Guest guest Posted June 17, 2002 Report Share Posted June 17, 2002 Hi Bobby, You: , "texasbg2000" <Bigbobgraham@a...> wrote: >They are just tools to > be used, and if you have no need for them because of your life (or > karma) they will fade away. > > -------------------------- > I disagree. All illusion diminishes with true development. > -------------------------- Me: Even the "illusion" of "illusion". Phenomena are just phenomena -- the only illusion is that they are something absolute and eternal. One can't step in the same river twice, but the river flows whether we step in it or not. You: > The seduction of the world is powerful enough even without the > development you describe. Me: Yes, it is. But the world does not seduce us, we seduce ourselves with our projections about that world. The problem with development only occurs when we make it the focus, the goal, of our activity as the end we are seeking. Your desires about that show that you are not seeking them, so if they come don't resist, but don't accept either. Let them be and then you won't be overwhelmed. If I have an "experience" I enjoy it, and if I don't I don't regret it either. To the liberated mind the world is just the world and we are free to respond or not; to the deluded mind the world is the master and we are the slave, we must react as it demands. It has been said that this world is heaven or hell, depending on our thinking. The more we resist something the more it persists. That makes for a lot of work. And I am very lazy -- I don't like work, especially unnecessary work. So I have found that when I let it be, "it" doesn't affect me -- and if it does, I deal with "it". Me again: Part of what I am responding to in your posts is what I sense is a limitation on your part of what we (humans) really are. The illusion is that we are mental/material beings and nothing more. The mind and the body are then seen as the enemy. Actually we are much more than mind or body, and the siddhis are actually tools for discovering the more that we are. It is like a ladder: physical senses on the lower rungs, emotional senses next, mental senses in the middle, the intuitive or soul senses up a bit higher, then spiritual senses on the top. Each set of senses allows us to view realms of being and becoming in their own order. The spiritual senses allow us to view the Absolute and Allness of Awareness, the lower relative senses are the school in which we are learning to "walk our talk". One is not better than another, not senses, not realms of being, rather each is appropriate in their own kind. We are the chooser, we choose how we will respond in each realm of being and becoming. There is reality and illusion in our view of those realms. We are not usually patient enough to wait for the reality to appear! We let the vrittis (mental concepts) dictate, even what is illusion and what is reality and that inevitably leads us down a path to physicality and materiality as the only reality, and we get lost because the spiritual basis becomes inaccessible. The vrittis are not the problem either, the problem is that we make them all and everything. They become judge, jury and executioner. By not allowing them to take their place as just tools, we lose it all. The Gurus of all teachings use words to communicate, to guide the seeker to that place where "direct transmission" can take place. If we are receptive then "direct reception" takes place even from the trees, the grass, the stars, the eyes of the beloved, even from the fly, the ant, the bear, the tiger, the mountain, the fire, ... The Gurus, the liberated, know how to use the tools and which ones to use when necessary. Don't throw away the tools, learn to use them wisely instead. Love, John L. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 18, 2002 Report Share Posted June 18, 2002 > You: > , "texasbg2000" <Bigbobgraham@a...> wrote: > >They are just tools to > > be used, and if you have no need for them because of your life (or > > karma) they will fade away. > > > > -------------------------- > > I disagree. All illusion diminishes with true development. > > -------------------------- > > Me: > Even the "illusion" of "illusion". Phenomena are just phenomena -- > the only illusion is that they are something absolute and eternal. > One can't step in the same river twice, but the river flows whether > we step in it or not. Hi John Thank you for this well considered reply. My take on illusion is that of mental construction. It has to do with differentiation. The potential world ground is infinite. When we differentiate or name such things as stream or stepping those names fit within a mental structure we have adopted that is an illusion. It is fabricated by us and maintained and has no basis in reality except a fleeting electrical charge in the brain for an instant. The structure must be maintained or the differentiation has no existence. It can crumble in an instant with a chemical imbalance. The mental structure or world is the only way we have of knowing there is a