whether that represents a path that others could or should
      take, I don't know. But it was pretty effective for me.
      Once one begins examining how reality is, in fact, a
      construction, there is no turning back.

      Virtually speculating, David



      Dear Melody, thank you for your warm response to the
      collective shame issue, where the vietnam-war was
      mentioned. I can totaly understand what you mean by your
      experience with the veterans of that cruel
      war-activities.And ofcourse that they are very strongly
      shattered with all kind of remembrance of brutal sceneries
      that really existed once in their life. I also think that
      some kind of human experience is for ever gone for them, to
      open up again a real difficulty. Also that one is giving a
      colour to the whole appearance of the human culture arround
      your place or in former times with the nazi-brutality here
      or in ex- yougoslavia...so and so on. And all of that
      creates some fog all arround that is not just dissolving
      but has to be felt and acknowledged before it´s possible to
      let it go. And that´s not only the work of the involved
      person but open to everybody. That´s why it is so worthy to
      say yes to this shame issue, as it is a part of the healing
      process even for our following generation. As the time has
      gone by, you already wrote about opening the heart which
      resonated again with me. I like verymuch how you describe
      it, that there was a path that you went on already,and that
      Rajneesh was there one helpful hand. That´s what I also
      experienced until a certain point, from which onwards it is
      necessary to have it found here and now not in old imprints
      and projections. And yes it is helpfull and supportive to
      read and simply to be here on this list! Thank you all for
      that forum



      "I am not, but the Universe is my Self" (Shit-t'ou,

      Logical analysis of this intuition By Wei Wu Wei

      "All we can say about this which we are, which to us must
      be objectified as 'it' in order that we may speak of it at
      all, is to regard 'it' as the noumenon of phenomena, but,
      since neither of these exists objectively, phenomenally
      regarded it may be understood as the ultimate absence from
      which all presence comes to appear.

      But consciousness, or 'Mind', does not project the
      phenomenal universe: 'it' IS the phenomenal universe which
      is manifested as its self."

      The rest of this very short article may be found here:




      greetingsyou all, Iwant to share this,I didn't speak about
      with anyone yet. Once working on a painfull foot of an old
      lady,feeling it,I came to see, I and the creator are one.I
      got afraid of this power and the big responsibility.So I
      forgot about it again . Today working with a paralised
      woman ,feeling the sacrum and axis percieving a great
      tension between this two points,just watching the tension
      left and what's felt was an great energy and joy wanting to
      dance.I thought my god this woman is healing me . Another
      day I touched a croocked spine percieving massive
      resistance,feeling much discomfort myself but staying in
      touch with and thinking " this is my creation" there was an
      immedeate release the tissue became like butter and the
      spine flexible. This morning sitting tired at the
      breakfasttable thinking about difficulties feeling
      frustrated about my life I stopped and suddenly the
      formless ,eternity, stillness .My backpain was gone.


      We are the Nonduality Generation.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.