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

Thursday February 22nd

Expand Messages
  • andrew macnab
    ___________________________________________________________________________ Hello everybody, It s *my* turn to announce that i have started a list/ forum/
    Message 1 of 1 , Feb 23, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      ___________________________________________________________________________


      Hello everybody,

      It's *my* turn to announce that i have started a list/ forum/ egroup/
      Y!group. Yes, i am the owner/ dictator of a brand new list, Guru Ratings, at
      GuruRatings@yahoogroups.com.

      Its purpose, besides aiding me in my quest for world domination, is to
      provide a place for those interested in evaluating the various folks in the
      biz and discussing the issues that arise in the course of such evaluation.
      It arose as a way to spread around the various feedbacks and suggestions i
      was getting. As yet there are few members and negligible action, but with
      your intelligent, lively input?..........

      And Sarlo's Guru Rating Service has been recently updated as well.

      Namaste, Sarlo

      Sarlo's Guru Rating Service
      http://www.globalserve.net/~sarlo/Ratings.htm
      Guru Rating Discussion Forum
      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GuruRatings


      ___________________________________________________________________________

      Harsha:


      Yesterday, we introduced Master Pham. Recently he has written a short piece
      titled, "The Highest Teaching: Self or Emptiness" looking at an age old
      debate.

      Master Pham writes, " Whether ultimate reality is fullness of the Self or
      Emptiness has always been a fascinating problem. It had been for long a
      debate between Buddhists and Advaitins, and among Buddhists themselves
      (Yogacara with the Mind-Only theory and Madhyamika with the Shunyata or
      Emptiness theory)."

      The article "The Highest Teaching: Self or Emptiness" can be found on
      http://www.harshasatsangh.com It sparkles with intelligence, logic, humor,
      and insight. It is clear that Master Pham has a universal and a
      compassionate vision which leaves no one out. Those who love nonduality and
      an integrated perspective will appreciate this short but well written piece
      in Master's Pham's inimitable style.

      HS Magazine is the official magazine of HarshaSatsangh. HarshaSatsangh is a
      fellowship with Sri Ramana as the patron saint and we follow the teachings
      of the Sage of Arunachala. Sri Ramana was a Universal Master and saw that
      all spiritual traditions point to the same thing. People from all religions
      (Hinduism, Buddhism, Christianity, Moslems, Judaism and others) visited Sri
      Ramana and freely expressed their questions and were answered. In a similar
      spirit we welcome all as brothers and sisters without regard to their
      philosophical or religious orientation. We follow the path of Ahimsa, which
      is the first principle given in Yoga Shastras. Currently about 350 teachers
      and students of Yoga, Meditation and Nondualism in a variety of traditions
      are members. The discussions typically focus on fundamental life issues and
      health in the context of the spiritual life with some required breaks for
      humor and good laughs. For a more complete description of the list, please
      go to the following URL.

      http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HarshaSatsangh/join

      http://www.harshasatsangh.com

      ___________________________________________________________________________


      "The realization that is neither absolute nor relative
      penetrates without intent.
      Clear water soaks into the earth;
      the fish swims like a fish.
      The sky is vast and penetrates the heavens;
      the bird flies like a bird."

      Dogen


      There's something about that last line, "the bird flies like a bird"
      that very much reminds me of Dan's 'just this, here'. Yes, the bird
      flies exactly like a bird, just so... the fish swims precisely as a
      fish does...

      Intimacy with 'what is'.

      Love,

      Omkara

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


      Thanks for the honorable mention,
      Omkara.

      Dogen also said, 'wood doesn't become
      fire, and then become ash', rather,
      'there is wood; there is fire; there is ash.

      But I don't rely on Dogen.

      As you say, a fish swims like a fish ;-)

      Love,
      Dan

      ___________________________________________________________________________



      Hi Gang,

      I know how much some of you disdain experiences, but this line from Dan
      and Omkara's conversation:

      Clear water soaks into the earth;

      reminds me that during one of my holotropic breathworks recently in
      Sedona, I had an experience of being the parched ground when the rain
      started falling. Oh my, that was nice!!! It was like being made love to
      by millions of gentle hands, and it opened me up so wide!!! YUM!!!


      Love, Mark
      hey, thanks for the memories. Was it good for you too?

