Guest guest Posted January 22, 2002 Report Share Posted January 22, 2002 Hi guys, I agree, I agree, I agree! Still loving the maya though, still creating the thought forms. Knowing yourself is not antithetical to loving manifestation. Nope, not at all. I want the universe for my playground. I don't care if this 'I' is only a specific expression of the I Am. As long as the I Am is expressed optimally within a vehicle that is ever the becoming of perfection. Don't know that Madge commercial. Maybe it never reached England. Yep, what is, IS. Just like the fish in the middle of the ocean asking what is water ? love eric. , Bruce Morgen <editor@j...> wrote: > Well, Eric and Mazie, it's > not as if we're given a > choice -- to paraphrase > "Madge," the manicurist > from that old TV > commercial: "Maya, you're > soaking in it." What > Jodyji is pointing out is > that, while "Madge" is > quite correct, Maya is not > who we actually are. The > direct realization of that > fact is jnana, and Jody's > long personal history as a > bhakta obviously did not > preclude the advent of > that wondrous grace. Heaven forbid if anyone got the idea that I don't enjoy Maya. The best thing in the world for me is to be racing down a steep hill in deep snow on my snowboard. I spend ridiculous amounts of time, effort, and money on this. However, riding in the powder or exploring the causal realms or taking a poop on the pot are all the same thing. The error isn't in knowing about these things, it's in thinking that they are somehow closer to the truth or that they bring us closer to ourselves. [snip] ------------------------ Sponsor ---------------------~--> Access Your PC from Anywhere It's Easy. It's Fun. - Free Download. Click Here! ---~-> /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 January 22, 2002 Report Share Posted January 22, 2002 I agree Jody, and this is my whole point. We are what we are. Perfection within creation. No one cannot be creation. It is not possible to be only the Source. We are the expression of that Source. Created to be its manifestation. Its perfection within ever more refined and subtle planes of consciousness. To my knowledge there has never been a human incarnation that has returned utterly to the Source. The great ones live on in eternity and also are masters of time. But I know nothing of such things. I live to live in the flow of this moment, with as much awareness as I can. Yes, there is great longing for the Beloved, but I find him nowhere but here- in creation. Understand? love eric. > Hi guys, > > I agree, I agree, I agree! > > Still loving the maya though, still creating the thought forms. Knowing > yourself is not antithetical to loving manifestation. Nope, not at all. > I want the universe for my playground. I don't care if this 'I' is only a > specific expression of the I Am. As long as the I Am is expressed optimally wi > thin a vehicle that is ever the becoming of perfection. But the vehicle is not the perfection, nor will perfection ever come to the vehicle or to the expression that it appears to carry. The perfection is always inherent eternally, despite the apparent disposition of the expression. That's the whole problem of becoming. If we're always working on becoming, how will we see that we're already there? You aren't expressed by any vehicles as such requires a point to express from. You are the immanent foundation of the entire universe's simultaneous expression, across all time and space, now and forever. This doesn't mean don't have fun in your apparent individuality. Just remember that it isn't real and what you really are really has nothing to do with any of it. [snip] ------------------------ Sponsor ---------------------~--> Access Your PC from Anywhere Convenience and Flexibility - Free Download Click Here! ---~-> /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 January 22, 2002 Report Share Posted January 22, 2002 I forgot to thank you for your comments. We are not talking a different language, just a different dialect. Just another view from the same infinite wheel. In my view, I need not run after Grace. In a sense all practice with a goal orientation is delusion. No offence meant. There must be orientation, but it is but the surrender to what Is. When we let go of what is not, we realise our Truth. We are healed of misperception and limitation of consciousness. Realised. Consciousness, if it is to be a creator within creation must have a vehicle. That vehicle need not be any form we can imagine now. Grace is acceptance of Godness in all things. Being One, we can be many also. God is God for it is singular and plural in One. love eric. , Bruce Morgen <editor@j...