Click here to go to the next issue.

Dear Sweet Purest Nectur,

I know what you mean,
in this falling madness of Love
we spin around into each
in turn
and in heart silence speak-

hello again!

Om as we are!
Eric

______________________________________________________________________


TIM G.:

"I,I" - a freeform poem

I glow from within, lit by my own radiance.
The body, the mind, they are not mine.
Through ignorance I have become associated
with form, substance, dream. I am not that.
There is nothing to describe me, no words.
No thoughts, no symbols.. I wear no clothing.
Nothing but Eternal peace and bliss, this,
One very moment... there is no other but I.

I, the reality, clothed in disguise...
OM, the bridge across forever.
I am the clear light of emptiness.
OM, the bow of the soul, empty of all
but what is real.
In me there are no distinctions,
no past-present-future, no here or there.
I am everywhere and nowhere, the light
that shines bright across the heart of Eternity.

In me is all that ever was, all that has ever been,
all that ever will be, in one eternal instant devoid of
time.
I cannot be described, nor thought of, nor dreamed of.
I cannot be imagined, nor felt, nor seen, nor heard.

The single timeless Eternal Fact I AM...
Devoid of form, of time, of causation.

Cross the bridge of OM to reach me,
the bridge across the ocean of dream.
Chant me, the no-chant OM, until
the dream ends. Until the Reality begins.
Satchidananda I am, forever bliss-being-love.
Nowhere and everywhere I am, and you cannot see me.
You can only be me.

___________________________________________________________

ALEKS:

hi tim!

happy to hear that you are in your new space.

here is a house warming present, poem for you. :)
love,
aleks


salapratistha:
the blessing of a house
“I bring this water free from impurity.
I bring this immortal Fire.
With these I set my foot within this dwelling
And take possession of it.”
--Atharva Veda III,12
I know there are those who would give
their left anything
for the blessing of such a world. . .
on a barely traveled alleyway, with a little shade
and a slight prevailing wind to blow
the cobwebs from their dreams.

May we be safe in this sacred space--
Keep it in good repair and cosmic order. . .
May there be a compassionate cop on the beat,
And little rain. . .

Inside the outside is a world--
Our first take on it.
Those who roam the cracked walks
and twisted ribbons of any city’s streets know
the value of a good shelter, refuge or sanctuary.
Outside, a good sturdy box: a roof
and a corrugated view.
Inside a life can take root: not merely
of the earth, but part of it.

And so I bless my new home--
its stability. My good fortune.
Shelter. Refuge. Sanctuary.
I bring water and fire and connect--
my life beginning to intertwine
with the roots of its ancient own.

Outside, a good sturdy house: a roof
and a view. Outside I
admire the garden, but love the weeds
that this old house grew into.

Bring water and fire. . .again today
I blessed this house, and if their had been a rat nearby
I’d have blessed him too.
--aleks berlin

_________________________________________________________________

MIRA:

Today,
reading my mail,
feeling so comforted,
reading messages from friends,
who don't know what they are talking about either.

Your messages so dear and appreciated,
between wisdom words,
light dances,
office memo's,
happy days,
nonduality paths, and
EO lists,
I could care less,
whether I am or not am,
or whether anyone knows or not knows.

Thank you all,
for the truth,
that we cannot put into words,
but cannot refrain from being either.

___________________________________________________________________


at the still point, there the dance is,
But neither arrest nor movement.
And do not call it fixity,
Where past and future are gathered.
Neither movement from
nor towards,
Neither ascent nor decline.
Except for the point,
the still point,
There would be no dance,
and there is only the
dance.

