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

NDS highlights for Saturday, October 21

Expand Messages
  • Melody
    JERRY: I hope I m not the only one thoroughly enjoying the writing and photographs of David Hodges: http://www.livejournal.com/users/wandertheearth There is a
    Message 1 of 1 , Oct 23, 2000
    • 0 Attachment
      JERRY:

      I hope I'm not the only one thoroughly enjoying the writing and
      photographs of David Hodges:

      http://www.livejournal.com/users/wandertheearth

      There is a permanent link to David's journal on my home page:

      http://www.nonduality.com

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

      SANDEEP and MELODY:


      Melody:
      What comes to me, as I write this
      now, is Adi Da's quote from earlier
      today in which he said describes
      the "unqualified state" of awareness in
      which:

      "The zero of the heart is expanded as the world.
      Consciousness is not differentiated and identified.
      There is a constant observation of subject *and*
      object in any body, any functional sheath, any realm,
      or any experience that arises."


      Sandeep:
      This is witnessing (constant observation) of the undifferentiated
      and
      un-identified Consciousness at play.
      Who does that?


      Melody:

      That's exactly my question!

      The moment one 'witnesses', isn't one
      then in a 'differentiated' state of awareness?

      How can a 'differentiated' consciousness *observe*
      an 'undifferentiated' Consciousness at play?

      When I am 'witnessing' ......it is not the 'Undifferentiated'
      I am witnessing,

      but the 'differentiated' field of play.

      Witnessing, from my experience, is simply
      a great method for detaching from any
      *identification* in that field of play.

      But when I am witnessing, there is still "two".

      It's just that I am no longer identifying with
      either one of those "two".


      Sandeep:
      Whoever, whether you call him/her a sage or Micky Mouse, that entity
      is still within phenomenality.
      Otherwise, witnessing is not possible.


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

      DAN:

      Any and all "dreams" (that is, phenomenally-experienced
      realities) are itself, are this unsplit moment.
      The apparent splits and continuities that give
      dreams their appearance are known as "not
      having ever occurred" as reality simply is
      unsplit and noncontinuous. This knowing
      seems secret, because is cannot be articulated.
      However, it is simply and clearly present,
      because it doesn't depend on articulation.

      It is because
      of the constant "breaking apart" of dreams,
      even as they occur, that the dream sequencing
      is never "tight". It is as if I, seemingly
      "in" this dream, know that the entire dream is
      myself. As I speak, I speak to myself, within
      myself. The unfolding dream is a sequence of
      moments, but the sequencing is broken "now" --
      as awareness. So each moment is timeless,
      is the only moment that is.

      Each now-moment is "only now", regardless of apparent
      unfolding. No now-moment is registered "in
      reality", so all dream is known as dream,
      as always only "unsplit nowness".
      The dream of a "nondual moment" is known as
      a dream-moment, and the dream of a "nondual
      moment" is known as a dream moment.
      That each can be distinguished from the
      other is fine, is discrimination.
      Discrimination knows itself as "mind alone".

      Thus, these discriminated moments,
      and their relative qualities,
      are known as always unsplit,
      unqualified, non-registered
      and nonretained reality --
      as there is only "this mind",
      which some have called "Mind Alone".

      Even as this dream unfolds as time,
      there is no dream, only the timeless.
      Time is the timeless.

      That which we call "Mind Alone"
      clearly is not that name,
      clearly is unnameable.
      With no location, how could
      it be identified?

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

      LOTHAR and SANDEEP:

      Sandeep:
      > Who observes that "I" have left?

      Lothar:
      Well, the me-entity A F T E R it's been constructed anew.


      Sandeep:
      So no observing takes place in the moment, it is only in recollection,
      only
      in the memory of "an" experience, that the conclusion of the "I"
      having left
      during a past event is arrived at.

      Secondly as you rightly indicated there is once again a "me-entity"
      coming
      into the picture.
      Whether it is the old one pretending to have learnt a new language of
      meditation, "I- leaving", Advait, non-duality, whatever or maybe a
      brand new
      "me-entity", is really immaterial.
      Can it be seen, it is the same circle again, fleeting glimpses and
      then the
      flip-flop, the "me", the "not-me"?
      Round and round the mulberry bush.


