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

Thursday, February 14, 2001

Expand Messages
  • Gloria Lee
    ********************* JAN B & GENE POOLE Re: Dictum (G) When the Being recognizes (no matter the age), it sees itself as being in this vast continuum of love.
    Message 1 of 1 , Feb 15, 2002
       Re: Dictum

      (G) When the Being recognizes (no matter the age), it sees itself
      as being in this vast continuum of love. Then everything is ok,
      even though the world 'is going to hell'. It is the workings of
      a vast machine, which works perfectly well the way that it works.

      >ºIf it does get messed up, then
      self-inquiry begins.
      (J) >The silence does get messed up for the majority of newborns who don't
      >even know the word self-enquiry. Messed up
      to the extent as to be unfit
      >for any kind of practice to quench the
      continuation of random mentation,
      >concealing silence like a brick is
      hiding space.

      (G) Yes. In recognition is the awareness that brick and space are
      interchangeable, like two words that are synonymous. How they
      are taken depends on the motive of the speaker/hearer.

      >ºIs the ending of self-inquiry,
      understanding, or simply renewed silence?
      (J) >As there isn't an "I", just this blissful silence, who has been enquiring into
      That  silence has left a trace in memory is evidenced at the
      of apperception (worded like 'recognition of') so what gets renewed?
      >Silence or the memory of it? Which leaves all practices as
      mental jugglery.
      >Which one would 'cut the crap' most swiftly, provided
      the student would be
      >fit for it?

      Which one? I would say, going naked.

      (See my reply to the question about Kundalini... )

      Thanks Jan...

      ==Gene Poole==

      >Subject: which role plays Kundalini in the disidentification
      >can someone describe his/her "own"


      Perhaps you are aware of those drawing-tablet toys,
      the ones for kids, where you draw on the thin cellophane
      film, and black comes through, so you can see what
      is drawn. If you lift the thin film (with a neat kind of
      ripping sound), the letters go away, leaving a blank

      Well, Kundalini is the one who lifts the thin film, leaving
      a blank page.

      The trick is to rub the film, the patterns impressed underneath
      are then revealed 'again'. I am the one who is made of those

      I used to become upset when Kundalini ripped my sheet
      up. Now, I welcome it; when it happens, it happens.

      Maybe someday, K will also melt the underlying impressions
      so that I cannot ever come back.

      Practicing blankness...

      ==Gene Poole==

      ONCE a beloved asked her lover: "Friend,
      You have seen many places in the world!
      Now - which of all these cities was the best?
      He said: "The city where my sweetheart lives!"


      NOW:> we can say whatever we like or remain silent and things are as they are
      > We ARE the way it is and I don't think it matters if
      we call it a conclusion
      > or a nonconclusion.

      I haven't reached a conclusion concerning
        whether or not it matters :-)

      The way it is, is.
      The way it is not, is.

      As being and the is of the way, not-two,
        saying things about being
        can't add anything.

      But, why not speak?

      Speaking is being, doesn't
        disturb the endless silence
        whatsoever :-)

      There is only Ati - Ken Wilber

      In a series of books (e.g., A Sociable God, Up from Eden, and The Eye of
      Spirit), I have tried to show that religion itself has always performed two
      very important, but very different, functions. One, it acts as a way of
      creating meaning for the separate self: it offers myths and stories and
      tales and narratives and rituals and revivals that, taken together, help
      the separate self make sense of, and endure, the slings and arrows of
      outrageous fortune. This function of religion does not usually or
      necessarily change the level of consciousness in a person; it does not
      deliver radical transformation. Nor does it deliver a shattering liberation
      from the separate self altogether. Rather, it consoles the self, fortifies
      the self, defends the self, promotes the self. As long as the separate self
      believes the myths, performs the rituals, mouths the prayers, or embraces
      the dogma, then the self, it is fervently believed, will be "saved"-either
      now in the glory of being God-saved or Goddess-favored, or in an afterlife
      that insures eternal wonderment.
      But two, religion has also served-in a usually very, very small
      minority-the function of radical transformation and liberation. This
      function of religion does not fortify the separate self, but utterly
      shatters it-not consolation but devastation, not entrenchment but
      emptiness, not complacency but explosion, not comfort but revolution-in
      short, not a conventional bolstering of consciousness but a radical
      transmutation and transformation at the deepest seat of consciousness itself.
      There are several different ways that we can state these two important
      functions of religion. The first function-that of creating meaning for the
      self-is a type of horizontal movement; the second function-that of
      transcending the self-is a type of vertical movement (higher or deeper,
      depending on your metaphor). The first I have named "translation," the
      second, "transformation."
      We must start with helpful translations
      before we can effectively offer authentic transformations.
      The reason is that if translation is too quickly, or too abruptly, or too
      ineptly taken away from an individual (or a culture), the result, once
      again, is not breakthrough but breakdown, not release but collapse. Let me
      give two quick examples here.
      When Chögyam Trungpa Rinpoche, a great (though controversial) Tibetan
      master, first came to this country, he was renowned for always saying, when
      asked the meaning of Vajrayana, "There is only Ati." In other words, there
      is only the enlightened mind wherever you look. The ego, samsara, maya and
      illusion-all of them do not have to be gotten rid of, because none of them
      actually exist: There is only Ati, there is only Spirit, there is only God,
      there is only nondual Consciousness anywhere in existence.
      Virtually nobody got it-nobody was ready for this radical and authentic
      realization of always-already truth-and so Trungpa eventually introduced a
      whole series of "lesser" practices leading up to this radical and ultimate
      "no practice."
      (note: this a long, tho very worthwhile excerpt, so here is the


      More from the "Great Pearl"

      "Q: What is meant by 'never being apart from the Buddha'?