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

      Hey Mark...

      shhh!!!
      <whispering>
      experience is all there is.

      love,
      andrew

      ~~~~~~~~

      Dan:

      X is all there is.
      X is all there.
      X is all.
      X is.
      X
      V
      .

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

      Come on Guys,

      Enough with the Xcuses... Let X = X.

      Love, Mark
      ps oh yeah, Laurie Anderson asked me to add:


      Let X=X

      I met this guy - and he looked like might have been a hat check clerk at
      an ice rink. Which, in fact, he turned out to be. And I said: Oh boy.
      Right again. Let X=X.
      You know, it could be you. It's a sky-blue sky. Satellites are out
      tonight. Let X=X. You know, I could write a book. And this book would be
      thick enough to stun
      an ox. Cause I can see the future and it's a place - about 70 miles east
      of here. Where it's lighter. Linger on over here. Got the time? Let X=X.
      I got this postcard.
      And it read, it said: Dear Amigo - Dear Partner. Listen, uh - I just
      want to say thanks. So...thanks. Thanks for all the presents. Thanks for
      introducing me to the
      Chief. Thanks for putting on the feedbag. Thanks for going all out.
      Thanks for showing me your Swiss Army knife. and uh - Thanks for letting
      me autograph your
      cast. Hug and kisses. XXXXOOOO. Oh yeah, P.S. I - feel - feel like - I
      am - in a burning building - and I gotta go. Cause I - I feel - feel
      like - I am - in a burning
      building - and I gotta go.

      ___________________________________________________________________________



      Since I was quoting Dogen, the founder of Soto zen,
      here's equal time for Rinzai, the founder of Rinzai zen;


      "Stop thinking and trying to find the answers. And do it now!

      Don't be deceived by others. Trust yourself. That's all that is required.

      The scholars and sutras! I spit on them! You have only to know that wherever you
      are , you are on the road to your own home.

      The hope of enlightenment is like a yoke about your neck.

      Bodhidharma and Nirvana are hitching posts for asses. Forget all this stuff.

      Don't worry. Take things as they are. Walk when you want to walk. Sit when you want to

      sit.

      Those who strive for success are stupid.

      Time is precious. There is no permanence in an instant.

      You are like a man who rejects his own head to look for another.

      The real is ready at hand and doesn't wait for an opportune time.

      There is no fixed teaching. All I can provide is an appropriate medicine for a
      particular ailment.

      What is there to doubt!

      Let go. Don't seek or run away.

      Make no mistake, there's nothing to be found without or within. And don't hang onto my

      words. Go your way in calm and with an empty mind. It is enough to be quiet and
      ordinary.

      Be self reliant.

      Observe in yourself what is already there.

      Farewell"



      andrew

      ___________________________________________________________________________
      ___________________________________________________________________________


      Dear Tim,

      >This is the only area we disagree. There is *EVERY* way to inquire
      >into this... every life event, everything can act as the inquiry.

      We don't agree or disagree.
      We each type words representing a point of view.
      Reality, which is all that is, can't be represented
      as a point of view.
      As only reality is, there can be no agreement or
      disagreement, simply presentation of points of
      view, conceptualizations.

      And if every life event in totality is the inquiry,
      then this is the all-out, all-at-once
      inquiry I had mentioned.

      Either there is nothing whatsoever
      lacking or opposed,
      Or there is an entity lacking something
      trying to gradually get somewhere.


      >If you deny such a thing as a sense of process (note - I'm not
      >talking about 'becoming'),

      Process involves becoming.
      A process moves from here to there,
      it changes from what is happening
      at point A to what is happening at
      point B. What is gradual is a qualitative
      change, what is nongradual and nondurational
      has no qualities -- doesn't happen, doesn't
      come into being, has no process.


      >I would question your eyesight... do the
      >numbers on the clock not continue to change sequentially when you
      >view them, or do you perceive them as stuck forever at some arbitrary
      >date and time when this "instantaneous" inquiry occurs?

      I would love to clarify, if possible, because
      for me, it's the "turning point" at which awareness
      dissolves any identification as independently
      existing time-bound entity,
      yet is able to continue to live in/as time.

      I know words can't provide clarity, yet if there is
      typing of words on this subject which can't be discussed,
      so be it ;-)

      (An actor suddenly realized that there is
      no such thing as a part in a play, because
      nothing is a part [apart], but could continue
      to play anyway, and did.)