stream there. Until we name it it is not known but the potential is there if we choose to keep a structure which allows us to know it. That structure disappears in deepsleep and thus the saying the world disappears. The stream is not there if we don't name it, only the potential for a stream is there along with the potential for everything else-the great undifferentiated. These illusions disappear with true practice. > > You: > > The seduction of the world is powerful enough even without the > > development you describe. > > Me: > Yes, it is. But the world does not seduce us, we seduce ourselves > with our projections about that world. The problem with development > only occurs when we make it the focus, the goal, of our activity as > the end we are seeking. I think you are right. Since by my standard described above we create that world and we are seducing ourselves. > > Your desires about that show that you are not seeking them, so if > they come don't resist, but don't accept either. Let them be and then > you won't be overwhelmed. If I have an "experience" I enjoy it, and > if I don't I don't regret it either. That is a good way to look at it. > > To the liberated mind the world is just the world and we are free to > respond or not; to the deluded mind the world is the master and we > are the slave, we must react as it demands. It has been said that > this world is heaven or hell, depending on our thinking. This sounds like you have an objective world in mind instead of one that arises with the mind as I have been describing. I guess we part company here in out thinking, but probably not in our hearts. > > The more we resist something the more it persists. That makes for a > lot of work. And I am very lazy -- I don't like work, especially > unnecessary work. So I have found that when I let it be, "it" doesn't > affect me -- and if it does, I deal with "it". True again, and I would be liberated if I did not resist but old habits die hard. > > Me again: > Part of what I am responding to in your posts is what I sense is a > limitation on your part of what we (humans) really are. The illusion > is that we are mental/material beings and nothing more. The mind and > the body are then seen as the enemy. I hope my beliefs are clearer now. To me the illusion is based on identification with the instrument of seeing. (I stole this from Patanjali) In other words the crucial mistake is identifying with the mind instead of the consciousness (Brahman). It is really a bad habit and I have gone to great lengths to do something about it but here I am anyway. > > Actually we are much more than mind or body, and the siddhis are > actually tools for discovering the more that we are. It is like a > ladder: physical senses on the lower rungs, emotional senses next, > mental senses in the middle, the intuitive or soul senses up a bit > higher, then spiritual senses on the top. Each set of senses allows > us to view realms of being and becoming in their own order. The > spiritual senses allow us to view the Absolute and Allness of > Awareness, the lower relative senses are the school in which we are > learning to "walk our talk". The siddhis are not tools for discovering who you are, they are hindrances. Liberation is beyond the scope of any power we will ever have at out disposal but by grace, all can be seen as the Self. I believe this but I can't think of an original way to say it so I have to settle for that. > > One is not better than another, not senses, not realms of being, > rather each is appropriate in their own kind. We are the chooser, we > choose how we will respond in each realm of being and becoming. There > is reality and illusion in our view of those realms. We are not > usually patient enough to wait for the reality to appear! We let the > vrittis (mental concepts) dictate, even what is illusion and what is > reality and that inevitably leads us down a path to physicality and > materiality as the only reality, and we get lost because the > spiritual basis becomes inaccessible. I think all that is good thinking and very reasonable. When you say there is reality and illusion in our view of those realms I prefer the concepts of accurate cognition and misconception. I think you are right about mental concepts dictating but I don't think materiality is reality at all. You are making a distinction between higher realms and lower which I don't make. > > The vrittis are not the problem either, the problem is that we make > them all and everything. They become judge, jury and executioner. By > not allowing them to take their place as just tools, we lose it all. i of course disagree. As I said in my earlier post that I believe the vrittis are distinctly the problem. What I mean by vrittis, as I said, is fluctuations of consciousness ( I believe the word also just means thoughts). This is the meaning placed on the word in Georg Feuerstein's translations of 'Raja Yoga' by Patanjali. There are five fluctuations of consciousness;conceptualisation, misconception, valid cognition, memory