Guest guest Posted June 5, 2001 Report Share Posted June 5, 2001 If the moments that are wasted in thinking of the objects which are not the Self are spent on inquiry into the Self, Self-realizarion will be attained in a very short time. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Ramana Maharshi , Spiritual Instruction , Practice ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Hi Vickie and all, Ive been attempting to discover where Advaita practice and Dzogchen practice meet in the non-dual state. Buddhism teaches 'emptiness' (of self, 'I' and 'mine') and about suffering which ocurs when delusional mind, (the faulty cognition of 'I') clings to what is empty and impermanent, Supreme emptiness is when there is no more clinging self. In the Buddha's words... "O Bahiya, whenever you see a form, let there be just the seeing; whenever you hear a sound, let there be just the hearing, when you smell an odor, let there be just the smelling; when you taste a flavor, let there be just the tasting; when you experience a sensation, let it merely be sensation; and when a thought arises, let it just be a natural phenomenon (feeling) arising in the mind. When its like this there will be no self, no 'I'." And when this is fully realized by mind, there is nirvana (supreme emptiness), and in practice there are moments of freedom from self and this is momentary nirvana. Emptiness is the sky and the birds flying through it, without emptiness nothing would be and all manifestation without exception is the expression of being. So, many strategies, in Buddhism, many helping mind reach the cognition that there are no 'objects' and when there are they are empty and occuring interdependently yet not separate from primordial mind/intrinsic nature. Including all posts, the glitch comes when we like or dislike an object in awareness. In Dzogchen, all objects arising in awareness are recognized as the expression of primordial mind and not other than it. This puts one into non dual practice. Yet primordial mind is not spoken of as 'Self'. So - supreme emptiness being supreme must relate somehow to this 'Self' Ramana Maharshi speaks of. If all dharmas or manifestations are empty, doesn't it follow that all objects, all manifestations of being are then "Self'. Thus there can be no dual state. At which point all is awareness and maintaining presence of awareness, no struggle to reach some 'other' such as Self or 'enlightenment'. Nowhere to go, nothing to do or be. Except stay Awake until permanently so. Does inquiry into Self allow one to experience all arisings in awareness as the expression of Self? What is 'not-Self'? Surely seeing a Self and then objects separate from this is dual or split mind? Thus mind could have an aversion to them and greed for some thing other than objects such as Self or 'enlightenment'? Which in the truth of non-duality must be then delusional? Just wondering. Joyce Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 5, 2001 Report Share Posted June 5, 2001 Hi Joyce, >Ive been attempting to discover where Advaita practice and Dzogchen >practice meet in the non-dual state. >snip< >In Dzogchen, all objects arising in awareness are recognized as the >expression of primordial mind and not other than it. This puts one into >non dual practice. Yet primordial mind is not spoken of as 'Self'. > >So - supreme emptiness being supreme must relate somehow to this 'Self' >Ramana Maharshi speaks of. Is this the source of the problem you are presenting? That some call it "primordial mind" and some call it "supreme emptiness" and some call it "Self"? Love, Dharma Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 5, 2001 Report Share Posted June 5, 2001 Yes, I suppose, lots of different "ITS" about - I was wondering if it could all be lumped into one IT. Not too many poets working with 'emptiness' in Buddhism, alas. A traditional Buddhist teacher would deny existence of a Supreme Self. But this may just be Buddha's skillful means of preventing mind from creating that duality - me and a separate God or Self that I can write poems about. Hysterical laughing... and how are you, Dharma? Love Joyce Is this the source of the problem you are presenting? That some call it "primordial mind" and some call it "supreme emptiness" and some call it "Self"? Love, Dharma Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 5, 2001 Report Share Posted June 5, 2001 Hi Joyce, >>Is this the source of the problem you are presenting? That some call it >>"primordial mind" and some call it "supreme emptiness" and some call it >>"Self"? > Yes, I suppose, lots of different "ITS" about - I was wondering if >it could all be lumped into one IT. They all seem to be talking about the One IT. And if there's only one IT, does it matter what we call IT? >Not too many poets working with 'emptiness' in Buddhism, alas. Not too many good images there for a poet. ))) Maybe we could start with an image and tear it apart, dissolve it into emptiness? Something like that in the "Four Quartets," I think. The whole thing feels like swirling around and around and every so often you get a glimpse into the center. >So