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

Wednesday, December 19

Expand Messages
  • Jerry Katz
    The caterpillar just does what s natural, for a caterpillar, and the little wee beastie has no need to figure that out. andrew ............so true. and humans
    Message 1 of 1 , Dec 20, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      The caterpillar just does what's natural, for a caterpillar,
      and the little wee beastie has no need to figure that out.

      andrew

      ............so true. and humans don't really need to figure
      anything out either. humans also cannot do anything natural
      until they work their way out of the cocoon.
      .............matthew

      humans are like caterpillars insofar as each is doing what
      they do.

      humans being human, caterpillars being caterpillars.

      it doesn't matter if humans think there can be something
      outside of nature, because thoughts like that are just part
      of human nature, which is never apart from nature.

      ...............dan

      I realize that metaphors seldom constrain themselves to the
      mere facts, but in this case the facts may add something to
      Matthew's point of view. The caterpillar actually does
      nothing, not even eat, while it is transforming within the
      coccoon, that is all hormonally driven. However, without the
      struggle to break free from the cocoon, it would be too weak
      and deformed to ever fly. If someone "helps out" by opening
      the cocoon, all is lost. Of course, that effort is also
      natural, but it does have to be made.

      ____________________________________________________________________

      JERRY KATZ

      "This "art of living," is this Sri³ Ravi Shankar? I get more
      respect for him." --Sarlo

      he's a nice, down to earth man, Sri Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, and
      the organization seems to reflect that. They have a presence
      in Nova Scotia, and everyone I've met is normal. No permanent
      smiles, glazed-over eyes, or sales pitches.

      I happened to catch Shankar once as he was leaving a talk. He
      was walking alone down a long hallway toward the elevator and
      we walked together for a minute maybe. I said something about
      a lot of people interested in spiritual things. He said, yes,
      "it's changing, everything is changing," were his words. I
      didn't say anything else. He came to the elevator and said
      goodbye.

      A day or two later I was with him and a dozen or so other
      people in someone's home. Again, I didn't say anything to him
      during that time. He seemed very peaceful and ordinary. It
      was very good to be in his presence. What's to say, really?

      I also saw him a third time at a Satsang/Darshan/whatever you
      call it type thing where people were dancing and jangling
      bells and stuff. I spent an hour or two there, and when I
      came home, Dolores (my late wife) was almost knocked back by
      what she said was energy emanating from me. She said it
      stunned her a little. I did feel 'high' from the encounter.

      I think some followers are addicted to that. In fact, I
      recall a conversation with one couple who had come to Nova
      Scotia from California to see him; they said they needed
      their 'fix'.

      But you know what? Maybe that 'high' is what people are
      supposed to feel. Like cee has told me: "allow bliss." Maybe
      bliss is default and I have blocks to it, and these retreats
      and darshan things bring one to a normal state, not to a high
      state.

      Having said all that, bliss or no bliss, ecstasy or misery,
      what doesn't change, doesn't change in any case. And if one
      is That, then what of bliss, ecstasy or misery? What are
      they? How can default be that which one blocks, frees,
      allows, disallows, or experiences in any way?

      __________________________________________________________________

      JERRY KATZ

      what i'm really getting into is my search engine which is
      going to search 7000 of the best emails ever sent to this
      list, all the postings to the I AM list, dozens of the best
      nonduality/advaita websites, and the postings of other lists
      as well.

      right now you can search about 4000 of the best emails ever
      sent to the NDS list by entering '+ (your topic of interest)
      +highlights. For example, if you want to find long lost Annie
      Heppingstone's posts enter +Annie +highlights in the search
      engine. <http://nonduality.com/search.htm>.

      You can also search the entire NDS website as well as the
      websites of Wide Open Windows, and A Course in Consciousness,
      simply by entering keywords.

