Click here to go to the next issue.

The following is delivered into our palms by John Metzger:

St. Kevin and the Blackbird

"And then there was St. Kevin and the blackbird.
The saint is kneeling, arms stretched out, inside
His cell, but the cell is narrow, so

One turned-up palm is out the window, stiff
As a crossbeam, when a blackbird lands
And lays in it and settles down to nest.

Kevin feels the warm eggs, the small breast, the
tucked
Neat head and claws and, finding himself linked
Into the network of eternal life

Is moved to pity: now he must hold his hand
Like a branch out in the sun and rain for weeks
Until the young are hatched and fledged and flown.

And since the whole thing's imagined anyhow,
Imagine being Kevin. Which is he?
Self-forgetful or in agony all the time

From the neck on out down through his hurting
forearms?
Are his fingers sleeping? Does he still feel his
knees?
Or has the shut-eyed blank of underneath
Crept up through him? Is there distance in his head?
Alone and mirrored clear in love's deep river,
'To labour and not to seek reward' he prays,

A prayer his body makes entirely
For he has forgotten self, forgotten bird
And on the riverbank forgotten the river's name."

--Seamus Heaney
____________________________________________________________________

NOTICE OF CHAT SESSION:

Hi All...

Big ChatFest on Sunday, noon, Pacific time.

See you all there!

We will be discussing the upcoming 'ZeroFest' gathering...
bring creative ideas!

Beyond Y2K...

On to Y2OK...

==Gene Poole==

For anyone who is new to chat, you might want to go to the
following link and check it out.

<a href="http://dragon.minopher.net.au/WebEd/protocol.htm">

The chat room itself is at

<a
href="http://www.eScribe.com/religion/nondualitysalon/chat">

Thanks for organizing this, Gene.

--Jerry
______________________________________________________________________

ERIC:

I wanted to share here the experience which just occurred
within me, these last few moments.
Another, an acquaintance of little more than a few weeks of
internet connection, opened, a door, of such profound
experience, that gifting gentleness, and power.

And in this place of speaking, and thusly furthering a
sharing from friend to friend, I wish to attempt to remind
all of us why we have come to this list.

I am simply talking through a dream, until a connection is
in actually, realized. This happened for me tonight in the
chat room. The *server* is now gone, and yet their link
remains *active*. Recent objection to banter and rants is
clearly understood from this place of pervasive stillness.
I, a fully licensed trickster, has just momentarily bowed
out. The immensity of all this is not lost on me.

I did not come here for any other reason than to increase
perceived Light, and offer my life force toward *helping*
other's awakening. What a surprise, to be assisted by
another, myself! In love, truly humbleness, shines. And
thanks to all of us here, dearly including those on
sabbaticals, I am finding myself further humbled,
unbelievably, yet again.

This occurs to me as an invention, and natural result, of
the Complete Sum of our energies, from seekers to Old Hags,
list rulers to drop-ins.

I float on a momentum created waterway of care, and freely
offered Love.

It inspires in myself, that far beyond me. I wished to
give...and yet I received.

Stay! Awaken!
Blessed Hotel.

We are all so very beautiful, round here.

Eric S. Laing Good Morning Loves~

___________________________________________________________________

PHIL:

What is this "human mind" which is so powerful as to eclipse
nonduality?
I am not so sure I believe in "human mind". I posted a view
of "mind"
some time back that got lost in the ozone of this list (no
response).
What is called "mind" is a subtle energy, which is creative
in essence.
Mind does not exist over against the nondual, but openly or
obliquely manifests the One. It is the play of
Shiva/Shakti, and there are no separate or separative powers
as against That. All that is is consciousness/energy.
Consciousness is energy and energy is consciousness.
Neither mind nor body nor soul nor personality exist apart
from That. Realizing is That. Non-realizing is That. Use
the mind recursively and see what it means.

______________________________________________________________________
PHIL:

How can you be so sure that you are not now in the "other
place" of which you speak? "Mars and Earth" are just a
perspective. From the point of view of the whole solar
system, there is no difference.

This did remind me of a PBS special about Rumi I watched
last night.
Rumi said somewhere that language-use is a mark of
separation from the Source. But what if separation is
impossible? What if "separation" is only a "leela" or
divine trick and the ineluctable reality is that You are
That always and everywhere?

