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

Sunday, April 8

Expand Messages
  • umbada@ns.sympatico.ca
    JERRY I ve re-organized the web pages entitled What Is Nonduality? . Scores of definitions and explications are included. I started collecting these
    Message 1 of 1 , Apr 10, 2001

      I've re-organized the web pages entitled 'What Is Nonduality?'.
      Scores of definitions and explications are included. I started
      collecting these definitions after I was unable to find
      nonduality or nondualism defined in the English Oxford
      Dictionary. I was at the library and looked through numerous
      dictionaries and found definitions of nonduality or nondualism
      in only one or two, and they were very brief and general
      definitions. Please take a look at the link below when you have
      time. Thank you, and thanks to all contributors over the years.

      By the way, I'm always collecting contributions from all
      perspectives, the most recent one from James Traverse posted a
      couple of days ago.

      Jerry Katz What is Nonduality - Nondualism - Advaita?


      Greetings everyone!

      I got up at an unusually early hour for a Saturday to catch the
      7:00 AM train to New York to attend Susan Dane's Seminar for
      WBAI, "When All Systems Fail, Spiritual Answers Beyond

      At the reception desk, Susan gave me a warm greeting (we have
      corresponded by e-mail, and spoken on the phone, but never met
      in person before). The first person I laid eyes on after that
      was our very own Victor Torrico! He was sitting there at the
      reception desk filling out his registration form. He told me
      that he and his wife were in New jersey, visiting family, and he
      decided to take the bus trip into the city for Susan's Seminar.
      So it was fun to share the experience with Victor throughout the
      day. (I met Victor at the HarshaSatSangh-NDS retreat last

      Susan's audience was diverse in terms of race, age, and
      background. There were many African Americans and Hispanics, as
      well as whites. There were Catholics, Jews, one fellow named
      Pedro who quoted the Tao Te Ching, and a couple of NonDualists
      at least (Victor and I!)

      Susan has a very compelling speaking style. She is dynamic,
      speaks extemporaneously, throws in a lot of humor, and often has
      her audience hanging on her every word. I won't attempt to
      summarize her message, you can get a flavor for it at her web
      site (http://www.susandane.com). But there is nothing "new"
      about what she is saying, of course, yet she has devised a way
      to present it that attempts to bypasses what people already know
      of spirituality from their own traditions and seeking, in order
      to point them towards what she calls "Ground". If her work has a
      basis in any tradition, it is the Christian, specifically
      Christian Science. But she presents it in terms of a lived,
      practical, un-sugarcoated spirituality. She was always quick to
      correct people who wanted to turn it into a feel-good message,
      or optimism.

      Susan is also a skilled interlocutor when answering people's
      questions. She doesn't comfort or coddle people, but forces them
      to examine the assumptions within their questions. She is like
      that one-on-one as well. More than once things she has said to
      me have zapped me with an uncomfortable truth.

      Here are some notes I took. Most are direct quotes but some are
      my condensed paraphrases:

      "Spirit is going to work to dismantle self, to bring us to the
      wall. It makes an inside out thing happen. We start to have
      space. Spirit deconstructs everything that is in its way. Spirit
      wants to be the only ground."

      "The authentic ground is not beyond words, there is

      "Learning to be wise about the technology of the human..."

      "There is a Chooser and it is Choosing: reclaim that ground"

      "We have to have a relationship to the Chooser: the Chooser is
      always free, always free to not be bound by its habit and its

      "Be conscious of your ability to choose that which your rational
      mind cannot choose."

      "Spirit is also that thing within us that is doing the Choosing.
      Spirit is choosing us, which allows us to choose Spirit."

      "Spirit has a feel and a sound and a sense to it."

      "That which is required of me is impossible for me. That is the
      way Spirit wants it."

      "Our human destiny is not a human event, it is a divine event."

      "The ground we are looking for is us."