we moved, and they, in a formal pattern, >Along the empty alley, into the box circle, >To look down into the drained pool. >Dry the pool, dry concrete, brown edged, >And the pool was filled with water out of sunlight, >And the lotos rose, quietly, quietly, >The surface glittered out of heart of light, >Garlic and sapphires in the mud >Clot the bedded axle-tree. >Where is the summer, the unimaginable >Zero summer? >Here, the intersection of the timeless moment >Is England and nowhere. >Never and always. >And all shall be well and >All manner of thing shall be well >By the purification of the motive >In the ground of our beseeching. >A condition of complete simplicity >(Costing not less than everything) It seems to be often done by putting together things that are opposite... an impossible contradiction, like a Zen koan. > A traditional Buddhist teacher would deny existence of a Supreme Self. I just looked for the word "self" in the index of Govinda's book... I found _one_ page reference! To this: >The experience of infinity which is expressed in the sacred syllable OM, >and which forms the basis and starting-point of the the Great Vehicle, is >thus deepened and counterbalanced by the >experience of the inner unity and solidarity of all life and >consciousness. This unity, which is not brought about by an arbitrary >identification of one's own consciousness with that of other living beings >(i.e., not from the outside), but which results from the profound >knowledge that the conception of 'self' and 'not-self', 'I' and 'not-I', >'own' and 'other', rests on the illusion of our surface consciousness, and >that the knowledge and the experience of the equality (samata) of beings >consists in the realization of that ultimate completeness which is latent >in every being. > The Buddhist, therefore, does not endeavour to 'dissolve his being in >the infinite', to fuse his finite consciousness with the consciousness of >the all, or to unite his soul with the all-soul; his aim is to become >_conscious_ of his ever-existing, indivisible and undivided completeness. >To this completeness nothing can be added, and from it nothing can be >taken away. But this may just be Buddha's skillful means of preventing mind from creating that duality - me and a separate God or Self that I can write poems about. An interesting thought. You know, they say Gautama taught anatma, no individual soul... but they also say that he remembered all of his past lives. )) How those fit together is beyond me. >Hysterical laughing... and how are you, Dharma? Oh fine... working on how to have time to teach... and also make some more money. The necessities of life, you know. And how are you? Love, Dharma Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 5, 2001 Report Share Posted June 5, 2001 Of A New Beginning (For My Father) >From the timeless Nothing, the morning dawns. The subliminal senses awaken the slumbering soul, creation's principal, to the proclaiming song of a new beginning. Candescent stars pale on the grey horizon, Bird songs gently ripple the atmosphere; Transition preludes an impending change >From dark silence to the symphony of light. Man out of primordial Nothing is cast And perceiving finds that that which is without is also that which is within, which is light, Ambitious, exuberant, transcendent light. Yet Light, like himself, is Something which is Nothing. By the light, by a man's being, the soul perceives that she is, but what it is that she is And from where, like light, she cannot discern. Pursuing knowledge of the light, she ignores what logic must and must not leave to fate. Attempting to see that which cannot be seen, she plucks out her eye and holds it in her hand. Like Lilith, she clenches her vision in her fist, surrounds it with herself and so becomes blind. So consumed in herself she loses sight of truth and sinks to drowning in the waters of despair. We are all Lilith. We have all lost our vision. We have all lost the strength to open our hand. There are no birds now. The sun has set. Predatory darkness will soon devour all light. Is Death the only law to which we may appeal in our forlorn state of sorrow and contrition? If so, may we who have played the coy mistress Become the faithful, compliant bride of the night. May the tawdry deceptions of insolent flesh And its landscape of callous spires without faith, Crumble in one apocalyptic moment As we surrender our darkness to the Other's light. >From the timeless Nothing, the morning dawns. The subliminal senses awaken the slumbering soul, creation's principal, to the proclaiming song of a new beginning. Forever, Forever, and Forever. -Mark Christopher Valentine - Dharma <deva <> Tuesday, June 05, 2001 10:02 AM Re: the moments that are wasted > Hi Joyce, > > >>Is this the source of the problem you are presenting? That some call it > >>"primordial mind" and some call it "supreme emptiness" and some call it > >>"Self"? > > > Yes, I suppose, lots of different "ITS" about - I was wondering if > >it could all be lumped into one IT. > > They all seem to be talking about the One IT. And if there's only one IT, > does it matter