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

[Meditation Society of America] Re: TRANSMISSION

Expand Messages
  • jodyrrr
    ... The Self is of nothing in this world. The laws of physics do not apply, facile similes notwithstanding. Everyone is the Self. Nobody is more the Self,
    Message 1 of 22 , May 2, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, jasonjamesmorgan
      <no_reply@y...> wrote:
      > Hello, hello,
      >
      > Put two glasses of water side by side, and the temperatures even
      > out. This is called resonance. If you want to defute transmition,
      > go to the local university, and prove the world wrong.

      The Self is of nothing in this world. The laws of
      physics do not apply, facile similes notwithstanding.

      Everyone is the Self. Nobody is "more" the Self,
      despite what superstitious folk want to believe
      about their gurus.

      The guru isn't there to zap you with shakti. That's
      a myth some gurus use to make themselves popular.

      What a 'dispeller of darkness' does is illuminate
      the thoughts of his/her devotees by pointing out
      the Self in their awareness. It's not something
      you catch vibrationally, it's something that's
      suddenly apparent when it wasn't before. The guru
      can make the connection for you, but you've got to
      see it alone, completely outside any mythological
      beliefs anyone has about gurus.
    • Reynold Wingate
      Jiddu Krishnamoorthy used to dissuade those who wanted to become disciples. He believed the spiritual path o each individual is different. A guru can only give
      Message 2 of 22 , May 3, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Jiddu Krishnamoorthy used to dissuade those who wanted
        to become disciples. He believed the spiritual path o
        each individual is different. A guru can only give
        general tips to grow spiritually based on his own
        personal experience. It may not necessarily work for
        his disciples.

        I believe a guru is not an absolute necessity for
        spiritual growth. If you have the desire deep in you,
        you will stumble into the truth some day.

        --- jodyrrr <jodyrrr@...> wrote:

        ---------------------------------
        --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com,
        jasonjamesmorgan
        <no_reply@y...> wrote:
        > Hello, hello,
        >
        > Put two glasses of water side by side, and the
        temperatures even
        > out. This is called resonance. If you want to
        defute transmition,
        > go to the local university, and prove the world
        wrong.

        The Self is of nothing in this world. The laws of
        physics do not apply, facile similes notwithstanding.

        Everyone is the Self. Nobody is "more" the Self,
        despite what superstitious folk want to believe
        about their gurus.

        The guru isn't there to zap you with shakti. That's
        a myth some gurus use to make themselves popular.

        What a 'dispeller of darkness' does is illuminate
        the thoughts of his/her devotees by pointing out
        the Self in their awareness. It's not something
        you catch vibrationally, it's something that's
        suddenly apparent when it wasn't before. The guru
        can make the connection for you, but you've got to
        see it alone, completely outside any mythological
        beliefs anyone has about gurus.





        ---------------------------------
        Yahoo! Groups Links

        To visit your group on the web, go to:
        http://groups.yahoo.com/group/meditationsocietyofamerica/

        To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        meditationsocietyofamerica-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

        Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
        Terms of Service.


        __________________________________________________
        Do You Yahoo!?
        Download the latest ringtones, games, and more!
        http://sg.mobile.yahoo.com
      • Bruce Morgen
        ... Well, he tried to do it -- unfortunately, after he died he became the nexus of YAPBC (Yet Another Posthumous Bhakti Cult). ... That s a fact, no belief is
        Message 3 of 22 , May 3, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          Reynold Wingate wrote:

          >Jiddu Krishnamoorthy used to dissuade those who wanted
          >to become disciples.
          >
          Well, he tried to do it --
          unfortunately, after he
          died he became the nexus
          of YAPBC (Yet Another
          Posthumous Bhakti Cult).

          >He believed the spiritual path o
          >each individual is different.
          >
          That's a fact, no belief
          is required.

          >A guru can only give
          >general tips to grow spiritually based on his own
          >personal experience.
          >
          Yes, just as pointing at
          the moon isn't that same
          as being able to grab it
          and hand it over. ;-)

          >It may not necessarily work for
          >his disciples.
          >
          >
          Clearly, otherwise such
          "disciples" would themselves
          uniformly be realized.
          There's obviously no
          universal recipe for that.

          >I believe a guru is not an absolute necessity for
          >spiritual growth. If you have the desire deep in you,
          >you will stumble into the truth some day.
          >
          >
          As Jodyji himself has put it,
          the only actual prerequisite
          is sincerity. This brings
          energy and determination --
          but also an awareness that
          "the desire deep within you"
          may in fact be nothing more
          or other than garden variety
          ambition, abeit clothed in
          "spear-chill" raiment!