      "Change happens when someone operates out of a different

      "Spirit want to be the ground and the expression at the same

      As I said, people seemed to be hanging onto her every word, and
      there were many urgent questions. During the lunch break I went
      out with Susan and her friend Meredith. We took sandwiches to
      nearby Gramercy Park. This gorgeous, gardened urban square is
      surround by a Black Iron Fence, to which only the neighborhood
      people have keys. Needless to say the park was deserted. We sat
      on the ledge by the fence, and soon were joined by 5 other
      people from the seminar, and Susan was holding forth again,
      right there on the sidewalk. To have a gorgeous but empty garden
      just the other side of the fence seemed like an apt metaphor for
      what was going on, the Garden - so close, but seemingly locked
      away - being the Ground that she was talking of.

      After the seminar a group of about 12 people gathered around her
      and continued the discussion for another hour or so. I felt that
      people were reluctant to leave her presence. Victor and I helped
      carry Susan's stuff down to the street and loaded into a cab,
      and we all said our farewells. I made it back to Grand Central
      in time for the 7:10 train. I feel like it was a day well spent.
      It was good to meet Susan and to see her in action. I felt
      warmed and welcomed, and buoyed by her strong expression of that
      which so vibrantly operates in her and through her.

      Warm regards to all, David



      It's funny how much courage it takes to be 'loose and natural'

      ...not just in sharing deep insights, ...but even in more
      'superficial' forms of expression.

      For example, I love hats. I buy them all the time. Problem is, I
      never wore then - always afraid of being seen as 'silly' in
      public. And so I had a closet full of them, many with the price
      tags still hanging.

      A couple of months ago I started wearing my hats. That first
      day, I don't mind telling you, I really braced myself -
      anticipating, and receiving a lot of 'second looks', smiles, and
      good hearted kidding.

      And I got all that....and more. :-)

      Not too long ago that good natured kidding would have been
      enough to get me to put those hats back away into boxes.

      Funny thing, though.....just last week I was in a mall during
      one of our school trips with another driver. We were walking
      thru a woman's section of a store when he spotted a rack of
      hats. He picked one up and said, "Hey look! This one looks just
      like you!"

      That was about the dearest thing I had heard in a long time.

      When I looked at the hat I had to wholeheartedly agree. It was
      just like what a 'natural and loose' Melody would wear.

      I wear my hats now all the time. And people continue to smile
      and point and nod when they see me in them.

      Even though I chose to wear them *in spite of* public

      the 'public' seems to enjoy seeing me in them every bit as much
      as I enjoy wearing them.



      "The Nondual Highlights list includes the 'best' of the day's
      posting to NDS, as well as posts from other lists (sometimes")

      I'm glad to see you put the word 'best' in quotes, Jerry.
      Clearly what is presented as 'best' each day more reflects the
      preferences and flavor of each editor. At least it did while I
      was editing and reading them.

      It's a first person accounting of what happened in a day.....as
      filtered thru one individual's lens of preference, perspective
      and 'mood'.

      I found, speaking for myself, that it told me much more about
      the 'editor' than it ever really told of the day's list

      I remember the day I quit doing the editing. I had forgotten it
      was my day to do the highlights, and so had to go back and
      reread thru a bunch of posts.

      To my surprise, almost all the posts that day I had deleted as
      either unread, or mostly unread.

      I thought, "oh shit! I got to go back and actually READ all that
      stuff !?" LOL

      And yet, I knew, that what was in my 'trash pile' was probably
      someone else's treasure.

      But I quit that day, nonetheless. :-)





      Bemused (and refreshed) by Gene's recent letter "in the context
      of a recent letter by TerryM," I thought I would venture a
      reply. I am not sure what letter gene refers to ("without
      quotes" he said), I don't think it made the highlights, but all
      my letters probably could use such background music as this,
      thanks. (And I don't know what a "phase-lock with space" is but
      it has a nondual ring to it.)

      Gene said:

      ~ It is seen that everything is happening in space, but that
      humans pay attention primarily to what happens in space, rather
      than to space itself. It is seen, that all forms are actually
      information, and that the common confusions of the human, result
      from attachments and aversions (values added) to information.

