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

Friday December 22, 2000

Expand Messages
  • Gloria Lee
    JERRY I m suggesting that a we perform acts. Everyone has experience with a we performing an act. Any time a person has joined with another in the name of
    Message 1 of 1 , Dec 23, 2000
      I'm suggesting that a 'we' perform acts. Everyone has experience with a
      'we' performing an act. Any time a person has joined with another in the
      name of some cause, however trivial and small, a felt group is present,
      and action in the name of that cause is done with awareness that the
      group of two is acting, not the individual. I'm suggesting that a person
      on these lists can know a felt group of many and can act as the group,
      and that this has power even if no one else knows that the felt group
      is, through an act of attention, a part of the action.
      TERRY then responds:
          It seems to me that this is how it always is, that the sense of
      ourselves working as individuals is an illusion.
           When people *recognize* that it is a group which is operating, they
      feel differently about what is said and done than if they perceive it to be
      an individual.  And it makes a much greater impression on people if they
      think a group is behaving a certain way than if they think it is an
      individual, because people tend to project their own sense of individuality
      on others, even when it is not there.
           If this were not true, there would be little point to forming groups
      and operating as a group; it wouldn't matter.

      TERRY had written:
      >I also think that social
      > change
      is the aggregate behavior of society, not something any individual or
      even group can effect.  But what people do reflects their core values, their
      > awareness of what is right, and that awareness can be affected by
      > individuals and groups.  I think groups have a greater effect,
      because we
      > are social animals, and it is easy to dismiss an individual's
      ideas and much
      > harder to do so when several agree.
      A question I ask myself is how much change is exoteric and how much is
      esoterically effected? Exoterically, the Beatles did bring about change.
      Esoterically, what was going on that seeded the cloud that let the rain
      of john paul george ringo to fall on us? The esoteric really interests

      Having said that I'm more interested in the esoteric, the quiet acts of
      attention, I am also interested in the exoteric. I'm 90% sure I'll be
      going to the Inner Directions gathering in La Jolla, California, this
      March. I'll see what I can learn. I would like to see such a gathering
      in northern California or in the northeast, one that is more expansive,
      that includes fine speakers and teachers well known in the nondual
      community, but one that also includes activists, the voices of the
      marginalized, rock bands, various artists and whoever else is making the
      nondual statement. I'm not talking about an event which one will leave
      feeling mellow and clear, but an event which will leave one feeling
      mellow, clear and ready to take on the world and move in the directions
      you are describing.

      >      The 'felt group' doesn't ring any bells
      here, Jerry, I feel I am obtuse.
      Hopefully I explained it more clearly above. The felt group is simply
      the personal image you have of any group. It's the congregation that
      wordlessly comes to mind when I say 'nondual realizers', for example.
      The felt group has to be treated like a homeopathic remedy. A person's
      felt group may actually consist of, say, 20 known people. However it has
      to be diluted and diluted and diluted until the names are gone, the
      faces are gone, their bodies are gone, their personalities are gone,
      their essence is gone. And what is left is the pure felt group. A person
      acts from that feeling. This is an esoteric practice. However, I'm not
      saying anyone has to do it, nor am I interested in who is and is not
      doing it. I'm only describing a direction in which I am moving.

      Jerry had written:
      > >That is the kind of action I would
      call for. It's strictly attentional.
      TERRY had written:
      >      As far as being
      associated with Nonduality, perhaps.  People, I think,
      > are going to
      have individual 'causes' that appeal to them in particular,
      > perhaps due
      to things that have happened to them.  Not everything needs to
      > be
      done in lockstep, eh?

