NDS Highlights for Sunday 11/26/00
- Ed: One of my favorite quotes from Jim Morrison is "Everything is broken
up and dances..." That's how I felt reading the first several posts on
Sunday, which tended to be replies to posts from Saturday. Here is a
response by Christiana to Omkara, aka Tim...
C: Good morning, Omkara..
First I'd like to apologize for not honoring the name which you are
receiving to be called. I have recently begun a new and intense job.
Weeks have gone by when I could only read the highlights, and I missed
the significance of your new name.
O: No need to include my name as part of the "discussion" between "Gene"
C: Yet, I have done so.. in honor of what arose in you to authentically
engage in dialogue with Gene. Beyond the ordinary mind's claim to "not
understand Gene".. a movement arose to engage. I trust that movement,
and your authentic questions were received as my own.
O: "I" do not speak "Gene's" language.
C: The locus of your attention (which appears to have shifted), appears
to you as a "difference". I suggest, (as has Gene) that in truth, there
is no difference.
O: That is not a negative reflection on "Gene," nor on "Tim." If when
speaking to a native Chinese, one of the parties don't understand, are
one or the other at fault?
C: When my daughter was studying Chinese, she understood that to openly
enter the language, was to also enter the mind-construct from which it
emanated. It only took maintenance of an open mind.
O: There was an attempt at translation / interpretation on my part, and
it was, for the most part, a failure.
C: Perhaps, the folly lies in the "attempt at translation". Perhaps, a
relaxing into the space from which it arises.. beyond any attempts.. is
O: I don't know if he speaks "my" language or not, because I don't
C: Again, I suggest, that the division employed.. of "his" and "my".. is
a facet of the conundrum.
O: At least not on the level of words, on the level of thought.
C: And.. are you mixing levels here. What would happen if you relaxed
O: His language is too complex for me. Its complexity flies right over
my head, just as Japanese does. "I" am too simple and basic to even
begin to comprehend such complexity, such massive concept-webs spun out
C: I sense fear arising here. A *fear of failure*, being one flavor.
What if you slipped out of that identification? What if you rested in
the Love behind the appearance of "concept-webs"?
O: Many find such webs beautiful to look at. Dan and Gene are masters
at spinning webs.
C: If Dan and Gene's intent were to spin beautiful webs for our
amusement or to ensnare us in complexity of mind, then many might indeed
be caught by the daze (they are very good). I, however, perceive no such
intent. For me, each of these men have danced on my screen in the guise
of teacher, mentor and friend. Foremost, however, has been the sense of
their being midwives. I do not read them to *comprehend*. I find both
their language, as well as their carefully crafted "webs", merely the
gracefully woven fabric of the birth canal. What is far more symphonic
to this *ear* is the "space" from which they speak. The pulsation, known
here, entrains upon that space heard as echo, through them. I don't
know how it is that I understand them, but I do. It is as though they
articulate a facet of knowing which is stunningly familiar; in
conjunction with what is, as yet, only intuited as an expression beyond
this birth canal. I recognize my stage in this movement of being, and I
no longer resist the pangs of contraction.
O: "Gene" seems to know a lot. "I" know nothing at all.
C: I don't compare Gene. I don't compare myself. I receive Gene's
knowing when it applies.. with gratitude.
O: Words are useless, pointless to "me." As pointers, they no longer
point to anything but themselves. I look at these concept-webs and see
C: Words can be imbibed; resisted; or opened to as conveyors of essence.
The choice is always facet of our freedom. May I suggest that you
self-reflect on the facet of identity which is positioning itself in
resistance? This is the breaking mechanism Gene speaks of. As Gene
suggests, "relax the leg".
O: "I" cannot continue on this list, at least at the level of debate or
discussion or "verbal dancing."
C: I agree. The steam from your breaking mechanism is revealing itself.
The locus of that "I" is struggling. Eye see you Omkara.. beyond the "I"
who cannot continue.
O: I could not debate "nondual principles" even with a child. My
knowledge all seems to have fled.
I am literally no longer able to understand anything.
There is no desire to understand.
Wordless Presence is enough.
C: Ah.. how well I grasp this.. yet is not the continuation of an
identity with some resistance occluding the "Wordless Presence"?
