Click here to go to the next issue.

...reminds me of a conversation I read about between the
Dalhai Lama and a monk who had been in Tibet all these years.
The monk mentioned that he had experienced 'dangers.'
The D.L. asked what dangers he meant. The monk said, "The danger of
losing compassion for the Chinese."

Xan

_______________________________________________________________________


From: Xan

----Papaji
from Wake up and Roar

Question: "When I am concentrated on no-thought the ego
is not there, but when I return to thought the latent ego
returns."

Papaji: "In this particular case, when you entered into this thoughtless
state (from ego to egoless state) you made an effort. To arrive into
egolessness, to Self, to light, you have fastened yourself with a rope,
with the ego, by making an effort. This rope, the ego, will pull you
back. Now don’t tie. No effort and no rope. Then enter into this
effortlessness. It is already there! There is no entrance and no exit
either!

Exist and entrance are the past and the future. So I say, break the link
with this past and future. And how will you come out? Everything is
truth. Who will call you back?

There is no ego. Ego has been dumped on you by someone else. Your
parent, society and the church. That’s all. There is no ego.
Egolessness, freedom is your birthright. It is your inheritance of
happiness. This is why you seek it. Everything that you do, you do for
happiness, peace, and love."


______________________________________________________________________


from Marcia:

People who have gone ahead on the road within can lend
me a compass and a road map. Granted the map is not the
territory but it doesn't hurt does it? I have to travel the road
myself. No one can do that for me.

Five days......

The first day I went down the road and fell in a pothole
and couldn't get out. A friend came along and helped
me out.

The second day I went down the road and fell in a pothole
and thrashed around and remembered to call for help.

The third day I went down the road and fell in the pothole
and thrashed around and remembered how to get out
by myself.

The fourth day I went down the road and saw the pothole
ahead of time and avoided falling in it.

The fifth day I took a different road altogether.

______________________________________________________________________


Forget the roads. Stay Home. Home is where the Heart is.

---Harsha

_______________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________



The major part of expectations is implicit; one isn't aware of their
existence. When waking up the next day in an igloo at the North pole
instead of in your bed, you 'll know what that means. The "default"
expectation is for "life as usual" to continue. When confronted with
discontinuity, disappointment or grief follows. Living "now" means to be
aware, as opposed to "life as usual". Habit mind is tricky...

Be aware,

Jan

___________________________________________________________________


Indeed, the numerous perceptions here
at NDS, and perhaps metaphysical and
religious thought generally, may
reduce to:

1.) Neti-neti, the reductionists, having
logical conclusion in nihilism.

2.) "Yeti-yeti" <g>, the inclusionists, having
logical conclusion in radical pantheism.

and,

3.) The abiders; towards harmonious balance
of all perception.

JL

____________________________________________________________________


Marcia:

My friend has a t shirt. On one side it says:

All of the Above

and on the other side it says:

None of the Above


Sam:

The thing I like about the inclusive rather than
the exclusive is... it makes it much harder to
step on 'an ant', kill 'a spider' or eat 'a cow',
not to mention how much harder it makes it
to harm 'another'... 'human being'.


______________________________________________________________________


Truth is ...

You can 'know' your own partial aspect of Truth ..

Truth is fluid, continuous, everchanging ...

The moment you put words around fluid Truth you impose a boundary, a
separation of Truth from itself
... and so you have thought ...

Thought is not Truth ... for every thought there is opposite thought ...
for all knowledge there is a lack of knowledge ...

Learning is the aquisition of thought ...

The thought process is scientifically measureable

Truth is not measureable ... because the measurement process involves
the projection of thought which will influence that being measured ...

Study will bias thought with the interpretative filters of the student
... words will create perceptual barriers according to the learned
meanings of the words ... the word is the expression of Thought...

Truth is ...

Man created God ... from thought ...

If you had the thought ... does the thought have you ...?

The Truth always is, was, and shall be for ever more ... constant yet
changing ...

The door that needs a key is an illusion ...

From one came two, from two came three, from three came ten thousand
other things ... (Tao)

---Christopher

______________________________________________________________________


Like a finger pointing to the moon,
concepts of God-Realization may
indeed be helpful, until one is ready
to drop away all conceptualizing.

I'm beginning to realize the essence
of the Judeo-Christian *concept* of
God-Realization, and the extent it
speaks to me.

To me, the J-C concept (and perhaps
even Gnostic?) is that there is a seed
of God implanted within each of us.
(Tho 'details' of how this happens
varies...)