          Can we be both sincere and
          indefatigable in our enquiry
          without hope of status and
          attainment? Isn't that the
          subtly elusive "purity" that
          is so often spoken of among
          seekers, the surrendered
          attitude expressed by "Not
          my will, but thine" and the
          very essence of both honest
          enquiry and authentic
          meditation?


          >--- jodyrrr <jodyrrr@...> wrote:
          >
          >---------------------------------
          >--- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com,
          >jasonjamesmorgan
          ><no_reply@y...> wrote:
          >
          >
          >>Hello, hello,
          >>
          >>Put two glasses of water side by side, and the
          >>
          >>
          >temperatures even
          >
          >
          >>out. This is called resonance. If you want to
          >>
          >>
          >defute transmition,
          >
          >
          >>go to the local university, and prove the world
          >>
          >>
          >wrong.
          >
          >The Self is of nothing in this world. The laws of
          >physics do not apply, facile similes notwithstanding.
          >
          >Everyone is the Self. Nobody is "more" the Self,
          >despite what superstitious folk want to believe
          >about their gurus.
          >
          >The guru isn't there to zap you with shakti. That's
          >a myth some gurus use to make themselves popular.
          >
          >What a 'dispeller of darkness' does is illuminate
          >the thoughts of his/her devotees by pointing out
          >the Self in their awareness. It's not something
          >you catch vibrationally, it's something that's
          >suddenly apparent when it wasn't before. The guru
          >can make the connection for you, but you've got to
          >see it alone, completely outside any mythological
          >beliefs anyone has about gurus.
          >
          >
        • jodyrrr
          ... Absolutely. One s sincerity can carry them as far if not farther than any mommy or daddy surrogate one is sucked up to. While it s definitely helpful and
          Message 4 of 22 , May 3, 2005
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, Reynold Wingate
            <reystar99@y...> wrote:
            > Jiddu Krishnamoorthy used to dissuade those who wanted
            > to become disciples. He believed the spiritual path o
            > each individual is different. A guru can only give
            > general tips to grow spiritually based on his own
            > personal experience. It may not necessarily work for
            > his disciples.
            >
            > I believe a guru is not an absolute necessity for
            > spiritual growth. If you have the desire deep in you,
            > you will stumble into the truth some day.

            Absolutely. One's sincerity can carry them as
            far if not farther than any mommy or daddy surrogate
            one is sucked up to.

            While it's definitely helpful and a blessing to have a
            real guru instead of one of these nonsense transmitters,
            the inner guru takes precedent every time.
          • Greg Goode
            Hey Bruceji, That s a cool one, YAPBC. I just might use it, with full attribution, of course! --Greg
            Message 5 of 22 , May 3, 2005
            • 0 Attachment

              Hey Bruceji,

               

              That’s a cool one, YAPBC.

              I just might use it, with full

              attribution, of course!

               

              --Greg

            • jasonjamesmorgan
              ... Well, well, Your a bit father off than I originally thought. I see you are still doing your sadhana to the end of savikalpa samadhi. For if you were
              Message 6 of 22 , May 3, 2005
              • 0 Attachment
                >
                > The Self is of nothing in this world. The laws of
                > physics do not apply, facile similes notwithstanding.
                >
                > Everyone is the Self. Nobody is "more" the Self,
                > despite what superstitious folk want to believe
                > about their gurus.
                >
                > The guru isn't there to zap you with shakti. That's
                > a myth some gurus use to make themselves popular.
                >
                > What a 'dispeller of darkness' does is illuminate
                > the thoughts of his/her devotees by pointing out
                > the Self in their awareness. It's not something
                > you catch vibrationally, it's something that's
                > suddenly apparent when it wasn't before. The guru
                > can make the connection for you, but you've got to
                > see it alone, completely outside any mythological
                > beliefs anyone has about gurus.

                Well, well,

                Your a bit father off than I originally thought. I see you are still
                doing your sadhana to the end of savikalpa samadhi. For if you were
                realized, you would know that duality is obvious and apparent and
                GOD. You have not realized, as you denie one side of the coin.

                A person can send prana to wherever, whenever they choose.

                So sad, so close, but to stubborn in his sadhana to drop the concept
                of no concepts.

                I grow bored of this. Maybe I will be back next year. My compassion
                might bring forth a thought or two for you. Ta Ta.

                Namaste
                Om Namah Shivaya
              • Reynold Wingate
                Can you please rephrase the last two paragraphs? I have read somewhere that when high-sounding words are abundant in writing, that s a sign the writer is not
                Message 7 of 22 , May 3, 2005
                • 0 Attachment
                  Can you please rephrase the last two paragraphs? I
                  have read somewhere that when high-sounding words are
                  abundant in writing, that's a sign the writer is not
                  very sure of what he is talking about. Good writing on
                  spirituality should be simple and easy to understand.
                  I am lost in the last two paragraphs you wrote. Sorry!