Your life dance affords you *time* to rest in Presence (as well, it
would seem, *time* to read, post, and assume positions). Mine has less
of such luxury. I am now at 2 a.m. coming from a 15 hr (two job) work
shift. Daily I am in the Coliseum of Life. Opportunities to resist
abound. Yet, knowing my place, in This birth canal, I no longer have the
option to resist. Or.. more accuratly.. resistance occurs, but it is
seen through. What remains, is the Stream.... and it obliterates
I also.. "know nothing". I am being abided.
Love to you, my companion...
Ed: Gene also responded point by point to Tim (Omkara)::
Hi Tim, a (somewhat tickled) response to you:
G: Thanks. I admit to a tad bit of disappointment, with Tim's refusal to
engage. But that is his right, and he need not make any excuses.
O: (or is it T?): If I understood what you were saying, I might
"engage." But you might as well be speaking Chinese, I've already said
it more than once. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. Can I make
that any more clear?
G: Yes. You could explain _why_ you do not understand. You are a native
English speaker, have a large vocabulary, and evidence sophisticated
understanding of esoteric systems of logic (machine languages, Boolean
logic, etc). You have described tiredness, but that in itself does not
prohibit understanding, it merely delays it, perhaps infinitely.
O: Apparently you disbelieve the above statement. That's your right, and
you need not make any excuses.
G: I have evidenced no 'disbelief' of your professed non-understanding,
merely feigned puzzlement.
O: Same for Bruce, he also apparently disbelieves the above, attributing
my "failure to engage" to "abject laziness" and "self-indulgence," then
goes on to state "We all do it," as if he has elected himself the
representative of Humanity, Sri Lord Bruce-acharya Maharaj, the latest
G: If Bruce says to someone, "I am big", it does not mean that he is
also saying, "you are small".
O: Then again, Bruce has already insinuated that he has a "Divinely big
ego," and when speaking to him I always keep that in mind. His own
assertion appears to be "God's Truth" as seen from here. At least he
doesn't lie about it.
G: Well, that evidences Bruce's self-awareness, does it not? I mean, at
least he is honest about it, and usually abstains from false humility. I
find that quality of his, quite refreshing!
O: Personally, you both appear as bloated balloons of meaningless, empty
conceptualization and carefully-hidden "self-importance."
G: Carefully hidden? I don't think so.
Meaningless, empty conceptualization? Why, yes, what else is there?
And you, Tim-O, have put yourself squarely on the Throne of the Judge;
you claim (it seems) the majority position, professing
non-understanding, and at the same time, disqualifying what you do not
understand. This is, IMO, a rather severe error, and possibly also a
harbinger of future errors of the same sort. "Danger, Will Robinson!"
And speaking of bloated balloons, all it takes is one little prick, to
deflate. Maybe that is what is meant by 'pop-culture'.
Empty and meaningless,
Ed: Will continued his conversation with Gene, and I tried to pick out
the parts I liked, but it was a long post and I kept changing my mind
about it, so what I've done is to include it just as it was, but I put
it at the end of the highlights, with two asterisks, to warn you that
it's long. ** (so if you want to read it now, skip past the next stuff
until you get to the two asterisks.)
Ed: Here Andrew tells of his visit to Arunachala Ashrama, Nova Scotia:
In the rural hamlet of Clarence, Nova Scotia, in the beautiful
agricultural countryside of the Annapolis Valley, there is an ashram and
retreat centre dedicated to Bhagwan Sri Ramana Maharshi, an adjunct to
the Ashram by the same name in New York City. Though it is only an
hour's drive from my home, and though I've known it was there for a long
time, somehow I never got around to visiting. Until last week. I emailed
saying I would like to visit and got a reply from Dennis, the devotee
who manages the ashram, asking me please to come. So I went, on Friday
The ashram property is an old farm, nestled against the south-facing
slope of North Mountain, which is a steep 700 foot high escarpment which
forms one side of the valley. It's a quiet place at this time of year,
only Dennis, a tall, scholarly man in his early 50's with a calm and
gentle manner, and one retreatant, Sriram, who is in New York for a year
on a teaching fellowship were there that afternoon. I was welcomed into
the warm kitchen of the 200 year old farmhouse and we ate a delicious
lunch of pasta and salad while out the window an early snow fell
steadily. The view up the valley from the kitchen window is wonderful.
Outside, two mourning doves sat all fluffed up against the cold in the
branches of an apple tree. After lunch, Dennis showed me the temple,
which is in a former one-room school building, beautifully renovated.
