Click here to go to the next issue.

Sitting by the fireside with Dave
(Manchine)

Tony: "All thought may stop but that
still leaves the 'feeling'. Is that
not still duality? "

Dave: My focus starts in "me", then
comes the "feeling" my focus begins
to broaden. I start "understanding the
feeling". In my daily life I
start to immerse myself in the
"feeling", not just when I'm
meditating,
but the joy and the pain becomes my
"OM". I begin to flow with the
current of the others, I start to
become the other, I become absorbed in
the web that moves around me. I loose me, I touch every strand of being
I can, By God I Am.

+++++
Annie: "I get the feeling that there is no such thing as mind... just a
label to Put on our spontaneously occuring, separate thoughts... not too
sure if this Is true though...

Dave: A label is a product of the mind.

My daughter came to me one day when she was about 6, "Daddy, daddy I can
talk in my head", proceeding to do it she said, "see?".

I had a dream once, when I was working night shift and sleeping in the
day. It was a rather lengthy dream, I had found a bomb and a group had
gathered trying to figure out what to do. I put to investigating, to see
if I could disarm it. As I opened the box, it blew up, fortunately
waking me, in time to realize that the bang had come from outside my
bedroom window! I was sure that the dream had lasted at least ten
minutes, but I would have had to construct it in an instant.

Our mind is full of tricks. There are things going on that we don't even
know about. It's true however that we have internal conversations. How
strange!! Who are we speaking to and why? Base thoughts, the
inspirations, happen in a flash with amazing detail, but then we
vocalize them. The moment we vocalize, we fix the thought, but we all
know that vocalization is clumsy. The thought is no longer free. What's
more, other inspirations can start arising from the clumsy
interpretation of the first, etc. etc.

What interests me is where do the base inspirations come from, the
virgins so to speak. How do we communicate those without vocalizing?
Action? Even that requires decisions (thought). Hmmm...

One thing that would help, is that in communicating that we don't get so
hung up on words, as transmitter or receiver. Well, you understand that
one. And that personal importance doesn't color the thought.

+++++

I'm not sure, don't have my PhD, but just from "feeling", I sense that
stilling the mind has it's function up to a point. Some of the things
I've been getting into here recently on the list seem to be accentuating
that.

It seems that stilling the mind could be one of the best tools to
introduce someone to awareness, and to perhaps lead them through a
transition. Once the process takes hold, mind stilling is sort of self
feeding and perhaps there comes a critical point when the emphasis
should be shifted to expanding awareness. Once I began to broaden my
awareness, loosing me, there seemed to be an increase in activity, yet
the silence became more exquisite. A focus on stillness, silence, in
those moments, I feel, stops the process.

+++++

** "The Giant Sleeps"

It's 09:45 PST and the Giant Sleeps, but its conscience is still alive,
bubbling away from another time and place in the here and now.

NOW
+++++
** "Dreaming"

Wait a minute, what's this?

We are dreaming, we are asleep and we are dreaming. Do you feel it?
Where will we go. Can I disolve the physical..? In a dream... blackness.
Nothing, no... a vibration, I feel us, wha... fwaa, fwaa, fwaa...
another place in the same blackness... its, it's shimmering, I'm
expanding... but how, there's nothing. .....OMMMM I'm inside, I'm
touching everything. My God.. I AM. I love you.

+++++
** "Now "

We are all at this very moment, seated in front of a computer, a concept
is taking form. It is happening now. Before your very eyes. The concept
is timeless. I am understanding this and it is me, it is us. The hands
on the keyboard and mouse are mine. They are mine. Do you understand
what I am saying. It is me who is perceiving this, and that said it is
us, in the here and now.

** On how to 'listen' to NDS posts:

Mary: some posts feel to me as if there is a battle going on and the
posts a battlefield. Maybe I don't like confrontations but it feels
like it's "I'm right, you're wrong" kind of thing. Or maybe I'm
taking all this too seriously and you're all having fun?