                  Reynold
                  --- Bruce Morgen <editor@...> wrote:

                  ---------------------------------
                  Reynold Wingate wrote:

                  >Jiddu Krishnamoorthy used to dissuade those who
                  wanted
                  >to become disciples.
                  >
                  Well, he tried to do it --
                  unfortunately, after he
                  died he became the nexus
                  of YAPBC (Yet Another
                  Posthumous Bhakti Cult).

                  >He believed the spiritual path o
                  >each individual is different.
                  >
                  That's a fact, no belief
                  is required.

                  >A guru can only give
                  >general tips to grow spiritually based on his own
                  >personal experience.
                  >
                  Yes, just as pointing at
                  the moon isn't that same
                  as being able to grab it
                  and hand it over. ;-)

                  >It may not necessarily work for
                  >his disciples.
                  >
                  >
                  Clearly, otherwise such
                  "disciples" would themselves
                  uniformly be realized.
                  There's obviously no
                  universal recipe for that.

                  >I believe a guru is not an absolute necessity for
                  >spiritual growth. If you have the desire deep in you,
                  >you will stumble into the truth some day.
                  >
                  >
                  As Jodyji himself has put it,
                  the only actual prerequisite
                  is sincerity. This brings
                  energy and determination --
                  but also an awareness that
                  "the desire deep within you"
                  may in fact be nothing more
                  or other than garden variety
                  ambition, abeit clothed in
                  "spear-chill" raiment!

                  Can we be both sincere and
                  indefatigable in our enquiry
                  without hope of status and
                  attainment? Isn't that the
                  subtly elusive "purity" that
                  is so often spoken of among
                  seekers, the surrendered
                  attitude expressed by "Not
                  my will, but thine" and the
                  very essence of both honest
                  enquiry and authentic
                  meditation?


                  >--- jodyrrr <jodyrrr@...> wrote:
                  >
                  >---------------------------------
                  >--- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com,
                  >jasonjamesmorgan
                  ><no_reply@y...> wrote:
                  >
                  >
                  >>Hello, hello,
                  >>
                  >>Put two glasses of water side by side, and the
                  >>
                  >>
                  >temperatures even
                  >
                  >
                  >>out. This is called resonance. If you want to
                  >>
                  >>
                  >defute transmition,
                  >
                  >
                  >>go to the local university, and prove the world
                  >>
                  >>
                  >wrong.
                  >
                  >The Self is of nothing in this world. The laws of
                  >physics do not apply, facile similes notwithstanding.
                  >
                  >Everyone is the Self. Nobody is "more" the Self,
                  >despite what superstitious folk want to believe
                  >about their gurus.
                  >
                  >The guru isn't there to zap you with shakti. That's
                  >a myth some gurus use to make themselves popular.
                  >
                  >What a 'dispeller of darkness' does is illuminate
                  >the thoughts of his/her devotees by pointing out
                  >the Self in their awareness. It's not something
                  >you catch vibrationally, it's something that's
                  >suddenly apparent when it wasn't before. The guru
                  >can make the connection for you, but you've got to
                  >see it alone, completely outside any mythological
                  >beliefs anyone has about gurus.
                  >
                  >



                  ---------------------------------
                  Yahoo! Groups Links

                  To visit your group on the web, go to:
                  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/meditationsocietyofamerica/

                  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                  meditationsocietyofamerica-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

                  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
                  Terms of Service.


                  __________________________________________________
                  Do You Yahoo!?
                  Download the latest ringtones, games, and more!
                  http://sg.mobile.yahoo.com
                • Bruce Morgen
                  ... I could, but with all due respect, I ll decline that request at his time. ... An absurd contention imo, especially given that there is no consensus on what
                  Message 8 of 22 , May 4, 2005
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Reynold Wingate wrote:

                    >Can you please rephrase the last two paragraphs?
                    >
                    I could, but with all due
                    respect, I'll decline that
                    request at his time.

                    >I
                    >have read somewhere that when high-sounding words are
                    >abundant in writing, that's a sign the writer is not
                    >very sure of what he is talking about.
                    >
                    An absurd contention imo,
                    especially given that
                    there is no consensus on
                    what "high-sounding"
                    means.

                    >Good writing on
                    >spirituality should be simple and easy to understand.
                    >
                    >
                    Well, that certainly puts
                    a good deal of what the
                    ancients wrote out of the
                    running, doesn't it?