Prayers and devotions are done there every morning (starting at 4:30!)
and evening. Inside is a peaceful, simply beautiful space, high ceiling
and tall windows, at the end of the room, on a raised dais, sits a life
size statue of Sri Ramana, a cast taken from the one at Arunachala in
India, there are a few relics, some verses done in embroidery hanging on
the walls, a photo of the late Arunachala Bhakta Bhagawata, the founder
of the New York and Nova Scotia ashram, and a frequent visitor in Nova
Scotia. We went back to the house for tea, and talked a little about
our lives and histories, about bhakta and jnana. I mentioned
Harshasatsangh and the NDS, Dennis remembered having once spoken to
Harsha by phone. It was a delightful afternoon, and I shall certainly
be returning, often I hope.
Ed: White Wolf echoes Andrew's experience...
...your experience as recounted below, except for unimportant
particulars of time and space, is exactly the same as mine to Tessahara
and the SF Zen Monastery...of course, for me, this experience is also
re-enacted everytime i enter a Catholic Church anywhere and approach the
either the Shrine of the Sacred Heart of Jesus or the Shrine of the
Blessed Virgin...the manifestations of the infinite are everywhere...we
who think we are blind merely need to remove our hands from our eyes to
see...a poem follows...^^~~~~
further up and further in...,
Ed: Jerry informed us of new aspects of the NDS homepage:
I added Gene's recent article on abiding, Gloria's movie review, and
Shankar's on-going translations (posted to the I Am list) about Ramana's
life, to the home page:
Also added a postage stamp of Jack Kerouac, designed by David Hodges.
Nonduality for/by/to/at/with/of the People <http://www.nonduality.com>
Ed: In response to a conversation between Jerry and Omkara, Jan pointed
to the Patanjali Sutras:
In the Patanjali Sutras, an entire chapter is dedicated to power. The
mechanism of acquiring power is what I have defined as "messing with the
identification matrix". The identification matrix is the entire array of
identifications (they are linked, related) and they include everything
that makes up a human being - that includes urges, like breathing and
Patanjali, chapter III is devoted to what could be called substitution:
replace one identification with another one (the desired siddhi). In
simple language, by (temporarily) forgetting the identification 'feeling
of body' and identifying with a cloud, the body will levitate. The art
of arbitrary identification is very difficult - and it will only bring
more bondage. For the "dedicated" nondualist, the identification
matrix could be called ultimate bondage - the sum of of everything, said
to be either "human" or "natural". So such a one doesn't have a choice
but to "wait" for the collapse of that identification matrix. In the
vast majority of cases however, the collapse is simultaneous with the
death of the body - "bad luck again" :) But this is, what the term
"siddha" is referring to...
Ed: I don't know about the inevitability of warp drives, but I am
confident of the inevitability of the rise of NonDuality as a political
force, under the leadership of Jerry Katz, so I decided to include this
prophetic peice by David Hodges <g>:
Dear fellow travellers on spaceship earth:
In the early years of the third millenium, two white men in their early
50's of exactly equal political appeal (or lack thereof) are fighting to
gain control of the Executive Branch of the increasingly archaic
geopolitical entity known as the United States of America. Whoever wins
will come into office as a "wounded duck" and will have to display great
and hitherto undetected qualities of leadership to be able to govern
10 years ago, the archaic geopolitical entity known as the Soviet Union
split apart with a minimum of bloodshed. It surprised many people that
such a colossal state could break up so suddenly, and yet in hindsight
many signs of the impending breakup were evident.
In future years will this contested election be pointed to as one of the
signs that the United States was entering the period when its
institutions and its will to be a superstate faltered, and the seeds of
its break up started to sprout?
The idea of a "nation" is highly conceptual and not at all long
standing. Most of the "nations" of Europe did not exist in their
present form 100 years ago, and many, like Yugoslavia and
Czechoslovakia, have already come and gone. The so-called United Kingdom
is already going through the process of shrinking, as it lost first its
empire, and now is loosening its grip on Ireland and Scotland and Wales.
Canada as a political entity has always seemed shaky, and the impetus
for Quebec to start a Canadian breakup is waiting for a spark.
The example of Israel and the Palestinians shows how very violent the
idea of a Nation is, when confronted with sharply divergent interest
groups sharing the same geography. Attempts to create or maintain
nations under such circumstances hardly seem worth the bloodshed and
heartbreak such efforts cause.