      ~ If values are stripped from information, the actual and
      intricate interrelationship of all things becomes very apparent;
      it is apparent that humans, while immersed in a vast and
      powerful field of information, prefer to both censor and
      embellish, rather than to simply receive.

      terry m responds (without the usual need to censor and

      Very perceptive remarks here, reminiscent of my old friend,
      Diogenes the Cynic. The word 'cynic' actually comes from a greek
      root referring to seeing, but it got a bad name because people
      like Diogenes made fun of the speeches of the rabble-rousing
      'democrats,' who zeroed in on people's aversions and attractions
      and exaggerated them in order to gain a following. Diogenes is
      probably best known for walking the central square in Athens
      with a lit lamp in the middle of the day. When asked what he was
      doing he replied, "I am looking for an honest man." The heart of
      Diogenes' philosophy was the perception that people were
      helplessly incapable of seeing how things really are because
      their desires distorted their perceptions. Even though it was
      bright daylight, it might as well have been full dark for those
      blinded by desire. And Diogenes' bright lamp might help these
      people - who for all their inability to see were not blind, they
      had fully functional eyes in their heads - to see what was
      around them, at least momentarily. One of Diogenes
      contemporaries - and a favorite target for his barbs - was Plato
      (what a time that must have been!). Plato had his 'cave
      analogy,' which similarly used the metaphor of a darkness so
      great that people with perfectly good eyes saw little and
      understood less. ("Why do my eyes hurt?" asked Neo. "Because you
      have never used them before," said Morpheus.) The darkness is
      ignorance, the ignorance is due to our powerful desire to enjoy
      a world which doesn't exist, never did and never will. We
      "censor and embellish" and thereby generally live in a world
      wherein 'what is' is constantly interfering with our dream of
      reality. Our desires are not even our own, as any Cynic knows;
      we are constantly being sold things which we don't want and know
      are bad for us for the profit of others, and we sell in our
      turn. Helplessly. Can we do anything about this condition, other
      than "phase-lock with space" or maintain our own integrity?
      Another of my favorite stories about Diogenes occurred during
      one of Athens' frequent wars. While Socrates fought alongside
      the citizens, Diogenes generally avoided service - Diogenes
      never wore clothes, lived in a bathtub, and generally speaking
      was not the sort of guy you wanted to stand next to while he had
      a weapon in his hands. But one day, in the midst of war
      preparations, Diogenes commenced to rolling around an empty
      wheelbarrow, very industriously, accomplishing nothing. The
      townsfolk, accustomed to his antics, laughingly asked him what
      he thought he was doing this time, and he responded, "I just
      wanted to show everyone I was doing my bit for the war effort."
      This, folks, is integrity. What do you do or say when people
      live in a darkness so thick they can't see the sun in the sky or
      the moon at night, a silence so great they can't hear babies cry
      or birds sing? Diogenes the Cynic (sometimes he was called 'the
      Dog' because he and his group would go naked and copulate in the
      gutter) found his integrity in acting out parables for the
      people in the town square. His integrity was so great that when
      Alexander the Great came to claim Athens, the two things (this
      story is from Plutarch) he wanted to see were the Parthenon and
      Diogenes. Alexander asked to be taken to Diogenes, and was led
      to a place along the river where Diogenes was sunning himself.
      Alexander approached Diogenes and said to him, "Hello, I'm
      Alexander, the Conqueror." Squinting up at him, the philosopher
      said, "Hello, I'm Diogenes, the Cynic." Alexander smiled and
      told him he had come out to see him because he admired his work.
      The most powerful man of the age went on to say, "I like you,
      and would like to offer you a boon; anything you desire, if it
      is in my power to give it, I will give it to you." Diogenes
      thought for a moment and said, "Would you please move over a
      bit, you are blocking my sun." At this Alexander laughed out
      loud and exclaimed, "If I were not Alexander, I would be
      Diogenes." Each of us, in living out the integrity that Gene is
      speaking about here, is responsible for living the truth of our
      insight in such a manner as to dispel the darkness, the
      ignorance of mankind, in whatever way we can. It is actually
      painful not to, as Gene says. Integrity is truth - or, as Dogen
      would say, 'practice is enlightenment.'


