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

Friday January 19, 2001

Expand Messages
  • Gloria Lee
    OMKARA sends A Few from Wei Wu Wei * * * Why are you unhappy? Because 99.9 per cent Of everything you think, And of everything you do, Is for yourself - And
    Message 1 of 1 , Jan 20, 2001
      OMKARA sends "A Few from Wei Wu Wei"
      * * *

      Why are you unhappy?
      Because 99.9 per cent
      Of everything you think,
      And of everything you do,
      Is for yourself -
      And there isn't one.

      * * *

      A man who is seeking for realisation is not only going round searching for
      his spectacles without realising that they are on his nose all the time,
      but also were he not actually looking through them he would not be able to
      see what he is looking for!

      * * *

      It is necessary to understand that I Am,
      In order that I may know that I Am Not,
      So that, at last, I may realise that,
      I Am Not, therefore I Am.

      * * *

      We do not possess an 'ego'.
      We are possessed by the idea of one.

      * * *

      Let us live gladly! Quite certainly we are free to do it. Perhaps it is our
      only freedom, but ours it is, and it is only phenomenally a freedom.
      'Living free' is being 'as one is'. Can we not do it now? Indeed can we
      not-do-it? It is not even a 'doing': it is beyond doing and not-doing. It
      is being as-we-are.

      * * *

      dear omkara,

      teachings about real and unreal are most profound
      can only be understood from the real itself
      where there is no possibility of anything temporary

      the real does not have unreal parts floating in it
      there never ever has been any division ever
      not even temporarily

      there is no duality between real and unreal
      the real is unborn because it always is
      the unreal is unborn because it never was

      with love and respect,

      Dear Cee,

      Nice post.  Namaste.

      There is no way to divide
          temporary and eternal
          except through words
          and concepts.

      Teachings, no matter how profound,
          are conceptual.
      Teachings about real and unreal
          are conceptual, understanding
          of the teachings
          is conceptual.

      If you are what is being taught,
          there is no need for the teachings.

      Which is to say, what is nonconceptual
          is unborn, therefore not subject
          to being taught or understood.

      Indeed - there is no duality of real and unreal,
          nor of temporary and eternal.

      What is Unborn and what is here
          are not-two.

      So, whatever is said here amounts
          to exactly whatever is said here.


      MARK offers Tagore
      I slept and dreamt that life was joy,

      I awoke and saw that life was service,

      I acted and behold, service was joy.
      MARK adds Hafiz

      I needed a poem break just now, and found this gem by Hafiz at this
      site: http://www.allspirit.co.uk/hafizlaughing.html

      laughing at the word two


      That Illumined

      Who keeps
      Seducing the formless into form

      Had the charm to win my

      Only a Perfect One

      Who is always
      Laughing at the word

      Can make you know



      From: 'The Gift' translated by Daniel Ladinsky

      > So, words are always false, although
      >       can be used in relatively
      "true" ways,
      >       depending on the

      That's an interesting thing to say, because it postulates "relative
      degrees of falsehood."  Then again, the medium being used to
      postulate, is itself relative.

      Thus, it all points back to a circular system.  Again and again
      thought demonstrates itself to be a circular, closed system, like a
      snake eating its own tail.  Entirely derived from memory, thought
      exists only in the past.  It has no present existence at all.

      How can something even remotely 'true' penetrate the barriers thought
      erects?  The only alternative is for awareness to disengage from

      And it's interesting to note that NOTHING thought can do will cause
      this to occur.  Seeing this is the beginning of truth.


      LILIANA re-sends a classic GENE POOLE post
        here is a slightly snipped excerpt:
      All this stuff

      Okay, so I have been reading, and it goes around and around. This
      is understandable, these circles, because everyone is 'at' a
      different place of understanding. Please do not mistake; I am not asking
      clarification. I see that at anyplace in the circle, one may exit,
      and that it is all the same. Outside of the circle, the circle is
      like a 'merry-go-round' (carousel), it goes and goes, and each
      rides the beast of choice; some say they are 'riding a body', others say

      they are riding 'conditioning', others say they are riding 'only
      what is', but the view from here, from off-circle, makes all riders
      look the same. They are all going up and down and around and around,
      and they all speak of the rush and whiz and the blur of the world as
      it seems to rush by. But from here, it is apparent that the whole
      thing is one thing, and that each chooses (one way or another) to
      experience it in the way that they do.

