Click here to go to the next issue.

Jerry provides the solution to all
problems and of course someone finds a
problem with his answer.:)

How is nonduality involved in dealing
with
> > personal problems. For me, it means
seeing what can't be
> > influenced or changed. It also
means knowing that that which
> > cannot be influenced or changed --
the stainless space of
> > Gene Poole -- is infinite
potential, which means you can
> > always start over from a position
of strength. There are no
> > problems if one abides in the
unchanging. There's only humor
> > and a looking forward to death. I know I'm expressing an
> > ideal, but it can be approached, if one meditates and
> > focuses on who they are.


> There may be no problems but there is no life either.
>
> How about abiding in the space between the unchanging
> and the ever-changing?
>
> Marcia

Thanks for coming back. You seem different, Marcia, very,
how do you say? ... Salon .... very, how do you say? ...
nonduality chic. In other words, great posts from an
individual being.

Yes, I'm agreeing with you in my own way. That is the gift,
to be able to abide the craziness, the swing from unchanging
to changing. At some point the swing or pendulum stops for
an instant, stands perfectly straight and free.

Jerry
~~~~~~~~~~~

Harsha (Dr. Harsh K. Luthar) wrote:

> And Marcia, you do sound different.
> Did you get a hair cut?

Marcia:

Now this is what I was looking for yesterday when you
went all soft on me. :-)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

(Editor notes:Of course, this is what all women are looking for, a guy who
notices her new "look" AND takes out the garbage! See below, as Jerry continues
to solve everyone's problems with nothing more than those little twisties and
gives a whole new meaning to airbags.)

> >Jerry: [snip]
> >It's a terrible thing to believe what people tell you. Maybe
> >that's what lies at the heart of everyone's problems.
>
> D: What a useful observation, Jerry!
> How much unnecessary tension, conflict, and distress
> is the result of believing what others tell me,
> *and* what I tell myself is "believable"?
> These "minds" are programmable - we're all entranced
> and entrenched in programming - yet
> perhaps also able to relinquish our programming.
> What a useful practice - simply to discard any
> unnecessary reference to beliefs about
> anything - including the belief that I need
> to discard beliefs!
>
> Love,
> Dan
>

Hi Dan,

Thank you. And yet it seems tools are needed to accomplish
the discarding. Like garbage bags, garbage pails, those
plastic ties kept in the little drawer with old batteries,
trucks, men, landfills. One can imagine the electronic
equivlant. In time the amount of garbage decreases, and the
day it stops, maybe that's when a person is identified as
self-realized or enlightened. Who knows? Maybe the
enlightened one is throwing out garbage bags filled with
air, just to hang around the pile. Now we know what O.H. is
doing there.

Jerry

DAN: Could be, could be, Jerry.
There are all kinds of tools in this world. Sometimes, a tool may not
look like a tool.

For example, bacteria may be a very useful tool. Who do you think breaks
down all that garbage in the garbage pile? Bacteria help return
everything to its original state - Nature's little helpers.
Most people don't like bacteria much,
but if it weren't for bacteria, we
wouldn't be here talking.

So, truly, bacteria are the angels
of this planet.

We all have something to learn
from bacteria about the breaking down
of garbage. We need to find our
"inner bacteria" to break down
our "inner garbage piles"
to "original substance".


~~Hey, you know my little friends!! They come for tea often. They grieve
for all of us who drag around our mind-made garbage and do not throw it
on pile! If you look very closely, you can see the drops of compassion
rolling down their little spines. That is why they are called,
"bacteria."

,^))
(i know, i know, very bad. smack those wrinkled fingers!)

i sure appreciate ramblings from you two Wise Guys (meant in most
positive manner imaginable.) Maybe you stop by pile sometime, share pot
of Airbag Tea and Angel Scones - very fine.

love you, dears,
oh
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Re: Marcia/Self and Other and Sharing

>
> But now that you ask I have to admit I have questions around
> the topic. Experiences I am unclear on. So bear with me as
> I poke around from various positions.