      A number of people have contributed to selecting the 'best'
      posts sent to this list. Gloria Lee has been involved for
      longer than anyone and is still active. She even kept the
      project going when it was almost dead and gone. Andrew Macnab
      put many long hours over a period of a few years into
      compiling the posts. Gloria and Andrew have been the main
      contributors with me. Melody gave the project the initial
      energy and contributed extensively early on. A few others
      have been involved for varying periods of time. Mark, OH,
      Lynn, Bruce, Christiana. There have been others. Forgive me
      for not remembering. When the search engine is officially
      ready, I'll have a link to a formal statement of
      acknowledgements.

      Beth and Manchine were the two others involved in putting
      together the Highlights. Everyone gave generously of their
      time and energy.

      ____________________________________________________________________

      JOHN METZGER

      SEARCHING FOR JESUS (editor's note: John used the search
      engine described above to compile the following:)

      Gene Poole: Now that I have the reader writhing in a
      veritable melange' of value-judgements, I should clarify that
      I now know that Jesus is... an eternal commentator on all
      things which impact humans. His gentle voice may be heard,
      revealing and telling the story of how this all works. He has
      informed me that hell is only for those that really need it,
      and that fear is the gateway to hell, and that He (Jesus) is
      free to go to any place and any time to help any person who
      needs help, whether or not that person is a 'Christian' or
      has even heard of Jesus. He further informed me that the
      basic human 'flaw' is to _decide_ or _conclude_. I learned
      that there is no such thing as 'objectivity', and have since
      that time, had to fight the (conditioned) tendency to take
      things seriously.

      I learned from Jesus that the way that He speaks, is designed
      to initiate a person who is ready, into ever-deeper
      mysteries; that in the way that He speaks, every phrase is
      like a step on a long staircase, leading up to what humans do
      not now know. In this regard, there is a place for faith,
      once a person has taken the offered help, and has seen that
      it works; that from that point, one is a fool to ignore what
      is offered. But perhaps, only one who has suffered as
      drastically as myself, can appreciate and use this insight.
      Others seem to persist in maintining that they can 'figure it
      out for themselves', and thus ignore the Grace (however it
      may come) which is the Free Ride. As you know, Judy, Grace is
      'where it is at'.

      Bruce Morgen: Buddha and Jesus notwithstanding, the primary
      "graven image" remains "ourselves," our harbored self-images.
      Statues of Buddha and lovely images of a kindly Jesus
      comprise a distraction from confronting the crucial fact of
      this imagined and imaginary idol.

      Dan Berkow: We worship the graven images we project. We
      idolize our mind's constructs. Jesus didn't die to leave us
      an image to worship. He died to invite us to face ourselves,
      account for ourselves, not postpone rebirth, no-birth, birth
      as imageless infinity, within, from, and through the One
      beyond One. The Greek word "Christos" has no equivalent in
      Hebrew. Jesus was made into the image of a divine savior to
      be worshipped, he spoke to reveal truth. By making of him a
      divine image to worship, humanity revealed itself to be
      affected by the energy he released, yet postponed dealing
      with this Truth that he pointed to as present.

      Melody: When 'images', whether of a savior, heaven, father,
      lover, etc are taken out of the 'concrete', and allowed their
      fluidity, images have the potential of leading awareness far
      beyond the realm of 'belief' and 'worship'.

      Images - as living metaphors - can open us to spaces of
      consciousness we have not yet touched, much less 'embraced'.
      And once one has traveled all the way through an image, the
      image...and the traveler...simply fall away.

      As an example, I could 'worship' a Jesus,

      or I could recognize Jesus as a distracting graven image,

      or I could 'step inside of' Jesus with mind and heart, and
      open to where it takes me. (I remember the first time I tried
      this, I could not sustain the 'fullness' of the experience.
      After only a minute, I had to let it fall away, it was so
      ...so...'expansive' (hard to find a word.....).
      http://home.epix.net/~miser17/trans.html

      DAN:
      Let us "empty ourselves" first, before we engage in debates
      about reality. Otherwise we run the risk of debating until
      the cows come home and never knowing what it means to
      "empty". It seems that this emptying is how "Jesus" and "me"
      end up not being separate. It's not me saying that this is
      so, it's the emptying that is the seeing that it is so. Such
      emptying is not a doing on my part, so Grace may be an
      appropriate word to suggest that it is not "action of the me"
      that can ever "empty me of me."