T.S. Eliot (sent by Harsha)

______________________________________________________________________

MIKI TAKASHI:


Thanks for the warm welcome.
I am sorry but I don't know much about Nonduality or Advaita
in Japan.
Those words are not popular at all here in Japan.
There are many Zen in Japan. But I know only little.
I think the most authentic academic institution in Japan is
http://www.iijnet.or.jp/iriz/irizhtml/indexj.htm

I feel the name of finger point and way of finger pointing
in Japan are different from "Nonduality" and " Advaita".
In these days I feel the structure of western ego and that
of eastern are different. Just intuition. So please do me
a favor no to ask why and how. :)


love miki takashi

-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-
-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-

MIRA:


Now stating that you know, or that you don't know, may
nevertheless attract all those who want to know, whether you
like it or not. You are now excused though, to not know,
you may send them home, telling them that they will never
know either, and that they shouldn't even bother to try to,
for they will never succeed anyway. Not knowing is indeed
easy and fun and is done 24 hours a day, yet not everybody
'knows' that.


-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-
-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-

To live fully and be wise, may mean to be comfortable with
wonder.


--Jerry


XAN:


As for me, I have fallen in love with Not Knowing.


SKYE:


Ah Xan,

Oh great joy to feel you here again.


Yes, yes, energy is purest when it doesn't take on a form.


love, skye


-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-
-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-

DAN:


Clarification of the question "Am I?":
1) It reverses the usual assumptions involved in the belief
"I am."
2) It calls all of existence into question.
3) It calls all knowledge into question.
4) When knowledge has ceased to be an anchor, and existence
is no longer assumed as a state, it finally points to
investigating the "line" that divides being from non-being.


-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-
-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-

JERRY:


No one ever said anyone knew. No one ever gave an answer.
It is closer to truth to say 'I don't know' than to say 'do
know'. Even closer may be to confess 'I neither know nor
not know'; it's a slight nudge from 'not knowing' to that,
but it's like moving a mountain to go to that understanding
from 'I do know'.


So knowledge is not conducive to nondual perception. What
is needed is 'not knowing', and then the confession,
'neither know nor not know'. That may be called the First
Silence.
And then the Second Silence is silence. And out of the
recesses of the Third Silence you hear that utterance,
'Wait, I know!' And those words are delivered like a ladder
upon which one may climb into the Attic of Silence.

-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-
-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-

DAN:


All appearance of or expressed belief in separation is
merely appearance and expressed belief - appearances and
beliefs have their place in the scheme of things, and
reality remains as always. Realizing this, you are free to
say what you will, assert or deny as you wish.



GLO:

If you understand, things are just as they are.
If you do not understand, things are just are they are.

Sooooo, besides being free to say anything, what are the
other "advantages" of thinking you understand?

-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-
-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-
-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-

BECKY:

It seems that the popular myth is that once a person is
'enlightened' suffering is ended.
Well, I was wondering if it wasn't really the other way
around. How about once enlightenment, your suffering
increases because now you can feel the suffering of the
whole world, not just your own little part. The difference
is once enlightened, you don't have to hold onto it for dear
life.

JAN:

In order to avoid talking about different things, the
meaning of suffering as given by the dictionary:
verb, intransitive
1. To feel pain or distress; sustain loss, injury, harm, or
punishment.
2. To tolerate or endure evil, injury, pain, or death. See
synonyms at BEAR1.
3. To appear at a disadvantage: "He suffers by comparison
with his greater contemporary" (Albert C. Baugh).
verb, transitive
4. To undergo or sustain (something painful, injurious, or
unpleasant): "Ordinary men have always had to suffer the
history their leaders were making" (Herbert J. Muller).

Regarding 1. there won't be a change; pain remains pain and
one won't stop crying over lost loved ones, despite knowing
"Being is one". When pricking an EO with a needle, the EO
won't proclaim the unity of needle, mind and body but
exclaim "ouch!!" The change is in 2., 3. and 4.; the notion
of enduring, advantage/disadvantage and undergoing will
change.
Knowledge by itself doesn't hurt; the identification
(imagining the victim's experience ) is what hurts; seeing
and hearing will establish the identification. The source
of identification could be called "I"; without the "I", 2.,
3. and 4. can no longer be remembered. Pain just "is" or
"isn't" and when the pain is gone, it doesn't leave an
impression (a memory of having felt pain).