Meanwhile, back in the U.S., does true power reside in Washington
anymore? Did the issues raised in the last campaign - being mostly
about Medicare, Social Security, and how to spend the surplus, really
address where the real focus of power is shifting to in this country: a
generational raising of consciousness that increasingly places planetary
values ahead of national values?
Planetary values are such things as: preserving the environment,
checking population growth, ensuring an adequate food supply for every
one on earth, raising health standards everywhere, controlling the
spread of AIDS in Africa and Asia, and, increasingly, preparing the
earth for the inevitable leap into galactic citizenship which will come
in the next hundred years as space travel and exploration becomes more
of a reality.
Increasingly radical scientific discoveries about the nature of quantum
reality will inevitably lead to the actual implementation of such things
as warp drives and instantaneous relocation across vast reaches of space
that have been written about in science fiction for decades. As this
reality begins to reshape the consciousness of the citizens of earth,
the forces of change that will be unleashed will, after many birth
spasms, divolve much formerly national power both to regional
governments AND to pan-national entities like the EU. Eventually,
local and regional decisions will be made locally and regionally, and
global decisions will be made on a global level, and the idea of the
armed and dangerous Nation-State will wither.
This process, I think, is inevitable, though there may arise new Abraham
Lincolns who hold off the process for decades or even a century or two.
But it will happen. There is just no need for Nation-States, bristling
with weapons, and jealous of their territorial sovereignty, any more.
The quaint process of "voting" by punching ballots and aggregating
these votes to "state electors" is now on the table, shown for the
archaic, futile mechanism that it is. The rise of cyberspace via the
Internet and now through wireless satellite networks everywhere, creates
communities of interest that do unlimited end-runs around national
sovereignty at every level.
I could see this election starting a process whereby the Northeast,
including New England and New York, where I live, might decide to go it
alone, or perhaps might join forces with Nova Scotia (so we can get
Jerry), in order to get out from the thumb of Texans like Mr. Bush.
Similarly, the Pacific states, California, Oregon, and Washington,
might team up with British Columbia under leadership centered in
Redmond, Washington, or Sunnyvale, California, where the true power
lies. The midwest and south can enjoy their own version of reality under
the leaders that they continue to put forward, such as Pat Buchanan and
Bob Dole. And Florida, poor Florida, now so divided and stigmatized,
will become the Israel/Palestine battleground of the South, or, perhaps,
will join up with Cuba after Fidel dies to try something new and
Spiritually speaking, all this happens in tandem with the spread of
NonDuality, which continues to grow (under many names and guises) from
the faltering relics of the established churches and religions whose
influence is increasingly hollow and ignored. NonDuality might indeed be
the key to the power in the coming World Federation that will lift us to
the Galactic Age. My vote is for Jerry Katz, the first Chairman of the
Federated Regional States of Planet Earth!
Peace, fellow citizens of Planet Earth!
Ed: Jerry replied:
Thank you for the very interesting letter, David, and the nomination.
Your sense of the changeability of nations finds accord here. I intend
to be the nominee for President, running for the Nonduality Party in
2004. Basically our platform will be one of widespread compassion and
reasonableness in running the country, while spending much time creating
stronger bonds with all nations. Americans will be encouraged to reach
out first to their families and eventually out to the world. This will
be the healing Presidency. We'll heal ourselves, the environment and the
world. It is what people want, but since no one offers leadership in
that way, so many have no choice but to deal with their disease, their
crippled nature. Prepare, David, for a high level position in the
government. Many others here will be offered high-level positions. How
do we legally create the Nonduality Party? We need people in every
State to get involved.
(ed note: Actually, this sounds like a Canadian invasion to me, and
might be just the thing to pull the country together...)
Ed: Bringing us back home, Christina asked:
For knowing so much, you all seem to talk a lot about the same things!
I'm sorry, but I've been lurking around for some time, and all I see is
a group of "adults" who are bent on (hehe) showing off their "spiritual
knowledge". Back and forth, you keep throwing ideas at each other,
just waiting for someone to argue your point with, so that (hopefully)
all will think, "Wow, s/he is sure wise!". But is that really why you
originally subscribed to this list? Or did you want to learn
something? I know I did. But all I have "learned" is that I already
know what I wanted to learn.
So, what brings me back? Is it the need for approval of my ideas,
stemming from that uneasiness a new thought/discovery brings? Naw- I
just want to see some real wisdom shared, so that maybe- just maybe- I
will learn something new. And I'm still waiting.
