Wednesday, February 27, 2002
- OOPS! I almost forgot to thank Gloria for "doing
the highlights" for me when I was gone for two
weeks. When Gloria's ready for a break, I'll be
taking over her days. We're always accepting
volunteer editors. --Jerry
I'm Caio Rossi, a new member from São Paulo,
Brazil. This is my "debut msg" to this group after
following the threads for 2 days. Here we go:
>...The problem is not thought itself. Thought is
> the medium through which we interact with all the data which the
> senses absorb. The problem is that we interpret input-data
> subjectively, drawing conclusions about everything we experience.
>...If we were able to have Draw-no-conclusions-mind, input
> be viewed with perfect objectivity so we would see things, and feel
> things and move in relationship to things directly, without any
> The possibility for dealing with this problem of mind is simply to
> sever the minds relationship to conclusive or analytical thinking.
> The mind is like a computer that analyzes every bit of stimuli that
> is picked up by the senses. It then selects the stimuli that
> reinforce survival, and rejects what doesn't support it. If you
> the minds analytical process, you have a senile and impotent
> dictator, just a figurehead with no power whatsoever.
How can you be sure the mind selects only those stimuli that reinforce ( I should add ITS )
survival?? If that were true, it wouldn't have allowed you to write a "mind-severing manifesto".
> ...The body simply does what what instinct requires, but the mind is
> tremendously manipulative.
I could rephrase that as: "The mind simply does
what thinking requires, but the body is
tremendously manipulative, as it has deeply
ingrained reactions that do not fit the outside
world anymore, differently from the mind's
reactions, as, being neuron networks much more
easily "re-shaped" than the DNA, it has been built
based upon the present environment and is subject
to future adaptations".
"Severing" the mind is disposing reason. One is
supposed to transcend reason, not become a moron!
That which is being made manifest right now in my
fingers and in your eyes, is energy!! Information
Yes - "we all know that". (or so "we say")
No - we, none of us, take that FACT into
consideration. For us, thought that is perceived is
taken as a "something", however difficult it may be
to define it satisfactorily amongst, between, or
within ourselves. But in fact, thought is not a
"something" nor is it a "not-something", nor is it
both "something" and "not-something", NOR is it NOT
both "something" and "not-something".
Thought - whether it conducts the "pro" position,
or the "con" position or the "independent" position
- is irrelevant. At least, to the thinker. And
don't you dare say there is no thinker!! That's
just not facing FACTS!! If you say so, then you
just don't know WHO the thinker IS!!
My fingers are blazing away right now in realtime,
just as your eyes are staring away right now in
realtime, so don't confuse the issue with some
idiotic thought bubbling up that there is no
thinker behind the thought. If you are braindead
then you can "say" there is no thinker behind the
thought (except that, if you're braindead you can't
say/think anything, now can you?) Energy IS being
transferred, in ways you can not imagine, and for
reasons you can not imagine. The "me/writer" and
the "you/reader" are Actualities with no potential.
"We" are in the midst of an imperceptible paradise
which can't be seen because thought is designed to
focus and stare and fragment and coagulate and
everything BUT see.
Some men want to think GOOD thoughts, or SMART
thoughts, or CLEVER thoughts, or Zen thoughts, or
Christian thoughts, or Gurdjieffian thoughts. Some
men want to NOT think thoughts at all - to stop
thought (and be like a clear pond on a still
morning reflecting all, though this very metaphor
muddles the clarity of the mirror as does any
But, some men want ***none of that***!!!
Independent thought is NOT just the middle-way of
the pro's and the con's. And those who "think" they
are somewhat "more independent of mind" than the
average bears in the bar, are neither completely
nor partially independent. They are, in fact, just
a Pro or a Con with a different face on.
Independent politicians are just one ACT away from
becoming yet another Pro or another Con, and all
their strutting about "independently" is just a
waiting game their mind plays until the next
election. Independent's claim distinction from both
other parties, and points-of-view, on the basis of
objectivity, but it is untrue: the basis is ALWAYS
self- interest, and that interest is to BE a Pro or
True Independent thought is impartial, objective,
non-aligned; its action has no impact on the
pro/con dynamic. True independent thought has no
purpose or function except to those who engage in
it. True independent thought is NOT opposed to the
Pro's or the Con's and has absolutely no interest
in their internal or external affairs.
To be truly independent, one must let go of the
interest in the Game being played, and must start
their own, setup their own rules, and move lock
stock and barrel. To be truly independent, is not
to be without passionate interest in life - only
such can have interest in something without having
a VESTED interest; no interest in cost.
In the Game, to think a new thought requires that
an old thought be forgotten; that is the new
To be truly independent, cost (equals) all old
The thinker is the thought. Information and Energy
- A thought is energy in formation.
All is energy, light, Love. When energy is in a
particular form, it is in a particular form like a
wave in the ocean. When the form dissolves the
energy is what is always was, is - It is Love.
Love is autonomous.
Someone Who Can Kiss God
Come to my house late at night
Do not be shy.
Hafiz will be barefoot and dancing.
I will be
In such a grand and generous mood!