It is then the 'work' of a spiritual
aspirant to find that seed (or spark)of God
within, to nurture it and focus upon it such,
that it grows and expands beyond our 'imaginings',
and until we surrender life as we know it, to
that Presence radiating 'thru us'...which we
recognize to be greater than us, individually.

And for those who dare to go further, there
is the recognition that the Presence simply IS,
as identification with self falls away.

Allowing myself to simply 'sink into' this
conceptualization, which resonates so well
inwardly, I have been delighting in reading
many of Yakov Leibs postings of the Donmeh
concerning God Realization. (Many of which I
never bothered then to read, but simply filed
away. <s>)

Now as I read them, I read them much like one
who is reading a great novel....sitting on the
edge of my seat waiting for the next chapter
to begin. :-)

Currently on the Donmeh list, he is beginning another
series called, "Impediments to Knowing God."

As a background, he sent this reposting of an
earlier offering. I found it rather fascinating,
which parallels my own experience thus far:

---Melody
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From: Yakov.Leib.haKohain
Subject: [DONMEH] Opening the Window to the Tree of Life

Dear Chaverim,

There is a window between the Psyche and the Ego that is shut:

THE FIRST REASON the window remains shut is because the Ego does not
know that it is there. This is the condition of MALKHUT, the 10th
Sefirah of the Tree of Life.

THE SECOND REASON the window remains shut is because the Ego, even
knowing that it is there, does not wish to open it. This is the
condition of YESOD, the 9th Sefirah of the Tree of Life.

THE THIRD REASON the window remains shut is because the Ego, knowing it
is there and wishing to open it, does not know how to do so. This is the
condition of HOD, the 8th Sefirah of the Tree of Life.

THE FOURTH REASON the window remains shut is because the Ego -- knowing
it is there, wishing to open it, and knowing how -- is too large to pass
through to the other side. This is the condition of NETZACH, the 7th
Sefirah of the Tree of Life.

THE FIFTH REASON the window remains shut is because the Ego -- knowing
it is there, wishing to open it, knowing how, and being small enough to
pass through to the other side -- is too weak to withstand the forces it
will encounter there. This is the condition of TIFERET, the 6th Sefirah
of the Tree of Life.

THE SIXTH REASON the window remains shut is because the Ego -- knowing
it is there, wishing to open it, knowing how, being small enough to pass
through, and having the strength to withstand the forces it will
encounter on the other side -- does not know where to turn when gets
there. This is the condition of GEBURAH, the 5th Sefirah of the Tree of
Life.

THE SEVENTH REASON the window remains shut is because the Ego -- knowing
it is there, wishing to open it, knowing how, being small enough to pass
through, having the strength to withstand the forces it will encounter
on the other side, and knowing where to turn when it gets there -- has
not informed the Others of its arrival. This is the condition of CHESED,
the 4th Sefirah of the Tree of Life.

THE EIGHTH REASON the window remains shut is because the Ego -- knowing
it is there, wishing to open it, knowing how, being small enough to pass
through, having the strength to withstand the forces it will encounter
on the other side, knowing where to turn when it gets there, and having
informed the Others of its arrival -- doubts that it is really there.
This is the condition of BINAH, the 3rd Sefirah of the Tree of Life.

THE NINTH REASON the window remains shut is because the Ego -- knowing
it is there, wishing to open it, knowing how, being small enough to pass
through, having the strength to withstand the forces it will encounter
on the other side, knowing where to turn when it gets there, having
informed the Others of its arrival, and having no doubts that it is
there -- hesitates to come before the Throne of Glory. This is the
condition of CHOKMAH, the 2nd Sefirah of the Tree of Life.

THE TENTH REASON the window remains shut is because the Ego -- knowing
it is there, wishing to open it, knowing how, being small enough to pass
through, having the strength to withstand the forces it will encounter
on the other side, knowing where to turn when it gets there, having
informed the Others of its arrival, having no doubts that it is there,
and coming before the Throne of Glory -- has not yet been called by the
Holy King, blessed be He. This is the condition of KETER, the 1st
Sefirah of the Tree of Life.

Omain v'Omain,

Yakov Leib haKohain, Ph.D.


____________________________________________________________________


To cross a wide, flowing river an ant had
climbed onto the back of a water buffalo.
Half-way across the ant thought, "I don't like
having to be dependent." So he jumped off
into the swiftly moving water.

Non-dual theorists may tell you there is no river to cross,
but I am a pragmatist, not a theorist. I will do whatever
works to transform my awareness back to its natural
original condition.