___________________________________________________________________

JOHN METZGER:

Am I even close, to surmise that nonduality might be a
"perfection" of one's point of view, but not necessarily of
one's personality? From my lowly discursive vantage-point,
can the same question be asked of what is called
enlightenment? Do I need to "see" nondualistically to
evolve toward or realize a state of being unconditionally
loving?
What is an example of the most loving, most aware being of
duality? Does 'it" depend on how I cut the Christ-mind, "I
and the Father are one," according to my own petty measure?
What can an ol' hillbilly do?

I saw Bo Diddly at one of those Everly Brothers festivals
one year in Central city. One more lesson in nonduality.

____________________________________________________________________

HANS:

This is my meditation. I totally ignore whatever arises.
Whatever arises is only a story and nothing more. A bunch
of words or pictures. If I would pay any attention to it, I
would get caught up in it. Just not worth it. I just stay
within this feeling of "existence". The "I" is still there,
but is not filtering anymore. It feels as if my attention
is being drawed to a certain "non-place" and whatever arises
just falls into it and vanishes. Very difficult to explain
in words.

____________________________________________________________________

LITTLE B:

Thank you Hans for the courage to write and send this
message. It is of great encouragement and help to little
b. The messages floats close to my heart.

Jean Klein is a very meaningful teacher for this mean little
spark.

Some excerpts that I found in "The Ease of Being"...

"Once you give the body a chance to be body, once you stop
projecting patterns, the unconditioned nature of your body
comes up in your awareness."

"In waiting without expectation, your real life appears.

"Heidegger calls this way of seeing "waiting without
waiting." JK-- "objectless waiting"

"You must lose yourself in objectless waiting. When you do,
you give up taking, you give up doing, you give up
creating. Then life spontaneously creates in you." "But
when this happens, there is nobody to whom it happens.
In timeless awareness there is nobody."

Giving all objects their freedom.
I return to stillness and silence.
In this I discover that I am Free.
_____________________________________________________________________

JAN:

Is is quite possible to "arrive" at nonduality without
having any knowledge of it. As this is the exception, it
cannot be made into a system or belief but the exception is
fundamental; recognition of "what is" will happen
automatically when awareness is (temporarily) freed from
conditioning. No quest, no seeking, no meditation, no
belief and unlearning instead of learning. I won't say that
is easy difficult or anything else:
it has happened this way and the biography of Ramana
Maharshi shows one of such examples; probably there are
many.

"Awareness temporarily freed from conditioning" is likely to
be a very inexact term. If the "first flash" is untainted,
one knows immediately "this is it" and one will go after it
no matter what it takes. Intuition will cry out loud what
to do and what shouldn't so again, no quest, seeking or
belief but spontaneous meditation and learning by
experience. This will result in a second "flash" with
permanent relief (from the "I"). As nondual only means "not
two" I hope it is clear. It still isn't the end of the road
but the wheel is halted.

Just for the sake of argument for those "not +knowing+ to be
there already" this is described as simultaneous living in
two worlds, the immovable kingdom of heaven and the world of
sense objects, or as a "dual, simultaneous consciousness":
one of the changeless Brahman and one of Maya.

Although the foundation of nondualism can be found in
scriptures, the foundation of the foundation is the pathless
path and direct experience.
P.S. One might ask why the "first flash" is for some so
bright as to see the "goal" at one glance. If this wasn't
possible, again that would mean a cause to "arrive" and the
need of a path to "go". So the question could be rephrased
as "how does one know for sure to have dropped all
conditioning?" and the answer to that is " one can only know
when taking leave from life in the act of dying". This is
rather serious and one won't laugh until the "first flash".
Interestingly, in Italy there has been a monastery where the
monks were sleeping in coffins. There isn't a description
of their sadhana though...

___________________________________________________________________

PEON:

If peon has not experienced there is not a cow in Texas nor
a guitar in Tennessee, but by equal odds peon can never
expect to help another experience, nor does peon really much
care.

Being in agreement with Richard Bucke of Cosmic
Consciousness recognition, there is not any feeling or
thought, that such is, or even could be, a consideration.

That such experience is spontaneous is of no doubt to peon.
That it could well fit the definition of an accident is also
of little doubt. I do however believe (as differentiated
from "know") that actions may be taklen which enhance the
probability of having such accident.

Peon is not here to teach anyone anything, nor does peon
care to do so. I am here for the sole purpose of being in
the company of other souls who are either experiencers or
interested in such because life at my age is, in retirement,
finally allowing time for such activity, and this media
allows me to reach into places sorely missed and unavailable
in earlier days.