Gene: OK

> Well, first I was meeting for awhile with someone who supposedly
> could help me come to understand some things. And he did actually.
> The first time I met with him I was talking allot but I felt this tug
> coming from somewhere else. Then for a moment or two we
> were talking on two levels at once. I felt my lips move and heard
> myself speak and go on about whatever it was I was talking about
> and at the same time I was totally "caught" in his gaze almost like
> a rabbit in headlights. We even smiled at each other from this
> position while I kept talking. I felt like I was being "fed".

Gene: Yes. I am quite familiar with this 'phenomenon'; I can induce
it myself, in others.

It does happen that we are able to 'entertain' more than one
'identity' at the same time. This is a virtually untapped aspect of
human nature, but one which the most ancient of Shamanistic
practices, that of Nepalese 'Bon-Po' is quite familiar with, and upon
which the various derivations of Bon-Po expound. I refer to both
Hawaiian Huna, and the 'Teachings of Don Juan', as expounded by
Carlos Castenada ("The Way Of Seeing") IE, 'Nagualism'.

To experience this simultaneity of awareness from two subjective
points is entirely possible; it can be inflicted by one upon another
(and this is common between parent and infant child), it can be
taught, it can be learned. The 'easiest' way, though, is to be in the
presence of one who is powerful in that talent, one who has learned
that it is 'just another value-neutral aspect of Being'.

Have you ever gazed at the movements of eel-grass in a tidewater pool?

> We continued to meet for about six months and it became
> clearer that I was being "fed" something.

Gene: Yes. Your 'egoic operating system' was being 'updated'. Your
friend desired to delete several historically important infoviruses
from your system as well. Your friend wished for you to join him in
his dimension of sharing; he was feeding you, so that you would be
able to do that and to have that; he was also teaching you how to
'feed' others, by allowing you to perceive that he was doing that
very thing as he was doing it. Your friend desired to enroll you in a
certain growing tribe of free sharers. All of these free sharers
experience simultaneous point of view of all sharers, all the time;
not only that, they also experience the actuality of what author
Phillip K Dick named as 'PLASMATE', in his ground-breaking book_
VALIS_ (hint, hint).

> I experienced several
> things which he said was a much finer or higher energy than I was
> ordinarily in. For instance once while we were saying good-bye
> I was looking at him from a distance of about three or four feet
> and for a moment or two I was inside his eyes looking at me and
> inside my eyes looking at him. It was as if we were looking from
> the same place at the same thing only the same thing we were
> looking at was ourselves.

Gene: Yes... this is a fine awareness to have, to cultivate, and to
share. It is harmless. But it can be jarring... it can lead to rather
traditional paranoia, which itself is nothing more than the fierce
clinging to individual identity. Consider: If this experience was
more or less commonly had, individual identity would be 'optional'.
People could have immense fun and pleasure, 'playing in each-other'.
Sometimes, young children do this. You may remember doing it, as a
young child.

> But something about the relationship
> did not feel right. He also made noise about "mixing influences"
> and I would have to choose between the group of people I meet
> with regularly and him. I agree that mixing influences can dilute
> things and perhaps I made a mistake in choosing not to choose
> him (perhaps fear, don't know) but something wasn't right. Too
> much of a power thing.

Gene: Yes, that was an error on his part. There is nothing wrong with
'mixing influences'; in fact, I advocate it 'as a way of life',
myself. But, I think that what he was struggling to share, was the
danger of "mixing LEVELS". Each level is discrete unto itself; the
commonality of 'truths and realities' that are universal for all
levels, should not be used as an excuse for sloppy perception or
thinking. This is especially dangerous when there are goals or
attachment to goals involved.

We can find similarity (genetic and behaviorally) between a fruitfly
and a man, but we are foolish to treat one as the other.

