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

Monday and Tuesday March 12th and 13th

Expand Messages
  • andrew macnab
    __________________________________________________________________________________ *fav jerry quote* the way out is to see the mirage and to stop the mirage
    Message 1 of 1 , Mar 14, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      __________________________________________________________________________________


      *fav jerry quote*

      "the way out

      is to see the mirage

      and to stop the mirage making."

      joy to each as all,
      cee

      __________________________________________________________________________________



      Dear Cee,

      If there is some kind of a get-together this summer, maybe you, me
      and Michael Read (and whoever else wants to) could bring squirt guns!

      I used to have so much fun with squirt guns as a kid... where have I
      been all my life??? :-)

      Let's talk Jerry into organizing something, he likes organizing!

      Loveya,

      Tim


      __________________________________________________________________________________


      Dustin:

      *the blankless void*

      Hey guys!

      I've enjoyed reading the recent NDS posts regarding self-realization, "final"
      realization, and self-awareness. Other replies
      to some questions I asked a week or so ago also pushed me into a bit of a different
      direction. These new thoughts came
      to me in a rush this morning. I put them into my journal, and I also lay them down for
      you here. Simple things, just
      thoughts, but they came to me out of nowhere, and I wrote them down right away.

      things are as they are
      there is no "ultimate" reality
      everything and everyone exists in their natural state
      there is no enlightenment which is to attain

      Q: Then who owns my personality, my personal identity? Why is it that I have been
      entrusted with this particular identity?

      A: The identity, such as it is, is also just as it is. Your identity is no different
      as a thing than would be a tree's "identity" in
      comparison to its own tree nature.

      things are as they are
      I am as I am
      I am I am
      I am
      I AM
      OM
      OM
      OM

      ( )

      (parentheses encapsulating nothing - like filling a sieve with water by throwing it
      into the ocean)



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



      Nice stuff, Dustin --

      There's no identity of which
      to be rid -- never was nor
      could be.

      There's no world from which
      to be hid -- never will
      or would be.

      There's only this, and your
      highest bid -- never
      will be enough, nor
      should be ;-)

      Love,
      Dan

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


      Doc Hobbes:


      >
      >Q: Then who owns my personality, my personal identity?

      What is this that it can be identified and as such be made personal?
      Personality is an extention of OM. A step away with the word 'my'. Your
      personality, no matter 'who exists', is not, so who then can own it? You are
      not your 'self' as you have not met this person yet.

      How do you define 'personality' and 'identity'?
      Truth is... you do not. These are defined for you and thus, here is what is
      and there is what is not. There is how you strive to reach the full
      potential of a zodiac sign (or a compliment or a pshycic pleasing words or
      the idea of a model) and then there is you that struggles with what 'it',
      the identity, is not.

      If you can not see these things how do you know what you are? If you strive
      for these things how will you ever be still?

      "People ask the way to Cold Mountain,
      but not road reaches cold mountain.
      Summer sky -- still ice won't melt.
      The sun somes out but gets obscured by the mist.
      Imintating me, where does that get you?
      My mind isn't like yours.
      When your mind is like mine
      you can enter here."
      Hanshan

      The one you seek is not found in the end where words where only things to
      live up to, about, and things to discard are found (although these discarded
      things go no where but deeper to be found again) and are all that is
      presented but rather, your search is found in that which searches its self
      without its self.

      What then can only be found?



      __________________________________________________________________________________



      Dear Dan,


      What's your take on physical death... ?

      Is there a perceived change? Obviously the 'show' is over at that point...

      What is, still is...

      But what happens to concepts, thought, emotions... all that? Anything
      interesting to say on this topic?

      Curiously Yours,

      Tim


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



      Hi Tim --

      Just thinking aloud about this intriguing question --
      it's a question that can spark deep looking,
      I share with you where I'm at here:

      If alive, there is being aware of life.
      There can only be "death" if
      there is "being aware of death".

      I am aware of death externally, of
      loss of objects. Can there be such
      a thing as "my" death, of
      awareness of the loss of awareness?

      If not, then who am I, who cannot observe
      any self inside or outside, any death,
      hence any birth? And what can "awareness"
      be, which can never observe itself as a something
      to be had or lost, yet which seems to be when
      an object is cognized, and yet can't be said not to be,
      for how would that be known?

      And what, then, are
      these "objects" that seem to be able
      to be born and die? Only "my" production
      while believed possible to cognize an
      external object, and while believed to be subject
      to conditions.

      If such belief is not, where can be anchored
      a stream of thoughts, associations, memories
      and experiences?

      Of course - trying to know ahead
      gives a perspective of the future
      based on projection of present concepts.
      Of what use will that be to a corpse? ;-)

      When I die, the universe dies.
      And because the universe can't die,
      I live.