      Lothar:
      > But in any way, why can't it be noted through me, as consciousness
      > keeps continuously noting through you, that there was something
      going
      > on? ...no matter whether or not there is somebody around to conceive
      > of an 'after' or 'before'...


      Sandeep:
      Oh that something, some behind the scene giggling, is going on, can be
      noted, is noted.
      All I am saying climbing 126 stairs, you do notice the crossing over
      from
      the 125th to the 126th, but if the 126th is to be the last step for
      the
      biological computer labelled "Lothar", the "me-Lothar" will never know
      this
      fact, if and when that occurs.

      Apperception (just another terminology) is not subject to memory
      recall.
      And yet identification with the biological computer may continue for a
      period of time.
      Where it has not, history has no record of such entities for obvious
      reasons.


      <SNIP>

      Lothar:
      > Hey, I'm not gonna let you mess up my whole point with that
      unrelated
      > prattling! ;) When you say 'apperception occurs', what are you then
      > referring to exactly?


      Sandeep:
      That there is no perceiver to attain the apperception.


      Lothar:
      > The end of the identification with any
      > experience?

      Sandeep:
      The end of "personal" identification with either the experience (any)
      or the
      apparatus through which experiencing happens.


      Lothar:
      > It can, however, if not experienced, be noted...that's
      > what I am enjoying to see you doing all the time! I am saying that
      in
      > some meditations it might be quite likely for apperception to take
      > place...then consciousness might be noting that fact through me!


      Sandeep:
      Offcourse.
      If apperception is taken to be acausal, non-volition, then being in
      meditation is no obstacle for the occurrence.That might well be the
      alloted
      role for the bilogical computer lablled "Lothar".

      Yes what is an obstacle is the personal identification with the state
      one is
      in, whether that be in meditation, or being drunk on some cheap German
      Reisling.

      (Sorry Lothar, I go French with the wine, maybe once in a while some
      Californian Chardonay)

      LOL.


      Lothar:
      > I
      > don't quite understand how you are clearly identifying something to
      > be an experience...you must locate that transition, the
      'apperception
      > occuring', somewhen, right?


      Sandeep:
      In the phenomenal context, experiencing, actioning, whether as
      thoughts or
      actualized external behaviour, continues all the time through a
      biological
      computer during it's "alloted life-span", through the billions of the
      dreamed characters.

      And in no instance there is an "experiencer", a "doer" in any of the
      individual dreamed character for any of the experiences, or for any of
      the
      deeds which got occurred.

      And since enlightenment, awakening, apperception are all events in
      phenomenality, even for these so called profound events, there is no
      "me"
      getting enlightened, getting awakened, or receiving apperception.

      <SNIP>


      Lothar:
      > Do I understand you correctly when I summarize what you're
      > essentially saying as "When there is no non-doing now, you cannot
      > make non-doing happen" ? ...so there would be not point in
      > meditating for that specific purpose?


      Sandeep:
      Absolutely.
      All this stuff and methodolgy involved in that stuff, of transcending
      Mind
      to go to No-Mind is hilarious.
      Who moves from Mind to No-Mind?

      "You" cannot make "doing" happen and "you" cannot make "non-doing"
      happen.
      Both are non-volitional happenings, if they happen.

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

      LOTHAR:

      ...you stop being a seeker and become a finder, instead... it's
      really that simple :-) get your dictionary and remove words
      like 'spiritual', 'non-dual', etc... give up every idea of a way you
      need to go... the only reason for your going that way is that you
      want to find that place where you then can rest, right? So why not
      sit down right now? IMO, every walking on a way is spiritual ego
      building... accept everything and everybody as already perfect,
      especially yourself...feel whole and complete! and then you have all
      the time in the world to start to play, love and laugh.

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


      Melody had written:
      I have not known moments in which the nondual AND the dual was seen at
      exactly the same moment.


