Guest guest Posted October 18, 2003 Report Share Posted October 18, 2003 I see UG screaming at everything anyone tries to say and calling us all barking dogs as a lot like Judi's blah blah blah message. Everything we say is conditioned, everything we say is from memory, a rehash of things said to us or what we have said before. Everything we say is anchored around the continuation of our sense of self and strengthens it. Everything we say is competely ignorant because it comes from a position of not having a fucking clue what's going on and pretending that we do. And as for this 'awareness' that you keep harping on about - here's a it of Steven Harrison: Can we bring awareness to the moment, whatever its content? This is the cultivation of awareness, bringing the attention to the moment over and over until there is a constant consciousness. This awareness without comment, without discrimination, without judgement is often taught as the end result of certain spiritual practices. But in actuality, this is a state of mind, a stance, a position requiring a watcher who is " aware. " In fact, this watcher is not in real contact with anything. This state of apparent awareness is a kind of virtual reality created by thought as an approximation to what pure consciousness might be like. After we have spent a great deal of time sitting in empty rooms " paying attention, " a zombiesque quality emerges. This awareness is generally addicted to quiet or otherwise controlled spaces and lacks what might be described as intelligence. This lack of intelligence means that this so-called awareness cannot change or adapt as the situation of life changes. It can only be " aware, " that is aloof, distant and uninvolved. .... It is often the case that we are attracted to the cultivation of awareness or other no-technique techniques because we are overwhelmed by our lives. We have been unable to control our lives and seek to distance ourselves from our own existence. The problem is that the conflict is in the watcher, the one who is aware, not the objects of our awareness. Our lives ARE out of control. What happens if we don't distance ourselves from that fact? I saw this and thought of you. Tanya. http://www.n0by.de/n0/Tanya.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 18, 2003 Report Share Posted October 18, 2003 Dear Karta, I'm a little puzzled by this message because I don't know who it is addressed to. Even the signature confuses me. > > And as for this 'awareness' that you keep harping on about - here's a > it of Steven Harrison: Who is this " you " that you're talking to? Is this part of a discussion from another group? > > I saw this and thought of you. > Tanya. The last word in this message is " Tanya. " Is Tanya the author of this message? Or did you write it, and you're saying that " this " reminded you of Tanya? Best regards, Rob - " satkartar14 " <satkarta4 <Realization > Saturday, October 18, 2003 9:36 AM words of the enlightened baby > I see UG screaming at everything anyone tries to say and calling us > all barking dogs as a lot like Judi's blah blah blah message. > Everything we say is conditioned, everything we say is from memory, a > rehash of things said to us or what we have said before. Everything > we say is anchored around the continuation of our sense of self and > strengthens it. Everything we say is competely ignorant because it > comes from a position of not having a fucking clue what's going on > and pretending that we do. > > And as for this 'awareness' that you keep harping on about - here's a > it of Steven Harrison: > > Can we bring awareness to the moment, whatever its content? This is > the cultivation of awareness, bringing the attention to the moment > over and over until there is a constant consciousness. This awareness > without comment, without discrimination, without judgement is often > taught as the end result of certain spiritual practices. But in > actuality, this is a state of mind, a stance, a position requiring a > watcher who is " aware. " In fact, this watcher is not in real contact > with anything. > This state of apparent awareness is a kind of virtual reality created > by thought as an approximation to what pure consciousness might be > like. After we have spent a great deal of time sitting in empty > rooms " paying attention, " a zombiesque quality emerges. This > awareness is generally addicted to quiet or otherwise controlled > spaces and lacks what might be described as intelligence. This lack > of intelligence means that this so-called awareness cannot change or > adapt as the situation of life changes. It can only be " aware, " that > is aloof, distant and uninvolved. > ... > It is often the case that we are attracted to the cultivation of > awareness or other no-technique techniques because we are overwhelmed > by our lives. We have been unable to control our lives and seek to > distance ourselves from our own existence. > The problem is that the conflict is in the watcher, the one who is > aware, not the objects of our awareness. Our lives ARE out of > control. What happens if we don't distance ourselves from that fact? > > I saw this and thought of you. > Tanya. > > http://www.n0by.de/n0/Tanya.htm ..........INFORMATION ABOUT THIS LIST.......... > > Email addresses: > Post message: Realization > Un: Realization- > Our web address: http://www.realization.org > > By sending a message to this list, you are giving > permission to have it reproduced as a letter on > http://www.realization.org > ................................................ > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 19, 2003 Report Share Posted October 19, 2003 Realization , " Rob Sacks " <editor@r...> wrote: > Dear Karta, > > I'm a little puzzled by this message because I don't know who it is > addressed to. Even the signature confuses me. > > > > And as for this 'awareness' that you keep harping on about - here's a > > it of Steven Harrison: > > Who is this " you " that you're talking to? Is this part of a discussion > from another group? > > > > I saw this and thought of you. > > Tanya. > > The last word in this message is " Tanya. " Is Tanya the author of this > message? Or did you write it, and you're saying that " this " reminded > you of Tanya? > > Best regards, > > Rob > Hi Rob, This is a reposting by Karta of something I posted at Direct Approach DirectApproach Tanya. > > - > " satkartar14 " <satkarta4@j...> > <Realization > > Saturday, October 18, 2003 9:36 AM > words of the enlightened baby > > > > I see UG screaming at everything anyone tries to say and calling us > > all barking dogs as a lot like Judi's blah blah blah message. > > Everything we say is conditioned, everything we say is from memory, a > > rehash of things said to us or what we have said before. Everything > > we say is anchored around the continuation of our sense of self and > > strengthens it. Everything we say is competely ignorant because it > > comes from a position of not having a fucking clue what's going on > > and pretending that we do. > > > > And as for this 'awareness' that you keep harping on about - here's a > > it of Steven Harrison: > > > > Can we bring awareness to the moment, whatever its content? This is > > the cultivation of awareness, bringing the attention to the moment > > over and over until there is a constant consciousness. This awareness > > without comment, without discrimination, without judgement is often > > taught as the end result of certain spiritual practices. But in > > actuality, this is a state of mind, a stance, a position requiring a > > watcher who is " aware. " In fact, this watcher is not in real contact > > with anything. > > This state of apparent awareness is a kind of virtual reality created > > by thought as an approximation to what pure consciousness might be > > like. After we have spent a great deal of time sitting in empty > > rooms " paying attention, " a zombiesque quality emerges. This > > awareness is generally addicted to quiet or otherwise controlled > > spaces and lacks what might be described as intelligence. This lack > > of intelligence means that this so-called awareness cannot change or > > adapt as the situation of life changes. It can only be " aware, " that > > is aloof, distant and uninvolved. > > ... > > It is often the case that we are attracted to the cultivation of > > awareness or other no-technique techniques because we are overwhelmed > > by our lives. We have been unable to control our lives and seek to > > distance ourselves from our own existence. > > The problem is that the conflict is in the watcher, the one who is > > aware, not the objects of our awareness. Our lives ARE out of > > control. What happens if we don't distance ourselves from that fact? > > > > I saw this and thought of you. > > Tanya. > > > > http://www.n0by.de/n0/Tanya.htm > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ..........INFORMATION ABOUT THIS LIST.......... > > > > Email addresses: > > Post message: Realization > > Un: Realization- > > Our web address: http://www.realization.org > > > > By sending a message to this list, you are giving > > permission to have it reproduced as a letter on > > http://www.realization.org > > ................................................ > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 19, 2003 Report Share Posted October 19, 2003 Realization , " Rob Sacks " <editor@r...> wrote: > Dear Karta, > > I'm a little puzzled by this message because I don't know who it is > addressed to. Even the signature confuses me. > > > > And as for this 'awareness' that you keep harping on about - here's a > > it of Steven Harrison: > > Who is this " you " that you're talking to? Is this part of a discussion > from another group? > > > > I saw this and thought of you. > > Tanya. > > The last word in this message is " Tanya. " Is Tanya the author of this > message? Or did you write it, and you're saying that " this " reminded > you of Tanya? > > Best regards, sorry Rob, a friend asked me to spring Tanya into action with the " wakedown " thingy at his club and I got carried away I see her fit to tach that stuff without porn <grin> > > Rob > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 30, 2003 Report Share Posted October 30, 2003 Dear Tanya, Thanks for explaining this (sorry for the long delay). Best wishes, Rob Realization , " Tanya Davis " <tanyarowan@h...> wrote: > > Hi Rob, > This is a reposting by Karta of something I posted at Direct Approach > > DirectApproach > > Tanya. > 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.