and sleep. All thoughts will be one of those four types (deep sleep excludes thoughts) They can be afflicted or non-afflicted. Constraining them is the optimum activity and the objective of meditation. Consciousness has three types;one-pointed, restricted, and enstatic. Consciousness has three faces;memory, intelligence, and I Amness. These cannot be tools to overcome themselves. They can be tools that if understood do not stand in the way so much. > > The Gurus of all teachings use words to communicate, to guide the > seeker to that place where "direct transmission" can take place. If > we are receptive then "direct reception" takes place even from the > trees, the grass, the stars, the eyes of the beloved, even from the > fly, the ant, the bear, the tiger, the mountain, the fire, ... > The Gurus, the liberated, know how to use the tools and which ones to > use when necessary. > > Don't throw away the tools, learn to use them wisely instead. good advice, thank you. The tools use themselves and i can know it when they do. > > Love, > > John L. it is a pleasure. Love Bobby G. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 18, 2002 Report Share Posted June 18, 2002 Hi Bobby, We are mostly in agreement and our differences seem to be mostly semantic. My take on it all is that even "hinderances" are illusions created by "mind" but not by "consciousness" for which there are no hinderances. [Thank you for clarifying that distinction.] When I get rid of the idea that there are hinderances (or enemies) then all things have equal value and the Oneness of All appears and self disappears into Self, as the wave disappears into the ocean, and yet does not lose anything, rather gains everything. Namaste, John L. , "texasbg2000" <Bigbobgraham@a...> wrote: > > You: > > , "texasbg2000" <Bigbobgraham@a...> wrote: > > >They are just tools to > > > be used, and if you have no need for them because of your life > (or > > > karma) they will fade away. > > > > > > -------------------------- > > > I disagree. All illusion diminishes with true development. > > > -------------------------- > > > > Me: > > Even the "illusion" of "illusion". Phenomena are just phenomena -- > > the only illusion is that they are something absolute and eternal. > > One can't step in the same river twice, but the river flows whether > > we step in it or not. > > Hi John > Thank you for this well considered reply. My take on illusion is > that of mental construction. It has to do with differentiation. The > potential world ground is infinite. When we differentiate or name > such things as stream or stepping those names fit within a mental > structure we have adopted that is an illusion. It is fabricated by > us and maintained and has no basis in reality except a fleeting > electrical charge in the brain for an instant. The structure must be > maintained or the differentiation has no existence. It can crumble in > an instant with a chemical imbalance. The mental structure or world > is the only way we have of knowing there is a stream there. Until we > name it it is not known but the potential is there if we choose to > keep a structure which allows us to know it. That structure > disappears in deepsleep and thus the saying the world disappears. > The stream is not there if we don't name it, only the potential for a > stream is there along with the potential for everything else-the > great undifferentiated. > > These illusions disappear with true practice. > > > > > You: > > > The seduction of the world is powerful enough even without the > > > development you describe. > > > > Me: > > Yes, it is. But the world does not seduce us, we seduce ourselves > > with our projections about that world. The problem with development > > only occurs when we make it the focus, the goal, of our activity as > > the end we are seeking. > > I think you are right. Since by my standard described above we > create that world and we are seducing ourselves. > > > > > Your desires about that show that you are not seeking them, so if > > they come don't resist, but don't accept either. Let them be and > then > > you won't be overwhelmed. If I have an "experience" I enjoy it, and > > if I don't I don't regret it either. > > That is a good way to look at it. > > > > > To the liberated mind the world is just the world and we are free > to > > respond or not; to the deluded mind the world is the master and we > > are the slave, we must react as it demands. It has been said that > > this world is heaven or hell, depending on our thinking. > > This sounds like you have an objective world in mind instead of one > that arises with the mind as I have been describing. I guess we part > company here in out thinking, but probably not in our hearts. > > > > > The more we resist something the more it persists. That makes for a > > lot of work. And I am very lazy -- I don't like work, especially > > unnecessary work. So I have found that when I let it be, "it" > doesn't > > affect me -- and if it does, I deal with "it". > > True again, and I would be