Christina :) "Don't burn the day away"-DMB
Ed: Andrew replied in a to the point manner:
What is it that you wanted to learn and found you already know? Now that
you know what you know, what happens now? Also who's DMB?
Ed: While White Wolf replied poetically:
bored to death we are....
What is Endless is Love
"Forget. Surrender. Love."
white wolfe sits alone in the snowy darkness
humbly sitting in drifting white snow
his open ears hearing the cosmic wind
his golden eyes burning the silver moon
his sensitive nose touching the stars
his wild voice and song in harmony
with all that is within and that is beyond...
humility is the beginning of surrender,
surrender is the beginning of love,
love is the beginning of compassion
that which endures goes far
that which goes far returns
that which returns has no end
that which has no end is endless
compassion is endless
therefore, humility is endless,
therefore, surrender is endless
therefore, love itself is endless
therefore the lover is endless
therefore the beloved is endless
Therefore, the lover and beloved are one
i who am sometimes called Mark am endless
i who recognize myself as white wolfe am free.
I am the Lover in love with the Beloved.
I am the white wolfe in love with the moon.
with all that is within and that is beyond
his wild voice and song in harmony
his sensitive nose touching the stars
his golden eyes burning the silver moon
his open ears hearing the cosmic wind
humbly sitting in drifting white snow
white wolfe calls silently to you and me always
to follow, follow him into and beyond the drifting Moon.
white wolfe sits not alone in the snowy darkness.
Mark Christopher Valentine
(November 24, 2000)
Ed: Jerry responded by inviting Christina to go deeper...
Dave Matthews Band, yes. How do you learn anything, Christina? Did you
wait for someone to say something wise and then suddenly you were potty
trained? Did you wait for someone to say something wise and then you
suddenly had a sense of right and wrong? Did you wait for someone to say
something wise and then suddenly your own way of expression matured?
Stop waiting for someone to say something wise. You immerse yourself in
a place or culture where you feel you belong and then you allow things
to work, allow unfolding to happen. You're only seeing the surface.
You're only hearing the music and seeing the lights flashing from around
the corner. You have to actually go around the corner. Stop listening
and looking and join the party.
Ed: Michael Read responded with a metaphor (or is it a simile?) (perhaps
just a smile...):
Yah! Tis a 'crack-up'!
This salon is often like a huge sandbox. Somewhere in the sandbox are
hidden a few precious jewels. A lot of sand has to be sifted from time
to time just to find a fragment of a ruby or a shard of a diamond.
Over in the corner there is a little tussle going on about who has the
best toys for sifting the sand. Somebody is shouting that no-one is
sifting properly. Some are building lovely little sand castles and
calling all who care to see. Some are explaining how the sand is good
while some are also explaining how the sand is bad. Others like to point
out that the good sand is really the bad sand and the bad sand is the
It's just sand. The jewels are just jewels. Sifting is just sifting.
What makes the sandbox beautiful are the players in the sandbox.
HAHAHAH and HOHOHO!
Peace - the universe in a grain of sand - Michael
Ed: Christiana replied to Christina philosophically:
I wonder what moved you to speak at this particular time?
A facet of how this list serves me is through observation of the
movement of thoughts which arise to express. It is an alive place to
observe (and listen to) the genesis of language.. movement of
expression. Which voices echo within and what arises to interact with
them? To come closer to discerning the canned-voice from
vitality-as-voice. In the end.. it is always an interaction with what
arises as self. So.. this endless dialogue with self. Refinement or
delusion? And yet.. often, self in the guise as other.. in
relationship.. seems to be how I stand closer to knowing Self.
I rarely on this list perceive people writing, with intent to appear
wise. We may, however, be writing to better see what is appearing
clearly... as us. In equal measure with what is still murky.
So.. what was "cracking up" as you wrote? You've introduced yourself as
seeing something here to push against. There really is nothing here but
what we bring. Push, pull, yield.. it all goes in the crucible.
Listening with you.
** Here is that long conversation between Will and Gene in case you want
From: will <mikebrooks@b...>
Date: Sun Nov 26, 2000 8:11am
Subject: gene: Re: Unrequited reply to Tim
--- In NondualitySalon@egroups.com, Gene Poole
> >>G: 'Ego' or 'me' or 'I' is an emanation of the immunesystem
> >of the body itself; this reaction of protectionof the
> >(as you have pointed out)
> >exists even in the ameba.