Dave: We're all right! It's just discussion. We really love each
other.... don't we?

Jerry: There has to be a sense that you are coming from freedom and
you need to hear that others are coming from freedom. Allow
yourself to enjoy their freedom. It is your freedom. Feel
the freedom others are coming from. Don't focus on your
constriction. Keeping open will allow others to keep open.

** Harsha On vigilant intention

The experience of celestial visions, astral travel, various Samadhis
etc. are common to all yoga paths. These are more or less a function of
spiritual practices initiated by the aspirant. Loss of body
consciousness, while remaining aware is typical of these experiences.
Mental consciousness is retained in order to have the experiences.
From a nondual perspective such spiritual and psychic experiences are
not given undue importance, but the subtle attentional effort remains
introverted falling back upon itself. When through Grace, the intent,
the attention, and the effort along with the mental consciousness are
absorbed, Self is Recognized by It Self as Pure Awareness without any
support what so ever. Self is Always Complete and Whole transcending
experiences of every type including all celestial and super natural
experiences. Therefore the aspirant who has no other goal then Self
Realization remains utterly indifferent to the glamor associated with
spirituality and seeks absolutely nothing and remains aware of the
Eternal Eye within the "I".

**Hans on the effects of points of view

In my point of view :) any point of view creates a viewer separate from
what is viewed and there starts the problem. In comes the thinker, the
observer. The only solution to this problem seems to be to realize on an
all including level, that inside and outside are the same, the thinker
and the thought are the same, the observer and the observed are the
same. This means that awareness must be absolutely choiceless,
but is that feasible ? I think not. You can not do it, because it is
your very doing that creates the observer. So it has to happen to you,
independently from your doing. I think this is called grace. This does
not mean we have to sit still, I mean we have to grow to a point where
insight takes over and we have to be ready to let it happen !

As i see it, any action is bound co create an image of itself and we
tend to get lost in the image. I very clearly feel the image i have of
myself when i am relating with other people. This image comes in between
me and the other. So i am not really relating with the other person, at
best i am relating with myself.

Sometime ago i realized that the image of an object that is projected
onto our brain, only appears to be continuous but it is not. It is like
the image of a computer monitor. Our brain must be rebuilding the image
all the time ! Billions or even more pixels every second. Amazing, isn't
it.


** Melody being nutty with Hans

Hans: I feel flattered to be wise and funny but let me assure you that
if i tell the same things to people around me, they will not agree with
you. They will ask me what the hell are you talking about are you going
out of your mind or what.

Melody: Yes, I know what you mean. But that's the
beauty of it all.

Like the commercial says ........

"sometimes you feel like a nut,
sometimes you don't".

A pecan tree bears nuts simply because it is it's
nature to do so..... not because it 'intends' for
its bounty to be appreciated and consumed by
someone else.

I found what you were doing 'naturally'
not only delicious, but nutritious as well.

But don't let it go to your head. Tomorrow
I may have a taste for something else. :-)

** More of Dan's exquisite guidance to Mary and all of us..

Mary: I've read every response to the I Am question and am
grateful for everone's input. I guess to me now it means I am
existence/life that is causeless. or I am just because I am. The
reason I am questioning the reality of I AM as an absolute Reality is
because logically, I think, if I as consciousness is all there is , as
Ramesh says, then I would not be aware of myself.

Dan: This is logical. So the question arises, what is the next
step? Where do you go that is not based on the words of "others",
the forms which have been provided simply to point to something
that isn't conceptual, where form and formless meet and are one?

Mary: And I'm not talking about Mary being aware of herself but
as awareness being aware of itself.) Because to be aware of myself I
would need to see myself as different from something else. So if I am
aware of myself, I must be separate from something else and not whole,
not one. If I'm not whole then I am not Reality as I see it. So,l I
feel that perhaps I Am is not the absolute reality.