      Question: If space could talk, what would it say?

      terry m:

      Answer: After you...after you are silent, I will speak.

      aloha, terry


      GENE POOLE via Christiana Duranczyk

      Tonight.. while reading Jerry's archives from a discussion we
      had two years ago on Bernadette Roberts, I reread this post from
      Gene Poole. It is so powerful for me, that I am reposting it. It
      is long, and like much of what Gene writes, requires a slow
      contemplative study.

      Submitted with respect and gratitude.. Chrsitiana


      We, I, every one of us, are the living recapitulation of the
      entire Cosmos.

      By this I mean that the entire unfoldment of the drama of birth,
      life, and death is embodied as _me_ and as you.

      This is not a small thing to say. To say this is to say that I
      have, in at least a potential or possible way, the entire past
      and future history of

      all that has been and will ever be, 'within' myself.

      Bernadette Roberts had no choice in that matter; she had to
      allow the conscious replaying of the entire record of the
      Cosmos. In this experience, she found herself as 'no-self', IE,
      as the 'record-player'. She, the 'personal identity of
      Bernadette', was then experienced as being played on that
      record, and simultaneously, as 'no-self', the record itself. It
      is extremely odd to have this experience of both 'Being and
      not-Being' at the same time; indeed, it is seeing one's identity
      as that of 'puppet' and also as 'puppetmaster'.

      I propose that none of us have the choice to avoid or to
      particpate in this unfoldment; we do have the choice of attitude
      through which to have the experience, however. Surrender and
      abiding allow the process to proceed with minimal pain and fear.
      If I am not mistaken, this is what we are talking about here in
      the NDS.

      The nondual perspective is to me, the voluntary adoption of the
      attitude which allows surrender of personal identity. This is
      stated to be 'not a loss, but a gain'. Yes, such a shift of
      attitude may be 'inflicted' via Kundalini or Shaktipat or
      'Grace', and that is in my opinion, a blessed event; but such
      'affliction' of Grace is potentially a complete disruption of
      social normalcy and thus the loss of the view into the mirror
      which confers social identity. Anyone who undergoes this shift
      to 'blindness' may have the experience of terror, yet this very
      experience is what is described in the Tibetan Book of the Dead
      as the awakening of the 'dead' in the realm of the 'Bardos'. One
      who is blind, cannot be faulted for hallucinating gods and/or
      monsters. It is further seen that even the sighted, hallucinate
      in that way.

      The 'other' has made a lot of noise, which I have heard; I can
      choose to make sense of it if I want to. The 'others' of the
      'past' have said certain things, have provided what is judged to
      be guidance and caution and encouragent; yet, I persist in
      having to experience all of this on my own. No-one has a
      'solution' for _me_; yet, 'others' persist in casting about for
      'answers', when in fact, 'clues' are all that are provided. It
      is my own willingness to continue on in life, to keep on living,
      that allows me to actually mature; in this process of maturing,
      of moving from 'larval' to 'post-larval', certain things are
      'revealed' to me. But I say that it is none of my work which has
      made this 'seeing' possible; I am guilty of no 'mystical
      attainment'. It is the process of living and maturing which is
      the natural unfoldment of my Being-nature, which is the
      revealing of the 'vision' which I can now speak of. If I have
      accomplished anything that has helped me, it is the learning of
      the value of patience. I have learned that by _abiding_, by
      being nonreactive, that I can know. By ceasing to stir the
      sediment into the broth, the media clarifies, revealing the
      confines of the pot.

      The story of Bernadette, as recently related by Jerry, seeks to
      tell this significant tale, but for reasons unknown to me, fails
      to do so. The simple fact of the matter is that we are all
      destined to relive every moment of what is seen as the classical
      unfoldment of the drama of creation, from the first moment to
      the last. Every one of 'us' embodies every iota of the richness
      of this Universe; Cosmic Consciousness allows this vision to be
      had. The effort to attain a clear 'nondual perspective' is the
      effort to 'have' Cosmic Consciousness, and thus to be in the
      clear as to our actual relationship with 'God' and all of

      All of this is to lead to the banishment of amnesia.