      What is not, cannot be perceived.
      What is not, is death.

      What is called death is thus only
      the gateway of/to universal life,
      the original face that can't be
      perceived.

      What is usually discussed as
      "death of the physical body"
      is the ending of a cognized
      object subject to conditions
      of becoming and ending.

      The real physical body isn't the
      cognized object, hence isn't
      subject to conditions, such
      as history and location.

      As the subject-object situation
      cognized and objectified as
      "the physical body"
      dies, there can be a shift from the
      attempt to embed experience
      in a container of experience.

      Death is, thus, the opportunity to
      shift from locatable objectifiable
      experience to "something else",
      which language based on
      experience with and as sensory
      objects can't convey.

      Again, there is no death of the real
      body, so it may be "reccognized" that
      the death of any objectifiable body
      has already occurred.

      However, without such "recognition".
      the so-called "death of the physical
      body" can bring resistance,
      the attempt to retain the perceived
      "stream of perception and memory" --
      experience for a "me"; transitional
      realms are generated by the attempt
      to retain cognized images and experience.

      This planet Earth is therefore a transitional realm
      as much as any realm constructed "after the death
      of the body".
      We are as much "between bodies" now as
      we "will be" after the death of this physical
      body.

      Which might lead one to observe:

      The death of the physical body ends
      the process of that body, with its
      concepts, associations, historical
      context, and emotional context.

      What has died?
      A process.
      What was the process?
      A self-reflexive stream of experience
      separated from the ocean beyond.

      What has died?
      Nothing.
      What is the significance of death?

      It is highly significant while the
      sense of observer-observed is
      maintained -- otherwise of no
      import.

      What's your take (or give)?

      Love,
      Dan


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



      Dear Dan-ji,

      Sorry for snipping your (excellent) post, it was long.

      My take? Far less "complex" than yours, perhaps :-).

      Physical bodies (I'll use this term for the so-called "body/mind")
      can be observed as "being born" and "dying." The birth of a body
      involves an observed integration, and the death of a body as an
      observed disintegration.

      For the sake of discussion, I'll assume there is such a thing as
      physical birth and death, since no birth is remembered here, and I am
      only told that this one will die -- it's all hearsay, despite
      observing something happening with "other bodies."

      The body being temporary, I see it as subject to the same 'laws' as
      anything temporary... that of arising, abiding for an
      unspecified "period," and then subsiding again. Such patterns can be
      observed literally everywhere... ocean tides, the seasons, planetary
      movements, sleep patterns, thoughts, nations, cultures, stars, solar
      systems, galaxies, ad-infinitum.

      There is an "apperceivable" background to all this. All these things
      seem to appear "within" or "against" this background. In order for
      change to be observed or perceived, an unchanging background is
      assumed (else "observer" would be changing with "observed" and all
      would appear static).

      That is assuming, of course that "observer" and "observed" do not
      appear to change at different "rates"... which makes no sense as seen
      from here, and is not indicated by anything whatever, scientifically
      or "spiritually."

      Anyway, my take is that the "background" in which these movements
      appear to occur is unchanging and unchangeable. Since there is no
      division anywhere, physical birth and death are precisely the same as
      all other arisings, abidances and subsidings -- take your pick.

      Certainly no more "threatening" than the ocean tides! Nothing is
      happening... bodies appear to arise, abide and subside -- as all
      else "manifest" appears to arise, abide and subside.

      There can certainly be no "reincarnation," at least as commonly
      defined. The ocean tide that arises is not the same tide as the
      previous cycle that arose... nor the new season the same one that
      arose last year.

      Beyond this, I know nothing -- except perhaps that for description
      purposes at least, I am the unchanging, timeless, spaceless,
      attribute-less 'background'. The 'movie screen' is unaffected by
      that which is projected upon it.

      Namaste,

      Tim


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




      [Jumping in here]

      Hi Dan,

      One of the hardest things that I had to deal with in my thinking through my
      own dying, was the realization that everything goes on as before...trees
      grow, seasons come and go, cars run. It was the radio playing in my car that
      made me angry...that stupid radio station would go on whether I was there to
      hear it or not. LIFE would continue...how dare it! I...the center of my
      universe would be no longer.

      << When I die, the universe dies.
      And because the universe can't die,
      I live. >>

      Disagree...
      your universe stops,
      when you are dead,
      the universal universe
      just keeps humming right along...

      You, me, all of us...
      are just a spit
      in a never-ending stream...
      totally unimportant,
      creating and dying,
      out with the old,
      mourn briefly at the loss...
      in with the new...
      never ending cosmos
      that goes on blindly ahead
      like an infinite foot stepping on
      ants in its path...a non -sentient
      juggernaut of cosmic proportions.