                    >I am lost in the last two paragraphs you wrote. Sorry!
                    >
                    >
                    Me too -- but there it is.
                    Are you sure you're not
                    being a bit lazy in your
                    approach? I can see only
                    one or two words in those
                    paragraphs that are all
                    that uncommon, and the
                    sentences parse pretty
                    easily. The gists of both
                    are quite simple and I'd be
                    glad to discuss whatever
                    specifics are eluding you.

                    Thank you for your interest!

                    >Reynold
                    >--- Bruce Morgen <editor@...> wrote:
                    >
                    >---------------------------------
                    >Reynold Wingate wrote:
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >>Jiddu Krishnamoorthy used to dissuade those who
                    >>
                    >>
                    >wanted
                    >
                    >
                    >>to become disciples.
                    >>
                    >>
                    >>
                    >Well, he tried to do it --
                    >unfortunately, after he
                    >died he became the nexus
                    >of YAPBC (Yet Another
                    >Posthumous Bhakti Cult).
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >>He believed the spiritual path o
                    >>each individual is different.
                    >>
                    >>
                    >>
                    >That's a fact, no belief
                    >is required.
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >>A guru can only give
                    >>general tips to grow spiritually based on his own
                    >>personal experience.
                    >>
                    >>
                    >>
                    >Yes, just as pointing at
                    >the moon isn't that same
                    >as being able to grab it
                    >and hand it over. ;-)
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >>It may not necessarily work for
                    >>his disciples.
                    >>
                    >>
                    >>
                    >>
                    >Clearly, otherwise such
                    >"disciples" would themselves
                    >uniformly be realized.
                    >There's obviously no
                    >universal recipe for that.
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >>I believe a guru is not an absolute necessity for
                    >>spiritual growth. If you have the desire deep in you,
                    >>you will stumble into the truth some day.
                    >>
                    >>
                    >>
                    >>
                    >As Jodyji himself has put it,
                    >the only actual prerequisite
                    >is sincerity. This brings
                    >energy and determination --
                    >but also an awareness that
                    >"the desire deep within you"
                    >may in fact be nothing more
                    >or other than garden variety
                    >ambition, abeit clothed in
                    >"spear-chill" raiment!
                    >
                    >Can we be both sincere and
                    >indefatigable in our enquiry
                    >without hope of status and
                    >attainment? Isn't that the
                    >subtly elusive "purity" that
                    >is so often spoken of among
                    >seekers, the surrendered
                    >attitude expressed by "Not
                    >my will, but thine" and the
                    >very essence of both honest
                    >enquiry and authentic
                    >meditation?
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >>--- jodyrrr <jodyrrr@...> wrote:
                    >>
                    >>---------------------------------
                    >>--- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com,
                    >>jasonjamesmorgan
                    >><no_reply@y...> wrote:
                    >>
                    >>
                    >>
                    >>
                    >>>Hello, hello,
                    >>>
                    >>>Put two glasses of water side by side, and the
                    >>>
                    >>>
                    >>>
                    >>>
                    >>temperatures even
                    >>
                    >>
                    >>
                    >>
                    >>>out. This is called resonance. If you want to
                    >>>
                    >>>
                    >>>
                    >>>
                    >>defute transmition,
                    >>
                    >>
                    >>
                    >>
                    >>>go to the local university, and prove the world
                    >>>
                    >>>
                    >>>
                    >>>
                    >>wrong.
                    >>
                    >>The Self is of nothing in this world. The laws of
                    >>physics do not apply, facile similes notwithstanding.
                    >>
                    >>Everyone is the Self. Nobody is "more" the Self,
                    >>despite what superstitious folk want to believe
                    >>about their gurus.
                    >>
                    >>The guru isn't there to zap you with shakti. That's
                    >>a myth some gurus use to make themselves popular.
                    >>
                    >>What a 'dispeller of darkness' does is illuminate
                    >>the thoughts of his/her devotees by pointing out
                    >>the Self in their awareness. It's not something
                    >>you catch vibrationally, it's something that's
                    >>suddenly apparent when it wasn't before. The guru
                    >>can make the connection for you, but you've got to
                    >>see it alone, completely outside any mythological
                    >>beliefs anyone has about gurus.
                    >>
                    >>
                    >>
                  • jodyrrr
                    ... But the obviousness of duality does not include the reality of the magical nonsense which exists in spiritual culture, the nonsense you are taking for
                    Message 9 of 22 , May 4, 2005
                    • 0 Attachment
                      --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, jasonjamesmorgan
                      <no_reply@y...> wrote:
                      >
                      > >
                      > > The Self is of nothing in this world. The laws of
                      > > physics do not apply, facile similes notwithstanding.
                      > >
                      > > Everyone is the Self. Nobody is "more" the Self,
                      > > despite what superstitious folk want to believe
                      > > about their gurus.
                      > >
                      > > The guru isn't there to zap you with shakti. That's
                      > > a myth some gurus use to make themselves popular.
                      > >
                      > > What a 'dispeller of darkness' does is illuminate
                      > > the thoughts of his/her devotees by pointing out
                      > > the Self in their awareness. It's not something
                      > > you catch vibrationally, it's something that's
                      > > suddenly apparent when it wasn't before. The guru
                      > > can make the connection for you, but you've got to
                      > > see it alone, completely outside any mythological
                      > > beliefs anyone has about gurus.
                      >
                      > Well, well,
                      >
                      > Your a bit father off than I originally thought. I see you are still
                      > doing your sadhana to the end of savikalpa samadhi. For if you were
                      > realized, you would know that duality is obvious and apparent and
                      > GOD. You have not realized, as you denie one side of the coin.

