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

Digest for Tues. 27th July

Expand Messages
  • andrew macnab
    Here s the digest for Tuesday. I ve snipped conversations and posts for length in a few places, but tried to maintain meaning and context. andrew
    Message 1 of 1 , Jul 28, 1999
    • 0 Attachment
      Here's the digest for Tuesday. I've snipped conversations and posts for
      in a few places, but tried to maintain meaning and context.


      Antoine and Gloria wrote;

      Why does not fire generate wood from air, like bees and flowers
      honey from the sun? Do bees live a deeper state of namaste
      between each
      other, than the molecules of dead wood do?, or maybe humans do?

      It does seems that in a community of Namaste, from the very basic
      of energy consumption, that each actions, or spark of fire, those
      "produce" "more", so that the "face" of the "community" may turn
      like a glove, outside in (or inside out), and come to create the
      direction in which it looks.

      Thoughts like this,


      Glo: Ahh yes, does the harmony of bees far exceed that of
      humans..yet it may be we distill a rarer nectar than honey.
      Thoughts like yours, Antoine, remind me of that. What generates
      this spark from Gene to you to me is more mysterious than fire
      generating wood out of air would be. And is why I am loving your
      questions more than any answer yet heard. Your questions about a
      face, our face, reversing the web of time like turning a glove
      inside out, to create a new direction...such a lovely dream..what
      possibilities. Here is a bee poem for all us dreamers..

      Last night, as I was sleeping
      I dreamt - marvelous error! -
      that I had a beehive
      here inside my heart.
      And the golden bees
      were making white combs
      and sweet honey
      from my old failures.

      by Antonio Machado


      Jumping like a butterfly from one flower to the other flower. I'm
      jumping from one heart to the same heart of a different "kaleidoscopic

      "The fire of my love blazes through
      The crystal of my heart.
      Just picture the colorful patterns of the fiery flames.
      Just imagine the heat of the fire's brilliant blaze.

      When that fire of love is reflected through
      The crystal of my heart,
      You can imagine what its glory must be
      And how divine a sight it is.

      You know my love exists for you;
      And when you touch it,
      It's patterns sweep through my entire being;

      Every pore of my body is a spark of love for you."

      Gurumayi Chidvilasananda

      Here are a few excerpts from a long conversation between Kristi and Gloria;

      I am beyond thinking I can fix anything or anyone, but I am not
      thinking I should be available to appreciate, affirm, recognize
      when someone
      is in my presence who needs that....but as you say, it is I who
      need that.

      For now, I think the most "nondual" approach is to just allow
      whatever is coming up for you now into awareness..there's
      sometimes a tendency on the list for people to outdo one another
      in being the most nondual..which may be why my "contrariness"
      rebels and insists on the ordinariness of day to day life
      experiences. I've had my share of mystical awareness, too. :)
      I'm just for being real, and I like your honesty. Fuck whether its
      "politically correct" or nondual or whatever.. what is coming up now??

      I think the ordinariness of everyday life IS spiritual and if
      our practice does not affect that then it is
      pointless mental masturbation...

      ... I think that the personal is sublime and the tedious
      and ugly are seeds too, I think I'll stay in public view...
      it's a form of honesty for me...I've been hiding for too long,
      pretending, it feels good to stand up and say
      this is the way it is for me.

      Definitions of ego;

      PhamDLuan wrote:

      Can anyone give an exact definition of the term "ego" as well
      as its history.

      Greg Goode:

      My favorite two definitions are:

      It is an idea we have of ourselves.
      --Wayne Dyer

      It is an object that is perceived, like a tree.
      --Jean Klein

      Ego is the sense of Me-ness. It envolves identification
      with thought, and the result is a sense of being separate from
      tottality as an inner entity/observer, that is perpetuated through
      a drive in becoming in time (usualy better). It also brings with it
      the false assumption of *I know*.


