Click here to go to the next issue.

Saturday 17-Mar-01


<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Blessed I am
-------------------
Jerry:

Hi Ron,

You write sweet words. It was good hugging that wearing
out body. I know you have a daily physical struggles
there in San Diego. It was good having a meal with you
and Christiana and watching San Diego
whiz by. I hope we can receive more of your thoughts, poetry,
confessions. Send them freely.

I've been trying to get in touch with Christiana by
phone, but now I read from Gloria that she has
been in the hospital. I hope she recovers quickly
and gains renewal. I know how much
you love her and I've learned much from my relationship
with Christiana, though not all that she has to offer.

Love,
Jerry
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Grateful for the Grace of your Heart breathe
--------------------------------------------------------------

Christiana:
Dearest friends...

Words will truly fail me tonight. I am home tonight from a
journey much longer than my six day hospital stay. So
many awesome and awful waves have lifted me and
tumble me in these past months; and they seemed all
to collapse on the beach at La Jolla. I couldn't listen to
or trust one more word; one more teacher; one more
position.. especially the ones arising from my own mind.
Nothing felt real any more. I thought I'd stay
away from lists and people and surrender again to solitude.

I was surprised that my daughter's private letter was
forwarded to this list. I don't tend to be this public with
my personal life. Yet the river of grace which has poured
through all of you towards me, has been
received like guiding heart currents, as I can
do nothing but surrender, as in John Metzger's offering
from Carl Jung:


> We must be able to let things happen in the psyche.
>For us, this actually is an art of which few people know
>anything.Consciousness is forever interfering, helping, c
>orrecting, and negating, and never leaving the simple growth
>of the psychic processes in peace. It would
> be simple enough, if only simplicity were not the most
>difficult of all things.

The Pneumonia, which still weights heavy, will eventually
heal; and in it's wake, I have been humbled by the fear
of breathe; and the loss of breathe; as well as gratefully
renewed by the living breathe you have
offered through your open hearts with me.

Tonight I listened to this song by Kirtana, which
was a part of Gangaji's presence in La Jolla. It speaks
more clearly to what I need to say. I love and thank you...

Christiana


{ _this embrace_ }
Kirtana

As I fall into this embrace
I feel your arms extending into space
While a love that will not rest
Blows through my open chest

And tears fall from my heart like rain
Like liquid love pouring from the slain
Glistening with grace,
Christening my face

I'll let this love carry me
Down Stream like a petal of presad
Uproot and ferry me
From the heart of confusion
To the heart of God

Words fall from my lips but they
All fall short of what I want to say
They gather where it's sweet
then surrender in defeat

So I fall into namaste
With this life I nearly threw away
and say 'Use it as you will;
The tiger keeps its kill'

I'll let this love carry me
Down stream like a petal of presad
Uproot and ferry me
From the heart of illusion
To the heart of god

As I fall into this embrace
As I fall into this embrace
As I fall into this embrace

>>>> + <<<<
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Death and Consciousness:
--------------------------------------
James to Terry M:

I mostly want to clarify.

You highlighted 'not two' and referred to a repeated error...

- Are you saying that if we identify with anything,
whether it is consciousness (or the body etc...)
then we are making this error?

- And, 'not two' includes consciousness?

----------------
I also have a 'not two' question:

Is consciousness dualistic?
Is consciousness only dualistic when I say,
"I am conscious?"

Namaste', I especially enjoyed the poetry.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

from: I Am That, by Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj
------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Otter:
Q How is it done?

M: There is no "how" here. Just keep in mind the
feeling "I am", merge in it, till your mind and feeling
become one. By repeated attempts, you will stumble
on the right balance of attention and affection and
your mind will be firmly established in the t
hought-feeling "I am". Whatever you think, say, or do,
this sense of immutable and affectionate
being remains as the ever present background of the mind.

Tim:
I've 'done' something similar to this.. it seems like too
many just read about it and go onto something else...

Or maybe it's still 'happening'... just the Beingness
or I AMness (consciousness free of content)...
and whatever lies beyond it, which
thought cannot conceptualize...

Yes, that has to be "the yoga" ... for those who
want a practice that isn't forced, doesn't require any
particular effort, just never forgetting 'the background'
of Beingness...