> wrote: > Well, Eric and Mazie, it's > not as if we're given a > choice -- to paraphrase > "Madge," the manicurist > from that old TV > commercial: "Maya, you're > soaking in it." What > Jodyji is pointing out is > that, while "Madge" is > quite correct, Maya is not > who we actually are. The > direct realization of that > fact is jnana, and Jody's > long personal history as a > bhakta obviously did not > preclude the advent of > that wondrous grace. Heaven forbid if anyone got the idea that I don't enjoy Maya. The best thing in the world for me is to be racing down a steep hill in deep snow on my snowboard. I spend ridiculous amounts of time, effort, and money on this. However, riding in the powder or exploring the causal realms or taking a poop on the pot are all the same thing. The error isn't in knowing about these things, it's in thinking that they are somehow closer to the truth or that they bring us closer to ourselves. [snip] ------------------------ Sponsor ---------------------~--> Access Your PC from Anywhere It's Easy. It's Fun. - Free Download. Click Here! ---~-> /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 January 22, 2002 Report Share Posted January 22, 2002 Dear Jody, just minor comments........ , ErcAshfrd@a... wrote: > > I agree Jody, and this is my whole point. We are what we are. Perfection > within creation. No one cannot be creation. It is not possible to be only the > Source. Not only is it possible, it is exactly how it is. All this creation we see with our apparent eyes is not us, including the apparent owners of those eyes. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am saying the same thing as you. We need not be entangled in words. I am unconcerned with metaphysical concepts. Just say God and smile! > We are the expression of that Source. Created to be its manifestation. Its > perfection within ever more refined and subtle planes of consciousness. To my > knowledge there has never been a human incarnation that has returned utterly > to the Source. The great ones live on in eternity and also are masters of > time. > But I know nothing of such things. I live to live in the flow of this moment, > with as much awareness as I can. Yes, there is great longing for the Beloved, > but I find him nowhere but here- in creation. Understand? > > love > > eric. We are the source, and the creation just is. It does what it does, and we shine within>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I so agree. , ,completely untouched by the going-ons of mad Mother Maya.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In my view,The Mother is not mad, our perceptions of Her are. I honour your point of view also though. love eric. ------------------------ Sponsor ---------------------~--> Access Your PC from Anywhere Full setup in 2 minutes! - Free Download Click Here! ---~-> /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 January 22, 2002 Report Share Posted January 22, 2002 , Bruce Morgen <editor@j...> wrote: > Well, Eric and Mazie, it's > not as if we're given a > choice -- to paraphrase > "Madge," the manicurist > from that old TV > commercial: "Maya, you're > soaking in it." What > Jodyji is pointing out is > that, while "Madge" is > quite correct, Maya is not > who we actually are. The > direct realization of that > fact is jnana, and Jody's > long personal history as a > bhakta obviously did not > preclude the advent of > that wondrous grace. Heaven forbid if anyone got the idea that I don't enjoy Maya. The best thing in the world for me is to be racing down a steep hill in deep snow on my snowboard. I spend ridiculous amounts of time, effort, and money on this. However, riding in the powder or exploring the causal realms or taking a poop on the pot are all the same thing. The error isn't in knowing about these things, it's in thinking that they are somehow closer to the truth or that they bring us closer to ourselves. [snip] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 22, 2002 Report Share Posted January 22, 2002 , ErcAshfrd@a... wrote: > > Hi guys, > > I agree, I agree, I agree! > > Still loving the maya though, still creating the thought forms. Knowing > yourself is not antithetical to loving manifestation. Nope, not at all. > I want the universe for my playground. I don't care if this 'I' is only a > specific expression of the I Am. As long as the I Am is expressed optimally wi > thin a vehicle that is ever the becoming of perfection. But the vehicle is not the perfection, nor will perfection ever come to the vehicle or to the expression that it appears to carry. The perfection is always inherent eternally, despite the apparent disposition of the expression. That's the whole problem of becoming. If we're always working on becoming, how will we see that we're already there? You aren't expressed by any vehicles as such requires a point to express from. You are the immanent foundation of the entire universe's simultaneous