Frankji/your clarification

[Guest guest]

>>Frankji:

>>thus, not all jnani-s are equally effective teachers.

the ones who excel, possess the universal key, and

sanction and uphold the esoteric doctrines of *all*

the great sages, from Sankara, Krishna, Buddha, Christ,

Milarepa, Padmasambhava, Bodhidharma, Hui-Neng, Hsueh

Feng, Suzuki Roshi, Tsong Ka-Pa, Lao Tzu, Chuang Tzu,

Jnaneshwar, Ramana, Ramakrishna, Sathya Saibaba, and

many others.

>> so what is the criteria of a jnani? the best way i

believe one can allude to the 'stateless state,' is

by affirming that it is the awareness-connection of

the [irrespectively everpresent] condition of bliss

in the Heart of one's Being. the bliss of the Self,

which is universally accessible, just by and through

the elimination of the barrage of thought obstacles.

either by stopping or defusing the impact of thought,

the wisdom in the Heart unfolds purely automatically.

 

Dan: Thank you for your words above, as well as your other

words that help clarify that the teachings of the Buddha

were not nihilistic, and for generally taking the discussion

of reality to an awareness beyond philosophical dispute.

Reality is not provided in a philosophical position or stance -

this is the clear message I receive from you. It is a trick

of thought to want to believe that Truth will be obtained once we

obtain the correct position about the rightness or wrongness of

philosophies, or about which thinker completed the thoughts of which other

thinker, and so on. Thought, by engaging in these tactics, never

looks into its core assumption of a thinker who can stand apart from

Reality in order to critique, explicate, and so on. The energy that

is reality is normally filtered through thought, and through the need of

thought to maintain its illusion of a separatively existing thinker.

The question then isn't which thinker most correctly expressed

which knowledge as it is: how do I, knowing this, realize the Truth

in which there is no reliance on separate structures?

This realization comes, I perceive,

in the way you suggest: by not relying on thought as anything more

than what it is -- a separative edifice, therefore limited.

I appreciate the way your expression allows the energy of Truth to shine.

-- namaste -- Dan

[Guest guest]

Dan Berkow, PhD wrote:

> [...] The energy that

> is reality is normally filtered through thought, and through the need of

> thought to maintain its illusion of a separatively existing thinker.

> The question then isn't which thinker most correctly expressed

> which knowledge as it is: how do I, knowing this, realize the Truth

> in which there is no reliance on separate structures?

 

 

yes, the compelling fallacy is the idea that

there is 'realization' achievable within and

through the dynamic of the pragmatic thinker.

this is the by-product of the ego-Mind habit,

which has to be finally broken. the fact is

that Self-realization is the natural essence

in/of one's Being, where thought does nothing

really to add or subtract from That, except if

and when it is relied upon to *access* Being.

this is where the detour invariably launches.

 

enter *choiceless awareness*. here, whatever

unfolds in the field of Mind is simply the Play.

as John Lennon told us in STRAWBERRY FIELDS,

"and there's nothing to get hung about..."

 

namaste