Sunday, October 15
These include the highlights of only the second half the day of Sunday.
I received no mail during the first half of Sunday, and it was not
feasible to access the messages off the web because my connection was
too slow. Well, enough excuses, here are some very fine and interesting
Wherever I go,
whatever I read
(or delete), you,
I, everybody of us
keeps an untempered
record of himself.
And nobody can escape his own records,
whatever words we may use, in whatever
form we may dress our words and deeds.
But the "happy message" is, those records can be erased faster than they
are made :))
(Sharing parts from a longer post. Gloria)
If you can recall the Vietnam War.. During the merciless war,
many scenes of altruism were reported: monks and nuns were
sitting calmly before advancing tanks; women and children
raising their bare hands against barbed wire and bayonets;
students confronting military police; youths running through
clouds of tear gas; mothers with babies in their arms caught in
btw gun fire; hunger strikes held silently and stoically; monks
and nuns burning themselves to death to try to be heard above
the rattling sound of machine guns and rumbling tanks.
Here is a true story. On one spring day when a team of 18
Buddhist monks/nuns attempted to evacuate about 200 civilians
trapped in a combat zone. A participant described what happened:
"The idea was to form 2 lines of Buddhist monks/nuns in yellow
robes and lead the civilians out of the war zone. They asked me
to carry a big Buddhist flag so that combatants of both sides
would not shoot at us. A nun was quite badly wounded by stray
bullets. The trip lasted terribly long, as we had to stop many
times, lying down on the streets and waiting for the shooting to
lessen b4 continuing. We left the district early in the morning,
but arrived in Pleiku only after dark. And what a bad time for
arrival! It was a time for the rockets. Pleiku was shelled.
Unfortunately, we were very close to a military camp, and one
rocket fell upon us, wounding 7 of us. Children and women kept
crying. We asked everyone to lie down and tried our best to help
those who had been struck by the rocket.
The most wonderful thing that happened that day is that we went
through both Saigon and NFL soldiers but none of us was shot at.
Had we not carried the Buddhist symbol I do not know what would
have happened. It seemed that as soon as they saw and recognized
us, they immediately showed their respect for life."
On that day and on many other occasions, Vietnamese Buddhists
parted the red sea of blood that was flooding their land. They
displayed the equanimity, the courage and altruism of peace
makers. Rather than feeling the rage, they saw the soldiers as
thoughtful and kind, acknowledging them for their ability to
respect life even in the midst of war.
"The term "engaged Buddhism" refers to this kind of active
involvement by Buddhists in society and its problems to
actualize Buddhism's traditional idealism of wisdom and
compassion in today's world. In times of war or intense
hostility, they will place themselves btw the factions,
literally or figuratively." ... Kenneth Kraft
Thich Nhat Hanh writes: "We need such a person to inspire us
with calm and confidence, to tell us what to do. Who is that
person? The later Buddhist sutras tell us that you are that
person. If you are yourself, if you are your best, then you are
that person. Only with such a person - calm, lucid, aware, will
our situation improve."
"Because personal peace is connected with world peace on a
fundamental level, we cannot meaningfully 'work for peace' as
long as we feel upset, angry or confrontational. Non- violence
is a day to day experience." ... Kenneth Kraft.
with metta and both palms together, brother yick
JIVANO AND ANDREW
ANDREW: I wonder, in your own experience, did whatever growth
that occurred to you come about only directly from the guru, or
did it also come through your interactions with your fellow
JIVANO: A teacher will always create the whole situation. In an
environment, where the setup is created by the teacher (often
with help from the older disciples), it's not practical to
differentiate between the persons. The effect is what counts.
I can't understand, how one can live in the present, without
have lost his wishes and hopes first. So these are certainly
effects which need to be created: frustration and hopelessness.
ANDREW: The message I take from the words of all the great gurus
I have read is [...]
JIVANO: The message we chose to take from the words we chose to
read from the gurus who appeal most to our existing system of
opinions are certainly not creating much frustration and
hopelessness in us, or do you think so?