      A: Having a mind freed from the ongoing and coming of concepts, its
      stillness unaffected by environmental forms so that it remains eternally
      void and motionless - this is being never apart from the Buddha."

      "Worldly" is a term valid only in contradistinction to "transcendental".
      The latter derives its meaning from the former.  If you do not accept the
      one as a valid concept, the other cannot be retained.  But, if you are
      speaking of the REAL Transcendental, that pertains to neither the worldly
      nor the transcendental...then you can also say that it is worldly.  The Real
      Transcendental is like that. Why?  The Diamond Sutra says: If their minds
      grasp the Dharma. they will still cling to the notion of an ego (a being and
      a life); if their minds grasp the Not- Dharma, they will still cling to the
      notion of an ego (a being and a life).  Therefore, we should not grasp at
      and hold onto the notions of either Dharma or of not-Dharma.  This is
      holding to the true Dharma.  If you understand this doctrine, this is true
      deliverance - that, indeed, is reaching the gate of non-duality."

      Eric Blackstead
      the St. Valentine's Day Massacre All Over Again
      From CNN. asia,
      ***Waving religious saffron flags, the 20 Hindu nationalists demanded
      a ban on Valentine's Day celebrations. They described cards for the
      lover's day as "obscene," and a violation of mainly Hindu India's
      cultural ethos.

      ***Activists from the Shiv Sena party ransacked gift shops of the
      Archies Gallery stores in New Delhi and tore up cards. Attacks were
      also reported in other Indian cities, including Bombay and Lucknow.
      When Fundimentalism couples up with Nationalism, whether Christian,
      Moslem or Hindu, it seems Love is always the 1st victim.
      yours in the bonds,

      .............c'mon eric. valentines cards are about Love? They ARE
      totally "obscene". Horrifying so when you see that the mood of
      valentines cards is most peoples  reference point for Love.(of course
      not on this site) How much more shallow can it get? They should be
      torn, burned, flushed down the toilet. i wish these guys would come
      to america and ransack those bastions of sentimentality, the hallmark
      stores. valentines cards make a complete mockery of Love.

      Mathew & Friends,

      > .............c'mon eric. valentines cards
      are about Love? 

      The clipping isn't about Valentine cards, Mathew. It's about violence
      to PROTECT HINDUISM & INDIA...from Valentine cards, get it?

      >valentines cards make a complete mockery of Love.

      Tell it to the lovers, Mathew. I was just passing on a funny and
      somewhat pathetic story as an ironic commentary.

      Take it any way you want.

      yours in the bonds,


      Spread outward. Crack the round dome. Break through.
      Have liberty not as air within a grave
      Or down a well. Breath freedom, oh, my native,
      In the space of horizons that neither love nor hate.

      - Wallace Stevens

      From "Things of August"

      Rolling Over
      > ºWhy would "thoughts" be seen by
      > º"thoughts" within the
      context of "understanding" or "not-understanding?
      > There is no
      end to "why" questions as one is chained to the next.

      I meant it as a real question-to which there is a simple answer which would
      put an end to the question.

      > ºThe "silent mind" may be "bliss" but thoughts may be
      > ºblissful expression of 'silent mind" (although
      "blissful" for whom?)
      > What if thoughts are just

      Sure, I can say to myself, thoughts are just thoughts. And there has been
      clarity for a long time that they are not "me", they are not "mine". Also,
      if mind recognizes that EVERYTHING is fundamental reality then there is
      peace and freedom from the craving for what one imagines one does not have.
      After one sees that clearly then things get more interesting.  Everything is
      Just So.  Goats are just goats. But I tend to ask questions (yes, Dan,
      thought investigating itself) and I would not say that anything is "just"
      anything...or just its label.  Its not as if Im saying that this is a Big
      Important Deal or that Im asking questions as part of the agenda to get
      somewhere or something-mind is just inquisitive. It is interesting the mind
      seems to wish to learn about itself, awaken to its self. Nothing else much
      to do, why not? I don't actually care much about the topic of
      "enlightenment", "God" & "persons" etc. but I am interested in reading posts
      on this list when I recognize that someone is both investigating thought in
      an emperical fashion as well as the mechanics of mind, and in a manner
      consistent, yet unpredictable and free from self-imposed imitation,
      projections and cultural modeling and, most especially for the joy of it,
      for the joy of it, not out of enlightenment fixation. This is when I get to
      see the actual workings of Awakened Mind in the mind of other which assists
      researches (play) going on here. Awakened Mind is everywhere, not just on
      some dusty pedastal.

      Here is an example of the kind of thing that I mean.  After floating face
      down in empty mind bliss for a good while in empty pool (but yes breathing
      now and then), I note that mind is in a different state of stability and
      clarity then when on land-probably to do with relaxation. Suddenly I note
      that invariably when face down, body will begin without fail to roll over
      via the left side. Repeat many times-always the same.  Why is this?  Is this
      so for everybody? Something to do with hemispheres?  New gripping question
      arises, new opportunity to watch mind working away and I'll spare you the
      details. Note (and ignore) condemning thoughts-"What a dumb thing to do".
      Work through the process and see what new territory is noticed. None of this
      mental activity even recognized as what we usually define as "thought".  A
      question might lurk for years or be answered in a short time but no anxiety
      or urgency.  The answer will be something I have never been told and
      something I have never read in any book.

      None of which probably has anything to do with abstractions about
      non-duality. Or perhaps it does.



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