SOMETHING "stinks" here anyway...
The smell could only be called
The question "where is God not?" is seen to have been
But who could have asked it?
Someone is seen to be answering
"Who is the point?"
But who could have answered?
The discussion is
between "Melody" and "Judi,"
as if there could be two such separate, distinct
"Ignorance" and "illusion" are discussed,
As if something
that never existed can be talked about
as something existing!
"subtle separation" always being made,
"Us" vs. "Them,"
vs. "The Ignorant,"
The primal distinction: "Judi" vs.
Nowhere God is not, God talking to God,
God trying to convince
God to "get with the program,"
The NondualitySalon list is a basket of
Stinking and rotting in the sun.
The only basket of fish
through all creation!
Pfew! There's something fishy
when the duality between "the manifest" and "the Ultimate"
made solid and distinct on the "Nondualitysalon list"....
'average joe' makes no such distinction,
speaks not about 'The Manifest' or
making up, imagining no such 'duality'!
A bunch of babbling old men and women,
from all orifices,
** of course there is a standard jerry. each one of us has our own
too. It is called by various names; conditioning, biases, prejudices,
programming, or just plain preferences. It may have nothing to do
or N but it is a standard none the less. Now, one could easily
say that this
is a bad thing, that our standards get in the way of
relationship.If we say
that we "should" enjoy all people for who they
are,(ie: equally) then that
is our new standard of enjoying people;
it is called the Standard Of
Enjoying All People Equally. (SOEAPE).
No different than any other
standard. And if we can't do that then
we are lacking, missing or
failing something. hmmmmm.
We like to blame the mind. We say all suffering is due to the
I would like to know how many on this list are below average in
intelligence? How many feeble minded people you know are Awakened/Realized?
Try to explain non duality to your neighbors, specially those who are a
little lacking in the mental department.
I suspect most of those on
this list have a high IQ. Most also I guess are
well read and open minded.
So! Are our minds the problem?
Without a mind I would be a vegetable.
Lying in a coma.
** Without a brain you would be dead. With a damaged brain you could
a vegetable in a coma. With a high functioning brain like you have
can understand all the language of nonduality. But that
anything to do with abiding. Just because my mentally
slow neighbor doesn't
understand a lick of this nondual jive, doesn't
mean he isn't fully abiding
in the reality of it.
All are blessed
It is the nature of the mind
Thought is a natural
Thinking does not
require a thinker. The 'thinker' is
identification with thought - this is
the I-image which is a
reaction to 'what is' and it is the source of all the
I find it helpful to make a
distinction between function
(the ego) which is natural and the
I-image which is a reaction to
For example it is natural
for me to be able to make this post,
it doesn't require a doer, an 'I' who
is doing it
More than those who state that they are intelligent, or by writing want
people to think they are..."The Fool on the Hill" as an example.
know that this is not the question you asked, about members on
list...but in my opinion, us feeble-minded persons have got it much
better than those who think they are not. And if we are known to be fools,
then we have it even better because we are left alone to muddle about in our own
"The Fool On The Hill
By John Lennon and Paul McCartney
day alone on a hill the man with the foolish
Grin is keeping perfectly
But nobody wants to know him, they can see that he's just
And he never gives an answer.
But the fool on the hill sees the sun
going down and the
Eyes in his head see the world spinning 'round
Well on the way, head in a cloud the man of a thousand voices
Talking perfectly loud, but nobody ever hears him, or the sound he
Appears to make
And he never seems to notice.
But the fool on the
hill sees the sun going down and the
Eyes in his head see the world spinning
And nobody seems to like him,
They can tell what he wants to
And he never shows his feelings.
But the fool on the hill sees the
sun going down and the
Eyes in his head see the world spinning 'round.
He never listens to them, he knows that they're the fool.
The fool on the hill sees the sun going down and the
his head see the world spinning 'round. "
(i) have completely dissolved!
i would say into thin air but
there is no thin
who i thought i was, was exactly
my precious teacher told me there will be
far more wonderful
there is no
because i never
could have been
remain as i am.
what i am
isn't what i 'think' i am
it is only
'what' i am.
what i 'think' i am
is the only
unreality, being unreal
never was thought about,
thought to have
been thought about.
freedom as default
and no freedom
empty of all
like the sky
Joining in... here. One of the points about jnana yoga is
distinguish the permanent from the temporary, the "real" from the
"unreal," the "I" from the "other than I."