The question is, what do you want? If you want to
awaken to the wholeness of yourself you will welcome
whatever comes to you for that. If you want to main-
tain an identity that you are dependent or independent,
then that is the loop in which you will remain.

If you're not sure which of the people, practices, etc.
showing up for you now will take you there, stop trying
to figure it out and rest in your heart. The songs all say it,
your heart does lead rightly.

Xan


________________________________________________________________________


This is how I see it: Nonduality doesn't exist. It's just a way of
accepting that there is something rather than nothing. It's an "as-if" -
the highest ethic. When I finally come to terms w/the fact that there's
a 'me' out there, & people & things, & women to dance with - when
I surrender, Nonduality happily gives way for the most unnoticed
creature & the most meaningless event that comes my way.

---Toon



Thank you for saying this Toon. I smiled and felt happy when I read it.
I GUESS - it may depend on whether one is coming to or going from
nonduality...and once you can give up everything else for
nonduality..you may then easily give up the "official nonduality
position" for anything that comes along.... I have no idea if this
is close to what you meant, but my mind started humming along to the
tune of "I got plenty of nothing ..and nothing's plenty for me.." It's a
catchy tune and I like it, tho perhaps totally meaningless. It certainly
requires nor expects any particular response.

---Glo

_______________________________________________________________________


Neti-neti has to be pursued until no further reduction is possible. This
means even a name like Self differs from the "real", because Self can
only make sense if there is a no-self. If a name has to be used, the
"Unnamable" is as close as one can get; I remember it from some Gnostic
writings.

From another perspective, excluding all could be an effort to paint a
picture of nirvikalpa samadhi whereas including all could be the effort
to paint a picture of sahaja samadhi. Yet these pictures are wrong,
because in nirvikalpa samadhi there isn't any thought and in sahaja
samadhi the thought of "I" won't arise; "I" is only used due to the
constraints of language. The point is, even if the pictures are "right"
from the perspective of "realizers", they can induce false concepts,
raise expectations etc.

Another way to convey this is that if everything is included, the
consequence must be that "everything included" has lost its meaning so
"inclusion" no longer exists. There is no longer a possibility to
verify; this possibility now is included as well. Likewise, when
everything is excluded, the possibility to verify this is excluded so
exclusion doesn't exist. Again, this shows both the danger and the
relative uselessness of descriptions.

---Jan
______________________________________________________________________

The following exchanged is repeated from yesterday, and expanded upon by
Dan...

It was stated:

...objective reality is demonstratable from the perspective of
relationship. For example, if you gather together a thousand people, and
they all observe a tree and agree that the tree is there, it can be
surmised that at the very least SOMETHING is there. In fact, that is
how human beings come by their idea of objective reality -- through
relationship with others. Without that relationship, all would be
subjective.


Andrew responded:

This is not objectivity, it's inter-subjectivity, and there are
fundamental assumptions underlying it. -Reality is assumed to present
itself to the individual such that the individual and the observed
object are distinct and separate. However, the experience of many is
that on deeper examination this subject object distinction fades away.
-It is also assumed that underlying this apparent reality, there is a
purely abstract rational construct, which is then called 'reality' and
what is perceived is called 'appearance', then if many individuals agree
about appearance it is assumed to reflect reality.

Also there is group pressure, we learn to see things as others see them,
and anyone who does not is considered crazy or lost in fantasy or
hopelessly romantic and ignored. There is no logical basis for saying
that because all agree on a thing it is any less subjective than if only
one perceives it.


Dan responds:

When doing research from an intersubjective perspective, it is
considered very useful to gather data from diverse perspectives of a
situation. This kind of "objectivity" is called "triangulation,"
probably because the process is similar to taking measurements from
three perspectives to determine a position. The goal of this
triangulation isn't to try to say what is "really there," but to form a
more comprehensive picture of the multiple realities inherent in a
situation. The researcher or researchers then integrate these data into
a hopefully useful research perspective.

Thus, intersubjectivity does have its own kind of "objectivity."
Subjectivity and objectivity arise in relation to each other. Consensus
plays a part in "reality formation," as does the purely individual
subjectivity and its "reality formation." If there were no consensus
about Ramana Maharshi, none of his views would have been transmitted and
no one would be discussing him. For me, relationship is indeed an
important aspect of reality formation, and Relationship and One are
not-two. I don't take any of these relationally formed realities as
ultimate "Reality," to me collective or individual, and objective or
subjective - reality perceptions are always "the past." Yet, without
the past, we would not be having this discussion, so "the past" has its
uses, just as illusion expresses creativity of One.

top of page