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

14868[Meditation Society of America] Re: Mixology

Expand Messages
  • jodyrrr
    Apr 23, 2006
      --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "Adam West" <adamwest1@...>
      > "You believe such at the great peril to your own
      > self-realization, which exists in you right now, closer than your own breath, as if on the
      tip of your nose."
      > Yes I agree, it is my awareness itself, the very same of which I am aware of
      > this act of typing - the pristine clarity and the vast space in which the fog of
      > conditioned cognition and identifications exist! But recognition of this self-
      > liberating awareness comes in degrees, and it is those degrees of awakening
      > which are appropriated by the ego to claim realization where little exists.

      It's not a space at all, and it comes all at once. A permanent rending of
      the ahamkara which results in an ongoing revelation of the truth of your

      > Rather, an intuitive realisation of truth / intrinsic nature is comprehended,
      > yet it is clearly confused with absolute realisation.

      That's not what I'm talking about.

      > Let us test your theses; are you enlightened?

      Would you be able to tell if I was?

      > Naturally, one mouthes one particular metaphysical theory, and answers yes!
      > All are enlightened - there is none other than this singular non-dual awarness;
      > thus am I! Yet are you conscious of creating and sustaining the universes?

      Such would not make me enlightened, as Brahman is only aware of
      Brahman and not of any of the particulars in the world of name and
      form, including the creation of such.

      > Are you conscious of the infinitude of the laws of nature, of the underlying
      > principles of quantum theory - of mathematical precision? Of course not! Y

      Neither is Brahman aware of any of the overlays we employ to help
      us "understand" the world of name and form.

      > our consciousness in actuality retains its finite limitations, thus by
      > definition, it has no access and realisation of its infinite potential -
      > no realisation of the totality of Being - no actual enlightenment,
      > merely metaphysical potential!

      You describe an idea you have about consciousness which I say
      occludes the truth.

      > Naturally, you may - thus I may accept you are one of the rare few! :-)

      These ideas you hold are preventing the truth from being known
      rather than assisting its establishment in your life.

      > We may have a sophisticated discussion of these things, yet it is
      > clear very, very few have "actualized" their intrinsic natures - while it remains
      > metaphysically true, there is nothing to realise - a convenient appropriation
      > by oh so many egos and charlatans :-)

      Your idea of "intrinsic nature" is like a fog which blocks the truth
      from your view.

      > As you are most likely aware, the Master Aziz has spoken of the
      > difference and problems of which I am arguing and alluding to :-)
      > In kind regards,
      > Adam.

      I don't know Aziz. But I do know that ANY idea you can think of
      about self-realization prevents your coming to recognize it yourself.

      Dump the ideas. It will be the best thing you've ever done
      for yourself.

    • Show all 20 messages in this topic