D: Right. How can a conceptualizable perception, given form as a
verbal statement, be "absolute reality"? This is true also for the term
"absolute reality," just as it is true for "I Am". "I Am" is suggestive.
It suggest pure unsplit being with no other. What is needed, now, is the
experiential reality, that which doesn't depend on suggestions,
associations, or perceived qualities.

M: Nisargadatta said in his book Conscousness and the Absolute
"Presently you are this "I Am", but this "I Am" is not the truth.
Whatever you are prior to the appearance of "I Am", that is your true
nature." Another of his books, Prior to Consciousness, says Before the
idea "I Am" sprouted, you are, but you don't know you are." Interesting
books and the quotes I gave you are taken out of context, I know that,
but it was these books plus A Course in Miracles that talks of a split
Mind that gave me food for thought and led me to question whether
Reality stops with the I Am.

D: Mary, these books you have read influenced your thought process.
You resonated with concepts in these books, and your resonation
allowed you to construct a new framework for questioning and for
forming insight. It seems here that the question then becomes,
can I release myself from the contraints of my own thought? Can
I release the need for a framework for understanding? Can I release the
"me" that is at the center of the thinking process and the framework I'm
using to question? What is my direct immediate experience, in its
totality and wholeness, unsplit by thought -- not referenced to any
one's words, to any memory image, any expectation, any bodily
reactivity, or any emotional response or need? Unless I learn directly
from the very depth of "who I am," I will stay on the surface, regulated
by others' words, concepts, or by the reactivity of the body-mind.

M: p.s. I'm aware that I may also be wrong. Anyway, all pointers
indicate to go within and be silent and I need to listen to my Inner
Voice.

D: It's not a question of what is right or wrong. It's a question
of what is immediately experientially here. Don't go within or without,
don't go anywhere. Hear the silence that is already present and is who
you are. To hear this silence, no inner voice is needed, in fact no
inside or outside is needed. The fact is, this silence is omnipresent
as awareness. It is missed because we look for it, because we imagine
it, because we think it is something other, somewhere else.
We do these things and think these things to preserve the status quo
of the body-mind system, which wants its center and wants to repeat
its past within its present. The program of the body-mind is not
only programmed to repeat, but to "open". It opens when there is
readiness. Readiness can't be forced, and occurs naturally when
the time is right.

M: Thanks, Dan, for your reply. I'm waiting for experience to happen.
I don't know how to release myself from the constraints of my thoughts.

** Joyce sharing a quote and her reflections

I came across a quote from the Bon master Shardza Tashi Gyaltsen in
Heart Drops of the Dharmakaya that says it better than I can.

"The practitioner is contemplation." (thats nice, aye?) Whatever the
practitioner experiences, whatever comes is an experience for the
practice happiness, bliss, whatever. He or she does not even care if
the thoughts are racing - there is no hope or path - so thoughts are
left as they are. That is the method of practice. Sometimes there are
raging emotions, like anger, or sorrow or whatever, and the practitioner
does not care. They are left just as they are. This is the teaching.
Not far away from the natural state, as if he or she is in space -
whatever is done, no traces are left behind - (the analogy of the mirrow
and its reflections is a good one) Everything is left as it is."

So - this is the Buddhist practice of Trekcho - and you attempt to keep
practioner as contemplation as described - and part of the practice is
not to get unseated by what does arise - for instance - bliss or clarity
or visions - and what will on occasion unseat me - the sheer terror or
egolessness that arises as everything reveals itself as empty. But
actual, experiential recognition of things arising as having the same
basis as our true self or the non dual state, intrinsic awareness, is
necessary as practice otherwise mind just clings to a conceptual
vagueness about non duality as object. One of the points in Trekcho is
that the student makes a strong action - a decision - to do this
practice totally otherwise there is doubt and indecision and no energy
to realize the practice.

"Whatever appears or comes, everything is the reflection of wisdom;
everything is like an ornament of the natural state and is
self-liberated. All the visions appear as wisdom. Therefore one must
decide to enter 'the Path of the Equal Taste.

top of page