If it becomes apparent to me that my presence is not desired
I shall, as I have in the past, depart.

My attitude is such that if I can learn from anyone, great.
If anyone perchance learns anything from this simple minded
experiencer, that too is fine. If not, so be it.

My natural state is a very joyful one, simple, open,
truthful, not obsesssed by doubts but trusting this Universe
which has labored endlessly for billions of years that I
might be sitting here tonight pecking with two feeble
fingers on this keyboard.

That we are here is proof enough for me that all is Miracle
and worthy of our acceptance, and it is evident to me that
creation requires a Creator. Beyond such, I have, as I have
stated, experienced the Creator. Belief in that by anyone
else carries no weight nor does disbelief. What is is.

______________________________________________________________________

==GENE POOLE==

Hi All,

Well, it is me again, or still. Sometimes I feel like I am
fielding balls from a hundred batters. No matter.

I want to assure you that no matter what heavenly postion
you may assume that I assume myself to be holding, that I am
actually right in here with you, in both mud and light. I
truth, I enjoy both.

I have often revealed my longing for direct honesty. Yet to
do so, invariably brings forth protests that I accuse others
of dishonesty.
Similar to my statement of my own style, which elicited
protests that I was issuing edicts. Why are these things an
issue for me?

I am unsure of others, but my own goal is to clear obstacles
to unassuming clarity. For me, this means to state myself,
rather than my 'beliefs'. I am not dogma, I am me. If I do
not present dogma, it cannot be objected to.
But if I present me, no matter what style or words used,
objection is possible. And this is good. Why? Because at
the base of it, it is not belief or dogma which will 'rule',
but instead, an abiding, unshakeable 'sense of self'. It is
in the security of myself, that I propose to write here.

I note that myself is not an idea, although the idea of
myself does exist as an idea. I experience myself as an
unseen, unknown (usually! Not always!) quality. If anyone
has an idea of what I am, and they do not approve of that,
they my certainly point that out to me, in their own way.
But I offer that if one actually does 'know' what I am, that
one also knows the 'me' as being the 'same me' which that
one is. So then there is no contention.

Contention occurs around ideas in discussion; it also occurs
around evaluation of other's behaviour and the assumptions
behind those evaluations. Hurt feelings abound; it is usual
to find that one who usually is 'sensitive' will strike
'back' if it is assumed that there has been a 'strike' in
the first place, as though being struck is an allowance to
strike.

I have written many of these letters; this is the first one
that I am sending. I do not wish to clog the bandwidth with
my personal whinings, especially if I think that I will be
seen as some vast pontificating stuffed shirt, or worse.
(heaven forbid!)

I ask you... what is going on with you? Do you enjoy the
tensions of unexpressed anxiety and fear? Why do you
tolerate it? I propose that it is tolerated, because in
their own way, each has a vested interest in maintaining
it. It serves to 'shake out' loyalties and provokes
side-taking; in that regard, it is also interesting to note
that some will placate, and others will fan flames. But no
matter, as long as the game continues, it is all grist for
the mill. It is only the family-game of 'we do not talk
about these things here' which enables ongoing unstated or
understated tensions in a population; someone has something
to gain, and someone has something to lose, so the
conspiracy is to keep the stressors going, to provoke the
evolution of short-term gains.

I state honestly, that I love every one of us; this NDS is a
great thing, and I want to keep it going. I do not want it
to degenerate into a personality cult; either by praise of
personality or by condemnation of personality. It can work
either way.

I say, beware pickpockets!

Figure that one out.

As I said, I do not usually send these letters which I write
to myself, to help myself clarify my own thoughts. But this
one I am sending, rather than to the trash. Put it there
yourself if that is where you feel it belongs.
Comment invited.

"Community is the sharing of the burden of personality"


______________________________________________________________________
NONDUAL DON QUIXOTE

from ZEN IN ENGLISH LITERATURE (1941)

R.H. BLYTH

from the PREFACE

Zen is the most precious possession of Asia. With its
beginnings in India, development in China, and final
practical application in Japan, it is today the strongest
power in the world. It is a world-power, for in so far as
men live at all, they live by Zen. Wherever there is a
poetical action, a religious aspiration, a heroic thought, a
union of the Nature within a man and the Nature without,
there is Zen.