      << What has died?
      Nothing.
      What is the significance of death?


      It is highly significant while the
      sense of observer-observed is
      maintained -- otherwise of no
      import.>>


      OK...this I agree with...
      no import...neither have we.

      I know that I left a lot out...your words explain themselves perfectly...just
      my 2 cents.

      Nice, thank you.

      beth

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


      Hi Beth!

      >One of the hardest things that I had to deal with in my thinking through my
      >own dying, was the realization that everything goes on as before...trees
      >grow, seasons come and go, cars run.

      Thought plays tricks.
      Only with questioning the root assumptions of
      thought will the tricks be revealed as they are.

      In looking into this idea about things going
      on as before, one can ask: goes on for whom?

      This is the same as the question: who lives, who dies?

      > It was the radio playing in my car that
      >made me angry...that stupid radio station would go on whether I was there to
      >hear it or not. LIFE would continue...how dare it! I...the center of my
      >universe would be no longer.

      The center of "the universe" can be lost,
      because there is no center.
      "The universe" can not be lost, because it
      is all that is.
      The universe and who I am are not two.


      ><< When I die, the universe dies.
      >And because the universe can't die,
      > I live. >>
      >
      >Disagree...
      >your universe stops,
      >when you are dead,
      >the universal universe
      >just keeps humming right along...

      I don't hear what you are saying as
      a complete disagreement
      with what I said.
      The "I-being" that seemingly
      dies, and the "universal
      universe" that can't die,
      aren't two different things.

      There is no separation between
      my universe and the universal
      universe, except that my universe
      depends on a point of view a
      "me" that is never really there.

      So, when my universe
      ends, nothing ends, except for
      an imagined point of view.

      The universe that depends on
      that point of view vanishes.
      In truth, it never really was,
      it was always "the past".
      And the universe that never
      came into being doesn't go
      out of being: my "true self",
      timeless presence.


      >You, me, all of us...
      >are just a spit
      >in a never-ending stream...
      >totally unimportant,
      >creating and dying,
      >out with the old,
      >mourn briefly at the loss...
      >in with the new...
      >never ending cosmos
      >that goes on blindly ahead
      >like an infinite foot stepping on
      >ants in its path...a non -sentient
      >juggernaut of cosmic proportions.

      Are you so sure that the foot
      and what the foot steps on
      are two separate things,
      totally different in quality?

      Where is sentience located?
      Who defines where sentience
      is located? Where is that
      one located? And who locates
      that one?

      Is the one who defines the location
      of sentience nonsentient?
      How could that be possible?

      ><< What has died?
      >Nothing.
      >What is the significance of death?
      >
      >
      >It is highly significant while the
      > sense of observer-observed is
      > maintained -- otherwise of no
      > import.>>
      >
      >
      >OK...this I agree with...
      >no import...neither have we.

      Yes. If there is no import,
      then you are beyond
      being born or being dead,
      beyond coming into existence
      or out of existence.


      >I know that I left a lot out...your words explain themselves perfectly...just
      >my 2 cents.

      Ah. I'm glad I was clear.
      And thanks for your two cents.
      Much appreciated --

      Dan

      __________________________________________________________________________________

      Tim:

      <snip>
      We make pretty noises at one another like birds. We "hear" only ourselves
      (assumptions and conclusions regarding 'the other') -- our own
      thought-stream -- and imagine we are actually "hearing" the other.

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


      >
      > Tweet tweet, you tweetie pie, you...

      That one I got... communication is one thing, whispering tweet
      nothings is something else entirely ;-).

      > I dunno, THIS one seems loud and clear.
      >
      > Tin -eared Glo-bird

      In birdless communion,

      Tim

      __________________________________________________________________________________


      <snip>
      > a failed attempt at communication...

      Actually it only appears to be a failure, if you are looking at the world
      through failure-coloured glasses.

      Love, Sarlo


      __________________________________________________________________________________


      > > How can I be sure such "death of
      > > the world" isn't occurring this
      > > instant?
      >
      >Be sure it is.
      >
      >andrew


      Or, is it just the breeze of
      a butterfly's wings?

      The Cheshire universe smiles softly.

      d.
      an

      __________________________________________________________________________________

      I confess. If Tim or anyone writes something vaguely critical, I feel
      bad, and if someone (like Gloria, for example) writes something nice
      in response to a post, I feel good. Would this qualify as
      communication? Terry



      Greg wrote:
      >Terry,
      >
      >I like your candor!


      Yup -
      Terry's candoriferous!

      Cool, too ...

      Dan


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