                      But the obviousness of duality does not include the reality
                      of the magical nonsense which exists in spiritual culture,
                      the nonsense you are taking for fact. The nonsense which
                      chokes the life out of realization like algae in a pond.

                      > A person can send prana to wherever, whenever they choose.

                      Sure, as a intellectual conceit or in a dream.

                      > So sad, so close, but to stubborn in his sadhana to drop the concept
                      > of no concepts.

                      The same is said of you, unable to see the truth that sits
                      on the end of your nose.

                      > I grow bored of this. Maybe I will be back next year. My compassion
                      > might bring forth a thought or two for you. Ta Ta.
                      >
                      > Namaste
                      > Om Namah Shivaya

                      How generous. Don't let the door hit you in
                      the ass.
                    • Jeff Belyea
                      ... Yes, we can. When the enquiry comes from a place of despair, degradation, shame and guilt, and the hope is for release from their grip, neither purity nor
                      Message 10 of 22 , May 5, 2005
                      • 0 Attachment
                        > Can we be both sincere and
                        > indefatigable in our enquiry
                        > without hope of status and
                        > attainment?

                        Yes, we can. When the enquiry
                        comes from a place of despair,
                        degradation, shame and guilt,
                        and the hope is for release
                        from their grip, neither purity
                        nor status nor attainment are
                        the foci - unless you are
                        going to quibble that attainment
                        of peace of mind is to be
                        counted among "attainments".
                        It is gift. The fact that
                        IT grants purity does not
                        count, either. The POM and
                        purity are totally Jackerjacks'
                        surprises. (Just a little
                        anticipatory fencing
                        before the touche).

                        The awakening in this context
                        is a startling and unexpected
                        helping of jimmies, a cherry
                        on top, a...lot of sweetness,
                        and frequently gives birth to
                        a Bhakti Yogi - a gratitude
                        attitude for the double scoop.

                        The fact that reports of
                        this unique solution are
                        often couched in spiritual
                        terms may be the result of
                        a family tradition or a
                        cultural prime coat.

                        Some will hear the reports
                        of spiritual enlightenment
                        as ego aggrandizement and
                        attempts to attain status
                        or imply some attainment
                        of a lofty estate. But the
                        Bhakti Yogi has no such
                        interests.

                        To those, like Jodi, for
                        whom it was more of an
                        "Oh, yeah, now I see it,"
                        and life goes on, there
                        are typically no jimmies,
                        no cherries, but a sweetness
                        nevertheless. Even Greg
                        uses the words "sweetness
                        and light" in his report.

                        (Sorry, Michael.)

                        Sweet as ever,

                        Jeff
                      • Greg Goode
                        ... ===These are good points. Sincerely and singlemindedly trying to end one s suffering is not the same as going for the status of having attained a goal.
                        Message 11 of 22 , May 5, 2005
                        • 0 Attachment
                          --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Belyea"
                          <jeff@m...> wrote:
                          > > Can we be both sincere and
                          > > indefatigable in our enquiry
                          > > without hope of status and
                          > > attainment?
                          >
                          > Yes, we can. When the enquiry
                          > comes from a place of despair,
                          > degradation, shame and guilt,
                          > and the hope is for release
                          > from their grip, neither purity
                          > nor status nor attainment are
                          > the foci.

                          ...

                          > Even Greg uses the words "sweetness
                          > and light" in his report.

                          ===These are good points. Sincerely and singlemindedly trying to end
                          one's suffering is not the same as going for the status of having
                          attained a goal. When in the middle of great suffering, a person
                          would gladly trade all chances of lofty attainment for the relief
                          from suffering.

