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

Friday February 23, 2001

Expand Messages
  • Gloria Lee
    DAN BERKOW Ramesh Belsekar, realizing the Ultimate Principle had got itself into a pickle pursuing experiences in Pandora s Box, recommended the following:
    Message 1 of 1 , Feb 24, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      Ramesh Belsekar,
      realizing the Ultimate Principle had
      got itself into a pickle pursuing
      experiences in Pandora's Box,
      recommended the following:

      "Self-realization is not meant for one whose intellect has been deadened by a
      firm belief in the illusory reality of himself as an entity in the
      phenomenal world and who thus pursues fulfillment in the illusory pleasures
      of the senses.  Such a person, who has objectivized the phenomenal world in
      his own mind, does not realize that it is the same illusory mind which
      destroys both himself and his world.  He therefore remains subject to, and
      victim of, his own notions of birth, suffering and death."

      Was the Ultimate Principle listening?
      Or did the pickle of pursuing non-existent
         experience continue?

      If you tune in for further developments,
         you are still listening for gurus speaking
         into Pandora's Box...

      DAN & CEE
         At the point where it is clear that the idea of
         something observing something is groundless,
         there is no need to give a name to what has
         never been something observing something
         in the first place ...


          yes, and we are so free to name it!

          brilliant and crystal clear like thin thin space
          nothing has ever occurred

          love cee
      Hi cee --

      Brilliant, clear, dim and dark --
      thin, thin, and fat
      where nothing but fatness has
         ever not-occurred --

      I am not free to give a name,
         this is my freedom ...


      The play of concepts is endless. Concepts about the body, the mind, spirit,
      etc. It is the quicksand which entangles one more and more. It is the stuff
      of religion, philosophy, spirituality, great writers, great thinkers, great
      teachers, great leaders, etc. The presumption to teach and help others to
      improve themselves reveals the unrelenting grip of the ego. The wise say,
      that, "I am the doer" notion is bondage. To go to the root of the ego, one
      should bring the awareness upon its own essence and thus stare at the
      originating point of thoughts and feelings. It is the essence of simplicity.
      Spiritual practitioners seek complex and glamorous practices leading to rich
      experiences. That is OK. Ultimately one must come to face with the
      directness of one's own awareness.


      Hi Susan:
      One last time: the best immediate worldwide link over the internet to WBAI is:


      Just select, copy, paste on your browser and GO!
      Try it.
      Good luck.


      I can only get live audio from WBAI by going to http://www.wbai.net/ and
      selecting the "WBAI Live Stream" link.  Please have someone knowledgable
      check this out if you want the out-of-the-listening-area listeners to be
      able to hear your programs.


      Dear jerry:

      How about "unknowing laughter?"  Or better yet, "The laughter of Unknowing." 
      ohmygod, I am actually "joining" the banter on the NDS network. (laughter)

      Thank you for your very sweet thoughts.  At this point the radio interviews
      seem so long awaited, that I can't remember if I've already been doing them
      for years.  (Remember, I used to do a lot of this before I closed down shop
      for five years.)  Now, I am better reconciled to necessity, and totally
      looking forward to it.

      I do hesitate to write anything on this general mailing as I feel as if every
      word will be put through the semantic ND filter--ah-ahh! "Looking
      forward"--rank dualistism.   


      JAN-Seeker & GENE POOLE
      Seeker, you wrote:

      > Date: Wed, 21
      Feb 2001 18:04:44 +0300
      > From: Jan
      > 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
      > 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

      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
      > even while going about our everyday duties? Why cannot
      > 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
      > Subject: 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
      > Thoughts do not want to come. Sometimes they start to
      > 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
      > 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
      Beloved Gene,

      Many thanks for your detailed reply. Much appreciated.
      Vocabulary is based on memory? Past experience? So cannot help me where I
      want to go?

      "Omkara Datta"  wrote:
      Ultimately, where consciousness "arises" is irrelevant, because
      consciousness is an impermanent and constantly changing state. 
      Consciousness can be observed or witnessed, which indicates there is
      something beyond consciousness as a witness to it.

          It is a simple problem with terminology. What you have refered
      to as "a witness" in the last line is what is commonly referred to
      as "Consciousness" in Indian Philosophy. Personally I prefer to call
      it as "the Subject", so that there is no confusion. And the Subject
      cannot "know" itself. It can only "Be" itself. When there is no
      "knowing" other things, it is called purly "Being", which is again
      refered to by various names in various philosophical and religious

      With love,
      It's also a problem with the idea that
         there is something that observes something.

      As long as there is this thought, there can
         be the idea of "one who knows" "one who sees"
         a "witness" or "being"...

      At the point where it is clear that the idea of
         something observing something is groundless,
         there is no need to give a name to what has
         never been something observing something
         in the first place ...

      DAN & JAMES

                           They say, "those who say, don't know.
                                Those who know, don't say."  ;-)

                           -- They


          Hi Dan,
      "He who speaks does not know. He who knows does not speak." -
      Lao Tsu

                  If I say, "I will let Silence speak"  I would sound very
      much like Lao Tsu and folks who only reads the words could say, "James
      spoke, therefore he doesn't know" and they would be right. They would
      also miss the significance of what the words are pointing to (as in many
      of your posts).
                  Today we have extraordinary technologies for connecting with
      each other and just as in Lao Tsu's time what really facilitates
      communication is our ability to listen.

      Hi James!

      Namaste --

      Silence listens.
      When/as silence speaks, there is only
          silence listening.

      What kind of dialogue is this?

      What kind of world is this, in/as which
         all that "happens" is silence, the
         one to whom it happens is silence,
         and where it occurs is silence?

      Speak, speak!  ;-)


      JAN-seeker & ANDREW
      Jan wrote:

      > What does Nisagardatta mean by the
      > "Just keep in mind the feeling 'I am',
      > merge
      in it, till your mind and feeling become one.
      > By repeated attempts you
      will stumble on the
      > right balance of attention and affection
      > and
      your mind will be firmly established
      > in the thought-feeling 'I am'.
      > What does he mean by 'right balance of attention and

      My impression on this is that by attention he means the action of the discriminating
      analytical mind and by affection, he means loving acceptance. He's talking about the
      right mood for self enquiry, neither too anxiously attentive, nor too laissez faire
      blissed out.

      > And 'thought-feeling' ?

      Not only a thought or a feeling but both at once.

      > What does he mean by:
      "The idea - 'I am the witness only'
      > will purify the body and the
      > and open the eye of wisdom."

      He's suggesting that you see yourself as the witness of the actions and states and
      perceptions of the body and mind, rather than as the actor or the doer of them. It's a
      way of seeing that you are not the body or the mind or anything else you can identify.

      I found Nisargadatta somewhat impenetrable, only reading excerpted quotes taken out of
      context. If you can get a copy of I Am That, and read what he has to say in full, it's
      much easier to understand.  Someone is posting it chapter by chapter in full here...



      Hi Kellie,

      I've posted your letter to Nonduality Salon, as you seem to have
      intended it for the list. Also check Banyen books in Vancouver for their notices. I'll also send your letter to someone in Vancouver who is also interested in the Community Initiative. -JERRY

      There's always Eckhart Tolle at http://www.eckharttolle.com/, or if you want
      more obscure, Burt Harding at
      http://home.talkcity.com/spiritcir/sivia/burtharding.html or Anami at

      Love, Sarlo

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