And when you apply the logic, that the effect is it which
counts, then the words itself don't have any 'truth' (read
effect) in them. Instead it's imported to whom, and when and in
what situation the words are spoken.
Consequently only a living teacher can really help. And his help
is going to be felt als frustration and hopelessness sooner or
So why waste our time with spirituality, if we don't want to be
frustrated and don't want to feel helpless and don't want to
surrender and don't want to feel stupid and don't want to feel
small and don't want to feel unimportant and don't want to feel
anything at all -- except the feelings we chose out of our old
I cannot see any other 'message' wherever I look a little
Spirituality has become business (the enlightenment circus) and
hence, also a pass time. So it is considered to be an
alternative pleasure, obtainable like all the others, by
learning a skill (like meditation) or reading tons of books and
presto: the "light" is seen and one can make a business out of
it, teaching others :)
How long will it take those smart Westerners to understand that
a bit of devotion has more value than 1,000,000,000 tons of
books on Advaita, Tantra, Yoga and similar stuff? The books will
at best build a nice grave or funeral pyre whereas with
devotion, the phoenix could arise from it :)
jivano wrote: "Anything else is just a cover up. And any feeling
which has a reason is not a feeling."
This caught my attention.
I have noticed that (sometimes) as a feeling arises, I begin to
'think about' it. I suspect this happens in those circumstances
where the feeling is/has not been allowed or not accepted. It is
not nice to feel......___________.
I have said that to observe a feeling, I have to feel it. I
think that I repress or sublimate certain feelings by shifting
to 'thinking about' them. I suspect that this also applies to
feeling good as I don't feel as if I deserve to feel good.
My kids say I analyze too much. I think this ties into the
drawing conclusion thread, for me at least.
Jivano wrote: "I can't understand, how one can live in the
present, without have lost his wishes and hopes first. So these
are certainly effects which need to be created: frustration and
Yes, we're all very familiar with this school. Judi is a great
devotee. The trouble is, it doesn't work. Some will say insight
or grace will turn hopelessness into freedom from hope. Anyone
who stays in this list is betting on insight, but we all have a
fairly high level of understanding but still nothing. Something
is missing. What makes it work?
I think in the terms of realness, you would not disagree that
long lasting friendships that obviously you have with many
people here on this email group are things that are earnt.
They're earnt over laughter, over awe, over intrigue, over
dismay, all the human experiences that can be mustered into the
palm of a human being.
And only you can qualify in that fire of love when you speak of
friendship. For I believe Dan, that every person must eventually
stand in that fire of love which is the fire of friendship.
I also believe Dan, that real friendship can be found even here
in cyber space. That too may sound strange to some but when the
heart is absolutely involved in the equation - if you needed
something Dan, do you understand me?
It doesn't matter what status of so-called intellectual ability
or status of humanness, part of being human is the quality to
reach out and ask.
I am sure you are consciously aware of this.
I am in no uncertain terms pretending I've earnt the right to be
called a friend. Yu may feel that way, so be it.
Friendship means so much to different people and that is only
something that friends can qualify. for every friendship as you
are aware, is unique in its flowering.
For some of us, friendship is the ability to simply show our
tears to others. Just to show our tears without the need for
justification or explanation.
Others write crazy love letters to others that are dear to heart
While I may not be qualified to call you my friend Dan, I'm
learning to appreciate what you are and who you are and maybe
why you are.
For Dan, it is clear that I am not writing to Dan, yet I am
writing to Dan. But I'm writing to that aspect of Dan in my
universe. The fact that I am the universe writing to the aspect
of that universe.
MELODY AND JIVANO
JIVANO: There is only one reason not to do something:
BECAUSE I DON'T FEEL IT'S RIGHT TO DO SO.
And there is only one reason to do something:
BECAUSE I FEEL IT'S RIGHT TO DO SO.
Anything else is just a cover up.
MELODY: To say this another way.....
Anything else is an act of fear.
And yet....acting because something feels right could also be a
response to fear.
JIVANO: And any feeling which has a reason is not a feeling.
MELODY: It may be that we are using the word 'feeling' in a very
If so, I would like to hear what you mean by that word.