      LARRY:

      This bears on the age old conundrum of multiplicity in unicity. Here's
      a
      relevant Nisargadatta quote from Miguel Angel Carrasco's site "Asmi"
      http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/umbada/asmi6a.htm :
      "The state of identity is inherent in reality and never fades. But
      identity is neither the transient personality (vyakti), nor the
      karma-bound individuality (vyakta). It is what remains when all
      self-identification is given up as false - pure consciousness, the
      sense
      of being all there is, or could be. Consciousness is pure in the
      beginning and pure in the end; in between it gets contaminated by
      imagination which is at the root of creation. At all times
      consciousness
      remains the same. To know it as it is, is realization and timeless
      peace. (395)"

      Here's another good one:

      "There must be love in the relation between the person who says "I am"
      and the observer of that "I am". As long as the observer, the inner
      self, the higher self, considers himself apart from the observed, the
      lower self, despises it and condemns it, the situation is hopeless. It
      is only when the observer (vyakta) accepts the person (vyakti) as a
      projection or manifestation of himself and, so to say, takes the self
      into the Self, the duality of "I" and "this" goes, and in the identity
      of the outer and the inner the Supreme Reality manifests itself. This
      union of the seer and the seen happens when the seer becomes conscious
      of himself as the seer; he is not merely interested in the seen, which
      he is anyhow, but also interested in being interested, giving
      attention
      to attention, aware of being aware. Affectionate awareness is the
      crucial factor that brings Reality into focus. When the vyakti
      realizes
      its non-existence in separation from the vyakta, and the vyakta sees
      the
      vyakti as his own expression, then the peace and silence of the
      avyakta
      state come into being. In reality the three are one: the vyakta and
      the
      avyakta are inseparable, while the vyakti is the
      sensing-feeling-thinking process."

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

      XAN shares some words of HAFIZ:


      Wayfarer,

      Your whole mind and body have been tied
      To the foot of the Divine Elephant
      With a thousand golden chains.

      Now, begin to rain intelligence and compassion
      Upon all your tender wounded cells

      And realize the profound absurdity
      Of thinking that you can ever go Anywhere
      Or do Anything

      Without God's will.

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

      BOB shares a talk from

      SWAMI RUDRANANDA:


      " The whole system is really very much like a plant that is sitting in
      the
      ground, and it rains and this thing reaches up and absorbs the water;
      new
      roots go out, and grow and spread. Its a very casual, a very natural
      thing,
      you don't find a plant screaming and jumping up and down in anyway and
      disturbing its potential. It really manifests its potential by
      assimilating
      whatever energy, whatever nourishment is put to it, and it grows. And
      you in
      your own mind have to understand that. Your sitting here has to do
      with
      assimilating, by taking your nourishment and growing. And if you are
      not
      breathing and having your attention inside and feeling these muscles
      moving
      and absorbing and digesting as a conscious thing, then nothing is
      taking
      place.

      Because it's like sitting in water and this thing will stay on the
      bottom. It's not going up and circulating, so this energy that you are
      being
      given, the information that you are being given, just lays there and
      will
      rot you out. Because it will lay at your feet, it will just lay there
      and
      eventually you will get ill.

      You have to really take and absorb, and really feel this thing
      expanding
      in you, feel the energy coming down from the mind through all the
      charkas,
      through your sex organs and moving up your spinal column. It's very,
      very
      essential. Otherwise, you are sitting and listening and you are
      agreeing and
      disagreeing and you are going through a whole number and this is not
      what it
      is all about. It's that you really inside feel the flow of your energy
      coming down then feel it at the base of the spine and feel it go up
      and you
      are absorbing.

      And as you grow, and as you really keep growing up and up, you will
      transcend yourself and all of the things you are concerned about. All
      of
      your problems will be drawn into you by this root system as a tree
      grows,
      and it will go up and up and all the problems that you think you have,
      or
      that your are born into will disappear because they will be absorbed
      as
      energy. Your being concerned about anything has to do again with your
      mind.
      You haven't learned to live quietly in your head and be grateful for
      those
      problems, because all these problems that we have represent all of our
      natural resources. This is what you are given to break down and make
      into
      fertilizer."

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


      ON THE LIGHTER SIDE:


      > By the way, did Nobody win?

      SARLO:
      Probably not. There *was* an actual person running for Lt-Gov of
      Washington
      state some mebbe ten years back whose legal name was Absolutely Nobody
      and
      whose entire platform -- concomitant with his name -- was to abolish
      this
      particular job. Again i didn't hear the results but i guess his
      opponent --
      rumoured to be Business As Usual beat him out.

      ooo0000ooo

      GENE:
      > Still waiting for Nobody to reply,

      BRUCE:
      Nobody has -- how about
      that? :-)

      ooo0000ooo
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.