Click here to go to the next issue.

time

present
trapped and bound
as memory
and anticipation

a trance of dreams
tales remembered
feared and desired
longed for, resisted

time
imagination

freedom
truth
love
eternity

this now moment

--Xan
___________________________________________________________________

Added the following to the Nonduality Salon web page:

Pieter Schoonheim Samara's 'The Self, Maya, and the Heart:
The Fundamentals of Non-Dualism', to a new section within
the Encyclopedia of Nonduality (thanks to the author for
permission to copy and to Harsha for introducing me to the
work):


NONDUALITY: INTRODUCTORY WORKS

The Self, Maya, and the Heart: The Fundamentals of
Non-Dualism

Nondualism: The Radical Perspective

Nondualism FAQ

What is Nondualism?
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Please take the link to the website:


http://www.nonduality.com/new.htm

_____________________________________________________________________

PETROS

Attended satsang with Francis Lucille tonight at Mahayoga,
13050 San Vincente, L.A.


He has a good presence and speaks simply and clearly (the
French accent takes a little getting used to . . .)


Our nature is consciousness. It is very simple.


"Thoughts do not think. Thoughts are thought." The thought
of "ego" is just another one of these thoughts. None of
them have power to limit what we always are.


(I am beginning to get to know people here. There seems to
be a small regular group of people who attend all the
satsangs in this area and we keep running into each other
over and over again, comparing teachers and their different
styles. I met a friend here whom I also saw at Bryon
Katie's seminar last month and at Neelam's place in Ojai. I
mentioned that I like to write "reviews" for NondualitySalon
which he thought was a good idea.
Another friend told me that Neelam had stopped teaching. I
will look into this.)


Francis Lucille is also having a weekend intensive in Malibu
tomorrow and Sunday.


Homepage: http://world.std.com/~msnow/lucille.html

______________________________________________________________________

LYNNE

Hi,

Sorry about not introducing myself in my first post. I'm
Lynne, a Canadian woman with three children. I recently had
an experience quite out of the blue with a force that has
had me searching for answers. It seems to be "grace and
kundalini, a 'force' which did not originate with my
ego-centered will. Whatever one calls it, one's life is
never the same after." You've got that right.


Anyhow, a search led me to this website about a month ago,
and I've been reading most everything posted.


"Listening to others, considering well what they say,
Pausing, searching, receiving, contemplating, Gently, but
with undeniable will, Divesting myself of the holds that
would hold me." W. Whitman

Thanks all for being here. It has been very helpful to
listen to you.
Many hints and clues and joyous silliness, and serious
striving have come my way as a result.


I'm here, still listening.


____________________________________________________________________
DAN

DAN

In My Humble Opinion: whatever can be stored in memory is
defined.
Whatever can be stored can be deleted. What you're looking
at here points to the ending of the category "enlightenment"
and the ending of the thought that there is any beginning or
ending to what is usually called "now".
With no beginning or ending, "now" loses any meaning as a
reference point.
What can be defined or deleted isn't mistaken as a grounding
for reality.
_____________________________________________________________________

GREG: Memory is just another puff of mist, and whatever it
seems to point to is not present and cannot be proven ever
to have been. The very world itself, including the seeing
of it, is made of mist, and the mist is made of sunlight.


DAN: Memory is a cute toy, a dangerous weapon, a brick
wall, an empty mirage.
Memory is time, is comparison, is the cohort of thought's
reality.
I don't appear in memory. My being is not memory's image,
nor thought's edifice. The mist of sunlight - I can't
comment on that!
_______________________________________________________________________

==GENE POOLE==


What we refer to as memory may simply be fragments of
recalled awareness; perhaps to reframe the concept of
memory, as 'insufficient span of attention', would lead
towards the result desired.


It occurs that attention may be called as 'conscious
awareness'; thus 'conscious awareness' is continual
attention, and thus the abolition of memory, as memory
occurs as the fragments of imperfectly perceived reality.


To 'recall' for information, may be compensation for
imperfect present awareness. Perfect present awareness
contains the entire span of attention, always given to the
entire span.