expression, across all time and space, now and forever. This doesn't mean don't have fun in your apparent individuality. Just remember that it isn't real and what you really are really has nothing to do with any of it. [snip] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 22, 2002 Report Share Posted January 22, 2002 , ErcAshfrd@a... wrote: > > I agree Jody, and this is my whole point. We are what we are. Perfection > within creation. No one cannot be creation. It is not possible to be only the > Source. Not only is it possible, it is exactly how it is. All this creation we see with our apparent eyes is not us, including the apparent owners of those eyes. > We are the expression of that Source. Created to be its manifestation. Its > perfection within ever more refined and subtle planes of consciousness. To my > knowledge there has never been a human incarnation that has returned utterly > to the Source. The great ones live on in eternity and also are masters of > time. > But I know nothing of such things. I live to live in the flow of this moment, > with as much awareness as I can. Yes, there is great longing for the Beloved, > but I find him nowhere but here- in creation. Understand? > > love > > eric. We are the source, and the creation just is. It does what it does, and we shine within, completely untouched by the going-ons of mad Mother Maya. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 22, 2002 Report Share Posted January 22, 2002 , "jodyrrr" <jodyrrr@h...> wrote: > , ErcAshfrd@a... wrote: > > > > I agree Jody, and this is my whole point. We are what we are. Perfection > > within creation. No one cannot be creation. It is not possible to be only the > > Source. > > Not only is it possible, it is exactly how it is. All this > creation we see with our apparent eyes is not us, including > the apparent owners of those eyes. Maya = Brahman -- but this is a 'realization' and not a thought or concept. Why create a duality where there is none? Cheers, Tim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 22, 2002 Report Share Posted January 22, 2002 , "jodyrrr" <jodyrrr@h...> wrote: > The perfection is always inherent eternally, despite the apparent > disposition of the expression. That's the whole problem of > becoming. If we're always working on becoming, how will we see > that we're already there? > > You aren't expressed by any vehicles as such requires a point > to express from. You are the immanent foundation of the > entire universe's simultaneous expression, across all time and > space, now and forever. This doesn't mean don't have fun in > your apparent individuality. Just remember that it isn't real > and what you really are really has nothing to do with any of it. > > [snip] No offense, but these words are starting to take on the air of a recitation, a sort of parroting or 'vain argumentation'. Cheers, Tim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 22, 2002 Report Share Posted January 22, 2002 , "jodyrrr" <jodyrrr@h...> wrote: > You aren't expressed by any vehicles as such requires a point > to express from. You are the immanent foundation of the > entire universe's simultaneous expression, across all time and > space, now and forever. You can go ahead and say what I'm not, and I'd be inclined to agree -- however, the moment you say what I am, you are handing out a glass of poison and asking me to drink it. No thanks :-). Cheers, Tim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 22, 2002 Report Share Posted January 22, 2002 > Discrimination is knowing what is real and what is not. Maya is > the term employed for the unreal, Brahman for the real. Sticking > them together with a wad of gum doesn't mean they are the same > thing, despite the fact that it's not on your map that way. Hi Jody I'm just trying to 'see' your angle here. I don't mean to be argumentative Isn't maya just our perception of the divine? I mean isn't the term "un-real" a relative term in itself, to define the tempory nature of the divine manifestation ? In my vision, i see Brahman and Maya as ultimately being the same thing; just in differing states of being or manifestation The un-manifest and the manifest, but it's still all one - all God....the 'same thing' really Perhaps i'm not understanding you fully? And understanding is all i'm looking for; i'm not interested in being right or wrong Blessings Sai Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 22, 2002 Report Share Posted January 22, 2002 , Bruce Morgen <editor@j...> wrote: > The > direct realization of that > fact is jnana, and Jody's > long personal history as a > bhakta obviously did not > preclude the advent of > that wondrous grace. To whom does that appear obvious? ;-) Cheers, Tim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 22, 2002 Report Share Posted January 22, 2002 , "fewtch" <coresite@a...