what we call IT? > > >Not too many poets working with 'emptiness' in Buddhism, alas. > > Not too many good images there for a poet. ))) Maybe we could start with > an image and tear it apart, dissolve it into emptiness? > > Something like that in the "Four Quartets," I think. The whole thing feels > like swirling around and around and every so often you get a glimpse into > the center. > > >So we moved, and they, in a formal pattern, > >Along the empty alley, into the box circle, > >To look down into the drained pool. > >Dry the pool, dry concrete, brown edged, > >And the pool was filled with water out of sunlight, > >And the lotos rose, quietly, quietly, > >The surface glittered out of heart of light, > > > >Garlic and sapphires in the mud > >Clot the bedded axle-tree. > > > >Where is the summer, the unimaginable > >Zero summer? > > > >Here, the intersection of the timeless moment > >Is England and nowhere. > >Never and always. > > > >And all shall be well and > >All manner of thing shall be well > >By the purification of the motive > >In the ground of our beseeching. > > > >A condition of complete simplicity > >(Costing not less than everything) > > > It seems to be often done by putting together things that are opposite... > an impossible contradiction, like a Zen koan. > > > A traditional Buddhist teacher would deny existence of a Supreme Self. > > I just looked for the word "self" in the index of Govinda's book... I > found _one_ page reference! To this: > > >The experience of infinity which is expressed in the sacred syllable OM, > >and which forms the basis and starting-point of the the Great Vehicle, is > >thus deepened and counterbalanced by the > >experience of the inner unity and solidarity of all life and > >consciousness. This unity, which is not brought about by an arbitrary > >identification of one's own consciousness with that of other living beings > >(i.e., not from the outside), but which results from the profound > >knowledge that the conception of 'self' and 'not-self', 'I' and 'not-I', > >'own' and 'other', rests on the illusion of our surface consciousness, and > >that the knowledge and the experience of the equality (samata) of beings > >consists in the realization of that ultimate completeness which is latent > >in every being. > > The Buddhist, therefore, does not endeavour to 'dissolve his being in > >the infinite', to fuse his finite consciousness with the consciousness of > >the all, or to unite his soul with the all-soul; his aim is to become > >_conscious_ of his ever-existing, indivisible and undivided completeness. > >To this completeness nothing can be added, and from it nothing can be > >taken away. > > But this may just be Buddha's skillful means of preventing mind from > creating that duality - me and a separate God or Self that I can write > poems about. > > An interesting thought. You know, they say Gautama taught anatma, no > individual soul... but they also say that he remembered all of his past > lives. )) How those fit together is beyond me. > > >Hysterical laughing... and how are you, Dharma? > > Oh fine... working on how to have time to teach... and also make some > more money. The necessities of life, you know. > > And how are you? > > Love, > Dharma > > > > /join > > > > > > 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 a. > > > > Your use of is subject to > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 5, 2001 Report Share Posted June 5, 2001 I love it, Wolf! Thank you! >Of A New Beginning >(For My Father) > >>From the timeless Nothing, the morning dawns. >The subliminal senses awaken >the slumbering soul, creation's principal, >to the proclaiming song of a new beginning. > >Candescent stars pale on the grey horizon, >Bird songs gently ripple the atmosphere; >Transition preludes an impending change >From dark silence to the symphony of light. > >Man out of primordial Nothing is cast >And perceiving finds that that which is without >is also that which is within, which is light, >Ambitious, exuberant, transcendent light. > >Yet Light, like himself, is Something which is Nothing. >By the light, by a man's being, the soul perceives >that she is, but what it is that she is >And from where, like light, she cannot discern. > >Pursuing knowledge of the light, she ignores >what logic must and must not leave to fate. >Attempting to see that which cannot be seen, >she plucks out her eye and holds it in her hand. > >Like Lilith, she clenches her vision in her fist, >surrounds it with herself and so becomes blind. >So consumed in herself she loses sight of truth >and sinks to drowning in the waters of despair. > >We are all Lilith. We have all lost our vision. >We have all lost the strength to open our hand. >There are no birds now. The sun has set. >Predatory darkness will soon devour all light. > >Is Death the only law to which we may appeal >in our forlorn state of sorrow and contrition? >If so, may we who have played the coy mistress >Become the faithful, compliant bride of the night. > > >May the tawdry deceptions of insolent flesh >And its landscape of callous spires without faith, >Crumble in one apocalyptic