      As these attentional or esoteric ideas are put out there, people do what
      they want. There's no need for me to know who is doing what. I don't
      want to know.
      TERRY then responds:
          There is a certain sense of anarchy about 'non-dual realizers,' isn't
      there?  We are connected at a deeper level than the merely human.  More than
      human.  We can't help but be 'part of the plan' but it is a wonderful thing
      to have a degree of consciousness about it, to feel the sense of Grace
      wherein everything which happens is Perfect.
           I have a sense that everyone is a 'nondual realizer' and that most of
      them don't 'realize' it.  A paradox perhaps; but without the nondual,
      without a sense of mystical participation in the collective unconscious or
      world soul, none of us would make it through any minute of any day.  We
      cling to the string of moments of self-consciousness and think of them as
      'who we are,' but much of the time each one of us is as completely dependent
      on the universe as a babe is on its mother.
           Perhaps a community of conscious 'nondual realizers' might have more of
      an impact on me if I actually knew any personally, in the flesh, which I
      don't.  It is such a community that interests me, though, and the potential
      for social change which lies with them - to begin with, increasing their
      numbers and articulation.

       Jerry had written:
      > >Out of that all kinds of
      movements and events would crystallize,
      > >including specific political
      actions. But to seek political change
      > >without the change in
      attention might not be so effective.

      >      Yes,
      absolutely.  Non-action is key.  Let others fight the battles, and
      > us work for peace; perhaps as part of ad hoc coalitions with
      > Non-Governmental Organizations.  *Live* peace and others will
      emulate it,
      > peace is desirable and when it gets hard to find, people
      become willing to
      > change their values to get
      it>      Perhaps one of our contributions to the field would be to strip away
      > the cultural baggage and get to the heart
      of the matter, which is
      > Nonduality, not Advaita or Zen or Taoism or what
      have you.
      >      One of the reasons such retreats
      use the methods of hinduism is to give
      > credibility and structure to
      their program.  You would need credibility and
      > structure for your
      NDS retreats as well.
      I think that contribution has already been made on the internet. Inner
      Directions has gatherings that get to the heart of the matter. Our
      retreat in Rhode Island was as pure as it gets; even 'nonduality' was
      stripped away. I think credibility is present.

      >      Sure, to lots of
      people in hawaii 'meditation' is foolishness,
      > navel-gazing, slacker
      stuff.  People here objected to the retreat in front
      > of the
      planning commission, they saw it as an outside organization using up
      prime agricultural land (currently cows), an organization having no useful
      > local purpose.  The hawaiians, like many other cultures,
      have a very
      > significant spiritual inheritance of their own, and might be
      amenable to
      > devices based specifically in their culture; there is little
      chance of them
      > adopting hindu ways or dress or methods or culture. 
      Still, they might be
      > open-minded as far as whatever else works; and they
      said they would make the
      > space available to the community if they were
      not having retreats, so I
      > imagine their facilities could be rented,
      right down to the incense.  I'm
      > personally not big on group
      meditations, especially where rigid postures are
      > required and people are
      allowed to hit you and shout at you.  Dharma talks
      > are OK though,
      depending on the teacher.  This is another case in which the
      trappings of one of the great wisdom traditions is an aid to credibility and
      > structure.  What will you say?  What exercises shall we
      perform?  Still, one
      > does not put new wine into old bottles, as I
      sense you agree.
      These questions make me assume the position of a contriver. I can only
      do what I already see done, and I don't see that done yet, but I will.
      Meanwhile, retreats involving NDS members certainly don't need anything
      at all in the way of hour to hour planning. However, it is hoped that
      people will come prepared to grace others with their gifts during the
      retreat. If many people come, then some organizing and scheduling will
      have to be done, but there are no guidelines with regard to what is
      taught, shared, offered, given.