liberated if I did not resist but old > habits die hard. > > > > > Me again: > > Part of what I am responding to in your posts is what I sense is a > > limitation on your part of what we (humans) really are. The > illusion > > is that we are mental/material beings and nothing more. The mind > and > > the body are then seen as the enemy. > > I hope my beliefs are clearer now. To me the illusion is based on > identification with the instrument of seeing. (I stole this from > Patanjali) > In other words the crucial mistake is identifying with the mind > instead of the consciousness (Brahman). It is really a bad habit and > I have gone to great lengths to do something about it but here I am > anyway. > > > > > Actually we are much more than mind or body, and the siddhis are > > actually tools for discovering the more that we are. It is like a > > ladder: physical senses on the lower rungs, emotional senses next, > > mental senses in the middle, the intuitive or soul senses up a bit > > higher, then spiritual senses on the top. Each set of senses allows > > us to view realms of being and becoming in their own order. The > > spiritual senses allow us to view the Absolute and Allness of > > Awareness, the lower relative senses are the school in which we are > > learning to "walk our talk". > > The siddhis are not tools for discovering who you are, they are > hindrances. Liberation is beyond the scope of any power we will ever > have at out disposal but by grace, all can be seen as the Self. I > believe this but I can't think of an original way to say it so I have > to settle for that. > > > > > One is not better than another, not senses, not realms of being, > > rather each is appropriate in their own kind. We are the chooser, > we > > choose how we will respond in each realm of being and becoming. > There > > is reality and illusion in our view of those realms. We are not > > usually patient enough to wait for the reality to appear! We let > the > > vrittis (mental concepts) dictate, even what is illusion and what > is > > reality and that inevitably leads us down a path to physicality and > > materiality as the only reality, and we get lost because the > > spiritual basis becomes inaccessible. > > I think all that is good thinking and very reasonable. When you say > there is reality and illusion in our view of those realms I prefer > the concepts of accurate cognition and misconception. I think you are > right about mental concepts dictating but I don't think materiality > is reality at all. You are making a distinction between higher realms > and lower which I don't make. > > > > > The vrittis are not the problem either, the problem is that we make > > them all and everything. They become judge, jury and executioner. > By > > not allowing them to take their place as just tools, we lose it all. > > i of course disagree. As I said in my earlier post that I believe > the vrittis are distinctly the problem. What I mean by vrittis, as I > said, is fluctuations of consciousness ( I believe the word also just > means thoughts). This is the meaning placed on the word in Georg > Feuerstein's translations of 'Raja Yoga' by Patanjali. There are > five fluctuations of consciousness;conceptualisation, misconception, > valid cognition, memory and sleep. All thoughts will be one of those > four types (deep sleep excludes thoughts) They can be afflicted or > non-afflicted. Constraining them is the optimum activity and the > objective of meditation. Consciousness has three types;one-pointed, > restricted, and enstatic. Consciousness has three faces;memory, > intelligence, and I Amness. > These cannot be tools to overcome themselves. They can be tools that > if understood do not stand in the way so much. > > > > > The Gurus of all teachings use words to communicate, to guide the > > seeker to that place where "direct transmission" can take place. If > > we are receptive then "direct reception" takes place even from the > > trees, the grass, the stars, the eyes of the beloved, even from the > > fly, the ant, the bear, the tiger, the mountain, the fire, ... > > The Gurus, the liberated, know how to use the tools and which ones > to > > use when necessary. > > > > Don't throw away the tools, learn to use them wisely instead. > > good advice, thank you. The tools use themselves and i can know it > when they do. > > > > > Love, > > > > John L. > > it is a pleasure. > Love > Bobby G. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 19, 2002 Report Share Posted June 19, 2002 What fine understanding John > the Oneness of All appears and self disappears into Self, > as the wave disappears into the ocean, and > yet does not lose anything, rather gains everything. Wim --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.370 / Virus Database: 205 - Release 6/5/2002 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 19, 2002 Report Share Posted June 19, 2002 , "johnrloganis" <johnrloganis> wrote: > Hi Bobby, > We are mostly in agreement and our differences seem to be mostly > semantic. Hi John: Yes i was thinking about that too. From my way of looking, the 'structure' that I have in which to 'name' things points to the same place yours does. > My take on it all is that even "hinderances" are illusions created > by "mind" but not by "consciousness" for which there are no > hinderances. [Thank you for clarifying that distinction.] Exactly. > > When I get rid of the idea that there are hinderances (or enemies) > then all things have equal value and the Oneness of All appears and > self disappears into Self, as the wave disappears into the ocean, and > yet does not lose anything, rather gains everything. The strong tendency of the vasanas (tendencies, in this case the idea there are hindrances) to return is for me the problem to be overcome. As you say getting rid of the idea of hindrances works. Not having the idea return again and again seems a matter of grace. Patanjali said to establish the opposite of a negative tendency AS a tendency in order to overcome it. This seems a graceful option. Love Bobby G. > > Namaste, > John L. > > , "texasbg2000" <Bigbobgraham@a...> wrote: > > > You: > > > , "texasbg2000" <Bigbobgraham@a...> > wrote: > > > >They are just tools to > > > > be used, and if you have no need for them because of your life > > (or > > > > karma) they will fade away. > > > > > > > > -------------------------- > > > > I disagree. All illusion diminishes with true development. > > > > -------------------------- > > > > > > Me: > > > Even the "illusion" of "illusion". Phenomena are just phenomena -- > > > > the only illusion is that they are something absolute and > eternal. > > > One can't step in the same river twice, but the river flows > whether > > > we step in it or not. > > > > Hi John > > Thank you for this well considered reply. My take on illusion is > > that of mental construction. It has to do with differentiation. > The > > potential world ground is infinite. When we differentiate or name > > such things as stream or stepping those names fit within a mental > > structure we have adopted that is an illusion. It is fabricated by > > us and maintained and has no basis in reality except a fleeting > > electrical charge in the brain for an instant. The structure must > be > > maintained or the differentiation has no existence. It can crumble > in > > an instant with a chemical imbalance. The mental structure or > world > > is the only way we have of knowing there is a stream there. Until > we > > name it it is not known but the potential is there if we choose to > > keep a structure which allows us to know it. That structure > > disappears in deepsleep and thus the saying the world disappears. > > The stream is not there if we don't name it, only the potential for > a > > stream is there along with the potential for everything else-the > > great undifferentiated. > > > > These illusions disappear with true practice. > > > > > > > > You: > > > > The seduction of the world is powerful enough even without the > > > > development you describe. > > > > > > Me: > > > Yes, it is. But the world does not seduce us, we seduce ourselves > > > with our projections about that world. The problem with > development > > > only occurs when we make it the focus, the goal, of our activity > as > > > the end we are seeking. > > > > I think you are right. Since by my standard described above we > > create that world and we are seducing ourselves. > > > > > > > > Your desires about that show that you are not seeking them, so if > > > they come don't resist, but don't accept either. Let them be and > > then > > > you won't be overwhelmed. If I have an "experience" I enjoy it, > and > > > if I don't I don't regret it either. > > > > That is a good way to look at it. > > > > > > > > To the liberated mind the world is just the world and we are free > > to > > > respond or not; to the deluded mind the world is the master and > we > > > are the slave, we must react as it demands. It has been said that > > > this world is heaven or hell, depending on our thinking. > > > > This sounds like you have an objective world in mind instead of one > > that arises with the mind as I have been describing. I guess we > part > > company here in out thinking, but probably not in our hearts. > > > > > > > > The more we resist something the more it persists. That makes for > a > > > lot of work. And I am very lazy -- I don't like work, especially > > > unnecessary work. So I have found that when I let it be, "it" > > doesn't > > > affect me -- and if it does, I deal with "it". > > > > True again, and I would be liberated if I did not resist but old > > habits die hard. > > > > > > > > Me again: > > > Part of what I am responding to in your posts is what I sense is > a > > > limitation on your part of what we (humans) really are. The > > illusion > > > is that we are mental/material beings and nothing more. The mind > > and > > > the body are then seen as the enemy. > > > > I hope my beliefs are clearer now. To me the illusion is based on > > identification with the instrument of seeing. (I