                          I remember one AIDS activist mentioning that he visited some AIDS
                          patients in the hospital. They said something that really made an
                          impression on him. They told him that sure, they remembered the
                          feverishly strong sexual compulsion they felt when they had sex all
                          those times - unprotected. There's a sort of divine madness that
                          takes over, seems like it will protect you. Now, they are
                          experiencing the aftermath. They all told the activist that they'd
                          gladly give away the sexual experiences they had, plus all hope of
                          *ever* having sex again, if they could only be free of the virus now.

                          In my case, I was intensely looking into the essence of my nature.
                          What made me ME? What makes anyone what they are, and not something
                          else? Where is my identity located? How is it carried? How is it
                          *my* identity? Although this was not a painful inquiry, it was a
                          constant one - yes, and it had a touch of sweet, light fascination.
                          I was really in the grips of it. My head was in the tiger's mouth.
                          I hadn't heard of any satsangs or spiritual groups doing this kind of
                          stuff. There was no association in my mind of a level, status or
                          endpoint to be reached. Because I had no acquaintances doing this
                          kind of thing, I really didn't have a socially constructed notion of
                          a kind of person to compare myself to, or "an after it is over." I
                          was doing it in kind of an open and unknowing way.

                          --Greg

                          P.S. Plus, meditation helped!
                        • jodyrrr
                          ... wrote: [snip] ... Actually, the seeing of it was accompanied by the simultaneous dissolving of the idea of me as Ramakrishna terms it.
                          Message 12 of 22 , May 5, 2005
                          • 0 Attachment
                            --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Belyea"
                            <jeff@m...> wrote:

                            [snip]

                            > To those, like Jodi, for
                            > whom it was more of an
                            > "Oh, yeah, now I see it,"
                            > and life goes on, there
                            > are typically no jimmies,
                            > no cherries, but a sweetness
                            > nevertheless. Even Greg
                            > uses the words "sweetness
                            > and light" in his report.
                            >
                            > (Sorry, Michael.)
                            >
                            > Sweet as ever,
                            >
                            > Jeff

                            Actually, the "seeing" of "it" was accompanied
                            by the simultaneous dissolving of the "idea of
                            me" as Ramakrishna terms it. Watching that me
                            dissolve was almost a shock, but it happened so
                            quickly that there wasn't time for a reaction.

                            This isn't to say I don't have a sense of "me,"
                            just that its hold on identity was shattered, and
                            has remained so ever since.

                            I have to admit a sweetness as the result of this,
                            although I'm still the same firey asshole I was
                            before it all went down.

                            --jody.
                          • Greg Goode
                            ... ===Yeah, that s just it. Even aging, the deaths of parents, friends, terminal illnesses, my wife going to federal detention for an indeterminate period,
                            Message 13 of 22 , May 5, 2005
                            • 0 Attachment
                              --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "jodyrrr"
                              <jodyrrr@y...> wrote:


                              > I have to admit a sweetness as the result of this,
                              > although I'm still the same firey asshole I was
                              > before it all went down.

                              ===Yeah, that's just it. Even aging, the deaths of parents, friends,
                              terminal illnesses, my wife going to federal detention for an
                              indeterminate period, not enough cash for her bail (no bail bonds
                              accepted for immigration stuff), $1200 phone bills, bleeding
                              rollerblading accidents, bike accidents, sprains -- all this isn't
                              separate from sweetness, space and light.

                              --Greg
                            • de la rouviere
                              Dear Jeff, May I come in here with some kind of observation. ... comes from a place of despair, degradation, shame and guilt, and the hope is for release from
                              Message 14 of 22 , May 6, 2005
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Dear Jeff,
                                 
                                May I come in here with some kind of observation.
                                 
                                You said:
                                 
                                 >>Yes, we can. When the enquiry
                                comes from a place of despair,
                                degradation, shame and guilt,
                                and the hope is for release
                                from their grip,>> snip..
                                 
                                Could it also be that this kind of suffering-based enquiry could have two rather distinct motivations: 1) the suffering coming from the things you pointed out above, and 2) when this kind of gross suffering has worked itself gradually out of the system there remains the pure suffering of duality in its most delicate form yet to be transcended? 
                                 
                                I guess what I am suggesting is that there is the totally untrimmed tree to start with and all that is evident are forms of emotional, psychological and mental disturbances.  These no doubt form the bulk of the conscious experience of separation at that level of disorganization.  However, there comes a time along the path of self-enquiry where these things no longer distract the practitioner so heavily from inner silence and some sense of freedom from conditioning and shadow emotional stuff.  This in itself brings a lightness of being, but there is still the residual state of duality present, which could easily again be drawn into mere reactivity and mental distortion.  Yet, at this stage, one is no longer driven by the gross suffering of personal historical stuff.  What is on the table is just the mere sense of duality.  It seems to me that only when this has been recognized as suffering and ways have been found to transcend this fundamental inclination towards mere separateness, can the freedom of which you may be speaking reveal itself.
                                 