      I can only tell you what I see myself doing at this time. I feel my work
      on the list and website has matured. My calling is toward activism,
      world change. I'll be starting a second website, www.nonduality.net. I'm
      waiting to hear back from a local company that will host the website.
      It's purpose will be to create a felt group of activists. The esoteric
      attentional work with the felt group of nondualists will combine with
      the felt group of activists and this will create great power.
      >      Needs work, I'd say, but I am
      feeling obtuse, like I am missing what
      > you are saying here. 
      Perhaps you could read my remarks and tell me what I
      > am missing
      We're speaking from different dispositions. I'm mostly concerned with
      the esoteric. Differences make for great strength. Hopefully you get a
      better feel for where I'm coming from, as I'm learning more about your

      Thank you!
      TERRY then responds:
           To me, the essence of nonduality is the merging of the exoteric and
      esoteric.  In practice this amounts to a kind of mysticism in which
      everything we do is by impulse or hunch, modified by intermittent periods of
      reflection.  Eventually we develop the ability to act in accordance with
      what is not yet seen, heard or felt, not actually 'knowing' the future in
      any conscious way but conforming with what has yet to happen on a regular basis
      Dear Gene..

      Again I am stunned and clearing through your response. The mechanics you
      describe, and the flow of your articulation, sober and open. A gift
      received with gratitude (and little sentiment).

      You wrote: (fuller context below):
      > It is this living flame,  which is capable of
      transmigrating from
      >   person to person, through the (latent)
      network of available
      >   sharing-channels; this is both a
      subterranean and celestial event,
      >   and it does occur. It can
      occur, if a person is open, and abides,
      >   willing to
      self-regulate the contractive aspect of the
      >   sharing-channel,
      to deliberately compensate for inexperience and
      hypersensitivity. To learn to breath open and to synchronize all
      >   self-same structures (in this case tubes), to allow the
      >   of the Flame-Being, 'who' will then heal and
      repair the damaged
      >   structures, and then issue credentials
      and marching-orders.
      Can you say more about "deliberately compensat(ing) for inexperience and
      hypersensitivity"... and "to learn to breath open and to synchronize all
      self-same structures". Is it more than witnessing the contraction of
      identity; and "breathing, abiding, allowing" as compensation? (Though
      inexperience.. and hypersensitively damaged sharing channel.. make this
      difficult enough.)
      >   The feeble awareness available to those whose
      sharing-channel is
      >   closed, refers to this Flame-Being
      indirectly as 'Shakti-Pat' and so
      >   on. As we discuss here
      endlessly, if the 'Shakti-Pat' does not
      >   dislodge the 'dog in
      the manger' identity, it is for naught. It
      >   really is this
      simple, and more a matter of mechanics than morality.
      >   It is
      more a matter of practical realization, similar to learning how
      >   to start a car-engine, than it is 'spiritual' in any
      way, although
      >   the spiritual literature is about the only
      place that semi-accurate
      >   descriptions can be
      So we can see or glimpse seeing, yet the dog keeps howling. And would
      the "mechanics of practical realization" then be, keeping the sharing
      channel open through awareness of and breathing through the contraction
      of the howl?

      This transmigration of the living flame gives new understanding of
      Pentecost. Or is that another interpretive meaning to be dropped?
      >   Keep in mind, that the 'Flame-Being' has NO
      sentiment whatsoever.
      >   Only identity is capable of sentiment;
      this puts the Flame to the
      >   identity. If the channel is not
      closed, identity will burn to ash.

      Through two years of listening to your "sharing", much has been lost..
      huge chunks of sentiment and an entire language among them. There is
      less here to recognize.

      again.. thank you,

      JOHN DUFF & DAVE (Manchine) 

      John Duff wrote:

      Also good to hear from you Dave.

      I'm back for a refresher course.  Get the batteries recharged and all.  No
      where else is the dialog more stimulating, varied, meaningful and profitable
      than here on NDS.

      Funny that you should say that! I was noticing how interaction here,
      sort of flowed into "regular" life, where here it may be words on
      a screen, "out there" it turns into real action and in an interesting
      way. Here, we openly discuss these things, whereas "out there" these
      things are not foreground topics nor tolerated as such by very many.
      I find myself working the conversations in the background. Wonderful
      experience an value. A "great battery charge" as you say.