stole this from > > Patanjali) > > In other words the crucial mistake is identifying with the mind > > instead of the consciousness (Brahman). It is really a bad habit > and > > I have gone to great lengths to do something about it but here I am > > anyway. > > > > > > > > Actually we are much more than mind or body, and the siddhis are > > > actually tools for discovering the more that we are. It is like a > > > ladder: physical senses on the lower rungs, emotional senses > next, > > > mental senses in the middle, the intuitive or soul senses up a > bit > > > higher, then spiritual senses on the top. Each set of senses > allows > > > us to view realms of being and becoming in their own order. The > > > spiritual senses allow us to view the Absolute and Allness of > > > Awareness, the lower relative senses are the school in which we > are > > > learning to "walk our talk". > > > > The siddhis are not tools for discovering who you are, they are > > hindrances. Liberation is beyond the scope of any power we will > ever > > have at out disposal but by grace, all can be seen as the Self. I > > believe this but I can't think of an original way to say it so I > have > > to settle for that. > > > > > > > > One is not better than another, not senses, not realms of being, > > > rather each is appropriate in their own kind. We are the chooser, > > we > > > choose how we will respond in each realm of being and becoming. > > There > > > is reality and illusion in our view of those realms. We are not > > > usually patient enough to wait for the reality to appear! We let > > the > > > vrittis (mental concepts) dictate, even what is illusion and what > > is > > > reality and that inevitably leads us down a path to physicality > and > > > materiality as the only reality, and we get lost because the > > > spiritual basis becomes inaccessible. > > > > I think all that is good thinking and very reasonable. When you > say > > there is reality and illusion in our view of those realms I prefer > > the concepts of accurate cognition and misconception. I think you > are > > right about mental concepts dictating but I don't think materiality > > is reality at all. You are making a distinction between higher > realms > > and lower which I don't make. > > > > > > > > The vrittis are not the problem either, the problem is that we > make > > > them all and everything. They become judge, jury and executioner. > > By > > > not allowing them to take their place as just tools, we lose it > all. > > > > i of course disagree. As I said in my earlier post that I believe > > the vrittis are distinctly the problem. What I mean by vrittis, as > I > > said, is fluctuations of consciousness ( I believe the word also > just > > means thoughts). This is the meaning placed on the word in Georg > > Feuerstein's translations of 'Raja Yoga' by Patanjali. There are > > five fluctuations of consciousness;conceptualisation, > misconception, > > valid cognition, memory and sleep. All thoughts will be one of > those > > four types (deep sleep excludes thoughts) They can be afflicted or > > non-afflicted. Constraining them is the optimum activity and the > > objective of meditation. Consciousness has three types;one- pointed, > > restricted, and enstatic. Consciousness has three faces;memory, > > intelligence, and I Amness. > > These cannot be tools to overcome themselves. They can be tools > that > > if understood do not stand in the way so much. > > > > > > > > The Gurus of all teachings use words to communicate, to guide the > > > seeker to that place where "direct transmission" can take place. > If > > > we are receptive then "direct reception" takes place even from > the > > > trees, the grass, the stars, the eyes of the beloved, even from > the > > > fly, the ant, the bear, the tiger, the mountain, the fire, ... > > > The Gurus, the liberated, know how to use the tools and which > ones > > to > > > use when necessary. > > > > > > Don't throw away the tools, learn to use them wisely instead. > > > > good advice, thank you. The tools use themselves and i can know it > > when they do. > > > > > > > > Love, > > > > > > John L. > > > > it is a pleasure. > > Love > > Bobby G. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 19, 2002 Report Share Posted June 19, 2002 Hi Bobby, I use the Hugh D'Andrade translation of the Yoga Sutras. As I read it I have learned to observe but not engage when thoughts rise. In nonresistence is release. But .... the hinderance is that I am not always alert and it gets me in the engagement. Grrr! We are only as far apart as our emails. Nameste, John L. , "texasbg2000" <Bigbobgraham@a...