                                Or perhaps we may be talking about different experiences altogether?.  It is really difficult to apprehend the very many manifestations of freedom from where people nowadays speak.  So many claim freedom and enlightement.  I often find it difficult to fully appreciate where they are coming from. In the olden days, and as tradition has it, practioners in the Zen tradition actually often left their teachers, or were sent away to other teachers to have the different levels of their 'enlightenment' verified, disputed, worked on etc. lest the student fools h/herself into truly believing they are fully enlightened while perhaps the finer points might still be missing.  As yet, we have no such kind of 'peer review' in the west relative to our enlightening experiences. So we all seem just have our own relative light to stand or fall by.  This may of course create some serious confusion for many  - and a ready breeding ground for illusion?
                                 
                                Have a good weekend,
                                Moller de la Rouviere
                                 
                                 
                              • Jeff Belyea
                                ... have two rather distinct motivations: 1) the suffering coming from the things you pointed out above, and 2) when this kind of gross suffering has worked
                                Message 15 of 22 , May 6, 2005
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "de la rouviere"
                                  <mollerdlr@t...> wrote:
                                  > Dear Jeff,
                                  >
                                  > May I come in here with some kind of observation.
                                  >
                                  > You said:
                                  >
                                  > >>Yes, we can. When the enquiry
                                  > comes from a place of despair,
                                  > degradation, shame and guilt,
                                  > and the hope is for release
                                  > from their grip,>> snip..
                                  >
                                  > Could it also be that this kind of suffering-based enquiry could
                                  have two rather distinct motivations: 1) the suffering coming from
                                  the things you pointed out above, and 2) when this kind of gross
                                  suffering has worked itself gradually out of the system there remains
                                  the pure suffering of duality in its most delicate form yet to be
                                  transcended?
                                  >
                                  > I guess what I am suggesting is that there is the totally untrimmed
                                  tree to start with and all that is evident are forms of emotional,
                                  psychological and mental disturbances. These no doubt form the bulk
                                  of the conscious experience of separation at that level of
                                  disorganization. However, there comes a time along the path of self-
                                  enquiry where these things no longer distract the practitioner so
                                  heavily from inner silence and some sense of freedom from
                                  conditioning and shadow emotional stuff. This in itself brings a
                                  lightness of being, but there is still the residual state of duality
                                  present, which could easily again be drawn into mere reactivity and
                                  mental distortion. Yet, at this stage, one is no longer driven by
                                  the gross suffering of personal historical stuff. What is on the
                                  table is just the mere sense of duality. It seems to me that only
                                  when this has been recognized as suffering and ways have been found
                                  to transcend this fundamental inclination towards mere separateness,
                                  can the freedom of which you may be speaking reveal itself.
                                  >
                                  > Or perhaps we may be talking about different experiences
                                  altogether?. It is really difficult to apprehend the very many
                                  manifestations of freedom from where people nowadays speak. So many
                                  claim freedom and enlightement. I often find it difficult to fully
                                  appreciate where they are coming from. In the olden days, and as
                                  tradition has it, practioners in the Zen tradition actually often
                                  left their teachers, or were sent away to other teachers to have the
                                  different levels of their 'enlightenment' verified, disputed, worked
                                  on etc. lest the student fools h/herself into truly believing they
                                  are fully enlightened while perhaps the finer points might still be
                                  missing. As yet, we have no such kind of 'peer review' in the west
                                  relative to our enlightening experiences. So we all seem just have
                                  our own relative light to stand or fall by. This may of course
                                  create some serious confusion for many - and a ready breeding ground
                                  for illusion?
                                  >
                                  > Have a good weekend,
                                  > Moller de la Rouviere
                                  > www.spiritualhumanism.co.za

                                  Thank you, Moller.

                                  Of course, we can only
                                  speak authentically
                                  from our own direct
                                  experience. And, yes,
                                  this is a difficult
                                  task - to communicate
                                  our personal experience
                                  clearly and completely.

                                  The gradual working out
                                  of the issues that were
                                  the root causes of
                                  suffering, either through
                                  the grace of time or
                                  with the help of a
                                  therapeutic approach
                                  is distinctly different
                                  from the experience of
                                  Enlightened Awakening, a
                                  "stepping into perfection"
                                  in which the startling
                                  realization of "all is well"
                                  presents itself, as if
                                  beyond anything the mind
                                  has previously thought
                                  or imagined.