moment >As we surrender our darkness to the Other's light. > >>From the timeless Nothing, the morning dawns. >The subliminal senses awaken >the slumbering soul, creation's principal, >to the proclaiming song of a new beginning. > >Forever, Forever, and Forever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 5, 2001 Report Share Posted June 5, 2001 On 6/5/01 at 9:17 AM Joyce Short wrote: [...] Does inquiry into Self allow one to experience all arisings in awareness as the expression of Self? What is 'not-Self'? Surely seeing a Self and then objects separate from this is dual or split mind? Thus mind could have an aversion to them and greed for some thing other than objects such as Self or 'enlightenment'? Which in the truth of non-duality must be then delusional?Just wondering.Joyce Hi Joyce, Didn't you forget that Ramana, unless having been made familiar with Advaitic scriptures by seekers, disciples and yogis, wouldn't have expressed himself about these matters at all? No doubt he could have expressed himself in Mahayana and Dzogchen "lingo" when that would have been read to him And could it occur to you that "realization" is possible without being conscious of any "practice"? How to express oneself then? Nothing at all, as the tendency to express oneself will die out by itself too Jan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 5, 2001 Report Share Posted June 5, 2001 Hi Joyce, Hi Jan. Didn't you forget that Ramana, unless having been made familiar with Advaitic scriptures by seekers, disciples and yogis, wouldn't have expressed himself about these matters at all? No doubt he could have expressed himself in Mahayana and Dzogchen "lingo" when that would have been read to him Joyce-Don't know these details at all -no reason to disagree. The'lingo' - merely a way to communicate about experience and indicate possibilities. Nothing inherently real in lingo. And could it occur to you that "realization" is possible without being conscious of any "practice"? Joyce - Absolutely anything and everything is possible. How immensely compassionate is being -seems to have room for everything -lingo, no lingo, practice, no practice, confusion, clarity -endless possibilities and potential. How to express oneself then? Nothing at all, as the tendency to express oneself will die out by itself too Joyce - Anywhere, any place one finds oneself is one's expression which is a you say, nothing at all. So - we may as well be friends while we pass time together. Joyce Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 5, 2001 Report Share Posted June 5, 2001 Nice post, Joyce - Thanks. My two cents: The object being cognized as object includes the subject cognizing, and vice versa. Providing a teaching is providing an object for study. As with all objects, cognizing includes subject with object and vice versa. When there is clarity of this, there may be an "aha". The "aha", or clarity, isn't dependent on a particular object (such as particular words, thought, feeling, point of view, person) nor on a particular subjective state. Thus, the "aha" can be expressed in different languages, concepts, associated with different feelings, activities, nonactivities or states. It's intriguing to explore similarities and differences involved in such expressions across individuals and cultures (e.g., Maharshi's Self, or Dzogchen's original awareness) ... Yet, none of the similarities or differences actually *is* the "aha" nor can provide the "aha" (simply because it doesn't depend on a particular phrase, language, lens, emotion, way of construing similarities and differences, etc.) This also is intriguing. For me, self-inquiry ends up exposing the nonlocation of the questioner, which makes question, questioner, and questioning, the same -- and the same as the answer -- this nonseparation seems to me to be what can only be indicated or suggested by concepts like "nondualoriginal mind", "Self", "God", unsplit reality, beyond subject/object division, etc. Although the expressions vary, and there are different emphases, if the origin and end are not-two, then the origin and end are not-two. For me, it's that simple, and that's how I treat apparent differences in expressions of truth. I don't try to make them the same as each other, or make their concepts absolutely equivalent, but I see them as partial expressions of what isn't partial ... Love, Dan If the moments that are wasted in thinking of the objects which are not the Self are spent on inquiry into the Self, Self-realizarion will be attained in a very short time. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Ramana Maharshi , Spiritual Instruction , Practice ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Hi Vickie and all, Ive been attempting to discover where Advaita practice and Dzogchen practice meet in the non-dual state. Buddhism teaches 'emptiness' (of self, 'I' and 'mine') and about suffering which ocurs when delusional mind, (the faulty cognition of 'I') clings to what is empty and impermanent, Supreme emptiness is when there is no more clinging self. In the Buddha's words... "O Bahiya, whenever you see a form, let there be just the seeing; whenever you hear a sound, let there be just the hearing, when you smell an odor, let there be just the smelling; when you taste a flavor, let there be just the tasting; when you experience a sensation, let it merely be sensation; and when a thought arises, let it just be a natural phenomenon (feeling) arising in the mind. When its like this there will be no self, no 'I'." And when this is fully realized by mind, there is nirvana (supreme emptiness), and in practice there are moments of freedom from self and this is momentary nirvana. Emptiness is the sky and the birds flying through it, without emptiness nothing would be and all manifestation without exception is the expression of being. So, many strategies, in Buddhism, many helping mind reach the cognition that there are no 'objects' and when there are they are empty and occuring interdependently yet not separate from primordial mind/intrinsic nature. Including all posts, the glitch comes when we like or dislike an object in awareness. In Dzogchen, all objects arising in awareness are recognized as the expression of primordial mind and not other than it. This puts one into non dual practice. Yet primordial mind is not spoken of as 'Self'. So - supreme emptiness being supreme must relate somehow to this 'Self' Ramana Maharshi speaks of. If all dharmas or manifestations are empty, doesn't it follow that all objects, all manifestations of being are then "Self'. Thus there can be no dual state. At which point all is awareness and maintaining presence of awareness, no struggle to reach some 'other' such as Self or 'enlightenment'. Nowhere to go, nothing to do or be. Except stay Awake until permanently so. Does inquiry into Self allow one to experience all arisings in awareness as the expression of Self? What is 'not-Self'? Surely seeing a Self and then objects separate from this is dual or split mind? Thus mind could have an aversion to them and greed for some thing other than objects such as Self or 'enlightenment'? Which in the truth of non-duality must be then delusional? Just wondering. Joyce Sponsor /join 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 a. Your use of is subject to the Terms of Service. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 5, 2001 Report Share Posted June 5, 2001 On 6/5/01 at 4:20 PM Joyce Short wrote: Hi Joyce,Hi Jan. Didn't you forget that Ramana, unless having been made familiar with Advaitic scriptures by seekers, disciples and yogis, wouldn't have expressed himself about these matters at all? No doubt he could have expressed himself in Mahayana and Dzogchen "lingo" when that would have been read to him :)Joyce-Don't know these details at all -no reason to disagree. The'lingo' - merely a way to communicate about experience and indicate possibilities. Nothing inherently real in lingo. Yes, "lingo" only serves communication - expressing with analogies, similes etc.. Considering the absence of a need to express, that says something about a society where such expression spontaneously arises. And could it occur to you that "realization" is possible without being conscious of any "practice"?Joyce - Absolutely anything and everything is possible. How immensely compassionate is being -seems to have room for everything -lingo, no lingo, practice, no practice, confusion, clarity -endless possibilities and potential. Exactly - life could also be seen as a one-(wo)man show - there is only "you". How to express oneself then? Nothing at all, as the tendency to express oneself will die out by itself too :)Joyce - Anywhere, any place one finds oneself is one's expression which is a you say, nothing at all. So - we may as well be friends while we pass time together. Joyce Understood, and cyber-friendship is easy - one doesn't have to clean the house, as inevitably will be the case when "live" friends are to arrive Jan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 5, 2001 Report Share Posted June 5, 2001 > Yes, I suppose, lots of different "ITS" about - I was wondering if it > could all be lumped into one IT. Not too many poets working with > 'emptiness' in Buddhism, alas. Don't tell Basho or Snyder ... ;-) > A traditional Buddhist teacher would deny existence of a Supreme > Self. But this may just be Buddha's skillful means of preventing mind > from creating that duality - me and a separate God or Self that I can > write poems about. While creating the duality between Buddhism and those other teachings? Maybe the reason why Gautama wasn't a Buddhist! Laughter and peace, Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 5, 2001 Report Share Posted June 5, 2001 On 6/5/01 at 5:41 PM Daniel Berkow wrote: º> Yes, I suppose, lots of different "ITS" about - I was wondering if it º> could all be lumped into one IT. Not too many poets working with º> 'emptiness' in Buddhism, alas. º º ºDon't tell Basho or Snyder ... ;-) º º º> A traditional Buddhist teacher would deny existence of a Supreme º> Self. But this may just be Buddha's skillful means of preventing mind º> from creating that duality - me and a separate God or Self that I can º> write poems about. º