____________________________________________________________________

JAN

For a nondualist, Kundalini isn't important; surrender,
intuiting and grasping are sufficient as this can lead to
the "first flash". Kundalini merely effectuates nonduality
(Sat_Cit_Ananda) in mind and body literally: first, by
making conscious of what *hinders* and then, by "burning" it
out. This has to be understood as a dynamic, autonomous
process that will do *anything* to continue, be it the
production of extra neurons to enable additional
understanding or the provisions, forcing one to
circumambulate the Himalayas 1,000,000 times on bare knees
:)) Non-understanding this "works" just as well and is
called Grace.


MELODY

I have to admit, I really loved this. :-)

Until a few months ago, I would never have imagined how you
could put 'kundalini' and 'grace' together in the same
thought, much less the same sentence.

But yes, 'Grace' could be used for those who don't
'understand'. Mostly westerners, I would guess.

And Kundalini is the term used by those who recognize the
'process' of surrender.

That's how I see they are the same. Both seem to
*demand* a surrendering. With both Grace and kundalini, one
actually experiences a 'force' which does not originate with
ego-centered will.

Whatever one calls it, one's life is never the same after.


JAN

It is quite likely that Westerners have a problem with
surrender. A question I often heard is "how do I know God's
will when there is a choice?" You appear to know the answer;
if the ego-centered will is switched off, there isn't a
choice :) Kundalini is Grace because one can become aware of
arising emotions before having to "live them up" and this
speeds up the "burning out" considerably. Knowing all to be
the work of Grace, enables one to bear the burden of "shit"
that occasionally comes out of the unconscious too, without
being affected by it. Experiencing Grace, one gains faith
and with faith, one gains proficiency.

Those who visit Lord Yama with the proper attitude, return
from him with the knowledge of surrender.
Others have to learn through practice and faith.
Faith is to know the mountain is there even if it isn't
seen.

It is easy to surrender when feeling miserable.
Surrender when in a pleasant state of mind too.
It is easy to praise the Lord when feeling fine Surrender
is, praising the Lord when feeling miserable too.

It is easy to surrender when feeling deserted with no one to
care Surrender too, when amidst friends and relatives who
care.
Instructed by Lord Yama, surrender is till no feeling is
left.
Others have to find out by pain and experience.

Life is a movie where one is the actor.
For one surrendered, acting is done.
The knower of God knows the movie to be an illusion.
But the knower still can fall in love with another actor :>)
For one surrendered, this is impossible.
It is like disdaining one's first Love.

For one, Self is the pristine bliss without a cause.
For another, Self is never ending Love, or Beauty
unparalleled.
Instructed by Lord Yama, surrender is till no feeling is
left and one really knows what IS.

Whether in heaven, on earth or in hell, the Fire of Love
will burn everything.
Those who surrender will know what remains.

OLD HAG

This thread on Grace and Kundalini reminds me of the last
darshan of Muktananda before he left the United States for
India (where he passed away. )

The meditation hall was jammed with over 500 people with a
huge overflow watching by remote in the dining area. There
had been various offerings of poems and Hindi songs by
Baba's swamis, and then Baba came out to give a talk about
Shakti and Her "Grace." When he was finished, a swami came
up to the microphone and told us that a devotee of Baba's
was going to sing for him. And she just wanted to be
called, Roberta.

So, Roberta Flack came up on the little stage pushing a
keyboard followed by a drummer and guitarist. She sang
Killing Me Softly directly to Baba, he put a white scarf
around her neck, and she then sang, The First Time Ever I
saw Your Face. It was like being in the Twilight Zone
- you sorta couldn't believe what you were seeing (Roberta
Flack was big recording star back then.)

And then she had us all clap our hands as she played and
sang an old time spiritual. It was funny because Baba
started shouting something out, and his interpreter, Malti,
said, "Baba says, this is not a night club!" That didn't
stop us for a minute. We were having a Shakti ball.

Then, Roberta quieted us down and said she was going to sing
a song that we could all sing with her, to Muktananda, to
Nityananda, to the Divine Feminine who had blessed us all.
And she played and sang, Amazing Grace, and we all joined
her - 500 strong and the whole dining hall, too. i bet
there was not a dry eye in the house.

