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

Saturday, October 6

Expand Messages
  • jerry@nonduality.com
    GARY MERRILL If there is any strategy, such as dropping the notion of self , if there is trust in any thing, which is tantamount to a solution, is this
    Message 1 of 1 , Oct 8, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      GARY MERRILL

      If there is any strategy, such as 'dropping the
      notion of self', if there is trust in any thing,
      which is tantamount to a solution, is this 'trust'?

      Trust in anything is not trust.
      Trust in nothing is trust

      Trust can't be practised it seems
      Relief then, is the end of this movement of self
      End of trust in self.

      _______________________________________________________________________

      TONY AND GLORIA

      TONY:
      I don't disagree with that only with diversions to
      indulge the senses and by extension the ego, so
      perpetuating the attachment.

      There is no last thought unless there is a last
      life. The last thought of this life continues on
      into your next, whether you die in your sleep or
      not.

      I think of the king who became a deer for a short
      time for he loved the deer so.

      We have to deny the human experience for it is the
      whole purpose of being here, not to be here. It can
      only be observed from a place of non attachment.

      What is beauty but in the eye of the individual
      ego, and thereby hangs the tail the ego. The
      illusion that we are experiencing and enjoying.

      Poetry, well I was a poet and so it is just a
      diversion, but the ego is there.

      Who am I, who enjoys? who isn't
      enjoying?........ONS...Tony.
       

      GLORIA:
      .... Tony, you are the one who is introducing ego
      into this by the assumption that it is only the ego
      who can enjoy. No doubt, ANY activity or
      experience, including the supposedly most
      spiritual, MAY be co-opted by the ego, but t'aint
      necessarily so. There have simply been too many
      accounts of the opposite, like the Zen archer who
      himself disappears into the shooting of the bow.
      The athlete at peak performance can be an egoless
      experience, conscious thought would just be in the
      way, an obstruction. The artist painting becomes
      simply painting happening. When you become the
      music, where is ego? No individual ego is required
      for any experience, neither is the assumption of
      attachment to senses always valid, simply because
      senses are involved in the awareness.

      Perhaps you might reconsider how much you associate
      the senses with ego? Just look at any young child
      who has no sense of self to separate him from his
      oneness with all that is. He is not *observing*,
      there is as yet no thought of there being any
      subject who can just observe, no one is there to
      merge with objects of experience. A child simply is
      in spontaneous unison, all experience pours through
      him unmediated by any self-conscious thoughts; so
      what he is - is only a state of natural wonder.
      This is what can be recaptured and re-known anew;
      to do so is the reason humans dance and sing and
      make music. Really seeing a sunset, really seeing
      anything, really feeling the rain, whatever brings
      back the wonder, the oneness. And this is what
      mystics like Hafiz are writing about in poetry. Art
      is at its best when there is no ego present, either
      in the making of it or the enjoying of it.

      For once, just let it be...

      _______________________________________________________________________

      MATTHEW AND DAN

      DAN: The one who isn't going to go for pie-in-the
      sky talk about ending world hunger by shifting out
      of making distinctions.

      MATTHEW: .......oh, that dan, (dan berkhow phd?)i
      should have known. Well, all talk is pie-in-the-sky
      isn't it? Communicating ideas is usually done
      through talk/writing.

      DAN: "That which is unsplit" and "distinctions" are
      one and the same.

      MATTHEW: ........yes i agree. and distinctions are
      still made by mind.

      DAN: There is no mind making distinctions,

      MATTHEW: ..........oh, look again my boy.
      Everything we do is based in a distinction-making
      mind. Ah, "show me this mind" you say. It can't be
      shown any more than "that which is unsplit" can be
      shown. But when you look at your actions, your
      manifestations, you see the results of such a mind.

      DAN: and that itself is the false distinction going
      on in such talk about a mind that could end world
      hunger. :-)

      MATTHEW: ......... Believing there is no mind
      making distinctions is about as pie-in-the-sky as
      it gets and also there was nothing said about a
      mind that could end world hunger. A mind could do
      nothing of the sort.

      DAN: When hungry, there is "hungry", there just
      isn't a mind that knows that it has hunger.

      MATTHEW: ........a mind has hunger? hmm. A body has
      hunger, and the mind will make all sorts of
      interpretations /distinctions about that ( I'm
      goona make a ham sandwich with swiss,or theres
      nothing good to eat in the fridge).
       

      --
      http://nonduality.com
      http://nonduality.net
      http://nonduality.org
      http://www.livejournal.com/users/awesboss
       

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