ºWhile creating the duality between Buddhism and those other teachings? º ºMaybe the reason why Gautama wasn't a Buddhist! º ºLaughter and peace, ºDan Thanks for the laugh Dan - Jesus wasn't a Christian either! But according to the dictionary, Zoroaster founded Zoroastrianism Some could conclude from that, Zoroaster wasn't nondualized... Joy and Light, Jan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 5, 2001 Report Share Posted June 5, 2001 Hi Jan Hi Joyce, Hi Jan. Didn't you forget that Ramana, unless having been made familiar with Advaitic scriptures by seekers, disciples and yogis, wouldn't have expressed himself about these matters at all? No doubt he could have expressed himself in Mahayana and Dzogchen "lingo" when that would have been read to him Joyce-Don't know these details at all -no reason to disagree. The'lingo' - merely a way to communicate about experience and indicate possibilities. Nothing inherently real in lingo. Yes, "lingo" only serves communication - expressing with analogies, similes etc.. Considering the absence of a need to express, that says something about a society where such expression spontaneously arises. Where's that? All effort does seem quite spontaneous. And could it occur to you that "realization" is possible without being conscious of any "practice"? Joyce - Absolutely anything and everything is possible. How immensely compassionate is being -seems to have room for everything -lingo, no lingo, practice, no practice, confusion, clarity -endless possibilities and potential. Exactly - life could also be seen as a one-(wo)man show - there is only "you". No need for brackets -surely the One -Woman Show? Only Me... can make the sparrows fly..... How to express oneself then? Nothing at all, as the tendency to express oneself will die out by itself too Joyce - Anywhere, any place one finds oneself is one's expression which is a you say, nothing at all. So - we may as well be friends while we pass time together. Understood, and cyber-friendship is easy - one doesn't have to clean the house, as inevitably will be the case when "live" friends are to arrive Joyce: Ha, never need clean house for any friends, in cyber space or any other space,thats how I know they're friends. Just need to have the wine glasses cleanish and ready. And then tell stories. J. Jan Sponsor /join 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 a. Terms of Service <> . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 5, 2001 Report Share Posted June 5, 2001 On 6/5/01 at 6:43 PM Joyce Short wrote: Hi Joyce, Hi Jan Hi Joyce,Hi Jan. Didn't you forget that Ramana, unless having been made familiar with Advaitic scriptures by seekers, disciples and yogis, wouldn't have expressed himself about these matters at all? No doubt he could have expressed himself in Mahayana and Dzogchen "lingo" when that would have been read to him :)Joyce-Don't know these details at all -no reason to disagree. The'lingo' - merely a way to communicate about experience and indicate possibilities. Nothing inherently real in lingo.Yes, "lingo" only serves communication - expressing with analogies, similes etc..Considering the absence of a need to express, that says something about a societywhere such expression spontaneously arises.Where's that? All effort does seem quite spontaneous.Yes, that's what it seems - but wait until no thing in the universe can add pleasure or pain anymore. And could it occur to you that "realization" is possible without being conscious of any "practice"?Joyce - Absolutely anything and everything is possible. How immensely compassionate is being -seems to have room for everything -lingo, no lingo, practice, no practice, confusion, clarity -endless possibilities and potential. Exactly - life could also be seen as a one-(wo)man show - there is only "you". No need for brackets -surely the One -Woman Show? Only Me... can make the sparrows fly..... Probably "just" a no-man show would have been a more appropriate expression How to express oneself then? Nothing at all, as the tendency to express oneself will die out by itself too :)Joyce - Anywhere, any place one finds oneself is one's expression which is a you say, nothing at all. So - we may as well be friends while we pass time together. Understood, and cyber-friendship is easy - one doesn't have to clean the house, asinevitably will be the case when "live" friends are to arrive :)Joyce: Ha, never need clean house for any friends, in cyber space or any other space,thats how I know they're friends. Just need to have the wine glasses cleanish and ready. And then tell stories. J. Then you had caring friends - and you never saw the state my house can be in. For me, it doesn't matter whether living in a pig sty or in a palace - as long as there is a hole in the ground for a toilet, a bucket for a shower and a little flat space for a sleeping bag. But as the issue of "visiting" has transformed into "request denied", no more "due" house cleaning Jan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 5, 2001 Report Share Posted June 5, 2001 My two cents: Worth at least a US dollar! The object being cognized as object includes the subject cognizing, and vice versa. Yes, what fun! Quite thrilling! How does that happen? Providing a teaching is providing an object for study. As with all objects, cognizing includes subject with object and vice versa. Also a great distraction from self-obsessing, Velcro-mind. If one is lucky teacher teaches from don't-know mind and so frees one from teachings. Or not yet. Maybe tomorrow. A good excuse to hang out. When there is clarity of this, there may be an "aha". The "aha", or clarity, isn't dependent on a particular object (such as particular words, thought, feeling, point of view, person) nor on a particular subjective state. 