> >W: 'Ego' or 'me' or 'I' or "I/me/you" is an outgrowth
> >Hormonal(Limbic)-Neuronal(Cortical) connection, and canbasic
> >not be ignored. This "duality" which IS man, at his
> >level, has one sole purpose - continuance, Life. Itsaims
> >are not dissimilar to that of Life itself. Up and Downthe
> >Rays of Creation/Destruction, these two forces merge ina
> >moment-by-moment dance of death.which are
> Yes, if it is the death of the 'incidental' life-forms
> sacrificed to sustain this one... participation in anunbroken
> chain of life.Certainly death!
But the death of the physical is of no continuing concern,
it were, inevitable. Death of the intellect is of more
concern - and
has been proceeding apace since about the age of 15, once
hormones kicked in and began seriously running the
(BTW: The "Rays" (used above) was a mere contrivance, of
pertaining to 4thway information you, and others here, are
with, and used only to "make a point").
> >"I/me/you" is the present, the "presence"... ...a
> >self-referential feedback loop of sensation and
> >driven by Hormones to think Thoughts...inferior to any
> Actually, it is integral, all of it. No 'part' is
> other."Actually" - as in "Really? - as in not "Un-really?"
Whereas no "part" is inferior, and all "parts" are alive
the distinction being made above is that "I..." is a
process - a
quite well-defined and observable process - NOT a thing,
NOT a "part".
Discovering (first) the process, and Controlling (second)
process, is my ongoing endeavor. Though very few even
it IS a process, fewer still learn it can be controlled,
extent, by employing certain techniques we've all heard
(self-remembering, stopping thought, etc.), so there is no
go into them here.
> >"I/me/you" is a construct of a mans' brains' inabilityto
> >consume the complex energies which course UP hisnervous
> >system into his headstone/capstone.allude to is
> That is one way to say it, yes. This 'inability' you
> not a universal condition, however."That is one way to say it?"
EVERYTHING is "one way to say it".
"No 'way' is inferior to any other."
Why did you feel you needed to clarify that?
The "inability" is a condition of ordinary people, like
you, like me,
like the corner grocery-store clerk or bank teller. It is
of Lifes' having "evolved" people ONLY up to a certain
point - People
are NOT finished, unlike animals which ARE finished. There
endings, in the brains of some people, which are not
cauterized, and as such, are waving free. Moving energy to
waving nerve endings, which RARELY - if ever - get any at
represents ones Life-given possibility for a higher (to
> >"I/me/you" is the "invented-by-brains-'YOU'" and its"headstone"
> >residence is the "capstone" (while alive), and
> >(when dead). It is not something external, nor eternal-
> >it is wholly unreal.'temporary'.
> There again, is the resort to the tired 'unreal'.
> In fact, it is neither real nor unreal. It is termed
There again, is the resort to the tired REMINDING of the
'real/unreal' controversy. What about the
controversy, and the "sleep/awake" controversy - where do
Jeez - take it simply, take it "relatively".
Words are unreal (compared to tables). There is no
it. Lay your words here, on this table, and I'll concede
You can't do that, so you must concede the point.
Actually, what's in question here is the "reality" of the
BEHIND words - and how that energy enters a human brain,
(somehow) produces perceptible conscious thought,
self-talk, and its
audible outpouring speech.
(((Well - how DOES that happen? How IS it that you can
yourself, and hear yourself talking? Please describe the
you know it.)))
Anyway, to continue; even SPEECH (those silly little
wholly unreal (beyond the vibrations in air produced by
of vocal cords) - regardless of its "effect" on others.
is such "effect", it is only the result of their OWN
about the thoughts they heard - NOT, the result of the
This is the non-dual-blindness that keeps many from
even simple things, without arguing, or avoiding.
The grass IS green, the rose IS red, the sky IS blue.
(of course, more can be said and understood about those 3
but literally, they are still true - well, true enough)
> >"I/me/you" is at its core, a word only - meaningless.
> >Meaning, is mechanical-linkage (attachment), to other
> >words. No one consciously "creates" a meaning for
> >"I/me/you" - "I/me/you" comes packaged, and delivered,
> >with its own "meaning".
> I would say, that it is instead, comprised entirely of
That is precisely what was stated:
> >""I/me/you" comes packaged, and delivered, with its own"meaning".