Each level is/has 'classes of objects', and each object and each
class (category) is found in extension on all other levels, but this
does not make them equivalent. The holographical/fractal patterns of
such extension forms the basic grid of possibility, and is as far as
I know, unalterable. The function of the human brain/mind is to allow
or provoke ('to key') complete collapse of particular
object-extensions; this is referred to (Fred Allen Wolfe, Q Theorist)
as 'collapsing quantum waveforms'. To have this 'inverse telescoping'
effect is to have 'understanding'; further, if and when this occurs
for any person, it seems that the entire universe now shares this
knowledge of what was just now understood. In this way, we can see
that 'knowledge' exists in potentiality. Your friend wished to share
with you the key to conscious use of this innate human function.

> Second, there are several people who I know that contact me
> to ostensibly just hang out but we always end up talking about
> the more inner side of things. They are hungry and without
> much volition on my part I end up feeding them. I talk to them
> about my inner work and they appear to be satisfied. Sometimes
> I feel drained afterwards.

Gene: What comes through here for me is that you are dealing with
'concrete', not vampires. Your job, when confronted with concrete, is
to allow/provoke it to liquify, flow, and eventually become the
volatile fuel for your (and 'their') 'work'.

> Third, I work with a group of people. We do ordinary things like
> eat allot of meals together and tell jokes and blah, blah, blah.
> Mostly our eyes are veiled but sometimes the veils come down
> and there is a real energy exchange just for a moment or two.
> Usually cause of a minor shock of some sort or another.
> And we hold hands in a circle before each meal and there
> is an energy circle which I can feel passing around us. This
> is mutual feeding. And we meditate together and on occasion
> when I am blocked coughing or whatever I can feel a hand
> come out and lift me up. Not a real hand of course but this
> is a feeding of sorts.
>
> So what do you think?

Gene: I appreciate your description. I point out that there is a
difference between affirming tribal affiliation, and feeding.

To give is to feed another, if the other can receive. To take is to
feed oneself; approval of other is optional. To share is to openly
give and receive, simultaneously. Our nature is to be in constant
sharing; this is what is missing from 'the family way', and this is
why we all long for community.

To take the affirmation of another, be it 'good' or 'bad', is to move
in the direction of the sharing of multiple identity, as in my
discussion above. Isolation is the unfortunate byproduct of 'psychic
rape', which is virtually the blasting of flame down the 'sharing
channel' of Shushumna-Nadi; this shocking and traumatic event sets
the stage for the human world 'as we have known it'. The fact that
this channel is so tightly closed that 'Kundalini' is a rare
occurrence is the real tragedy of our human community; true
communionication/sharing can be difficult to initiate as long as the
virtual invasion of one person by another is allowed to continue.

This is why it is important to realize the reality and importance of
_boundaries_; this is what 'ego' is designed to do, but we have a
world of ego-disabled persons, most of whom are participating in the
tacit conspiracy to further the disabling of ego in very young
(preverbal) children. It is the powerful contraction of Being,
induced by parent to child, which is the stumbling-block to universal
sharing; and it is our task to make this essential science of Being
known to all, in whatever terms they can understand.

Imagine a planet of relaxed and aware people; nothing is wrong.

Imagine a planet of relaxed and aware people; nothing is wrong.

Imagine a planet of relaxed and aware people; nothing is wrong.


I will be happy to expand on any of these ideas/concepts; please
state specific detailed questions.


==Gene Poole==

[Universal Sharing: Consider the alternative]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From: xanma

" Learn to witness and to wait. Becomes as one, you and your camera, clear
as glass and selfless. The more still, the more open and clear you are -- the
more will come. Believe me: more will come that you could dream or dare."

quotation from a photograph book by Nell Dorr
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

http://www.onelist.com/subscribe/HarshaSatsangh

All paths go somewhere. No path goes nowhere. Paths, places, sights,
perceptions, and indeed all experiences arise from and exist in and subside back
into the Space of Awareness. Like waves rising are not different than the ocean,
all things arising from Awareness are of the nature of Awareness. Awareness does
not come and go but is always Present. It is Home. Home is where the Heart Is.