'Aha' is very playfully unpredictable. Doesn't seem to pick favorites. Always lose, lose. Never win, win. Thus, the "aha" can be expressed in different languages, concepts, associated with different feelings, activities, nonactivities or states. Yes, it seems quite willing for this to occur. It's intriguing to explore similarities and differences involved in such expressions across individuals and cultures (e.g., Maharshi's Self, or Dzogchen's original awareness) ... Always travelling........................................ Yet, none of the similarities or differences actually *is* the "aha" nor can provide the "aha" (simply because it doesn't depend on a particular phrase, language, lens, emotion, way of construing similarities and differences, etc.) This also is intriguing. Intriguing isn't aha!, seems a close relative, Relatives are very undependable. For me, self-inquiry ends up exposing the nonlocation of the questioner, which makes question, questioner, and questioning, the same -- and the same as the answer -- this nonseparation seems to me to be what can only be indicated or suggested by concepts like "nondualoriginal mind", "Self", "God", unsplit reality, beyond subject/object division, etc. Sometimes Im located somewhere in particular, Other times nowhere in particular. When I ask someone any question Then I can go to where they are And be with them for awhile. Instead of saying, "How are you today?" I say, "Where are you at this moment?" And then if they are someplace, I can go there And play. Sometimes their place is dangerous, Sometimes its joyful. Sometimes it's nothing special. If I'm lucky, they are nowhere, Know it clearly and invite me in, Teach me their language Such as you are doing. Although the expressions vary, and there are different emphases, if the origin and end are not-two, then the origin and end are not-two. For me, it's that simple, and that's how I treat apparent differences in expressions of truth. I don't try to make them the same as each other, or make their concepts absolutely equivalent, but I see them as partial expressions of what isn't partial ... Nothing is partial, There's only so many ways to cut the carrot. Can the Whole Express itself Other than Whole-y I wanted to ask a question, but ran out of colors. Pretty colored moments. Love, Joyce Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 5, 2001 Report Share Posted June 5, 2001 Yes, that's what it seems - but wait until no thing in the universe can add pleasure or pain anymore. I would not like that. I would forget others Are here too. Even when they aren't. When the last bug leaves I'll shut the door behind us. That's my job. It wasn't a smart career choice. But its OK. Pleasure and Pain, OK And could it occur to you that "realization" is possible without being conscious of any "practice"? I'm currently changing traditional definition of 'realization' for new dictionary -any input here? Then you had caring friends - and you never saw the state my house can be in. For me, it doesn't matter whether living in a pig sty or in a palace - as long as there is a hole in the ground for a Think of all the billions of places we have lived - the mind boggles! Did you ever live in a place where squatters and sitters had to share a western style toilet and it was raining and the ground was muddy? HA! toilet, a bucket for a shower and a little flat space for a sleeping bag. But as the issue of "visiting" has transformed into "request denied", no more "due" house cleaning 'No visitors' sign on the door? There's people standing on the doorstep with wines and cakes for the party. (no meat) Lets see, what color am I? Joyce Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 5, 2001 Report Share Posted June 5, 2001 At 07:21 PM 6/5/01 -0400, you wrote: My two cents: Worth at least a US dollar! The object being cognized as object includes the subject cognizing, and vice versa. Yes, what fun! Quite thrilling! How does that happen? Providing a teaching is providing an object for study. As with all objects, cognizing includes subject with object and vice versa. Also a great distraction from self-obsessing, Velcro-mind. If one is lucky teacher teaches from don't-know mind and so frees one from teachings. Or not yet. Maybe tomorrow. A good excuse to hang out. When there is clarity of this, there may be an "aha". The "aha", or clarity, isn't dependent on a particular object (such as particular words, thought, feeling, point of view, person) nor on a particular subjective state. 