Speaking generally, in world culture we find Zen most
clearly and significantly in the following: in the ancient
worthies of Chinese Zen, for instance, Eno and Ummon; in the
practical men of affairs of Japan, Hojo Tokumune, for
example, and in the poet Basho; in Christ; in Eckehart, and
in the music of Bach; in Shakespeare and Wordsworth. 'Zen
in English Litarature' embraces the literature of Zen in
Chinese and Japanese, the Chinese and Japanese classics, and
the whole extent of English literature, with numerous
quotations from German, French, Italian and Spanish
literatures. Don Quixote has a chapter all to himself; he
is for the first time, I believe, satisfactorily explained.
He is the purest example, in the whole of world literature,
of the man who lives by Zen; but Sancho Panza also is not so
far from the Kingdom of Heaven as perhaps even his author
supposed.

_______________________________________________________________________

The Pathway of Nonduality

by Raphael

Chapter 7

The Three States of Being

Q. What do the three states of Being and the Fourth,
mentioned in the Mandukya Upanishad, mean? There is also
mention of the three worlds of manifestation; do these
correspond to the three states? Some speak of seven worlds;
is this perhaps in disagreement with the teaching of the
Upanishads?


A. Every world can be subdivided into other worlds or
spheres of existence; therefore mention is made of three,
five, seven and even ten worlds. The number is of little
importance. It depends upon the point of view from which
one wishes to examine things.


For example, the physical plane may be taken as a whole or
divided into its solid, liquid and gaseous dimensions; we
know that, within each of these live and move entities which
are different from one another. Thus in the 'liquid'
dimension, although it belongs to the gross-physical domain,
a world quite apart from the solid one lives and moves and
may even be considered as a world unto itself with its own
specific qualities. In any case, we can say with the
Mandukya Upanishad:


"All this is surely Brahman. This atman is Brahman and
atman has four quarters (pada).


"The first quarter is vaisvanara, whose sphere of action is
the waking state....


"The second quarter is taijasa (the luminous), whose sphere
of action is the state of dreaming....


"The third quarter is prajna, whose sphere of action is deep
sleep....


"The sages believe that the Fourth...is invisible,
non-acting...."


The Mandukya is defined as that Upanisad which alone
synthesizes the whole of Vedanta teaching. We find in it
the enunciation of the three states of Being as well as the
Fourth which refers to the metaphysical and transcendent
state.


All branches, both Western and Eastern, of the Tradition
recognize the fact that the one Being expresses Itself, on
the plane of manifestation, in different vital states, in
different existential forms or in various modes.


One may also say that Being expresses Itself in various
vibratory states of consciousness, both at the formal and
formless levels. It follows that we have to distinguish the
existential plane from the entities that live and are in it.


Let us take as an instance the dense physical plane, that
is, the plane on which we are experiencing our present
lives. It is a plane of existence. It is formed by solid,
liquid and gaseous vibrations, etc., which belong to the
gross plane of vaisvanara, in all these vibratory state, as
we already mentioned, there are entites that live, move, a
way of being, millions of entities that express their
qualities through well-defined forms; in the gaseous state,
or in the air, as many millions more of entities carry on
their existence and their being, and so on.


When the Mandukya Upanisad speaks of vaisvanara it refers to
our bodily state, our physical being, our gross state, which
corresponds to the gross universal plane Being (Virat).
Therefore we have that visva, or the entity identified with
visva, experiments [sic] upon a portion of the Virat plane.


Visva is the individual entity; Virat is the universal
Entity; therefore Virat is not only our planet but the
totality of the worlds that express themselves upon the
gross plane.


The sphere of action, of manifestation of the jiva-visra
(the soul embodied upon the gross plane) is that which man
normally calls waking -- naturally as compared with dream
and sleep. Through this state of consciousness and upon the
existential plane of Virat, the human jiva has various kinds
of experience.


This state is characterized by ahamkara (the sense of ego),
by manas (the empirical projective mind), by kama (desire in
its indefinite expressions) and by the gross physical body
(sthulasarira or annamayakosa, body made of food, or, in the
correspondent's case, 'cheetomayacola'). Therefore the
jiva, by means of appropriate bodies of manifestation, with
their respective senses and faculties, experiences the
vaisvanara sphere.


The world of the bodies-visra is a world of needs, tension
and conflict because it is essentially a world of want,
poverty and non-being.


But besides the dense physical plane, the jiva-entity
experiences with its subtle body (lingasarira) another
existential plane, that of Hiranyagarbha.


(to be continued)


_____________________________________________________________________

SKYE:


In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a
lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a
bad move...

top of page