Jnanis know the Heart to be the Finality of Eternal Being. A true devotee
relishes in the Truth of Self-Knowledge, spontaneously arising from within into
It Self. Welcome all to HarshaSatsangha.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Tony's request for a dictionary evoked many answers. Please bear with some
repetition of his questions, as sometimes the replies only refer to certain
parts of his question, they make more sense that way.

>From: Tony O'Clery >>
>Namaste All,
>
>Could somebody please sort out the gobbledegook, and
>please tell me what the words, 'realisation',
>'enlightened', mean, to these lists?

>My understanding, up until now was that they meant the
>same thing as Moksha/Liberation/No Mind/Merging with
>the Self etc. It is confusing to my mind, yes I still
>have one.
>
>Here is where I am at, perhaps someone can tell me
>which slot I am.ha ah a aha. That comes from ekagratha
>or practising one-pointedness.
>
>I have a mind, somewhat dysfunctional, sometimes
>happy, sometimes depressed, like many who quietly
>living their lives. Not in quiet desperation as
>someone said, Lincoln?


>
>I have some spiritual and K experiences, also some
>kind of 'samadhis'. Also some kind of non dual,
>oneness type happenings. I know I am part of a whole
>and that really I am an illusion.
>
> I see that all is the universal everywhere, my dog,
>the tree everybody. So I am enlightened to that
>extent, and I realise my situation or illusion.
>
>I find the teachings of Ramanashram to be true for me.
>Also other Jnanis like Jesus, Sankara, Maharaj etc.
>All Adwaitic. However I have a Bhakti dimension as
>well.
>
>However I still have a mind and I still see the world,
>that means to me that I haven't finished the journey.
>
>
>So what do these words mean? Realisation,
>Enlightened.I know what Moksha, Maya and illusion
>mean.
>
>Om Namah Sivaya, Tony.
>

From: Greg Goode

Tony,

Like Harsha (I think) said, you are unique and authentic. And I love you,
feel your power and passion in all this. You are going to get a lot of
answers on this!!

It was Thoreau, in Walden I think, who said "The mass of men lead lives of
quiet desperation."

Here is my concept of enlightenment/nirvana, etc.

Samsara is seeing a difference between nirvana and samsara.
Nirvana is not seeing a difference between nirvana and samsara.

There is really no individualized entity to be the possessor of
enlightenment or unenlightenment. Enlightenment or its lack cannot reside
in any of the 5 koshas, because the koshas are not more than appearances in
consciousness. There is no real "X" and "Y," where we can say "X" is
enlightened and "Y" is not enlightened. If one truly believes that some
real "X" are enlightened and others are not, then there's a sticky belief
in some kind of jiva or lifestream that is the holder of enlightenment.
And what exactly would that holder be? Instead, all is light. This of
course is consistent with your traditional definition of sahaja samadhi, no
mind, no samskaras, etc.

In a conventional-teaching sense, however, enlightenment is often used as
an encouraging and motivational term. It is an inspirational way to
recognize great world-teachers, and there are many of us who would like to
emulate them. (Like Jerry, I don't have the hair for it!!) But oddly
enough, these great teachers never say that people must be vastly
influential and famous like they themselves are. No, often they rather
say, just BE. And another purpose of the term "enlightenment" is like the
ultimate goal-of-goals for the sadhaka, and interpreted each to her own.
This keeps one on steadily the path. It functions like this until it falls
away. I think Osho said, "Enlightenment is a concept for the
unelightened," a phrase which paradoxically mixes both the conventional and
esoteric levels. And then, as you know from scripture and literature,
there is often that irreversible non-moment outside of time when the whole
thing is intuited, and laughter results. I don't have the citation, but I
heard it attributed to Buddha this saying. Another saying that mixes both
the conventional and esoteric levels:

"When I was enlightened, I saw that the whole
world had always been enlightened.

With love,

--Greg
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Your idea of "no mind" is assumptive and not accurate.
There is no "merging" with the Self as we are already
*are* the Self.

There are states where mind is inactive, but these are
not and cannot be permanent. We can as beings "see"
between our thoughts, and this would be "where" one
could find "no mind" perhaps.

