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

Re: Andy: change and growth/Jody

Expand Messages
  • Andy
    ... ... *****Yes, I understand this perspective. And I am suggesting that the understanding you offer is simply another story we tell
    Message 1 of 123 , Nov 30, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "jodyrrr"
      <jodyrrr@y...> wrote:
      > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "Andy"
      <endofthedream@y...>
      > wrote:
      > > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "jodyrrr"
      > > <jodyrrr@y...> wrote:
      > > > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, Andy
      > > <endofthedream@y...>
      > > > wrote:
      > > >
      > > > [snip]
      > > >
      > > > > There is no growth.
      > > > >
      > > > > There is only apparent change.
      > > >
      > > > Some patterns and directions that can be observed in change are
      > > > what we call growth.
      > > >
      > > > From the regard of the individual, there is a trajectory of
      > > > development which seems to occur in the context of a spiritual
      > > > practice.
      > >
      > >
      > > *****This "trajectory of development" may occur in contexts other
      > > than spiritual practice as well. Spiritual practice is nothing
      > > special.


      > I'd offer that spiritual practice *is* special when it is approached
      > as a discipline of transformation. The engagement which practice
      > engenders seems to allow for an accelleration of this
      > transformation.

      *****Yes, I understand this perspective. And I am suggesting that
      the understanding you offer is simply another story we tell
      ourselves. It continues the sense of separation: this is special;
      this is not special. I am involved in the "special" activity ----> I
      am therefore special.

      IS there actually transformation? Can one transform from what one is
      into what one is?

      Consider: if you believe you can't see, and therefore conclude that
      you are blind, and then someone turns the lightswitch on and you now
      can see...was there any transformation (other than the light coming
      on)? You thought you were blind (because you couldn't see). That
      was the "state" of things for you. However, in actuality, you were
      not blind (that was a misunderstanding arising from thought). You
      could see, but there was no light to allow that seeing to happen.
      So, in turning on the light, was there transformation? That is what
      awakening is all about: a realization that there was nothing to
      transform into. That what was being sought was always, already Right
      Here Now! Perhaps something was lifted, but that which "thinks" it
      was transformed is exactly what was already, always There.


      > The connection between transformation and understanding is
      > only apparent, but you cannot deny that those who have come
      > to understanding have *usually* done so from within the context
      > of a spiritual practice.

      *****Is this an assumption? I know it is common (popular) knowledge:
      those who have come to understanding have *usually* done so from
      within the context of a spiritual practice. But is it so?

      Perhaps there are many who have come to this understanding who have
      not done any spiritual practice, about which we know nothing?

      Maybe they embody this understanding "naturally," without effort?

      Maybe, to some, the understanding is so...natural, commonplace, that
      they do not speak of it (and thus we would miss them in any
      statistical collection about who used spiritual practice
      successfully)?

      Maybe awakening happens ... spontaneoulsy (as in "spontaneous
      remission") in some, with no preparation, no forethought, and, being
      so, they don't even know it is "spiritual" and do not talk of it to
      anyone?


      > True spiritual understanding is almost always preceded by
      > massive personal transformation (growth through change.)


      *****Again: this is how such things are consensually perceived and
      agreed upon. I wonder if that is not simply part of the "story."

      See: change implies time and I wonder if time is really "real"
      (Hahaha!!!). If there is only Now! then over the course of
      what "time" does change happen? If there is only Now! and Now! and
      Now! (despite the mind's - and society's - assertion that time is
      linear: past, present, future) ... if all there is an immediate
      Now! ... then over the course of what "time" does change happen?
      Does not change require the positing of a past (I was this way
      before)...and if so, what is this "past" other than memory?



      > We may come to know ourselves as the eternally changeless, but we
      > seem to endure quite a bit of change before coming to that point.


      *****Yes, I would agree: we "seem to endure" ... but "seems" is
      not "is." ;-) One is fantasy; the other, actuality.
    • devi@pacific.net
      ... Patanjali. ... formed. ... devi: i have it on order from the library, i ve already read about four or five commentaries, most from indian scholors, i m
      Message 123 of 123 , Dec 17, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        > If you like the study of the mind, Eglaelin, You might try Georg
        > Feuerstein's translation and commentary on "Yoga Sutra" by
        Patanjali.
        > It is the basis of Raja Yoga. It is very systematic and well
        formed.
        >
        > Love,
        > Bobby G.

        devi: i have it on order from the library, i've already read about
        four or five commentaries, most from indian scholors, i'm actually
        thinking about offering study groups in my area..
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.