      ego is
      and isn't
      things we did last summer, tragic pet deaths, reruns of gilligan's island,
      someone i used to know, a broken lawnmower, someone who defined me, a way i

      ego is a wierd window: porthole or panoramic. ego is and isn't. ego is a
      grease spot on the garage floor of life.
      ego is
      a poptart
      in a universe with no toaster
      ego is that old jacket i used to have, my memories good and bad, my terror,
      my joy
      ego is the person i'm gonna be when i get there, ego is a street that
      stops, goes both ways or dead ends on command--ego is a little big word
      that's fun to toss out at parties, ego is one of those marvelous but useless

      broccoli rubber bands, ego is everything i've ever needed, wanted,
      seperated, picked up ,discarded, had sex with, sorted, had drycleaned,
      bought, sold, lent, given, lost, or thrown away. ego is a bad hair day
      sometimes finds a hat or a buzz clipper. ego is a velvet elvis at a van

      ego is the only thing that has ever made me cry.

      ego never was freedom.

      my best friend,
      my worst enemy,
      a rapist,
      a liar,
      a clown.


      ego promises
      ego regrets
      ego names
      ego says you're born
      ego names you weary dead .

      leggo my ego
      and now
      ego nudges me here
      or on my way to the moon. . .
      ego closes my eyes and opens ears. . .then, nothingness realizes
      its own nonexistence. . .
      i have looked in the package which contains us and *everything.*
      ego wasn't in there.
      and here,
      how can nothing stand in the way?
      ego is and isn't :)
      love aleks


      I would define "ego" as inertia. When a wheel is at rest, it is easy to
      move it. But when it rotates, it has a momentum "of its own" that will
      prevent it from changing direction. Once set in motion, it will keep
      spinning, sometimes accellerating, sometimes descellerating. A successfull
      yogi is one who pulls the break so that the wheel stops spinning.

      I have seen and felt
      what I call ego
      as a contraction.
      Beingness is sky-like,
      having no "things".
      When I see and feel like sky
      I have no things
      and no qualities
      I am as no thing.

      I saw today
      that my ego began
      as a movement
      in pure expansiveness,
      I imagined a "step back"
      to see myself.
      In seeing myself
      there was a moment
      of hesitation
      and in that moment of imagining
      all forms of all things appeared.

      Even in the ensuing world of forms
      I can let the holding of myself separate
      to fall back -
      like a wave falls back into the sea.
      With that falling back
      issues, problems, ideas, separation disappear.
      Out of habit
      this contraction/holding reappears,
      then disappears again
      as I notice the holding
      and stop.

      Ego is the effort of holding
      so familiar to us now
      we don't notice.

      Yet in contrast to just being
      it is all the effort there is.


      Dear Ego queriers:

      A Course In Miracles describes the ego as: "the false idea that we are

      Further discussion of ego;

      Marcia wrote:

      The ego construct is operational.

      Greg wrote:

      What do you mean? That the ego really does something? Is it really any
      different in its relation
      to our true nature from any other object? Is it different from the
      Empire State Building or the
      cup of tea at your elbow, or the most sublime meditative state? Isn't
      it is an object that arises
      from consciousness, and subsides back into consciousness? There are
      beliefs that arise that
      attribute lots of doing and responsibility to the ego. But those
      beliefs themselves are just objects
      that arise and fall, are they not?

      All I am saying is that it isn't an object. It is a verb not a noun.

      I see what you are saying. But a verb is an object too. Not a physical
      object, but an object in the
      sense of being an appearance. Becoming and moving and transforming and
      changing and identifying
      are all objects because they all arise. (Even arising is an object.) But I
      think that these verb-like
      objects are lighter and less subject to identification and belief than nouns
      (or their referents).

      I think that the first step in awakening is identification with something
      which life has not programmed me to identify with. Perhaps
      even identification with the sense of Presence rather than the
      sense of self translated as "me". Perhaps then the second
      death is the death of the identification with the sense of Presence.

      Great point! And this is a succinct road-map of how formal advaita vedanta
      takes this path.
      Identifying with things that are ever more subtle until there is no
      identification left. The aspirant is
      taught not to identify with the physical body (if they are a good student,
      what results is identification
      with the emotions or "manas."). Then it is taught that we aren't the manas
      (what results is
      identification with the intellect). Then it is taught that we aren't the
      intellect (what results is
      identification with the blissful Presence). This is the last to go.