And the meaning is meaningless - it MEANS nothing. It IS
>...but it is meaning which is packed into a space, andthat space
> is unseen, the meaning taking attention, the space goingunseen.
> It is important to see the space. There are worlds ofmeaning,
> but only this one space.Perhaps this can be further delved into by us:
The "self" that one can talk about (like we're sort of
nevertheless, consists of "words" which can be "thought"
brains. Those words "reside" in the neural connections of
matter - the last part of the brain to evolve and the
"physical part" in man. There is nothing "physical" which
than conscious thought.
(People want to SAY emotion is higher, but if you did not
capacity to think and further, to think about thinking,
you could not
"feel" human emotions - you could certainly experience
and other instinctive emotions, but NOT the higher ones -
love, charity, etc. - for they all require a thinking
"Words and emotions are living entities USING man as
They are processes, not feeding on man but allowing a flow
thru their (words and emotions) action. Their "effect on
All this flowing of energy occurs below the surface, as it
Below the surface of his consciousness - he is NOT
conscious of any
of it. All words, all "meanings", exist below the surface
of his OWN
level of consciousness (whatever that level IS for him).
That is not to say that this energy-flow is unconscious
just MOST. If a person could raise his own level of
above his ordinary level, he'd understand more about what
is going on
"down there", would know that "I..." and all that is
that is emptiness cubed.
> >Beyond that, there are two paths and two paths alone.organism
> >Mechanical linking and Conscious Linking. Lateral
> >expansion of consciousness and Vertical expansion. Both
> >can occur simultaneously, and is the reason for the
> >"apparent" bigness of "mind and imagination." Seemingly
> Mechanical is always taking place; without it, the
> perishes.allow the
> Conscious is, (in this context) as you may realize, not
> 'individual' in the sense of
> separate; it is 'distributed', to as many nodes as will
> carriage of it.Only a individual can raise his own level of
consciousness. No books,
no teachers, no systems, no "ways" can help, for the real
proceed. Those "aids" may be required to "get one
started", but you
do the work alone and experience the results alone. As
cares about other "nodes"?
Though, it is probably true that two or more "conscious"
converse and be friends, it is doubtful whether they carry
ridiculous conversations like we're now having - really,
purpose? Walking Buddha's don't need teachers/students
> >There IS no "I/me/you".
> >It was not there at birth, but only as a potential of a
> >mind that can think, and can "think about thinking".
> >Proof: if it can NOT be laid upon the table, it IS
> Saying that it is 'unreal' is a convenience, not a
> saying 'unreal' posits 'real', and what would that be?Hmmm?
Real is "real for me". Tables are "real for me".
Unreal is "unreal for me". Words are "unreal for me".
The grass IS green, the rose IS red, the sky IS blue.
(of course, more can be said and understood about those 3
but literally, they are still true - well, true enough)
> >To "think about un-realities", is the most useless
> >activity, and is the common state of man.Why? That's a hoot!
> Yes, agreed, so why do it?
That's ALL people do, minute-by-minute, hour-by-hour,
driven till they drop. There is a very DEFINITE purpose
why people do
it - because that's all they CAN do, all they're supposed
to do - and
Life is running the show.
But for someone who's discovered the game, and wha
Well, that's certainly another matter.
> Real and unreal... are an unnecessary complication,
> to obscure, by contributing objects to a space which isdesired to
> be clear. Real and unreal cancel each other, leavingnothing.
> >"I/me/you" can not exist "in the future" - to it, THAT
> >outside its dynamic. (note: tomorrow is not "thefuture" -
> >"The Future" is a kind of New Thinking, evolvedthinking,
> >post-evolutionary-thinking, and beyond).Passion - well, once, I boarded a train, thinking it was
> Your passion is admirable!
Byzantium (Constantinople, Istanbul - jeez, what's with
all the name
changes?), and there we all were, mindlessly looking out
taking in the scenery, snapping pictures for our
a gay ol' time. Occasionally, the train would stop and
board, also hoping to arrive at the presumed destination.
night, looking out the porthole in my room, I spied a
bizarre sight -
the windows were painted. THE WINDOWS WERE PAINTED! And no
Passion? Like the passion an imprisoned man feels when
he is IN prison - and worse, a prison with no walls, and
the guards are his friends and family. Till then, he was
stay. Since then, there has been only abiding thought -
who you gonna ask the way out? Your Cell-mates?