      Judi: ...you can't get closer to the truth or to God by
      looking at the subtle. God is not subtle!! The second thing I
      want to say ... is that I would like to see you start
      thinking on your own. You are your own person, second to
      none, not Sandeep, not Jesus, not anyone!! This whole
      business that we are talking about is about standing on our
      own, not gleening information or leaning on anyone else. And
      there is one thing I can guarantee you thruout this whole
      process and that is you are never alone.

      Gene: Now, such a one, living among others, shall maintain
      integrity by an honest (righteous) expression of Being as
      that one. This 'means' that such a one will, inevitabley,
      come to be seen a 'different' by those others with whom such
      a one associates. The story of Jesus illustrates the dangers
      to mortality which such honest expression of Being may
      attract; Jesus abject honesty led to His demise. But His
      Realized 'non-alive/non-dead' condition was revealed to the
      populace as his apparent 'ressurection'. The depth of His
      realization was such that not only had death lost any
      reality, but life also. His power is such that he existed
      outside of the 'dualistic universe'; the dichotomy of
      apparent 'life and death' had been resolved as being neither
      life nor death, but something else entirely, which is the
      'Kingdom of Heaven' itself. Already being there, in that
      Kingdom, Jesus thus had neither life nor death, but instead,
      Divinity, which is 'beyond' the life-death dilemma.

      That Jesus intention was potent, is well-known; his intention
      brought forth the very fruits he summoned. Wine now but water
      before, life now and death before, as honest expression of
      His way of Being, which is that of righteousness (integrity).
      Jesus demonstrated the potential within integrity as power
      beyond life and death, beyond the assumptions of the world of
      duality. His life was thus of our salvation, if it can but be
      seen. That He is seen as God is no suprise, and is as good as
      true, to those who are still laboring in the sweat-mines of
      duality. That Divinity is defined as exclusive, embodies or
      exemplifes the isolationist/separateness of the false
      principle of exclusion upon which duality rests.

      Jesus life is a signal that integrity empowers. Jesus exists
      as a timeless beacon, in the timeless realm which is the
      Kingdom of God, which is this realm. His intention, once
      implemented, continues to bear good fruit; His intention is
      to alert us to the way of integrity, which if implemented,
      opens the gates of That Kingdom. Thus the truth of his
      assertion that He is the way to the father and His Kingdom;
      his 'life/death' are an enactment of the potential or
      possibility open to anyone who realizes.

      The choice-factor is clearly emphasized in the story of
      Jesus; choice of how _will/intention_ is manifest, _either_
      to integrity, or to gains 'of this world' of duality, is a
      clear choice that is made. That one would choose, is the
      first step in the direction _either_ of the gaining of the
      power which is the result of 'having integrity', or to the
      direction of trading one's 'soul' for worldly gain. 'One may
      not serve both God and Mammon'.

      Here then is the answer to the question of the practical
      application of Nonduality; that the only application of
      Nonduality is the maintaining of integrity, which is
      something which can be done only for oneself. Nonduality is
      an individual experience; an imagined community of Nondual
      realizers is thus a community of individuals 'in integrity'.
      I leave it to the reader to imagine the possible fruits of
      such a community. That such a community as a possibilty is
      imaginable, and thus possible, is intuitively obvious.

      When the rewards of this 'world of duality' are finally seen
      to be fickle and empty, what then? The story of Jesus
      remains, as a hint to the direction which one may move, to
      the 'final reward' of Heaven. The 'finality factor' is not to
      state an end, but timeless beginingless endless
      already-always Being. Momentum is thus converted to
      stillness, and direction becomes one-point-only, nowhere to
      go, having already arrived, from here to Here.

      Jesus life [2] is thus a statement of Be "Here" now [3].
      Jesus pointed to himself as an example of our own potential
      to be able to enter where He dwelt then and now, the Kingdom
      of Heaven, which is not gained, but received by Grace. I
      might say that Grace is our natural state, and thus that our
      worries of insufficiency and mortality are the very fetters
      which bind us to the world of duality.