      Skye can't help but wonder whether we go full circle. Could
      there be a blissful presence unimaginable via any psychological
      identity that is here in front of our face, so close it is our face?
      Could this *actual* moment *now* (experienced as this lively sensate
      body) BE this entity's *actual freedom*. Without the need for any
      ego or 'I' identity, without any concept of nonduality or

      This brain observes an Actual Universe which has
      intelligence beyond my wildest dreams. If I surrender all my
      concepts of *it* and *me* will this Absent Presence be truly united
      with IT right here right n o w....has it always been so but I chose
      my limited human intelligence instead. And is there a fear of this,
      that my body will awaken to sensations I never
      dreamed possible, sensations that I have been programmed not to
      identify with?
      And why not come ALIVE in the BODY of this infinite, trip the
      light fantastic,
      universe? What fire burning latent with me beyond all human
      conceptual passions, must be fanned, was perhaps fanned by our
      creator, to bring about Freedom in Actuality.

      When Marcia wrote "I think that the first step in awakening is
      identification with something which life has not programmed me to
      identify with."

      ...I pondered, is this identification with
      something Marcia called life, what humanity has been programming
      itself *not* to identify with...could it be...am I this...actual
      here and now sensate bodily
      universe! No conceptual identity acknowledgment necessary. Am I here
      to inflame the essential sensate character of this dimension, after
      all the galactic mental trips, am I already seamlessly integrated
      with the substance of each plane my Absent Presence resides in and
      am I actually here to learn to *let go* ancient non actual
      conceptual fantasies about "TAT" therefore freeing the life force to
      live fully and deeply within this wondrous realm. Do I have the
      courage? Could this bring freedom from all mental human conditions
      and it's resultant physical numbness, could this bring unimaginable
      blissful peace to the earthly body.

      Tomas asked about nondual education and Gene answered;

      To get the ball rolling- I'm presenting the following questions:

      1- what is the meaning of true education? how should the child be taught?
      What is being done currently?

      3 Questions here...

      I can only say, that now the process of 'teaching' is aimed at (deliberate
      statement) a hypothetical 'person' who is hoped to be an ideal dweller
      within the world-dream. It is the creation of this ideal hypothetical
      person which is the goal; no other ideals are allowed or admitted. Further,
      the ideal education-created hypothetical person, will view other people as
      _hypothetical_, rather than real. This viewpoint, as cultivated
      successfully now, allows each person to be hypothetical, and to treat
      others as hypothetical. Each person is thus made to be simply, a container
      for what-ever idealism is currently popular or expedient. (see the
      phenomenon of the 'fad' and of 'belief'). Teaching children to be an
      obedient container for ideals, is the goal, and the current 'system' is set
      up to do only that.

      As to 'what is the meaning of true education/how should the child be
      taught?', education _should_ help the child create 'healthy ego', a
      profound sense of individual boundaries, respect, patience, tolerance. This
      must be interwoven with any other 'teaching' of subjects. 'No-harm' style
      of teaching must be employed, wherein the teachers are not only ready to
      instruct, but to own and if necessary apologize for their
      boundary-infringing behaviours, conducted against students inadvertantly.
      Only by exampling, very deliberately, this combination of humility and
      genius, can humility and genius be 'taught'.

      2- How can current technology participate in supporting the process of true

      education? (How can the internet?)

      Connecting to greater, more skilled and experienced persons... admitting
      that we are all yet in school, and pointing without any embarassment _at
      all_ to those more competent, is the appropriate use of the internet. Many
      years ago, individuals would go on a years-long pilgrimage to the
      universitas of the teachers of renown, devote years of time to study, live
      in poverty for the priviage of learning from the best in the world. Now, it
      is available via one mouse-click.
      Our universal Pedagogue is at hand, to clear the way
      for those who can see through
      the dust-storm of the world-dream.

      Gene replies to Antoine who replied to Gene:

      ==Gene Poole== wrote:

      Okay, now I am on the border of saying something. 'Nondual' says to me...
      that the apparency of Maya is a gradient-rich display, which we observe as
      we move. The recession of objects of 'Maya' denotes our movement... into
      the (apparent) future, as we face our own past. In other words... we are
      moving forward while facing backwards, viewing a recession of apparent
      objects. Entropy is apparent in this backward view. I do not claim that
      this is 'actual' but rather apparent. Still, such data is relevant, and as
      you say, is not meaningless. Perhaps it offers a clue to something, like
      maybe why we face backwards...


      The confrontation itself, between being and being, rather than between
      being and Being, is what I point to. The 'finality' (is this the
      authoritarian factor?) may be resolved by 'Namaste', at least on one level.
      How do we turn all those around us, into gods? Can it be done? Divinity (as
      useless as this concept may be) may be more common than apparent.