      It is futile, it seems, to caution against becoming bogged down
      in the myriad details which comprise the experience of 'other'.
      The vocabulary, syntax, traditions, etc, can become a veritable
      bog of quicksand, which if swallowed, may become incorporated as
      personal belief or criteria. The holding of personal 'opinion'
      as 'faith' leads, as we have abundantly seen, to conflicts of
      personal and global scale. To avoid these conflicts is
      difficult, without simply dismissing the entire array of
      traditions and pronouncements as mere chaff blowing in the wind
      of Being itself. Nonduality has the possibility of doing this
      very thing, in a way that does not rankle the ire of any
      'organized religion' or of the adherants of such.

      So the core or seed of self "is our deepest experience of life
      and energy." Out of this seed grows the affective system, the
      feeling-self, the will, emotions and feelings.

      Yes; this is self-creation, as growing in the ground of Self.
      Consider a board balanced on a fulcrum, like a child's seesaw
      ride, Roberts suggests. The fulcrum is the cognitive system, the
      knowing-self. The board is the affective system, the feeling
      self. The ends of the board represent the extremes of attraction
      and repulsion, while the part closest to the unmoving center
      represents subtle, unconscious movements.

      Yes, a good analogy. The 'middle' or point of the fulcrum is
      that very point which we so very often are unconscious of,
      especially during emotional 'storms'. But it is this very point
      which seems to be the connection to the whole emotive experience
      of being human.

      Optimum stability exists at the center of the two systems. The
      non-contemplative one gains and maintains equilibrium despite
      forces that exist to unbalance the whole system.

      Yes. That is the 'work' of living, of Being incarnate.

      The contemplative seeks to go a step further and move from
      awareness of the center point of equilibrium of the affective
      system, to the still point or true center of being (I AM).

      That is a 'good' step to make. Probably a necessary one, at
      that. The qualifying word here is 'contemplative', which is a
      deliberately undertaken behaviour, in contrast to headlong
      flight from suffering.

      Now the will is the center of the affective system, Roberts
      says, and the provider of energy for the affective system. Also,
      underlying the will is the still point or true center of being.
      So when the will does not move, or is free of desire, the
      affective system does not move, a state of desirelessness
      exists, and it is easier to access the still-point (I AM).

      Yes. 'But'... there is more.

      To know desire, is to know the alternative. Both together are
      the whole picture of our assumptions of what is reality. To see
      beyond this assumption of reality is to see the ground upon
      which the fulcrum rests.

      This is to see not only the playground of our desires and
      aversions, but also to see upon what that playground is built.
      All action takes place on that playground. The very ground of
      Being is usually ignored and assumed to be 'what is'.

      This center or will, can be known independent of the cognitive
      system, which also touches the center of the affective system.

      Yes. That is the 'feed' for all disturbance/perturbation; that
      is the 'valve' of the Siddhe of creation.

      Once the contemplative knows the still-point (IAM) and turns
      attention there, the movement of the affective system comes to a
      stop, and there is a sense of stillness and peace.

      Yes. I would point out that when the emotional storm rages, that
      is called suffering. Persistant guilt, fear, unrequited desires,
      are suffering.

      Going to this point, as driven by suffering, is a natural
      reaction. Catatonic shizophrenics can arrive there, and dwell
      there. But reactive movement always has a counterpart, so the
      storm continues, if the movement has indeed been reactive. The
      desire to hide or escape is the opposite of that of the

      If on the other hand, the arrival to the still-point has been
      the product of deliberate abiding in stillness, conscious
      awareness still prevails. Thus, one may record the event of
      arrival and abiding, and talk about it later with others,
      because it can be remembered.

      The nature of this unitive state is union of human and divine
      will and power, so that will is now God's will, not contrary to
      that. Here is where one may become further tested by the world.
      Now situations arise that would test movement of the will, test
      the integrity of the unitive state. The requirement is for
      attention to be unceasingly on the still-point (I AM).