Recognizing we may be dealing with an issue of semantics, I
would suggest that ALL FEELINGS have a reason.
By 'feelings' I'm referring to an emotional response that can be
*felt* in the body. Whenever I experience a feeling in my body,
only rarely have I not been able to trace back to the 'reason'
for it. Occassionally, though, I have had feelings when the
reason was not known......such as a sense of dread, or sorrow,
or 'butterflies'. Even then though I'm rather sure there's
always a reason.....though it is not always apparent.
JIVANO: So all my 'why's boil down to "I don't feel it's right
to do ...".
MELODY: When you say you don't feel it's right to do, are you
speaking for yourself,
or do you get the feeling it's not right for anybody else to do
JIVANO: If you, Melody, say "But I feel right to do so." I don't
have any problem. But are you?
MELODY: I've kind of lost the context of this question. Looking
back it seems you may be asking me here if I'm hiding in
'spirituality' by participating here on this list?
If that's what you're asking, the answer is:
Somedays yes. Somedays no. Somedays I'm cowardly or slovenly.
Sometimes I'm fearless.
Maybe you're asking me why am I here?
My interest is in discovering more and more, day by day, what
hides in my unconsciousness.
My interest in not in changing my behaviour, but becoming
completely conscious of it..
I have no ambition to destroy, kill, deny, master, or control my
I only want to see it for what it is, and see clearly what it is
And an e-mail group (the NDS, in particular) is a marvelous
place to make those discoveries.
JIVANO: Or are you hiding behind your "why not?" ?
MELODY: It's interesting that what simply arose naturally from
interesting that what was my way of suggesting that whatever
happens is opportunity for discoveries in consciousness
may have been heard by you as some sort of hiding, or defence.
It reminds me of the first time on these lists that I read
someone's email, and realized I didn't have a clue how to take
it. I saw that it could be read any number of ways....and I
didn't have any sense whatsoever how to read it. I appreciated
that moment so much - it was such a taste of freedom for me,
because I realized I was hearing it without filters,
expectations, or memories. I was just reading the words, and
found that in order for the dialogue to continue, I would have
to ask a lot of questions....dig deeper.....to really hear what
that person was saying.
I really loved that moment of 'not knowing'.
Identification is not based on thoughts or any thinking process
but is certainly reinforced by thoughts. There are many levels
of identification subtler than thoughts. Thoughts may cease
(though i'm not sure why one would want them to) and
identification will still continue. Identification is rooted in
the body not in thoughts.
Hello to all. I have been lurking (off and on) for a coupla
months now. And may I ask, (don't get offended!), why do you all
read/ participate in this group? And please, I am not asking in
an accusatory voice- I'm just curious, that's all. I find it
very ironic that a group of people who are seekers/ knowers of
"truth" (or so they say), would have an e-mail group. Sure, you
could use the defense that you are here to share your knowledge
with others- but shouldn't you tell them to look within, and not
without? Or, at the very least, at everything, but not at
specifics (such as this group?) Where is talking going to get
anyone? No idea can enter your mind that wasn't already there to
begin with, so why try? But please understand, I am only a
high-schooler with nothing better to do than sit around all day
and think, smile, and smile some more...so I must be a little
PAUL AND POOLE
matthew files wrote: "i hope we arent going round in circles
here:), but this takes me back to my other post about drawing
conclusions. Drawing conclusions is simply what mind does. So
for me it is a matter of mpartially observing the mind as it
draws conclusions. Drawing conclusions is a constant on going
process. Are we connecting here?"
MARCIA PAUL: I may be beating on a dead horse here. :-)
But....I have found very recently something I find astounding.
And I don't think it is identification or maybe it is. Perhaps
the drawing of conclusions IS identification.
GENE POOLE: You have found a small part that is 'true'.
"Identification" in this case, is WITH the mechanism and the
pictures it draws, as it clicks from one 'conclusion' to the
Your saving grace, Marcia, is that you, in your 'overly
analytical' way, convert what are 'conclusions' into 'tentative
conclusions'. But here is the crucial point; you still _seem_ to
be attached to the product of thinking. Like this: "Well, those
are interesting tentative conclusions, but we have still not
arrived at any real conclusion". It is well to know, that there
are no actual conclusions.