> wrote: > , "jodyrrr" <jodyrrr@h...> wrote: > > , ErcAshfrd@a... wrote: > > > > > > I agree Jody, and this is my whole point. We are what we are. > Perfection > > > within creation. No one cannot be creation. It is not possible to > be only the > > > Source. > > > > Not only is it possible, it is exactly how it is. All this > > creation we see with our apparent eyes is not us, including > > the apparent owners of those eyes. > > Maya = Brahman -- but this is a 'realization' and not a thought or > concept. > > Why create a duality where there is none? Trying to use the mind to remap the world into nonduality doesn't work. > Cheers, > > Tim There is no duality. There's an environment mapper called the mind that renders a world picture called duality, but it's not the "thing" in itself. Discrimination is knowing what is real and what is not. Maya is the term employed for the unreal, Brahman for the real. Sticking them together with a wad of gum doesn't mean they are the same thing, despite the fact that it's not on your map that way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 22, 2002 Report Share Posted January 22, 2002 , "fewtch" <coresite@a...> wrote: > , "jodyrrr" <jodyrrr@h...> wrote: > > The perfection is always inherent eternally, despite the apparent > > disposition of the expression. That's the whole problem of > > becoming. If we're always working on becoming, how will we see > > that we're already there? > > > > You aren't expressed by any vehicles as such requires a point > > to express from. You are the immanent foundation of the > > entire universe's simultaneous expression, across all time and > > space, now and forever. This doesn't mean don't have fun in > > your apparent individuality. Just remember that it isn't real > > and what you really are really has nothing to do with any of it. > > > > [snip] > > No offense, but these words are starting to take on the air of a > recitation, a sort of parroting or 'vain argumentation'. > > Cheers, > > Tim You've nailed me Tim. Right on the money. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 23, 2002 Report Share Posted January 23, 2002 , "prashanti" <prashanti@n...> wrote: > > Discrimination is knowing what is real and what is not. Maya is > > the term employed for the unreal, Brahman for the real. Sticking > > them together with a wad of gum doesn't mean they are the same > > thing, despite the fact that it's not on your map that way. > > Hi Jody > > I'm just trying to 'see' your angle here. I don't mean to be argumentative > > Isn't maya just our perception of the divine? I mean isn't the term > "un-real" a relative term in itself, to define the tempory nature of the > divine manifestation ? Maya is the manifest world. We are pure being. Pure being only knows Itself as pure being. From the regard of pure being, only pure being is real. You can't call Maya pure being. She is variegated being, and hence unreal from the regard of the Self. > In my vision, i see Brahman and Maya as ultimately being the same thing; > just in differing states of being or manifestation > The un-manifest and the manifest, but it's still all one - all God....the > 'same thing' really But that which is manifest and that which is not manifest is different by virtue of its state of existence. Like fire and its power to burn. The fire "contains" the burn and is inseparable from it, but we can still make a distinction between the two. > Perhaps i'm not understanding you fully? And understanding is all i'm > looking for; i'm not interested in being right or wrong > > Blessings > Sai "Not two" describes reality, yet there lies an apparent distinction between that which we really are and that which we think we are. When discrimination arises in the mind this is known directly. That which is "not this" is Maya. Her reality is apparent only, for to the Self there is only the Self. All the things together that we call the world cease to be in the Self. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 23, 2002 Report Share Posted January 23, 2002 Eric & Friends, Eric says: "I am in love with the duality, the intermediary levels, with the journey itself. I want to explore all the myriad planes of created existence. I want to dance in ever finer levels of polarity. I seek always the eternal here in the duality, and love it all. Mazie says: I like seeing this marvelous view sometimes as I play in the poet's playground and gather what I find there. Dear, Eric & Mazie, That's why they call it Maya. yours in the bonds, eric , ErcAshfrd@a... wrote: > Dear Jody, > > > a big grateful ditto on all that Mazie has said in her reply to you. Advaita > is sublime gnosis. Its pratitioners are warriors of the highest order. Yet, > and yet....... > > I am in love with the duality, the intermediary levels, with the journey > itself. I want to explore all the myriad planes of created existence. I want > to dance in ever finer levels of polarity. I seek always the eternal here in > the duality, and love it all. > > with love and respect > > eric. > > > > > , "jodyrrr" <jodyrrr@h...