Moksha is the moment where Purusha withdraws identification
from Prakriti, resting in It's own nature forevermore.
This event can and does often occur in the context of
a living, breathing body/mind, with all the functions
of the body/mind, including desire, intact.

(snip repeat of questions)
> However I still have a mind and I still see the world,
> that means to me that I haven't finished the journey.

You will continue to have a mind until your body/mind
expires. You are welcome to hold on to the incorrect
assumption that mind must cease before realization
begins, but you do so at the peril of your own moksha.


I contend that while you may have a limited understanding
of these terms, your assumptions about them hinder a more
proper understanding.

Realization = The event whereby the Self recognizes the
Self in the context of a body/mind, permanently erasing
the essential delusion that we are only individual beings
as defined by our life experiences.

Enlightened = The continuation of the realization experience
over time in the life of a jivanmukti, whereby the mind has
been modified from within the context of realization, thereby
resulting in the accumulation of ever greater levels of clarity.

Moksha = see realization.

Maya = The world or manifest universe. Maya is the creation
of Shakti. Shakti is the manifesting principle inherent in
Nirguna Brahman. Ramakrishna used to say "Brahman and Shakti
are like fire and its power to burn." Maya can be said to
be the theatre of Shakti's lila, or play. Shakti's lila is
the manifesting principle behind each, every and all
phenomena in the manifest universe, including each, every, and
all our own thoughts, feelings, sensations, and desires.

Illusion = First, the essential attachment to the idea that
we are only our individual persons as defined by our memory,
conditioning and life experiences. Second, the activity of
our perceptual systems that renders the universe as a set
of objects in motion distinct from ourselves as Self.

--jodyr.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

We all have a mind and we will always have a mind. It is our thinker
and often our stinker! Suffering comes about in large part due to
our attachment to our thinker. Suffering also arises when we try to
become mindless or to somehow destroy our mind because we think that
we must in order to become enlightened/realized/awakened. Accept your
mind as a part of the eternal all. Don't fight with it. Don't fear it.
Use it to solve problems. That is its function. Niether embrace the
mind nor reject the mind.

But you know what? I'll never convince you or anyone of that. What I
would like to suggest is a nice little book by Pema Chodrun. She is
the director of the buddhist monastary in Nova Scotia. The book is
'The Wisdon of No Escape and The path of Loving Kindness'. On pp 74
she talks about not prefering samsara or nirvana.

>
> I have a mind, somewhat dysfunctional, sometimes
> happy, sometimes depressed, like many who quietly
> living their lives. Not in quiet desperation as
> someone said, Lincoln?

Yes after awakening/enlightenment/realization you will still have a
mind. It will be as important to you as your big toes. You never
think about them, but they keep you from falling on your face! You
only become aware of toeness when you stub your toe. The mind will be
like your toes. It will be in its proper place, but the occasional
migrane may develop! ;-)


> I have some spiritual and K experiences, also some
> kind of 'samadhis'. Also some kind of non dual,
> oneness type happenings. I know I am part of a whole
> and that really I am an illusion.
>
> I see that all is the universal everywhere, my dog,
> the tree everybody. So I am enlightened to that
> extent, and I realise my situation or illusion.


This is to me a major sign of an awakened person! So, stop your
@^&*%$# whining and get on with life! ;-) Love you!

> I find the teachings of Ramanashram to be true for me.
> Also other Jnanis like Jesus, Sankara, Maharaj etc.
> All Adwaitic. However I have a Bhakti dimension as
> well.

And the heavens parted and the great voice said, "ALL DIMENSIONS ARE
ONE!"
And I squeeked out, 'holy shit'.
And the great voice said, "THAT TOO!"

> However I still have a mind and I still see the world,
> that means to me that I haven't finished the journey.


Who has? Each spark of us will glow until we expire. That is our
journey. Do you suppose that you get to know everything all at once!