>From an other angle, one IS Sat-Cit-Ananda; this isn't some
concept but an experiential fact. The transformations,
mentioned in various disciplines (Patanjali, Mahayana
Buddhism, Rosicrucianism), simply denote that "after"
enlightenment, the mortal shell (mind-body) can be
transformed to Sat-Cit-Ananda as well, in which case one is
no longer able to feel any pain. Of course this is very
rare.

>From yet another angle, one is living up to the recorded
impressions of the mind. For someone going through a
process of dying and giving up everything, the contrast with
the "first" Sat-Cit-Ananda is the highest conceivable. Such
a one will like a mad(wo)man "go after it" and nothing could
stop him/her. It usually means a sequence of samadhis that
will end with the natural samadhi. In that case, suffering
can be recognized but any identification is impossible as
the "I" is no more.

In the case of Buddha, the last impressions "before" were
strong impressions of suffering, so the recognition brought
about a strong contrast between the bliss of the "real
nature"
and the previous suffering. As the Buddha left no doubt
about "attaining" nirvana and nirvana without substratum, it
follows that he completed all transformations - no longer
able to feel any pain.

DAVE:

B said :"it seems that the popular myth is that once a
person is 'enlightened' suffering is ended.
Well, I was wondering if it wasn't really the other way
around. How about once enlightenment, your suffering
increases because now you can feel the suffering of the
whole world, not just your own little part.
The difference is once enlightened, you don't have to hold
onto it . . . "

we need to watch out we can swop ideas till the cows come
home but in doing so we only make ourselves feel better

feeling better is not good enough

enlightened - not enlightened dharama - no dharam suffering
- non suffering

. . . people let it all go.

if we focus on techniques practical stuff that will help us
look we can learn much more.

so now this could be an example:
who knows how to deal with this?
"the 10,000 things return to the one where does the one
return?"

its a kind of trick hands up (honestly now)
those people whose first thought was "I don't know".

I don't know is the starting place and you apply your
techniqies from there.
everything else is candy.

I read most of what is posted most is missing the real "I
don't know"
good new and bad news bad news = unless you find the real "I
don't know", you remain lost the good news = there's stil
time.

find a technique ask for help about the technique don't say,
"it might be this"
or, "they say this"
ask "how do I look?"

not many ask this type of question why?

-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-
-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-

ANDREW:

After a while I stop saying I don't know, it goes without
saying, how many ways can I say the same thing?
(I still say I don't know.)

Look anywhere. Ask around.
Make up techniques, try them all Get through all those
techniques Don't pay attention to anything I say.
Don't pay attention to anything you say.
Pay attention, you're speaking to me.
Techniques are like sauces or marinades, I still can't
swallow or spit.
Techniques are like sauces or marinades, I still can't
swallow or spit.
(I chew)

One asks, and looks all ways.
What else is there to do?
One stops doing, then one starts again.
The one who starts knows that s'he's not the one who stops,
but s'he is too.


-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-
-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-

==GENE POOLE==:


The question of 'a separate self' arises. Usually the
discussion dips and loops and comes back to the question.

I have no answers to this one, but a few thoughts. This is
how it occurs to me.

I am with another person, I am looking and we are talking.
Beneath or above the level of conversation, I am remembering
to observe myself. I am aware that I am observing myself,
and that I am also observing this other person, who is
observing me (but is he observing himself?). There is so
much monitoring going on, so many points being viewed and
viewed from.

Suddenly I am aware that the entire process is quite
effortless, and that what is observing, is awareness. I am
aware that I am aware of the observational powers of
awareness, and it is by awareness that I am aware of this.

For me, in this way, is the question of 'a separate self'
resolved, in the dynamic of relating, rather than in the
abstract of 'offline' considering.
Even now, I find no satisfactory way to express now, what I
'know' in the moment of actual being-with; so my point is
that it is one thing to consider this question of 'a
separate self' as a puzzle, but another to consider it while
actually being-with another. It is the dynamic
being-experience which is satisfying to me. In that
recognition, I realize the benevolence of this 'separate
self', that it is aware of itself, that it loves itself. In
this recognition, any sense of separation seems to
evaporate, leaving only warmth and good feelings.