      As the play, all reality is a flickering field of points
      of light -- yet it is instantaneously "seen" that
      this single point neither turns off nor on to itself.

      The field of relativity is all these points, boundlessly,
      yet each point, being neither on nor off, only
      seems to be on or off when contrasted with other
      points. There are no "other points" -- it is
      only an appearance due to an imaginary
      comparison. There is only this point -- seeing
      this fact, there can be no comparison, there is
      nothing to compare, hence no time, no duration.
      This "seeing" is instantaneous because no
      duration, no being or becoming or nonbeing is
      involved.

      As there is no duration to this point, there is neither
      coming into or out of being, and the entire field
      of relativity is shown as it is -- neither coming
      in or out of being -- nondurational.

      The instant I discuss is instantaneous no-time
      that doesn't interfere with time, but
      shifts irrevocably the perception of the
      "field of time".

      I am the
      point of nonduration at the end of the clock's
      hand, which is always
      "now", so never knowing itself as "now" --
      neither moving or not-moving (to itself).

      The instant I discuss (which never has
      or will be the subject of discussion ;-) neither
      arises nor departs. I've mentioned in previous
      conversations that
      the way I'm using "instant" is equivalent
      with "nondurational". (Just ways of languaging
      that which is beyond any language or concept.)
      The nondurational undermines any verbally-oriented
      conceptual understanding of what reality is;
      the nondurational, which never can be or not be,
      has been "forgotten" as we come to depend
      on images and ideas of reality as if those gave
      reality, as we construe compartive realities
      as if substantial.

      >Simply resting as Beingness, choicelessly remaining in/as 'what is'
      >is prior to and beyond any arbitrary definition of "instantaneous"
      >or "gradual." Unless I'm completely misunderstanding (a possibility
      >since sometimes your 'poetic' writing style is difficult to
      >comprehend), you seem stuck on one side of a duality: "instantaneous"
      >vs. "gradual."

      Beingness seems from here to be a monolithic quality
      elevated to a transcendent prior unity. If it is not that,
      then it has no duration, and can't be said to
      be "prior to", "during" or "after". As 'this', then
      it is not an it, is nondurational, has no quality of
      being, becoming, or not-being.

      Nothing comes into being, nothing goes out of being.

      Beingness sounds like a quality --
      there is no quality in/as
      nondurational timelessness --

      Dichotomizing instantaneous and gradual is indeed
      the common understanding of these terms,
      which makes it seem that each opposes the other.
      The instantaneousness referred to here is unopposed,
      not related to "another instant of time"
      so isn't the common understanding of an instant.

      When there is no opposition of now and then,
      here and there, movement and nonmovement,
      no time is constructed, and there is only
      this "instant" of "no duration". It isn't connected
      with another moment, nor does it fail to be
      connected - as there is no other moment.

      I'm not trying to be poetic. The fact is, this moment
      isn't connected with a previous moment or a moment
      yet to come. There is nothing gradually happening,
      because this moment doesn't relate to another moment.
      It doesn't avoid relationship.
      It is only what is, beyond is or isn't, beyond relationship
      or non-relationship.

      What is gradual can be opposed.
      If I am gradually heading toward something,
      whatever blocks that movement is opposition.
      Gradual process depends on something changing.
      When there is no something to change, there
      is no gradual process.

      If I am instantaneous, I am heading toward nothing,
      and there can be no opposition.
      What is gradual doesn't oppose what is instantaneous,
      because it has no basis, it is entirely a conceptual
      fiction, a point of view.
      What is instantaneous isn't a point of view.
      It doesn't "happen", so how can it establish as a point of view?

      Instantaneous awareness isn't nihilistic, so
      it doesn't do away with gradual processes.
      Those can still be participated in and discussed.
      However, the fiction that there is anyone participating
      has dissolved, so there isn't change of a quality
      or entity from point a to point b, except conceptually.

      I deal quite well with process aspects of
      reality, on a daily basis.
      But that is understood as conceptual,
      conventional.

      We speak, we act, we live -- and all of this
      is "instantaneous" -- without exception.
      It's not even a matter of someone seeing it
      or realizing it.
      There's no choice involved.
      It is all-seeing, all-knowing, with no
      reliance on senses or knowledge --
      its nondoing is all apparent doings.

      The nonconceptual, nondurational takes no time.
      It doesn't occur.
      It has never occurred and never will occur, yet
      is all that is.