      Well, it seems to me you are talking more about choice, than responsibilty,
      and as it pertains to external affairs more than internal and some imagined
      result compared to what actually happens.

      But, clearly, choice enters somewhere in discussions of responsibility.

      Then, again, from my perspective, responsibility can be purely internal.
      What, for instance, drives our tenor in interactions with others?  This is
      the [my] primary focus of discussion on responsibility.

      It is in the not knowing of another's frame of reference when they use a
      word and the projection of our own interpretations of what that word means
      onto what the other said that causes confusion - often conflict.

      The external world is too large an engine for me to worry about.  Least of
      to tilt at windmills.  I can just look to bring some mindfulness to my
      interfaces with that external world.  The resulting mindfulness would be the
      product of what impulse?

      One could easily say 'responsibility'.

      One might just as easily say 'cause and effect'.

      In my previous post, perhaps for me there are a few central points,
      one is centered around the word "intent". The other centers around
      that as well, but more in relation to the "critical" relation
      that choice has to responsibility.

      Summing it up, I would tend to say that "nothing happens by accident",
      it may only appear that way. In a timeless existence, all just IS,
      and the part of it which we see at any given point in time is
      directed by our focus. A narrow focus leads one to beleive that they
      are an individual running around sequencially in time following
      the most "interesting" or "preocupying" stimulus in the vicinity.

      Conversely of course, an infinitely expanded focus would permit
      a better view of "intent". I do use intent as a word which
      means more than that which is  usually attatched to it. If you
      will, I use it  more in the sense of "purpose of life".

      My goal is to be in touch with "intent". Such a wonderful thing
      this intent! It seems boundless in its nature, yet
      as fixed and solid as any physical law that we can  find to
      describe. Intent speaks when one is prepared to listen.

      So, as our 'vision' narrows, we tend to chase around more after
      stimulus. All of a sudden there is cause and effect, and choice.
      Basically we choose how to see things, and therefore have tremendous
      desires to react in one way or another and now we have expectations
      etc. etc.

      Perhaps it may be clearer "what drives our tenor in interactions with
      others?" For those that have narrower focus, it is perhaps more
      an issue of 'living up to expectations'. For those with wider focus,
      it is perhaps more an issue of merely expanding awareness.

      .I figure, it's to BE the eight of clubs.
      .This enjoining to BEing stems from a sense of what?

      It seems to me that all of this is put here with Intent. The
      rules of Intent are as completely open as they are fixed. Like,
      it's here to be seen if you want to see it, and you can see it
      how you wish, but in the end, what it IS is unchanging.

      This enjoining to BEing is Intent, don't think there's
      really a choice... although  it may not "happen" with

      .You know what I mean don't you?
      .I might, and I might not.  The eight of clubs has some additional meaning
      .me it may not have for others.
      .In any case, your mention of the 'be'ing of the card is not lost here.
      .trying to 'be' my own suit and face.
      .Whether this happened by accident or intent - doesn't matter that much,
      .since, however it unfolded one must play the hand one is dealt.  As well as
      .one can play it..
      .Which stems from a sense of what?

      Well, given that one's own interpretation of "as well as one can play it"
      is only meaningful to that individual, what other choice is there?

      The responsibility comes in just seeing... being. Knowing Intent.

      .One could easily say 'responsibility'.
      .One might just as easily say 'art'.
      .Warm regards,

      Yes, I like the sound of "art".

      The following from Gurubhakta Markandeya was received and is submitted


          The following is a conversation I had with a dear brother in Shiva,
      had some questions regarding Buddhism, Vedanta, and Trika. The
      following response from myself is in regards to his question of the
      difference between nihilism and transcendentalism and how it applies to

      Nihilism is the Buddhist view that the void, Shunya is the Supreme.
      Vedanta, on the other hand, holds that there is a Supreme Being, full
      of the Light of Consciousness, but with no activity. The world is
      therefore illusary.