Come to my door at any hour,
Even if your eyes
Are frightened by my light.
My heart and arms are open
And need no rest
They will always welcome you.
Come in, my dear,
From that harsh world
That has rained elements of stone
Upon your tender face.
Should receive a toast from us
Bring all the bottles of wine you own
To this divine table the earth
If your cellar is empty,
This whole Universe
Could drink forever
Lets dine tonight with exquisite music.
I might even hire angels
To play just for you.
Hidden beneath your feet
Is a Luminous Stage
Where we are meant to rehearse
Our Eternal Dance!
And what is the price of my
What could I ask of you?
All I could ever want
You have the priceless company
Who can Kiss God,
That you have the priceless gift
Of becoming a servant to the Friend!
Come to my window, dear world
Why ever be shy?
Look inside my playful
For Hafiz is
Barefoot and Dancing
And in such a Grand and Generous
In such a Fantastic Mood.
(I Heard God Laughing versions of Hafiz by
You certainly express your opinions with an
admirable gusto, but I can't help wondering if they
are based on anything other than just opinion?
While what you say greatly resembles the old nature
vs. nurture debates, the idea of genes needing
heroes, reading, etc is a bit far fetched.
Accumulated bodies of knowledge have to be
laboriously passed from one mind to another. There
is no "mind" split off from the body, that is
carrying on some other life apart from the "man"
living this one. While both body and mind are quite
malleable, within limits, the brain we are born
with hardly differs any from the basic model of
600,000 years ago.
Ok, what I hear behind my back is a chorus of
voices saying, "Speak for yourself"..heh, heh.
Still, would you consider all the technological
inventions in just the last 100 years to be the
result of some gene? Like the gene for TV and
airplanes just suddenly appeared?
Ideas, like religions and other cultural phenomena,
are generally referred to as memes. To the extent
that genes might acquire some survival advantage
from the body of knowledge of which we are
carriers, they might be said to be indirectly
benefitting. The actual needs of genes and bodies
are quite simple, and also unchanged from those of
600,000 years ago. Genes can survive quite happily
living in a cave without reading, etc - the game of
civilization either benefits or harms mostly those
who play it.
If we are going to think at all, wouldn't some
basic concern for opinions vs. facts be helpful?
The other thing, which I won't go into in depth, is
that you seem to misunderstand the purpose of
methods such as stopping thoughts, etc. It is not
meant to result in some blubbering idiot incapable
of any thinking at all. There is no conflict
between clarity of mind and a functioning person.
Minds ARE thinking, contents may vary.
I got back into town yesterday but haven't had a
chance to post to the list. Thanks to Gloria Lee
for covering my days while I was away.
We had a good time at the Inner Directions
gathering. There's something about being in the
presence of everyone that's simply a good thing to
do. I like the fact that cee took notes. I'm going
to do that next time, if I attend.
About 14 or so people got together on Saturday
night. Jody and Petros held court. A young lawyer
of 30 named Andrew Breese had many questions. He
had such a sparkling personality we all agreed that
he'd be wasting his time trying to understand
nonduality and that he should immediately start
giving Satsang. We decided we'd coach him in
answers and questions.
cee sat in perfect bliss. Christiana spoke briefly
but so intently and clearly from the heart that
much gratitude was shown to her. Thomas Murphy
didn't get a chance to say much, but he and his
beautiful wife Dianne graced the room. Tom did get
a chance to talk to Rudy Aquirre and Andrew prior
to everyone else arriving.
Rudy came to Inner Directions from Michigan. He'd
never been to southern California before and was in
love with the warm weather and the palm trees.
Dave Lambert attended with his lovely wife Barbara.
Dave maintains the Satsang schedule for Los Angeles
and has the task of deciding who to list. His
standards are high and he serves a (snail) mailing
list of very many who trust his judgments. He and
Barbara told some good stories and had poignant
thoughts about the nature of Gurus, based on their
Chuck Hillig was present and helped organize the
gathering. Chuck is like the 'rock' of the west
coast nonduality contingent. He can speak like a
psychotherapist, which he is, and laugh like a
Buddha, which he is.
We also enjoyed the company of Metta Zetty and her
cool husband Gary, a couple of Texans. Howdy.
Metta, Adyashanti, and Gangaji were, in my opinion,
the most outstanding speakers, as they seemed to
come from a place of reality more than the other
speakers. I guess public appearance becomes a job
like anything else and some vitality can be lost.
Not to take anything away from 93 year old Douglas
Harding, who with his smashing wife entertained the
audience for two solid hours. He's so energetic I
got tired watching him.
Things like retreats and gatherings aren't
necessary to any spiritual path, and they can be
very distracting. But at some point it's nice to
say hi to oneself in one's many guises. It's just
good for some people, that's all, like walking on
the beach or hiking in the mountains.
Harsha is having a get together in the summer in
Denver. There will be a 3-day retreat in Nova
Scotia in October right around the time of peak
I'll be posting pictures from La Jolla soon, taken
by cee and christiana.
We have added a selection from the Satipatthana
Sutta (Foundation of Mindfulness Practice) to the