      I offer that at this cruical point of personal evolution, that
      it would be helpful to understand deeply the difference between
      God's will and personal will. This can become very confusing,
      unless one remembers that it is God who set this whole thing up
      'in the first place'. Apparently, we are 'meant to be' or
      'designed to be' so-tested. And what that means is that the
      whole thing is a larger ground upon which to behave. On this
      larger ground, one may see that God is indeed testing us;
      specifically, to see if we have the wisdom to suspend creating,
      and thus to fall into the pre-existing creation of God.

      The common dilemma is this; "If I stop creating, if I do not
      persist in creating the very best 'version' of reality, there
      will be NOTHING; I will be extinct". This assumption is
      destroyed, upon voluntary or involuntary suspension of the
      Siddhe of creation.

      To know of the power of creation, is to be able to develope
      workarounds to avoid exercising it. Upon suspension of this
      Siddhe of creation, the creation of God may be experienced in
      it's 'raw' form. I must mention that this can be the most
      shocking moment in a person's life.

      Yogic technique can lead to the suspension of the Siddhe of
      creation, but one should undergo the prerequisite yogic training
      before attempting such advanced yogic technique. The mishaps of
      drug-experiences and improperly invoked Kundalini, that of
      hurtling into the void of no-creation and the experience of the
      anihilation of 'self' (self as self-creation), serve as standing
      proof of the care which might be exercised by those who accept
      the guidance of wisdom-Guru.

      What Roberts learned is that while there was no more wavering
      from abidance at the still-point, no longer any tipping of the
      board symbolic of the affective system, there was still the
      movement of the ever-horizontal board up and down. This was
      Roberts way of saying that she was tested at her innermost core.

      I would call that a test of 'faith'; if the board moves 'up'
      from the fulcrum, it may be perceived as God moving 'away'. The
      test is this; can one accept the loss of self, to be replaced
      (by a moment of realization of) Self?

      And what she observed and discovered was that there was a gap
      between herself and God. What demonstrated this gap was the
      initial spontaneous movements in response to life events. These
      movements were automatic and harmless, yet mystifying to
      Roberts, as she was not sure of their source, whether it was
      herself, or God, or some subtle instinct. But these movements
      demonstrated that there was a gap between herself and God.
      Within that gap between the center of the board or affective
      continuum, and the still-point (I AM), was the battleground
      between the forces of self-preservation and self-extinction.
      This battleground appeared to be separate from consciousness and
      untouchable, not under one's control or will.

      Yes; that is the issuance-point of immunity and integrity. That
      is the portal through which actual Self-creation (That What Is)
      arrives recognizably. To allow this gap to remain, is to
      increase immunity and integrity. One may, in faith, allow this
      gap to remain, and to grow to any size which God ordains, even
      to the point of Jesus' question of being forsaken by God. In my
      opinion, such abidance of this variable gap, allows one to be a
      servant of God. The apparent connection comes and goes; I am
      expected to have the intelligence to be able to know when I am
      being guided, versus when I am being tested.

      Seeing this battle for what it was, understanding it, the battle
      simply ceased. Roberts found that the initial spontaneous
      movements also stopped, and the still-point (I AM) was then able
      to further draw the affective system into its silence.

      At this point, noise and silence are the same; all silence. In
      this vast silence, _any_ creative movement is seen. This is the
      'governer' of spiritual life. To know this is to be able to use
      the Siddhe of creation sparingly, and with proper timing. To
      discerne the difference between the 'already always' background
      of what is, and the assumed background of self-creation, is to
      know that one is small, but also that one may become large. This
      recognition allows one to avoid doing harm.

      To know noise as silence is to know that this is all God's
      creation; and that my Siddhe of creation has been created by
      God. This may be looked upon as a paradox. I find it helpful to
      do so; by doing so, I am able to suspend my Siddhe of creation.