      Leaving attachment is not detachment, but an acknowledgement
      of our weakness of succumbing to attachment; and is thus
      properly stated as _non-attachment_.

      Detachment is denial of weakness; non-attachment is
      confession of weakness, which confession itself points to
      integrity as a way of Being, and is thus strength. Thus the
      confession of weakness, is the means to the entry of the
      Kingdom of Heaven, or as can be said, the Nondual
      perspective. This confession can be stated as "Not my will,
      but Thine". [4]

      ANDREW
      "Christ" means the anointed one, and Jesus's message to me is
      that all who accept his (nondual) teaching become the Christ.
      Baptism (Christening) is the symbolic representation of this.

      GLO
      The other side of this coin, is that God first ended that
      separation, and demonstrated the oneness of God with man thru
      the appearance and life of Jesus. Baptism is symbolic of our
      awareness of what is is already so!!

      Jesus message to me was that HE so identified himself with US
      that "whatsoever you do unto the least of one of these, you
      do unto me." That's anyone and everyone..who is excluded
      here? Very little depends on our awareness or acceptance of
      this way of becoming the Christ, ...what is flowing down from
      the hierarchy is lowliness and humility, mercy and love.
      "Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count
      equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself,
      taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of
      men."
       
      Dan: Nondwelling awareness is directly mentioned in many
      Buddhist texts, and interestingly seems referred to by Jesus
      when he said, "the foxes have their dens, birds have their
      nests, but the Son of Adam has no place to rest his head." I
      see nondwelling awareness as exactly the "rebirth" that Jesus
      described in his expression. The tendency of awareness is to
      identify with and in "something". Somethings appear in
      awareness, and awareness tends to get caught in the
      appearance. Particularly, awareness believes it dwells in the
      human body. Once "positioned", awareness experiences the pull
      of things it wants, the fear of trying to avoid or escape
      things (or sensations or thoughts) that it doesn't want, etc.
      The tension of this situation leads awareness to deeply
      question its situation. Many proposed "solutions" may occur
      (more and better "things" to have, "enlightenment" to get,
      beautiful people to relate to, drugs and alcohol to numb or
      enhance the senses, etc.). If no solution is accepted,
      awareness eventually confronts the untenability of any
      position. At this instant (of impasse, of no tenable
      position), there is a "shift" or "release" - awareness
      suddenly has no dwelling place. It is not in things, and
      things are not in it. The infinite appearance of things is
      seen as nothing other than awareness itself. There literally
      is no dwelling place, no position for awareness. Awareness is
      not fighting against attachments, there literally can be no
      such thing as attachment, as there is nothing there to attach
      to. Deception (of sensory
      awareness/perception/cognition/emotional reactivity) is seen
      through. Is this the end of any work for awareness? No. It is
      an insight opening endlessly. The full energy of awareness is
      required every moment (and there is only one moment). This
      endless deepening of intensity and extensivity of That which
      is endless and beginningless is the reason for the
      Bodhisattva Vow, at least as understood here. Because the
      relative and absolute are not apart from each other, and are
      not two, we can say there is endless deepening with no
      beginning or end. Nondwelling awareness, having no place to
      be, no situation to call home, only can endlessly "flow into
      itself" as it always has and always will. Remarkable that I
      am sitting here typing this, looking out the window at
      beautiful snow-covered trees, as awareness "circulates"
      infinitely.
       

      __________________________________________________________________

      ERIC
      from Nisargadatta list

      The great black folksinger Huddie Leadbetter, better know as
      Leadbelly, said on a great Folkways record including his
      spoken words with the music: Relax your mind, relax your
      mind, and you will live a great long time. Perhaps this is
      part of the song you're thinking of?
       