Questions such as the
following are deeply considered...
When I go to sleep, am I still
there? Is there evidence at that time the
body is present? That
the mind is present? (It is not evidence that
later, someone else says
they saw you sleeping. Rather, what was the
evidence at the
When the body gets old, weak and gray, do *I* change?
When I get in a mood, do *I* change or is it the mind/emotions?
When anything changes, is there anything constant that observes
this? What would that be?
If I see the body, observe the variations
in the mind, feel the sensations in the body, then can I be any of the things
observed? If I am one or more of these things, then how could I be looking
at them? If I am not any of these things, then what could I
These are a few of the questions asked in jnana yoga... Another
part of it is not to take anyone's answer for granted, it must be investigated
on one's own...
It's never truly personal, never really about you or me or I,
fascinating a seeming personal journey to implosion might seem.
It's not that when a person stops thinking/reacting in a certain way then the
ego dissolves or is seen to be consciousness, and then one gets to rest as pure
awareness. It's not really even that there is
seeingness-of-true-nature when before there wasn't. Seeingness
happens to an I. Where would that pivot-point of the I or the
before/after, where would these reside? If there is really a going, then
what's to prevent another coming? (This is why some teachings postulate a
magnificent going, but then say that there must be eternal vigilance to deepen,
and to prevent another coming.)
Where would the I or the before/after or the coming/going
located? It's like trying to spin the world on a single hair. So
never about me or I. Every I statement is the same. Take a
well-respected I-statement like this one,
"I am There even
if universes come and go"
Its truth value never depends upon which
seeming "sentient being" utters it.
No sentence is true, even this
We appear here
The depth of "who I
Where are all these nondualists
you are talking
Where are the dualists who are
supposedly a different
All I see are all beings simultaneously,
everything they behold is me.
To "be beyond mind" is to be "not against
any thing" --
certainly not "mind" ...
just "now" -- where is there
or someone to blame?
To be beyond self is to
of self and other -- not to be
those who have a self" ...
Fully beyond mind and
self is "just here, just this, just so" ...
Nothing "now" outside, no one
explanation to be provided, whatever is
is said whenever and however it is said
> Your point is well taken.
> There is no 'waste' unless
something is *treated* as
> waste, or attempted to be 'disposed
> Even then, all will be 'eaten'.
I guess that you are
saying 'will be', as in 'eventually'. And yes,
that seems to be
Right now, all of what is treated or regarded as 'waste' is at this
moment, available as 'food', but perhaps 'fuel' is a more appropriate
word to use. Right now, it can go into the hopper, to be reintegrated
into the pantheon of what is validated. Obviously, if we go about
categories of good and bad, the polarities thus synthesized
a flow of energy which (while able to 'do work' or
'induce change') is known
The power or dynamic of the polar tensions, is energy available
any kind of work, as is intended by the one doing the
categorizations. It is like building cells into which force is
A cell of charge, may be consumed at any time, for its
effects. And any cell may be eaten, as long as the value-charge
'bad' is removed. Unless, that is, one enjoys the spice which the
'bad and nasty' imparts to the stew...
> The question before me is
"Are we our brother's keeper?"
> and the answer "there are no
brothers", "there are no
> keepers" just doesn't cut it.
My brother says that I am a keeper... maybe it is my magnetic
All seriousness aside though, the Great Plan of the Vast
Universe consistently dictates that 'all sentient Beings' shall be
guided to know their true nature, as being that of the Vast Living
And that can be appreciated by one who has strayed far from
home, now returned as the prodigal.
How identity melts, when one sees
oneself in the eyes of other.
The End of the Internet
Congratulations! This is the last page.Thank you for visiting the End
of the Internet. There are no more links.
You must now turn off your
computer and go do something productive. (That means you too Letecia Jackson.)
Go read a book, for pete's sake.