> wrote: > > > , "mazie_l" <sraddha54@h...> wrote: > > > > Dear Friends, > > > > > > > > In "Autobiography of a Yogi" Swami Sri Yukteswarji says: > > > > > > > > "The causal world is indescribably subtle. ... > > > > > > [snip] > > > > > > It's a quaint idea Mazie, and perhaps beautiful to behold, > > > but unfortunately it has little to do with self inquiry. > > > > > > Who we are is quite beyond all that, and we needn't ever > > > reach the casual plane or experience it to come to the > > > understanding of ourselves as the Great Self. We can skip > > > right over these additional layers of Maya, and most of the > > > sages of advaita recommend that we do just that. > > > > Dearest Jody, > > > > Yes, it is quaint and beautiful. I know what you are saying is the > > truth. I like seeing this marvelous view sometimes as I play in the > > poet's playground and gather what I find there. I do understand the > > truth though. All that I have finally come to understand by studying > > and listening to Advaitists is beyond compare. My Bhakti nature finds > > the swinging along in joy just right for me right now. The messages > > that you share have opened my eyes up more than you might imagine > > dear Jody. I appreciate that quite alot. I can't begin to name all > > who have helped me here to come to a fuller understanding of Advaita. > > > > Love, > > Mazie > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 23, 2002 Report Share Posted January 23, 2002 Jody, Sai & Friends, Sai's view is also the view of Kashmir Saivism, Siddha Yoga, Jnanashvar Yoga and innumerable schools of Tantra, including Tibetan Vajrayana.Still, it is worth bearing in mind that "neti-neti" and the renunciation which it signifies is the method that has born the most fruit for the historical originators of these schools. As was so beautifully dramatized in the Gospel of Shri Ramakrishna when Totapuri, the nondual advaitic Sannyasi, came to Dakshineshvar to initiate Ramakrishna, thoroughly trained and Realized Tantric Master that he was, into the final teachings of Advaita and Nirguna Samadhi, Even the Mother must be consciously sacrificed (cut in half by the mind)to experience the final nondual state of Siva (Siva-Sakti Samarasya, Shakti, Krishna, Rama, Buddhamind, Dharmakaya etc.). yours in the bonds, eric , "prashanti" <prashanti@n...> wrote: > > Discrimination is knowing what is real and what is not. Maya is > > the term employed for the unreal, Brahman for the real. Sticking > > them together with a wad of gum doesn't mean they are the same > > thing, despite the fact that it's not on your map that way. > > Hi Jody > > I'm just trying to 'see' your angle here. I don't mean to be argumentative > > Isn't maya just our perception of the divine? I mean isn't the term > "un-real" a relative term in itself, to define the tempory nature of the > divine manifestation ? > > In my vision, i see Brahman and Maya as ultimately being the same thing; > just in differing states of being or manifestation > The un-manifest and the manifest, but it's still all one - all God....the > 'same thing' really > > Perhaps i'm not understanding you fully? And understanding is all i'm > looking for; i'm not interested in being right or wrong > > Blessings > Sai Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 23, 2002 Report Share Posted January 23, 2002 , "jodyrrr" <jodyrrr@h...> wrote: >>> Discrimination is knowing what is real and what is not. Maya is the term employed for the unreal, Brahman for the real.<<< May I just say this! All the signs of unadulterated mentalism and duality are popping up when discriminations or distinctions between some self evident reality of Brahman ("Brahman for the real") and some apparent unreality of Maya ("Maya is the term employed for the unreal") are bandied about... It ain't like that... It ain't like this... It ain't even not... Reality is... Any discussion on what reality entails or entails not, is conceptual and by definition dualistic. Get off it... lest one infect one's re-liberation with such blight and thwart one's re-origination. And Jody, as you wrote: >>> The best thing in the world for me is to be racing down a steep hill in deep snow on my snowboard.<<< Yes, Jody, by all means, snowboard to your heart's content... And Mazie as you wrote: >>> I like seeing this marvelous view sometimes as I play in the poet's playground and gather what I find there. <<< Yes, Mazie, go for it, be as poetic as Jody rides the deepest snows... Wim 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.