                                  The latter mends the
                                  illusion of separation
                                  and sense of duality, and
                                  leaves a residual sweetness
                                  as an undercurrent of
                                  day-to-day consciousness
                                  (as Jody and Greg have
                                  noted in recent posts)
                                  that is above any and all
                                  circumstances of life
                                  events.

                                  So many models attempt
                                  to distinguish between
                                  the therapeutic recovery
                                  and the Enlightened, more
                                  dramatic resolution of
                                  suffering. And even these
                                  have subsets. The savikalpa
                                  and nirvikalpa, and then
                                  sahaj samadhi, come to
                                  mind.

                                  The easing of suffering
                                  through time erasure of
                                  the sting, the temporary
                                  Enlightenment of savikalpa
                                  samadhi, and the seemingly
                                  permanent shift of awareness
                                  and Awakening to the
                                  "Ture Self" of nirvikalpa
                                  samadhi are neat distinctions,
                                  but as you've written,
                                  can cause a lot of confusion
                                  and maybe even delusion.

                                  Additionally, those who
                                  feel compelled, or as
                                  Bruce Morgen writes, are
                                  "choicelessly obligated"
                                  to share the good news
                                  of Enlightenment, seem
                                  to innocenlty over-promise
                                  the availability of this
                                  New Wisdom, Understanding,
                                  Experiential Knowledge.

                                  The Big Guys of Gurudom,
                                  and the relatively unknown
                                  Awakened Teachers, seem
                                  to all offer a model or
                                  point to a path that they
                                  walked, with the expectation
                                  that a similar walk will
                                  produce a similar result.

                                  As Bruce and Jeff Brooks
                                  have written; if this
                                  were so, we would have
                                  millions instead of
                                  hundreds of Awakened
                                  Ones, Buddhas, Christs,
                                  Krisnas, on earth now.

                                  As for the much-hunted
                                  deluded gurus, it seems
                                  that this is a much-overblown
                                  hunt. It is unimaginable
                                  that anyone would step up
                                  to the role without the
                                  experiential knowledge -
                                  for some power trip or
                                  monetary reward. That
                                  hunt is left for others.

                                  Those who fire verbal
                                  bombast at any talk or
                                  writing of Enlightenment
                                  are the more discouraging
                                  and disparaging game in
                                  my crosshairs.

                                  Peace,

                                  Jeff
                                • Jeff Belyea
                                  ... Hi Jody - Thanks. The dissolving of the idea of me is one of those subtle and difficult to describe aspects of Awakening that has the rational mind hear
                                  Message 16 of 22 , May 9, 2005
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "jodyrrr"
                                    <jodyrrr@y...> wrote:
                                    > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Belyea"
                                    > <jeff@m...> wrote:
                                    >
                                    > [snip]
                                    >
                                    > > To those, like Jody, for
                                    > > whom it was more of an
                                    > > "Oh, yeah, now I see it,"
                                    > > and life goes on, there
                                    > > are typically no jimmies,
                                    > > no cherries, but a sweetness
                                    > > nevertheless. Even Greg
                                    > > uses the words "sweetness
                                    > > and light" in his report.
                                    > >
                                    > > (Sorry, Michael.)
                                    > >
                                    > > Sweet as ever,
                                    > >
                                    > > Jeff
                                    >
                                    > Actually, the "seeing" of "it" was accompanied
                                    > by the simultaneous dissolving of the "idea of
                                    > me" as Ramakrishna terms it. Watching that me
                                    > dissolve was almost a shock, but it happened so
                                    > quickly that there wasn't time for a reaction.
                                    >
                                    > This isn't to say I don't have a sense of "me,"
                                    > just that its hold on identity was shattered, and
                                    > has remained so ever since.
                                    >
                                    > I have to admit a sweetness as the result of this,
                                    > although I'm still the same firey asshole I was
                                    > before it all went down.
                                    >
                                    > --jody.


                                    Hi Jody -

                                    Thanks.

                                    The dissolving of the "idea
                                    of me" is one of those subtle
                                    and difficult to describe
                                    aspects of Awakening that
                                    has the rational mind hear
                                    a metal-pipe clang.

                                    That shift out of the personal
                                    sense of "ego" to just "being"
                                    brings the sweet relief from
                                    taking anything personally, and
                                    it not only allows for continuity
                                    of the fiery asshole persona...
                                    it transforms one predisposed
                                    to being a fiery asshole
                                    into a fearless fiery asshole;
                                    taming the lions of fear and
                                    doubt and replacing those with
                                    a hot and sweet pepper undercurrent.

                                    Love, as always,

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