DO YOU WANT TO EXPLODE! Just kidding. Take it easy. The universe
existed long before you manifested as Tony O'Clery and will continue
to exist long after you lay Tony's bones to rest. :-)

> So what do these words mean? Realisation,
> Enlightened.I know what Moksha, Maya and illusion
> mean.

You are the real in realization. You are the light in enlightened.

The illusion that you know what illusion is - is the joke you keep
playing on yourself.

'I am you and you are me and we are one together! Come together right
now over me!' The Beatles


The short answer to the above request is: You are IT!

HAHAHAHAH and HOHOHOHOHO!

Peace - and Love Abiding - Michael
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

MS Bookshelf gives for enlightenment:
Buddhism. A blessed state in which the individual transcends
desire and suffering and attains Nirvana.
And for self-realization (small s):
Complete development or fulfillment of one's own potential.

With a capital S, Self-realization is "recognizing one's real
nature": recognizing "It" as the source of joy, all issues
like attachment, detachment etc. are moot although onlookers
will perceive asceticism. This sudden recognition is the boon
Nachiketas wanted and Yama was reluctant to bestow
(Kathopanishad). Ramana could be called a spontaneous visitor
to Yama and received the same boon.

So these terms can have a different meaning.


¤
¤My understanding, up until now was that they meant the
¤same thing as Moksha/Liberation/No Mind/Merging with
¤the Self etc. It is confusing to my mind, yes I still
¤have one.

Moksha is the "end" and "goal" regarding nonduality as the
pronoun "I" no longer is felt (and consequently, won't appear
in one's thinking). It is identical with nirvana (substratum
remaining). The substratum here is equivalent with "causal
body" or the anandamaya kosha. In Sufism, non-I is symbolized
by "lover is annihilated in the Beloved" and in Christianity
it is called "resurrection from the dead". The term "merging"
is a misnomer, there is nothing to merge with, rather,
something has to be removed (the sense of "I", "doer"). The
issue with "mind" had better be forgotten as it invites a lot
of speculation: thinking remains possible and the sensory mind
remains intact (seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling, feeling
remain possible for a jivanmukta). In Rosicrucianism, the
"resurrection" is said to be the end of transmutation (of base
metals into gold) and transfiguration will start and Kundalini
will "stay" too, until transfiguration is completed (identical
to nirvana without substratum).

So "mind" isn't the issue per se: the issue is "I, me and
mine".

¤Here is where I am at, perhaps someone can tell me
¤which slot I am.ha ah a aha. That comes from ekagratha
¤or practising one-pointedness.
[...]
With spontaneous K. awakening, it is difficult to say. The
first "common denominator" (experience all will have) that is
mentioned in Rosicrucianism (there have to be such descriptors
in other paths too) is piercing the knot of the heart and it
is called "the holy grail". The piercing of knots is a useful
descriptor of "where" and unless veiled, can be recognized at
one glance. But as a rule, the chakra where sensations are
felt strongest is the one "being acted upon"; only when the
next one (in ascending order) contains a knot, that can be the
chakra "being acted upon".

Jan
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hi Tony,

Good list question. A person who is realized may know the I
AM continuously. A person who is enlightened may have
transcended I AM. At least that might be one way of looking
at it.

Jerry
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Realisation = seeing
Enlightenment = being

Realisation is coming to an intuitive understanding of the fundamental fact of
our
human existence, which is that everything, forms, feelings, perceptions,
thoughts are
no more or less than consciousness itself and that consciousness itself is
empty.
Living according to that understanding is enlightenment. It's living simply in
the
fullness of the moment without being driven and without resisting, which
transforms
everyday life into pure wonder and mystery.

andrew
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Tony I hope everyone responds to this. If not, re-post it during the
week. I'm sure everyone will have many answers. For me the most
important word to decipher is "I". It's like scooping up a handful of
ocean. Nothing to it but here it is. Very puzzling. Maybe the answer is
to just relax the headache. Or dive deep until you run out of air and
are forced to swallow it. :-)

Larry

top of page