      So that is how it looks, and I am not on it. I am here looking at
      it. I am able to hear the stories told by those on the ride, I can
      estimate the stories, compare them, and find certain commonalities
      in those stories.

      A favorite story is this one, the story of 'things are not as they
      seem', but what is being said? Is it not usually, 'things are not
      as they seem... to YOU'? These stories are offered, really, as a way
      of becoming closer, of banishing isolation, and that could be called
      'sharing'. But some of the stories are offered in order to cancel
      the stories of all of the others; this is like saying that I have the
      'supreme story', against which all others are meaningless. This is
      not sharing to become closer, but to remove the threat that is
      presented by the presence of other people. It is the presence of
      other people which triggers both kinds of story-presentation, both
      the sharing and the domination.

      So now we have the real scenario; it is the presence of others,
      and that context alone, which triggers this, all of this

      Our usual version of what is going on here, is that it is the
      'illusion of separateness' which should be overcome, and that is
      the high spiritual goal, toward which we can march, shoulder to
      shoulder, eyes uplifted, eventually to 'become one'. This however seems
      to be a plan to overcome the troublesome presence of 'other', of other
      people. This plan, this story of overcoming 'separateness', is
      thus nothing but an embarrassed attempt to dismiss the obvious pains
      which emanate from our 'relationship with other'. It is our failure to
      come to grips with relationship which drives this whole thing, this
      roundabout 'search and destroy the ego' mission.

      Obviously to me... is the attempt to overcome the fear of other,
      and the attraction one has for other, by somehow building a reality
      which then has to be torn down for one to become "whole", "enlightened",
      I may, I am privileged to, maintain my empty relationship, and to
      thus be off of, or on the circle, the carousel, the world-dream,
      but this is only through exacting honesty. This honesty is not a goal,
      and it is not a state; it is a realization of 'how things work',
      or is also said, of 'what is'. What is, is relationship, and it is
      only relationship, and this relationship is self.

      Now I will crack for you, the ancient code of semantics, which
      serves to obscure just how our language already has in it, all of these
      keys, but which keys are used in the wrong locks. The wrong locks
      are simply the holding of the wrong context; please allow me to
      provide the correct context.

      This is the context: Two being as one, the great heartfelt goal,
      is accomplished through relationship with self, and with self only.
      Each self which is exactingly honest with self, each self which
      functions with utmost integrity in relationship with self, each self
      which is impeccability, is the realization. It is this realization which is
      self, and self alone.

      Each self alone, is thus self, and thus self of other also, and
      thus, 'two being as one' is not the merging of two, but the realization
      of one, and of one only.

      The failure of relationship with 'other' is inevitable, for there
      is no other but self. Other, scary other, desirable other, enviable
      other, hateful other, loving other, is none other than self, and
      it is the 'same' self that you are, and if you do not know this, it
      is because you are not living in absolute (pure) honesty in
      relationship with self, you. You, self, have choice of honesty or
      endless rationalization, seeking 'ways' to attain 'something', a goal, a
      means, an arrival. But the actual is self, and it is you. If you
      do not realize this, you are fixated in the maze of fractally
      distributed Boolean forks, and you will use language and thought
      to follow that maze, learning slowly of 'truth' (truth are valid
      forks, leading to the center of the maze, with the little board that
      says on a map, with an arrow, 'you are here'), and you will suffer, and
      all because of dishonesty.

      In reality, you have nothing to say to other. In reality, there is
      only self and the realization of self. In reality, you are either
      in reality (honesty) or not. If not, reality is hell, suffering,
      searching, 'trvth', and all of the accessories of the seeker, the
      victim, the hero. If you are reality, you are realization, you are
      impeccability, you are self, and self alone. Alone, you are
      honest, and so now, there is nothing projected upon the putative
      Other is empty, and is only what you give it, in your honesty or
      your self-deception, and what you 'experience' is the product of that
      relationship with self, alone.

      Honesty says, 'if I do not know, then I do not know'. This is
      honesty. Try it!

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