      "First there is a mountain, then there is no mountain, then
      there is". When the 'drawing' was complete, the continuum was no
      more, self was no more, and the still-point was no more. The gap
      between the still center of the affective continuum (self) and
      the still-point (God) was no more. Therefore, no self, no God
      there remained. Only what Is.

      And what a 'what is' it is.

      I see that to use the Siddhe of creation wisely is to use it in
      reverence of God. My own experience is that I am 'Okay' if I use
      my creative powers to decorate, respectfully, the 'Christmas
      Tree' of God's creation. To such, I offer this tiny ball.
      ---Gene Poole.



      "The mind gives meaning to some things, and denies meaning to
      others. Things in themselves neither have meaning nor lack
      meaning, but the mind makes it seem so. To see everything as it
      is, without either attributing some certain meaning or denying
      some certain meaning is to see things as they truly are." --



      The entirety of "manifested life" could be gathered under the
      denominator of "conditioning" and after a visit to his lordship,
      (Yama) conditioning will start to surface like "buttons" that
      can't be pushed anymore. That is something to be observed

      When thinking is required, think - when not
      required, don't think... But for most, that isn't what
      happens... And thinking won't provide a "remedy". And knowing
      that won't stop the automated, ongoing thinking either... Oh,
      how hard to be a human :)



      To me futile means ineffective or incapable of producing a
      desired result, so I was wondering what it is that thought fails
      to accomplish. If there is nothing like that in mind, why say
      it's futile? That's like saying the scent of roses or the view
      out the window is futile.

      Thought for a human is not
      intrinsically futile any more than flying is for a bird or
      running for a dog. If bird is caged or dog is chained, then
      flying or running could be said to be futile. It seems to me
      that there is a similar implication in the statement that
      thought is futile. I can see that thought about thought is
      futile, and that thought as a means to understand reality is
      futile, but thought in and of itself is neither futile nor
      utile, so it seems.



      The description of "Here is how I'm speaking" is interesting,
      but useless as a pointer. No pointers point to anything but what
      they point to. Pointers being useless here, since 'here' is
      'what is', the description is appreciated, but point(er)less

      The most foolish thing in the universe would be to read a
      description like the one below and 'attempt to emulate it' or
      derive meaning from it. Something like this would immediately
      create the entity- illusion 'seeing like Dan sees' or 'seeing a
      certain defined way'.

      Nobody sees like anybody sees. You are not even speaking like
      you are speaking! :-)

      Nobody seeing, no volition in posting the description below, no
      point to posting the description below, nobody reading the
      description below, it can only be the pointless play of whatever
      is playing :-).



      Whether there are or aren't thoughts doesn't matter to me, as I
      don't have any means to validate the matter either way ...

      Here is how I'm speaking: Each word, each instant spontaneously
      is as is, without anything making it be that way -- no cause, no
      premeditation by an entity, no time. Each word brings with it
      the concept of time in which it unfolds. Its unfolding is its
      time. Its assumption of something that was before is the
      "assumed observer", the assumed premeditator or volitional
      entity. It is the same with any "being" and the same with any
      universe - unfolding out of/as no-thingness (or "God"), there is
      no place "else" it could be, or that it could be.

      No separated intellect is here.

      Words are comprehended however they're comprehended. The
      comprehension is "in the moment of the word arising" -- each
      thought-moment is its own comprehension of itself by itself.

      Thus, each thought-moment is dissolved before it arises, and the
      same is true of any being or universe.

      These moments of word-comprehension, these beings, these
      universes can't be said to really be here nor not to be here.
      Hardly. Intuition spontaneously manifests speech in the moment
      as fits the moment. Interacting with an "entity" dealing with
      depression occurs according to "where the 'entity' has presented
      itself as being" ...

      "Nonduality" is "going beyond the "mind of opposition" ... only
      if/as clarity is, can such "opening" *is* ...

      Exploring a perspective that is the undermining of any assumed
      perspective is indeed the "razor's edge" ...



      To be really "loose and natural" is to be able to partake in
      customs, convention and ethics of society with no resistance to
      them. As somebody said somewhere "to be in the world but not of
      the world".
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.