      In the end, it is Trika that guides the jiva through the experience of
      the void of Buddhism, into his essential realization of his nature as
      identical with the Transcendent source (atma vyapti of Vedanta), and
      beyond these two, to the expansion of that essential realization to
      include all of existence in all its varieties as nothing less than the
      glory of the Supreme, the expansion of His divine Shakti. In the Trika
      view, Shiva is not only full of the Light of Consciousness, but
      possessive of Absolute and completely Independant Free Will. This makes
      Shiva not the victim of an indefinable Maya, but rather, Maya is the
      result of His own independent Free Will, full of both the Light of
      Knowledge AND Action. This is Shiva/Shakti.

      The Absolute, for the Shaiva, is the Supreme Light of Consciousness
      which illumines all things, full of Knowledge AND Activity.

      For the Buddhist, the world is 'something' that arose from no-thing.
      There is a first primal misconception, the original conception, and
      from that the pain of experience arose in the Nothing, which is
      perpetuated by a continuous stream of samskaras, thoughts which link
      one to other in an endless self perpetuating stream of pain and

      For the Vedantin, the Ultimate is not a return to nothing, but a return
      to the Supreme Transcendent Brahman, pure Light of Being. All of 'this'
      is merely illusion for the Vedantin.

      For the Buddhist, enlightenment comes when one is established in the
      Void and the world is annihilated.

      For the Vedantin, enlightenment comes when the world is Transcended,
      negated, and only the knowledge of the Pure Transcendent Brahman

      Trika absorbs both of these.

      Buddhism Trika holds that the Void which Buddhists experiences is truly
      there. In fact, the Void is the means that Shiva used to detach his
      Absolute Awareness from Himself. It is that moment in creation which
      His Shakti seemingly disconnected itself from itself, like a computer
      rebooting, and when God came back from the 'reboot' he was ignorant of
      His all encompassing nature. This is how he has the multitude of
      'experiences.' This is how the totality comes to enjoy unlimited
      particularity. This moment of separation of Consciousness from complete
      Awareness of itself is called Anashrita Shiva, that first primal moment
      that Shakti or dynamic Awareness seemingly becomes 'separated' from the
      Absolute Consciousness and expands into an infinitude of limite
      'things' seeking the whence and where of their nature and having a
      marvelous journey along the way. In the final analysis, says the
      Shaiva, this marvelous play, this epic drama happening on infinite
      levels and from infinite angles is merely the blissful sport of the One

      This is the secret of the Tantric doctrine. Shakti and Shiva are never
      really separate at all; it is only a seeming separation. This power to
      do this is called Maya Shakti or Shivamayi. Absolute Consciousness
      (Shiva) is no longer Absolutely Aware (Shakti), and the Shakti which
      has by Her own Free Will contracted into the Kundalini which is the
      mother of all Creativity and resides as the individuated awareness or
      individual, is no longer Aware of Its Absolute Consciousness.

      For the bound soul, he is not fully aware (Shakti) of his Absolute
      Consciousness (Shiva), and he is not Conscious (Shiva) of His Absolute
      Awareness (Shakti).

      So for the Shaiva, the Void of Buddhism is the merely the first step
      back towards the Absolute.

      How, says the Shaiva, can there be an experience of the void as the
      Buddhists contend, unless there is an unchanging absolute Experiencer
      or Experient to experience the void? The void, says the Shaiva, is not
      the Absolute, it is merely the first step of Absolute
      Consciousnes/Awareness creatively contracting Its Unity Consciousness,
      and expanding into a reality of diversity consciousness. Likewise, in
      the return of the jiva back to Shiva, the void is the first step
      towards withdrawing from this experience of diversity of objects, back
      to an expansion of the Absolute Awareness of Consciousness that is
      whole and complete...Consciousness which is wholly Aware.

      For the Shaiva, the void is merely the lack of objectivity, the first
      move back towards the Ultimate, of which the void is a real part of and
      dependent on.