Perhaps... this has something to do with the typical Hindu
prescription of a living Guru, as the ultimate and necessary
step of resolution in these matters. Perhaps it is the
living Guru who can recognize and thus share, the living
'truth' of Being. Perhaps also, this is how it is resolved
to overcome scriptures, with knowing.

-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-
-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-

SKYE:

Hi all that is :-)

Well I read 'Collision with the Infinite' by Suzanne Segal
in two spaced out days! My goodness. Then I gave Shojiro a
quick run down on the story and he said; there was a young
Japanese boy who was known to have experienced a similar
enlightening emptyness(what I call spontaneous combustion)
of the self but died early of unknown causes. After his
death the autopsy revealed he had died of a 'brain tumor'.
I'll see if I can get more info when Shojiro gets back.

When I commented on cancer way back I had no idea of her
life.

I have now begun Nisagadatta's 'I Am That' (a most
appropriate sequence it seems!) and have now fallen
madly/passionately in love with it. I have to laugh, here I
am loving to learn, 'Am I?' nothing (thanks Dan) and
everything and nothing and.....but why is there no pain? I
guess its all still safely tucked into my conceptual self.

I find myself in a quizzicle state often saying strange
things out loud like; 'oh shit!' and 'well I never!' or
laughing out loud when I see my ego trying to have a
tantrum....yawn, yawn ;-). Very strange, enlightenment
seems to be like meeting yourself on the road and
recognizing it is you. A meeting of the ridiculous and the
divine, an embracing of the best and worst in myself. What
is this divine illusion being played on this great clear
empty expanse with all the passion I can muster? ;-)


-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-
-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-`-

The Pathway of Nonduality

by Raphael

Chapter 5

ADVAITA VEDANTA (conclusion)


In the West, especially in the modern West, philosophy is
reserved to those who wish to 'demonstrate', through mental
and discoursive dialects, their own vision of the world and
of Being. In other words, one tries to 'demonstrate' truth
using discoursive reasoning, but we know that mental
discourse has its limits because it can only operate on the
plane of the objective and contingent. A rational,
empirical 'demonstration' of Being, for example, implies
setting oneself upon the plane of duality which, in turn,
precludes not only the 'demonstration' itself but also the
true knowledge of Being.


One may say that in the West philosophy suffers from the
typically Western consciential attitude of looking at things
from a dualistic, objective standpoint. It aims at knowing
the external object while oriental thinking aims at knowing
him who wants to know the external object.


Western philosophy is one of simple mental 'demonstration',
Eastern philosophy is one of realization.


Besides, while the Western philosopher has produced a
philosophical system of his own, often in contrast with and
in opposition to the systems of other philosophers, the
Eastern philosopher has not produced a system nor has he
claimed ownership of his enunciations.


The Advaita Vedanta (like all other darsanas) is a darsana
stemming from the Vedas, drawing from the Vedas, which
develops a 'perspective' or 'point of view' that already
existed in germ form in the Vedas. The word darsana, in
fact, is not indicative of a closed philosophical system of
thought by some solitary thinker-philosopher; its
etymological meaning is 'to look', 'to observe', 'point of
view' concerning the Vedic Scriptures, i.e., Vedas and
Upananishads Sruti). But even Greek philosophy, in its
precise meaning, was a philosophy which derived its content
from the Mysteries. The Mysteries are a branch of that
eternal Doctrine which we have called Sanatanadharma.
Orpheus, Pythagoras, Plato, Plotinus -- to name a few -- all
drew from the Mysteries. And Christianity, while availing
of the Sacred Mysteries (in the Mass, in fact, the statement
'let us celebrate the Sacred Mysteries' is made) has refused
and repudiated them. Thus, when we speak of philosophy we
refer to that Philosophia Perennis which has no history and
was not formulated by a human mind.

top of page