      _______________________________________________________________________

      GENE POOLE
      from Center of Friends

      From: Polly Hymnia <hardcoretheist@...> Subject: a
      question for Gene Poole

      What do you interpret the phrase "no cohabitation during
      gestation" to mean? Does this Oahspean law recommend no sex
      during pregnancy?

      Well, I have not read the Oahspe for so many years, that
      there is no way that I can be of help with your question in
      that context.

      I consider how the question appears to me, and say:

      "Gestation" in this case, refers to the development of what I
      am becoming. "Cohabitation" refers to the invited or
      passively accepted presence of an influence which would
      distort or otherwise inhibit gestation.

      The cohabitation which is prohibited, is that of my
      'conditioning', which would live in me as 'host' for all of
      my life. Because I can see my conditioning, I can 'invite it
      to leave'.

      I do retain, however, the aspects of conditioning which allow
      me to commune with the apparent others of this apparent
      world. This would be language, and the habit of putting
      meaning on every event, be it sound, image, or memory.

      This may seem to be a compromise, and I agree, it is. I
      sometimes am aware of suffering for making this choice, of
      retaining the 'things of Babylon'. I think of this ploy, as
      'hedging my bets', like the atheist who prays, 'just in case
      there is a God'.

      At least, I can have fun and indulge myself in this way. I am
      sure, that if I continue with my vast and profound cosmic
      studies, that someday, my writing talents can be parlayed
      into a vast fortune as an important author.

      Now, in relating what 'I am becoming', or the gestation, I am
      becoming what I am. Because I am already that, I can amuse
      myself by conversing between what I am and what I was. Or is
      it, between what I am, and what I will be.

      Maybe I am actually 'out of the loop', being neither what I
      was, nor what I will be. I am only sure, that I am.

      On the other hand, I have to ask myself, just who is talking.
      Knowing as I do that my conditioning loves to hide behind
      things I am attached to and thus will not throw away, the
      person speaking may not be me. And the irony is, that there
      is no-one being used, and the user, the conditioning, would
      like to think of itself as a real and whole person.

      I hate to disappoint 'it', but beyond making babies (which I
      have done with superb results) and supporting 'the common
      weal', there is little for me, but such indulgence as this.
      If my conditioning wishes to continue to see me as a 'fine
      catch, who am I to disappoint?

      Perhaps my conditioning hangs out in me, because I am like a
      fine pub. I wonder what flavor of brew I am serving, in
      there? Well, I guess that would define what is meant by
      'staggering intelligence'.

      I had a shocking memory quite a few years ago, of awakening
      in a bizarre, fractally-distributed landscape. It was obvious
      what had happened; our ship had 'crashed' and to prevent us
      from dying in the void of space, it had deployed its own
      substance, to create this world.

      This was confirmed, when the voice of the ships computer
      (affectionately called 'Seeuness') managed to speak to me,
      apparently from nowhere. Then I understood; the ship, in
      'sacrificing itself' in order to create a world which would
      be able to support us, had unfortunately distributed its
      communication capabilities far and wide. I could communicate
      with it, but at this point, have to contend with ideograms
      and even phrases which are themselves, also fractally
      distributed.

      This problem can be overcome, by simply allowing the gestalt
      of stimuli to which I am subject at any time, to arise in me
      without any interpretation being applied by myself.

      In this way, by removing any counter-pressure to the arrival
      of the whole intent of my whole world (which is of course my
      beloved yet now mutated ship, appearing to be a world) I am
      able to simply imbibe the song which my ship now sings, in
      lonely isolation from her former crew of 12.

      And the parts of the 12, you ask, where are they? They are
      striving to come together, but every time they do, they just
      make more parts!

      So, I ask, do I simply wait for rescue, or do I set about, to
      use the parts of my ship (this world) to make a new ship,
      with which to then resume my journey?

      I could, but I need a full crew, or more likely, a goodly
      number of duplicates as well, keeping in mind that the new
      ship will not be autonomous and self-aware as was faithful
      Seeuness. It will probably be many moons before our scattered
      parts can remember how to produce a sentient ship.

      In the meantime, I will amuse myself in this way.

      --
      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.