> >>G: The 'I' is an 'experimental navigator', a
> >holo-projection, designed to enhance the survival of
> >organism itself. It accomplishesand
> >this enhancement of survival, by the faculty of mind
> >imagination; thissurvival)
> >is why mind and imagination are so (seemingly)
> >disproportionately 'big'. The most useful (for
> >aspects of our human design, are obviously our mainThe "experimental navigator" is the budding
> >The "experimental navigator" is the future. It does not
> >YET exist in man.
> Hey, Will, if it does not exist, how do I know about it?
nerve-endings which have YET to experience anything (or
"I..." is not that Neural Explorer, that Subversive, that
"I..." is the establishment, the civilized, stable part of
One does not "know about something" just because one can
You call "I" a holo-projection and RE-name it as something
"experimental navigator". To what end? Defining one
another - that's all. All of it is functioning inside a
box and all
discussion about the contents of a box are just that. So
There are TWO kinds of people:
1) those who think there are TWO kinds of people
2) those who don't
1) those that think the "all and everything" is a closed
"all there CAN be"
2) those that think the "all and everything" is a closed
system - but
there is a way out.
You picks yer poison and you drinks yer poison.
Just don't give yer poison to me, thankuvedymuch.
> That is the trouble with the 'high bar' of the 4th Way;People, ALL people, are OK right now. There were
> by definition, nobody can be 'okay' right now.
intimations made by me otherwise. If you inferred that
my words, you were mistaken. People are birthed by Life to
"what-they-now-are", and, in a few,
Either way, everyone is OK and no one NEEDS to do anything
their current "state" unless they WANT to, NEED to -
discovered the desire/need to do that, and then mustering
necessary energy to make a lifetime of unnecessary
> 'I am' this holographic-state construct, I will have youknow!
> And anyone who thinks they are anything other than this,for
> is simply mistaken. Of course, it has taken many years
> this concept (holography) to emerge, so earlier savantsCongratulations!
> can be forgiven for the lack of proper metaphor.
> "I am so pure, I am writing this 5,000 years in the
> This is NOT A DREAM!
Hope you're happy.
I'm sure you ARE exactly what you SAY you are.
Do you have a Bio of the next 5000 years of navigation I
Perhaps you could illuminate us all as to what Mankind of
far-future is like.
> >W: To study the contents of a box, in which all men areask?
> >almost destined to spend ALL their days, is to discover
> >NOTHING about getting OUT OF THE BOX (who you gonna
> >your box-mates?). If what you want to know, is why someup
> >people are deluded, then go for it. If what you want to
> >know is how to get OUT of the box, then you're barking
> >the wrong nerve-endings.No one.
> Whom are you addressing here?
These are just ideas pointing to something outside the
realms. Take it or leave it.
> >>G: So there is nowhere to stand, to observe'correctly'.And
> >this means that all doctrines are specious. Humanmisery,
> >emanates from doctrinal disputes, and that is the meatof
> >the world-dream. It is all 'political'.one
> >W: "Only those who can't, say 'no one can'. To say 'no
> >can' is living proof that the SPEAKER can't."statement?
> And I might ask... of what relevance is the above
>Thought it was obvious!
>>G: So there is nowhere to stand, to observe 'correctly'.which strongly suggested to me, that YOU have nowhere to
thus EVERYONE has nowhere to stand, and thus "correct"
not possible (for you).
Is that NOT what you were suggesting?
In any case, the ditty: "Only those who can't...." is
applicable, don't you think?
> >There is another place to stand - above your ownordinary
> >level, of Consciousness. Forget about someone else'syou
> >level. Sure, it's almost impossible and no one you know
> >has ever done it, or if they have, they wouldn't tell
> >- THAT does not belie the possibility.Do you disagree?
> Hey... what about me? Eeep! Eeep!
It SEEMS you're beginning to retreat from the
conversation, such as
it is, and down here, your "tone" seems more and more
politely caustic. Have you run out of "arguments", and now
"resorting" (eeeps! there's your word again) to attacking
> >(Someone "told" you, you were "asleep" and "could
> >- though from then till today, you couldn't namesomeone
> >who Was Awake (and, rightfully so).metaphor?
> Do you, Will, admit to the fact, that 'awake' is a
> If so, it is a metaphor for[please fill in this spacewith your