      As this is all-out inquiry,
      there is no inquirer and nothing to be asked.
      There is nothing to do, not to do,
      nothing to start or halt.

      Nothing has happened or will happened.

      This is "nondurational".

      Love,
      Dan

      ___________________________________________________________________________

      Jerry:

      http://www.wwfwwffw.net/parahumanism/mind.htm

      ___________________________________________________________________________




      NDS

      Seeker, you wrote:

      > Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 18:04:44 +0300
      > From: Jan <swork@...>
      > Subject: To seek or not to seek is the question
      >
      > To seek or not to seek is the question

      The question actually is; "why is there a question?"

      > seek and ye shall find

      Where, how, and when, to find the one who seeks?

      > as Rumi would put it:
      > get thirsty, really thirsty... and God will do the rest

      Rumi makes beautiful metaphor, best appreciated 'after the fact'.

      > I think the fear is, getting too used to seeking or to the
      > journey and not wanting to arrive

      The fear is, of the extinction of the 'favorite me'.

      > [These are not my opinions, friends ... just a newbie
      > thinking out aloud]

      Do you always think in the opinions of others?

      > To give my example, I am reluctant to meditate, to inquire
      > the question of 'who am I' until I have read enough on the
      > subject. I fear starting out on the wrong footing [so to
      > speak].

      First be sure that you have caught up on your sleep.

      > Though I do try it out for a few minutes every now and
      > then. Isn't the quality of meditation or inquiry more
      > important than the quantity?

      Who judges quality?

      > I don't think controlling thought is that difficult.
      > Shutting out all sensation, etc. can be done. You get the
      > blank mind than what? Are we supposed to maintain this
      > blank mind for a long time?

      If you can self-instill sensory deprivation, the next step is to pay
      attention to yourself.

      > In fact why meditate at all? Isn't this freedom, this
      > stillness, this self-awareness supposed to be ever present
      > even while going about our everyday duties? Why cannot it
      > just creep in unnoticed? Cannot it grow from mindfulness,
      > heedfulness, constancy? Suddenly you realize that this
      > stillness has always been with you. It is just that you
      > have not been paying attention to it?

      You may do as you wish.

      > Isn't all achievement nonlinear? It comes to you out of
      > the blue when you least expect. As if it is not for us to
      > achieve but for God to grant in his sweet time? Or do we
      > accumulate stamps of some sort and when the required
      > amount is accumulated, bingo! jackpot?
      >
      > forgive this slow newbie learner ...
      >
      > love,
      > seeker

      Questions of 'what and how to do', occur when doing is given
      precedence over Being.

      > From: Jan <swork@...>
      > Subject: Exhaustion or Stillness
      >
      > Exhaustion or Stillness

      In perfect fitness, and when exhaustion is not an issue, the
      stillness allows detailed examination of the entire surround.
      Stillness is not without purpose, and there is purpose to our ability
      to 'access' stillness.

      > I used to daydream a lot. In fact most of my spare moments
      > were spent day dreaming.
      > Now with this new found interest in 'God' I have almost
      > stopped day dreaming. All I do is read and think;
      > download, read and think.

      Perhaps you intuit the deep and present need to replace your current
      set of vocabulary, concepts, and assumptions. If this is so, you
      could examine the difficulty of validating anything, by the use of
      what is by all evidence, invalid itself... meaning, all current
      vocabulary, concepts, and assumptions.

      > Sometimes my mind seems to rebel and just goes blank.
      > Thoughts do not want to come. Sometimes they start to form
      > and disappear midway!

      You are observing the behaviour of a 'mechanism'. 'You' are not this
      mechanism, this mechanism is your servant. Learn how to properly
      prioritize the activities of this mechanism, and it will do all of
      the 'work' for you. It will bring many things to you. But none of
      these things will have any relevance to you, yourself; instead only
      to what it is that you remember of yourself in this life.

      If you in stillness examine the entire surround, find what is not
      relevant to you, in memory in this life.

      > Is this exhaustion or a precursor to 'stillness'? I
      > suspect the former, however couldn't it be an aid to
      > stilling the mind?
      >
      > =============================
      > love,
      > seeker

      Your constant recitation of your vocabulary, will convince you that
      there is nothing which is beyond it.

      What is all vocabulary built upon?


      ==Gene Poole==

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