      I enjoy each one of your word Gene, but these two paragraphs woke up the
      face facing the past in the gradient movement of my arrow of time. In
      other words brought memories from thermodynamics to burn.

      Greetings, friend Antoine...

      After a careful reading of your webpages, I see that you are indeed aware
      of the esoterica of thermodynamics. This is a rare attribute among people,
      to see physics in terms of 'spirituality'.

      Looking for a clue to why we face backward, is to me trying to find out
      why fire burns. Which is to me a very legitimate question, since i am
      essentially fire in essence of manifestation. From where does come this
      general tendency for fire to burn, the movement towards maximum entropy,
      the arrow of time? Why is it not a fully reversible process? This web in
      which our face, facing backward, is caught...

      Allow me to just ramble here. We face backwards 'because' what we would
      otherwise face is the event-horizon of 'death', the sole predictable
      singularity in life... or so it is promoted in world-dream belief and
      teachings. For world-dream humans, the future is 'death'... but for those
      (Nagualists, nondualists) few who fall outside of the artificial limits of
      the world-dream, navigation does not include death as a signifcant
      landmark. Thus, facing the 'future' is possible, and is taught as 'Tantra'
      via the school of Vajrayana (which is built not only upon Buddhism, but
      also upon a more ancient foundation, that of the 'Nagualism' of Bon-Po, or
      as it is called. "The Way of Seeing"). It is possible to live... without
      the classical definitions of life and death; to do so, may put one at odds
      with the enforcers of the world-dream. That is when things become very
      'interesting' in a social context, and that is why hermitism/Shamanism is
      still a very rare flower to be seen blooming among the thorns.

      Why does not fire generate wood from air, like bees and flowers generate
      honey from the sun? Do bees live a deeper state of namaste between each
      other, than the molecules of dead wood do?, or maybe humans do?

      According to the ancients... all of 'reality' (as treated by physics) is
      merely degenerate light; that is to say, that from light comes not only
      fire, but also movement (relativity), space, water, ash (earth). We
      observe, as you know, from a present which still emanates from that light,
      but this simple fact is lost upon most observers. Entropy is the activity
      of degeneration of light, the return to light, via the myriad paths of
      matter (elements) and energy.

      Living biological Beings use the power of _accelleration of entropy_ for
      the business of creation, of honey or anything else. Organization here, is
      at the expense of organization elsewhere. Eating/digesting/anabolism is at
      the expense of the envirionment; we build by destroying. It is however,
      only the 'binding energy' which we actually expoit. Matter itself is
      symptomatic of the existence of binding energy; the Being uses binding
      energy released via the reactor of digestion to sustain itself, the body is
      'simply' the slow-motion outflow of what was destroyed, or 'degenerate

      Eventually, long-wave infrared heat is consumed by the great singularity,
      to be once again boosted in activity to photonic and beyond. This long,
      seemingly eternal gradient is the _stretched single point of Being_. The
      mind of the human creates 'time' as a _justification_ for what is observed,
      but the concept of 'time' thus disguises the reality which entropy reveals
      to physicists. We seek to remove that disguise, yes?

      This is why I object to platitudinous 'explanations' which seek to reduce
      it all to slogans and beliefs and standards (even the standards of
      'nondualism') through which to see. It is only by facing forward into the
      future/unknown that direct vision of our power of creation, the highest
      Siddhe, can be recognized and thus used responsibly.

      It does seems that in a community of Namaste, from the very basic level
      of energy consumption, that each actions, or spark of fire, those
      "produce" "more", so that the "face" of the "community" may turn itself
      like a glove, outside in (or inside out), and come to create the
      direction in which it looks.

      Thoughts like this,


      Well-thought, Antoine. Yes... we have innate power of creation, and can
      learn to use it wisely. We can, through various means, deliver guidance and
      teaching and encouragement to others. Sometimes this can be experienced as
      a 'shock', by the student. It is what the student _reaches for in reaction
      to that shock_ which is the significant, telling evidence of just how the
      student is already conditioned, and of what thus must be unlearned, before
      the student may be able to face the raw unknown without pulling a rabbit
      out of the hat of imagination/conditioning. Our world-dream is literally
      crawling with such imagined-into-reality rabbits, a factor which is itself
      revealing of our power of creation.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.