'Aha' is very playfully unpredictable. Doesn't seem to pick favorites. Always lose, lose. Never win, win. Thus, the "aha" can be expressed in different languages, concepts, associated with different feelings, activities, nonactivities or states. Yes, it seems quite willing for this to occur. It's intriguing to explore similarities and differences involved in such expressions across individuals and cultures (e.g., Maharshi's Self, or Dzogchen's original awareness) ... Always travelling........................................ Yet, none of the similarities or differences actually *is* the "aha" nor can provide the "aha" (simply because it doesn't depend on a particular phrase, language, lens, emotion, way of construing similarities and differences, etc.) This also is intriguing. Intriguing isn't aha!, seems a close relative, Relatives are very undependable. For me, self-inquiry ends up exposing the nonlocation of the questioner, which makes question, questioner, and questioning, the same -- and the same as the answer -- this nonseparation seems to me to be what can only be indicated or suggested by concepts like "nondualoriginal mind", "Self", "God", unsplit reality, beyond subject/object division, etc. Sometimes Im located somewhere in particular, Other times nowhere in particular. When I ask someone any question Then I can go to where they are And be with them for awhile. Instead of saying, "How are you today?" I say, "Where are you at this moment?" And then if they are someplace, I can go there And play. Sometimes their place is dangerous, Sometimes its joyful. Sometimes it's nothing special. If I'm lucky, they are nowhere, Know it clearly and invite me in, Teach me their language Such as you are doing. Although the expressions vary, and there are different emphases, if the origin and end are not-two, then the origin and end are not-two. For me, it's that simple, and that's how I treat apparent differences in expressions of truth. I don't try to make them the same as each other, or make their concepts absolutely equivalent, but I see them as partial expressions of what isn't partial ... Nothing is partial, There's only so many ways to cut the carrot. Can the Whole Express itself Other than Whole-y I wanted to ask a question, but ran out of colors. Pretty colored moments. Love, Joyce Very pretty colors, rainbow-woman! Thanks! Enjoying your energy! And yes -- the Whole, taken Wholely as Whole, is always only expressing itself Wholely. And, not taken at all, there's neither expression, expresser, or place to express -- and none needed! Peace, One Colored Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 5, 2001 Report Share Posted June 5, 2001 On 6/5/01 at 7:36 PM Joyce Short wrote: Yes, that's what it seems - but wait until no thing in the universecan add pleasure or pain anymore. I would not like that.I would forget othersAre here too.Even when they aren't.When the last bug leavesI'll shut the door behind us.That's my job.It wasn't a smart career choice. But its OK.Pleasure and Pain, OK Perhaps there will be a day when you realize that like equals pleasure and dislike equals pain... And that memory operates independently of it. Something that can't be read from the textbooks <laugh> But then the "why" of some texts will be discovered too and you remain silent And what if there was no job but just an ongoing surprise party (happy nownow to you, happy nownow dear <(^-^)>, happy nownow to you!!! And could it occur to you that "realization" is possible without being conscious of any "practice"?I'm currently changing traditional definition of 'realization' for new dictionary -any input here? Can't help you - the term "realization" lost its meaning before the issue arose Getting undressed for the party maybe? Then you had caring friends - and you never saw the state my house can be in. For me, it doesn'tmatter whether living in a pig sty or in a palace - as long as there is a hole in the ground for aThink of all the billions of places we have lived - the mind boggles! Did you ever live in a place where squatters and sitters had to share a western style toilet and it was raining and the ground was muddy? HA! I had quite a few holidays during the 70s in some Balkan countries and at that time, there existed even the term "Balkan-toilet" for a hole in the ground, quite a smelly place And of course I've been camping there too - quite a laugh when daily ascending the steep road to the place, overhearing many remarks by folks, unaware I was a Westerner too ) toilet, a bucket for a shower and a little flat space for a sleeping bag. But as the issue of "visiting"has transformed into "request denied", no more "due" house cleaning 'No visitors' sign on the door? There's people standing on the doorstep with wines and cakes for the party. (no meat) No one could find the place - not even the cabbies. And with a map supplied, it's still difficult Regarding the party, don't forget Amarula and some smoked goat cheese for the cat... She loves the smelly stuff. Jan Lets see, what color am I? Joyce Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.