When we got to the line, "I was blind, but now I see,,"
Malti (now Swami Chidvilasananda who succeeded Muktananda),
whispered in Baba's ear what the words meant, and he nodded
and muttered happily, "Ah, yes, good, good."

The hall was filled with so many devotees who had sung so
often the Hindu songs, sometimes haltingly, trying to
understand, to get with it, but now, here was a song we had
all grown up with, that we really "knew", and everyone put
their heart and soul into it (well, heart and soul that's
another song, Roberta didn't play that one.,^)).

Anyway, it was a time to remember. So, thanks for bringing
back the memory. Yes, old woman here, has always considered
Grace and Kundalini one and the same. Amazing!

_______________________________________________________________________

The Pathway of Nonduality

by Raphael

Chapter 8 (concluded)


Maya

Q. Is man therefore made of the dualism of being and
non-being, essence and substance?


A. Earlier we talked of polarity which resolves itself into
a transcendental point, a metaphysical point where polarity
or what we conceptually call being and non-being disappear.


Q. If also maya-prakriti is a polarity of the metaphysical
Point, why are we told that maya-prakriti must be rejected?


A. The metaphysics of Non-duality does not say to desert,
reject or negate maya. Such an attitude belongs to the
sphere of avidya. What Asparsa metaphysics tells us is not
to create identification or identify with maya, not to
superimpose maya upon purusa or the metaphysical Point,
taking -- as in the classical example -- the rope for the
snake.


If we believe ourselves to be exclusively body-vehicle-form
(therefore prakriti) we fall into avidya, that is, we fall
into the error of considering as absolute that which is not
absolute or to consider that which is imperishable-constant
as changeable and perishable. The disharmony, aberration
and chaos of the human individuality derive from the fact
that the individual considers himself to be only body-form,
therefore limitation, since each body represents a
limitation-bondage of being.


Q. Can avidya be considered absolute, real and permanent?


A. If it were real-absolute we could never eliminate it.
Therefore we would be obliged to remain in
incompleteness-ignorance; we would always remain in error
without any hope of escape.


Q. And where does avidya go when it is dispelled?


A. It comes from nowhere and it goes nowhere. When we
discover that the rope is not a snake, where does the error
go? Or else, when we wake up where does the world of
dreams, projected upon the screen of our 'aura' and made of
the stuff of prakriti-substance go?


When we manifest an idea, a thought, we shape a definte and
geometrical mental image that an acute clairvoyant can see.


Now, when we stop thinking, where does the form-image go?
This entire phenomenal universe is an idea materialized by
Mahat (universal Mind) and, when the supreme purusa stops
'imagining', it vanishes like a cloud in the sky.


We have to eliminate two types of identification or of
super-imposition which are the product of avidya, but which
are two moments of the same process: one is when we believe
ourselves to be image-form-body, the other is when we
believe ourselves to be prakriti at the non-formal or
undifferentiated stage. We, as purusa, and more so as
metaphysical Point, are beyond the world of names and forms,
beyond prakriti-substance itself.


Prakriti is the instrumental cause of the world of names and
forms. It is the stuff the individual and the universal
'dreams' are made of, while purusha is the first cause of
the movement of prakriti.


The profound recogntion of what we really are is the goal of
Samkara's Advaita and Gaudapada's Asparsavada.


Conflict, disharmony and pain come to an end only with the
recognition of one's own identity. A society of individuals
who do not acknowledge their most profound and elementary
reality, is destined to live in alienation and conflict,
notwithstanding all the philosophical, socio-political and
sentimental formulae it can 'create' in time-space;
time-space represents another name for maya.


Q. Can maya, therefore, solve the eternal problem of being
and non-being, of ego and non-ego, and proved an answer to
the question of how the Abolute has fallen into the
relative?


A. Yes. Every duality (like real and non-real, being and
non-being, ego and non-ego, absoltue and relative, etc.) is
the outcome of mental representation; it is not
real-absolute, it is not aseity (the property of a being
which has in itself the reason and the end of its own
existence).


Between Being and what we believe non-being to be exists
maya; it is sufficient to eliminate it to discover that only
the absolute Being exists.