I can testify, after awhile it becomes 'automatic'...
much more quickly than one would suspect.
Something 'reverses' and then in a real sense it takes
effort to NOT remain still. It's a bit like
a 'rubber band' pulling awareness back to the center,
although it may 'stray into' the contents of consciousness.

There is no escaping freedom. There is no escaping it.
That is the 'reversal'.
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Essay on Ego:
---------------------
Gene Poole:

A brief essay on ego

In response to recent letters


As identity is compounded, so is apparent Being.

Identity follows Being in schema and form.

What is referred to as 'ego' is a complex functionality,
designed to facilitate survival. As such, there is nothing
inherently 'wrong' with ego.

'Ego' as referred to by common speech,
denotes a wide spectrum of concepts.

'Egotism' does not refer to ego,
but to immaturity. Common speech
twists understanding.

As a powerful aspect of Being,
ego generates of a 'virtual' Being,
which we can call 'identity'. The common
'sense of self' which most everyone is
endowed with, is the product of ego,
it is not itself ego.

Identity' is not ego, it is the product of ego.

Ego is the essence of the 'immune system';
ego differentiates between what is 'I'
and what is 'not-I'. In this way, does ego
act as the criteria of what food substances
are assimilated and which are not.

By extension, ego also differentiates what is 'me'
from what is 'not me' on the level of identity.
Ego creates the difference between self
and other. As ego creates self, it also creates
other.

The 'virtual Being' is created by ego, it is not ego.


Learned people, consider that ego 'exists',
and give it some credit. Ease up on it
and ease up on yourselves. Defining
a natural aspect of Being as something
to destroy, or to revile, is an act of violence
against yourself. Please consider this.

Consider 'ego' to be a powerful mechanism,
which is involved in modeling the universe
in a very special way; this way is to present
the universe 'in relationship with' Being.

One may object, based upon millennia-long
mistranslation and subsequent misunderstanding,
that 'ego' is a problem of some sort. One may
compound, as is so commonly done, strategies
of 'attainment' which are based upon the defeat
of ego. One may hinge self-esteem, and also
spiritual 'evolution', upon assumptions regarding
ego.

Ego is not a thorn to be removed from 'something else'.
Identity is what assumes and defines what ego 'is'.
Identity of suffering, may fasten upon ego as a 'cause'
of suffering, but in truth, ego is the 'cause' of survival
of the physical body. The fight for survival is real.

Virtual means 'might as well be real'.
It is so real, that many people are 'fooled'
by this persistent, self-regenerating
virtual self. It is 'you' when you awaken
in the morning, and it is 'you' when you
fall asleep at night.

Idntity is the historical 'you', which usually
carries opinions, resentments, fears,
hopes, and ambitions. This virtual self
is what quests for knowledge and relief
from suffering. But remember that this virtual
self is the product of ego, it is not ego.

Ego builds or models a self, and also
models the universe, and places
this virtual self in the virtual universe.

The enactment of 'your life' is
a game of dolls, and do you see
the hand which moves the doll
about in the doll-house of the universe?

The doing which the doll assumes
it is doing, is done by the hand which
moves it about as the game is played.

The doll is rebellious, however, and claims
to be able to overcome its 'dollness'.

For the doll to realize that it is a doll,
may allow the doll to allow the hand which
moves it in the game, to do as it will.

Identity does not know, necessarily,
that it is a construct, and a volatile one at that.
Identity does not know this, but Buddha
spoke of it; listen well:

"Anatman".

There is no self, no ego, no universe, no soul,
no doer, and nothing can be done about this.

The doll, rebellious as it is, denies Buddha.

Buddha, doll that he is, realized his dollness,
his 'suchness'.

The essence of this realization is awareness
of the volatility of all things; this means that
all things are essentially temporary.

Gazing at a rotting log, Buddha had this
realization; he realized that the one who
gazed, was itself eternal, unlike the log.

Eternal is a funny word. As long as I exist,
eternity is real. "I will live forever", for it is
I who carries the criteria of what is temporary
and what is permanent; my judgement will
prevail, for as long as I exist.

Liberation is liberation 'from', but the catch
is that nothing is left after liberation;
if liberation has 'fruits', they are not enjoyed
by one who needs the counterpoints
of death of death and suffering,
to make life 'real'.

The one who observes, observes all.

Does self appear,
in the field of what is observed?

top of page