      Vedanta Now, as for Vedanta, the attainment of the essential Self,
      called Atma vyapti is also a very real and legitimate step towards the
      Absolute. However, stopping at the point of negation of the world is a
      fatal flaw, according to the Shaiva yogi. Atma vyapti is necessary as a
      step, or a phase, of destroying the ignorance of the mind. This, in
      Trika, is called bauddha ajnana, or the ignorance of the mind as the
      personal center or self. Atma vyapti is merely the removal of this
      bauddha ajnana. This is where the Vedantins proclaim enlightenment, but
      for the Shaiva yogi, it is only the necessary predecessor to the final
      aim, which is the removal of paurusha ajnana. Mere removal of Bauddha
      ajnana only lands the yogi in blank abstactions, such as real and
      unreal, etc...For the Shaiva, the mind must first be cleared of
      ignorance and established as being in non-difference with Shiva (atma
      vyapti) before the final beatitude can be accomplished, which is the
      expansion of this Shiva realization to include all of existence (Shiva

      Atma vyapti is the removal of bauddha ajnana; Shiva vyapti is the
      expansion of that essential realization of Self to its original glory,
      which is all-inclusive.

      For the Shaiva, individual effort is acknowledged as the way to Atma
      vyapti, as is maintained by the Vedantists through vichara (enquiry)
      viveka (discrimination) and vairagya (dispassion). However, the final
      beatitude comes only through divine agency. This act of grace, imparted
      by Shiva through the agency of the Guru or by direct divine
      intervention, is called Shaktipat, and the result is the expansion of
      the essential realization of the jiva as Shiva to include all of
      existence. This is Shiva vyapti, this is moksha or mukti in the Trika
      of Kashmir.

      Gurubhakta Markandeya

      Hi Andrew,

      Thanks for asking!  BPM3 is the acronym for a phrase that Stan Grof
      coined; namely basic perinatal matrix 3.  The  transpersonal psychology
      movement (led by Stan in this) is realizing that not only do traumatic
      events in our early childhood affect our adult lives, but that birth
      itself and events prior to birth do as well.  Mainstream modern
      psychology seems to think that myelinization of brain neurons is
      required for events to be imprinted on our psyches, and so circumcision
      and other intrusive treatments are done without anesthesia because for
      some unknown (to me) reason, modern medicine doesn't believe infants can
      feel pain (in spite of their ability to inform us by howling).  Anyway,
      Grof believes and has amassed considerable evidence in the form of the
      reports of patients doing psychedelic therapy and holotropic breathwork
      that birth itself is a huge trauma, which forms a template for our
      entire lives, perhaps even a longer time frame...

      Grof spent years developing a cartography of the psyche that can give
      form to the varied experiences people have in healing, nonordinary
      states of consciousness, and finds that a good deal of peoples'
      experiences can be associated with 4 stages of birth.  (so perinatal
      means around the time of birth).  Thus, an experience of floating,
      oneness with the universe (I think this one is what attracted me to drug
      and alchohol use as a youngster) can be associated with being a fetus
      before the birth process happens.  This state may be interrupted by
      toxins like tobacco, alchohol, crack cocaine, etc, by the desire of the
      mother for an abortion or other strong emotions, or by the onset of the
      birth process.  The onset of the birth process is the transition into
      BPM2, which is HELL, plain and simple. The cervix is closed, but
      contractions have begun, and the hormonal milieu has shifted
      unpleasantly.  Heaven (Mother) is a traitor and there is no way out.
      BPM2 can be an experience of  black, deep, even infinite depression,
      life becomes flat and colorless like cardboard cutouts.  There is no way
      out of BPM2.  Except that once you accept there is no way out, BPM2
      often gives way to BMP3, which is violent struggle, often associated
      with all bodily fluids - blood, mucus, urine, feces. (This is when the
      cervix is opening and the contractions are strong, and one is beginning
      to move down the birth canal)  There are biological associations with
      each perinatal matrix, but there are archetypal and transpersonal
      associations as well.  BPM3 is apocalypse, and many people having BPM3
      experiences experience being both the perpetrator and the victim (of you
      name it.. rape, murder, mass murder...or, more postively, killing the
      dragon, slaying the evil oppressor, etc).  BPM4 is the triumphant
      release when you are finally slipping out of the birth canal into life.
      It's numinous splendor.  Congratulations and welcome to Earth.