Between the rope and the snake or between the dreaming
entity and the dream, there is maya; it is sufficient to
eliminate it to discover that only the rope or the dreaming
entity exists.


The Absolute, if it is such, cannot fall into the relative
or transform itself into the relative, as the absolute Good,
if it is such, cannot become evil or anything else. What
changes is not Reality itself, but our maya perspective of
Reality. The rope remains the rope, but what changes
(movement) is our perspective, our vision of the snake, of
the trickle of water, of a stick, etc., which we superimpose
on the rope, etc.


Q. Can maya be considered pure illusion?


A. Maya is not an illusion in the Western sense of the
word.
An illusion produces nothing, it is non-existent; an
illusory event can be compared to a hare's horns. Samkara
holds that the mayika universe is not like the hare's horns
or the barren woman's child. In Western terms we can say
that maya is synonymous with phenomenon, with 'shaping and
shaped movement'.


______________________________________________________________________

ZEN IN ENGLISH LITERATURE (1941)


R.H. BLYTH

Selections from Chapter 14: Don Quixote

(please see the previous installment in which the poem by
Byron, commented upon here, is featured)


"All such efforts fail." It does not need Cervantes to tell
us that, and anyway, what does it matter? "Of all tales
'tis the saddest." The only sad tales are those of men who
renounce their ideals as Don Quixote does at the end of the
Second Part. "His Virtue makes him mad." There is a
profound truth in this. It was their virtue that made
Christ, St.
Francis, Blake, Daruma, all mad, mad as hatters, compared to
sane people like you and me. Which is a sorrier sight, his
life or ours? Again, what is "the great moral taught,"
which is such a sorry thing? "Noblest views" are not "mere
fancy's sport:" here Byron's sense of humour is defective,
laughing at Quixote is one thing, laughing with him is
another.
"Cervantes smiled Spain's chivalry away." Cervantes coud not
do such a thing. You might as well try to smile the
pyramids away, smile death away. Byron could not laugh
religion away in Cain and the Vision of Judgement. The
chivalry which is made fun of in Don Quixote was already
dead. The chivalry which Don Quixote embodied is as eternal
as the faithfulness of Oishi-Yoshiio, the leader of the 47
Ronin. As to the later decadence of Spain, if it be
ascribed to loss of Romance, that is to loss of idealism, to
the loss of power to love the better more than the good,
this means the loss of power to distinguish the essential
from the unessential in Don Quixote and this cannot be
perversely blamed upon Don Quixote itself, except in so far
as Cervantes defaces his original in the Second Part and
confuses the issues.


What was wrong with Spain, what is wrong with every nation,
every individual, is the lack of the true spirit of Don
Quixote. Professor Suzuki, in his 'Zen Buddhism and its
Influence on Japanese Culture,' gives an example of Zen in a
bullfighter. No doubt it is correct in its way, though the
bull would afford an equally good example, at the same level
of intelligence of intelligence and morality. But the man
who in the history of the world exemplifies all that is best
in Zen, the man who surpasses Hakuin, Rinzai, Eno, Daruma
and Shakamuni himself is Don Quixote de la Mancha, Knight
Errant.

___________________________________________________________________

FROM THE ANANDA LIST

Two aliens landed in the desert near an abandoned gas
station. They approached the gas pumps and one of them said
to it, "Greetings, Earthling. We come in peace. Take us to
your leader." The gas pump, of course, did not respond.

The alien repeated the greeting, but still there was no
response.

Annoyed by what he perceived as the gas pump's haughty
attitude the alien drew his ray gun and said impatiently,
"Greetings earthling, we come in peace. How dare you ignore
us this way! Take us to your leader or I will fire."

The other alien shouted to his comrade, "No, you must not
anger him..."

But before he could finish his warning the first alien
fired. There was a huge explosion that blew both of them
200 meters into the desert where they landed in a heap.

When they finally regained consciousness the one who fired
turned to the other one and said, "What a ferocious
creature! It nearly killed us.
How did you know it was so dangerous?"

The other alien answered, "If there is one thing I have
learned in my travels through the galaxy it is this: ....if
a guy has a penis he can wrap around himself twice and then
stick in his own ear, it's best not to piss him off."

top of page