> wrote: > , "johnrloganis" <johnrloganis> wrote: > > Hi Bobby, > > We are mostly in agreement and our differences seem to be mostly > > semantic. > > Hi John: > > Yes i was thinking about that too. From my way of looking, > the 'structure' that I have in which to 'name' things points to the > same place yours does. > > > My take on it all is that even "hinderances" are illusions created > > by "mind" but not by "consciousness" for which there are no > > hinderances. [Thank you for clarifying that distinction.] > > Exactly. > > > > > When I get rid of the idea that there are hinderances (or enemies) > > then all things have equal value and the Oneness of All appears and > > self disappears into Self, as the wave disappears into the ocean, > and > > yet does not lose anything, rather gains everything. > > The strong tendency of the vasanas (tendencies, in this case the idea > there are hindrances) to return is for me the problem to be > overcome. As you say getting rid of the idea of hindrances works. > Not having the idea return again and again seems a matter of grace. > Patanjali said to establish the opposite of a negative tendency AS a > tendency in order to overcome it. This seems a graceful option. > > Love > Bobby G. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 19, 2002 Report Share Posted June 19, 2002 , "johnrloganis" <johnrloganis> wrote: > Hi Bobby, > I use the Hugh D'Andrade translation of the Yoga Sutras. As I read it Hi John; I guess I will have to get that one. B K S Iyengar's is good. He is a real desciple and gives a lot of history. > I have learned to observe but not engage when thoughts rise. In > nonresistence is release. But .... > > the hinderance is that I am not always alert and it gets me in the > engagement. Grrr! I actually got a lot of good out of Vivekananda. he talks about diet and practical matters and then gives the translations. i will look for the one you mention when I get some money. > > We are only as far apart as our emails. Vigilance. > > Nameste, > John L. Love Bobby G. > > > , "texasbg2000" <Bigbobgraham@a...> wrote: > > , "johnrloganis" <johnrloganis> > wrote: > > > Hi Bobby, > > > We are mostly in agreement and our differences seem to be mostly > > > semantic. > > > > Hi John: > > > > Yes i was thinking about that too. From my way of looking, > > the 'structure' that I have in which to 'name' things points to the > > same place yours does. > > > > > My take on it all is that even "hinderances" are illusions > created > > > by "mind" but not by "consciousness" for which there are no > > > hinderances. [Thank you for clarifying that distinction.] > > > > Exactly. > > > > > > > > When I get rid of the idea that there are hinderances (or > enemies) > > > then all things have equal value and the Oneness of All appears > and > > > self disappears into Self, as the wave disappears into the ocean, > > and > > > yet does not lose anything, rather gains everything. > > > > The strong tendency of the vasanas (tendencies, in this case the > idea > > there are hindrances) to return is for me the problem to be > > overcome. As you say getting rid of the idea of hindrances works. > > Not having the idea return again and again seems a matter of > grace. > > Patanjali said to establish the opposite of a negative tendency AS > a > > tendency in order to overcome it. This seems a graceful option. > > > > Love > > Bobby G. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 20, 2002 Report Share Posted June 20, 2002 Hi Bobby, You may have trouble getting it. The only place I can guess it might still be available is the Samuel Weiser bookstore in Manhattan. I have real a number of translations and I do like the Vivekananda one and curiously, the translation from the Theosophical Society. John L. , "texasbg2000" <Bigbobgraham@a...> wrote: > , "johnrloganis" <johnrloganis> wrote: > > Hi Bobby, > > I use the Hugh D'Andrade translation of the Yoga Sutras. As I read > it > > Hi John; > > I guess I will have to get that one. B K S Iyengar's is good. He is > a real desciple and gives a lot of history. > > I actually got a lot of good out of Vivekananda. he talks about diet > and practical matters and then gives the translations. i will look > for the one you mention when I get some money. > > > Bobby G. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 20, 2002 Report Share Posted June 20, 2002 That store was great but exists no more. Went out of business because of the new Barnes & Noble that opened nearby. They do have an antiquarian service. They're linked to http://www.allbookstores.com/index At 07:41 PM 6/20/02 +0000, johnrloganis wrote: >Hi Bobby, >You may have trouble getting it. The only place I can guess it might >still be available is the Samuel Weiser bookstore in Manhattan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 20, 2002 Report Share Posted June 20, 2002 , Greg Goode <goode@D...> wrote: > That store was great but exists no more. Went out of business because of the new Barnes & Noble that opened nearby. They do have an antiquarian service. They're linked to http://www.allbookstores.com/index > > At 07:41 PM 6/20/02 +0000, johnrloganis wrote: > >Hi Bobby, > >You may have trouble getting it. The only place I can guess it might > >still be available is the Samuel Weiser bookstore in Manhattan. Thanks for the tips John and Greg. i tried the All Books site but they don't have any Andrade books. i will find it when I am ready for it. Love Bobby G. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 20, 2002 Report Share Posted June 20, 2002 Hi Greg, Thanks for the update. That is so sad. It was a great bookstore, but it was a long time ago when I was last there. John L. , Greg Goode <goode@D...> wrote: > That store was great but exists no more. Went out of business because of the new Barnes & Noble that opened nearby. They do have an antiquarian service. They're linked to http://www.allbookstores.com/index > > At 07:41 PM 6/20/02 +0000, johnrloganis wrote: > >Hi Bobby, > >You may have trouble getting it. The only place I can guess it might > >still be available is the Samuel Weiser bookstore in Manhattan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 20, 2002 Report Share Posted June 20, 2002 Hi Bobby, Well.... I find I have an extra copy. It was privately printed and privately distributed. So...I made copies. I can send you one if you will write me privately (email) with your address. It is small with no commentary and it will be my Xeroxed copy but made in book form. Nameste, John L. , "texasbg2000" <Bigbobgraham@a...> wrote: > , Greg Goode <goode@D...> wrote: > > That store was great but exists no more. Went out of business > because of the new Barnes & Noble that opened nearby. They do have > an antiquarian service. They're linked to > http://www.allbookstores.com/index > > > > At 07:41 PM 6/20/02 +0000, johnrloganis wrote: > > >Hi Bobby, > > >You may have trouble getting it. The only place I can guess it > might > > >still be available is the Samuel Weiser bookstore in Manhattan. > > Thanks for the tips John and Greg. i tried the All Books site but > they don't have any Andrade books. i will find it when I am ready > for it. > > Love Bobby G. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 20, 2002 Report Share Posted June 20, 2002 I really did like it too. I got most of my Masonic and Rosicrucian books there. No one else had them, and they had more books than any other store on esoteric stuff from so many traditions. Including esoteric *fiction*! They closed in about 1992, keeping only the antiquarian side, and now I'm not so sure how active that is. To this day, I have on my altar a little wooden incense holder from Weiser's filled with amber - that wonderful crystalline substance that lasts forever and which serves as the basis for so many incenses, perfumes and colognes. Nice remembering with you! --Greg At 12:16 AM 6/21/02 +0000, johnrloganis wrote: >Hi Greg, >Thanks for the update. >That is so sad. It was a great bookstore, but it was a long time ago >when I was last there. >John L. > >, Greg Goode <goode@D...> wrote: >> That store was great but exists no more. Went out of business >because of the new Barnes & Noble that opened nearby. They do have >an antiquarian service. They're linked to >http://www.allbookstores.com/index >> >> At 07:41 PM 6/20/02 +0000, johnrloganis wrote: >> >Hi Bobby, >> >You may have trouble getting it. The only place I can guess it >might >> >still be available is the Samuel Weiser bookstore in Manhattan. > > > >/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 20, 2002 Report Share Posted June 20, 2002 Hi Greg, I felt your memory feelings and my heart echoed the memories. I would go visit them every Saturday afternoon just to browse. There is a bookstore in San Diego, California called THE CONTROVERSIAL BOOKSTORE, which carries a great many books in the esoteric traditions. Also the BODHI TREE BOOKSTORE in Hollywood is as massive as Samuel Weiser was, but without so much of the Antiquarian thrust. Thanks for sharing, John L. , Greg Goode <goode@D...> wrote: > I really did like it too. I got most of my Masonic and Rosicrucian books there. No one else had them, and they had more books than any other store on esoteric stuff from so many traditions. Including esoteric *fiction*! They closed in about 1992, keeping only the antiquarian side, and now I'm not so sure how active that is. To this day, I have on my altar a little wooden incense holder from Weiser's filled with amber - that wonderful crystalline substance that lasts forever and which serves as the basis for so many incenses, perfumes and colognes. > > Nice remembering with you! > > --Greg > > At 12:16 AM 6/21/02 +0000, johnrloganis wrote: > >Hi Greg, > >Thanks for the update. > >That is so sad. It was a great bookstore, but it was a long time ago > >when I was last there. > >John L. > > > >, Greg Goode <goode@D...> wrote: > >> That store was great but exists no more. Went out of business > >because of the new Barnes & Noble that opened nearby. They do have > >an antiquarian service. They're linked to > >http://www.allbookstores.com/index > >> > >> At 07:41 PM 6/20/02 +0000, johnrloganis wrote: > >> >Hi Bobby, > >> >You may have trouble getting it. The only place I can guess it > >might > >> >still be available is the Samuel Weiser bookstore in Manhattan. > > > > > > > >/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...
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.