      Fight club seemed to me to represent the transition from BPM2 to BPM3.
      In the beginning, the hero is desperately seeking a way out, going from
      support group to support group,... (I thought the first half of the
      movie was hilarious)  At the end of the movie, the hero is firmly in the
      grip of BPM3, having realized the oneness of himself and his "mentor",
      and accepted that violence is part of him.  I don't see the ending as
      arrival at BPM4 though.  He's firmly in the grip of BPM3, having just
      shot off half of his face.  He may have killed his resistance to the
      process, but the process is just beginning.  I'd argue that the Matrix
      ended just at the transition from BMP3 to BMP4, as does Dark City.  I
      need to watch the Thin Red Line again, as I was too tired when it was
      shown in the training to really watch it.  (Tav Sparks loves to show
      these movies in the evenings of the Grof Transpersonal Training and I'm
      starting to understand why)  I think the Thin Red Line does a good job
      of showing the nonlinearity of the transitions between BPMs.  I find
      these films to be compelling depictions of Grof's cartography, and find
      it fascinating that members of this list have argued for them as
      depictions of nonduality.  That's the transpersonal end of the spectrum,
      and is very consistent with Grof's picture, but more about that later if
      anyone cares..

      Anyway, thank you for asking, and have a lovely holiday season.

      Love, Mark
      One of my favorite stories...reposting again...........


      T.K. Sundaresa Iyer (T.K.S) met Sri Ramana in 1908 when T.K.S was only a 12
      year old boy. His cousin Krishnamurthy had been visiting Ramana Maharshi
      regularly and would sing songs of devotion to him. One day T.K.S asked his
      cousin where he went every day.  Krishnamurthy told him about Ramana and
      said, "The Lord of the Hill Himself is sitting in human form, why don't you
      come with me." Both of them then climbed the Hill and went to Virupksha

      Now the story in T.K.S.'s own words.

      "I too climbed the Hill and found Bhagwan sitting on a stone slab, with
      about 10 devotees around him. Each would sing a song. Bhagwan turned to me
      and asked, "Well, won't you sing a song also." One of Sundramurthy's songs
      came to my mind and I sang it. It's meaning was, "No other support have I,
      except thy holy feet. By holding on to them, I shall win your grace. Great
      men sing your praise Oh, Lord. Grant that my tongue may repeat Thy name even
      when my mind strays."

      "Yes. That is what must be done," said Bhagwan, and I took it to be his
      teaching for me. From that time on, I went to see him regularly for several
      years without missing a day."

      "One day I wondered why I was visiting him at all. What was the use? There
      seemed to be no inner advancement. Going up the hill was meaningless toil. I
      decided to end my visits on the hill."

      "For one hundred days exactly I did not see Bhagavan. On the hundred and
      first day I could suffer no longer and I ran to Skandasramam, above
      Virupaksha Cave. Bhagavan saw me climbing, got up and came forward to meet
      me. When I fell at his feet, I could not restrain myself and burst into
      tears. I clung to them and would not get up. Bhagavan pulled me up and
      asked: "It is over three months since I saw you. Where were you?'' I told
      him how I thought that seeing him was of no use. "All right,'' he said,
      "maybe it is of no use, so what? You felt the loss, did you not?'' Then I
      understood that we did not go to him for profit, but because away from him
      there was no life for us."

      From "At the Feet of Bhagwan" by T.K. Sundaresa Iyer.

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