Every tentative conclusion is simply a new dot, of an
ever-growing picture, which will not be complete until every dot
has been plotted, and then connected by the 'lines'. I am saying
that to me, it 'seems' that you favor the completion of the
picture, and that you hunt for the completeness of the picture.
Matthew is correct in what he says about the nature of mind. It
will continue to draw pictures. But it is good to notice that
this activity is actually unceasing; mind has no attachment to
an outcome, no matter what anyone may assume of the nature of
mind. Mind simply plots dots and connects them without ceasing.
Mind cannot recognize truth; and truth is merely the consequence
of imposition of one pattern over another and noting a 'match'.
One must already have the target pattern in store 'somewhere',
to be able to do the pattern-matching procedure, to thus
However, the actual issue is this; it is to recognize the
mechanical nature of mind, that mind has no attachments, that it
has no access to the "correct" pattern by which to ascertain
'truth'. Mind simply does what it does, unceasingly.
For a person to notice that mind is active, and to thus conclude
that there is a valid question, which mind 'must be searching to
answer', is an error of the first magnitude. Activity of mind is
evidence only of activity of mind, and of nothing more.
Understanding this allows mind to be seen as simply an activity,
in the field of awareness.
Now that we have taken care of that...
We can see that to observe the activity of mind, is to recognize
the mechanical quality of mind. But this means that mind will
continue to run, to acquire data, collate, categorize, tally,
etc, even if the whole of reality is clearly visible, right in
front of us. Mind will continue to do its 'thing', even if we
are taking a long, hot bath in the the very essence of 'truth',
and drinking glasses of 'truth' and making toasts to 'truth'.
Mind will continue, even if we are discussing 'truth' with
'truth' itself, in person. Mind will simply continue and
continue and continue, chattering like an obsolete teletype
machine in the background of the newscast.
MARCIA: It may be what Gene is referencing when he talks to
'filling in the blanks or cells' (I know I just massacred that.)
An impression is registered in the thinking center which
triggers an association (the conclusion). The associations are
totally subjective (identification) as they are mechanical.
GENE: Yes, similar. However, it matters not that the conclusions
are 'subjective'. There are no 'objective' conclusions, ever.
Mind is incapable of 'objective' conclusion. Get this. It is
only our _attachment_ to product of mind-activity, which causes
us to value it over the ever-present, self-revealing, big,
whopping, REALITY which is what we are.
I know that I am saying this clearly; yet, I know that some will
receive this, and then drop it, to begin fielding the next pass.
This is the very activity of mind in action. If nothing else,
please keep treating each conclusion as tentative.
Just as I assume that you are not 'getting it' and so keep
saying it, you assume that I am not saying it and so keep asking
it. Yet in this small block of text, is the entire schema. I
would have the reader re-read these four paragraphs until the
paradox is broken. The point is to see what mind is operating
within, which is the field of awareness, raw. Mind only seems to
refine this raw field; in reality it (this field) cannot be
changed in any way. This field is empty, unless filled by
activity of mind.
MARCIA: I notice a thought or I notice I am thinking a thought
and rather than go on to the next associative thought I step
back and take a second look at the thinker of the thought which
IS the thought itself. Thinking the thoughts is identification.
There is no thought without identification so it can't be a
matter of whether or not I am identified with what the mind is
GENE: Above, you have forgotten that 'identification' is a
MARCIA: I may be in way over my head here. :-) Pun intended.
GENE: It may seem that way, but that is the way that it is.
"Knowing" as you assume it to be, is probably a personal myth,
and nothing more. I refer you to what Sandeep calls
'apperception'; in that, there are no conclusions, yet there is
'knowing' of the deepest kind. And in that, mind-activity is
like unto the buzzing of a far-away mosquito.
MARCIA: Awareness doesn't identify. There is nothing in
awareness to be identified with what the mind is doing. (Help me
Dan <s>) Identification is the mind doing.
GENE: Identification is the assumption of 'what we are'. It is
the loss of what is nothing, to gain nothing.