Guest guest Posted March 16, 2001 Report Share Posted March 16, 2001 Hi Melody, My take on some of these things.. (1) Love.. is what we *are*, not what we see, what we feel or anything else... that doesn't mean it can't be felt as a reflection of what we are, a shadow of 'reality'. (2) Karma is.. not. From a purely nondual perspective, it never was. From another perspective, it is " cause and effect. " Overall, " karma " is overrated as something of much importance. Just my take on it. (3) Sattva is said (in hinduism) to " light the way to liberation " (Shankara). It is not to be aspired to, it is that which is " closest " to liberation. It can act as a pointer or " grace " ... such things as goodness, nonviolence, harmony, love, peace. Makes sense as seen from here, again from the 'manifest' point of view. I guess I would put it this way... is it " better " to hug someone, or to kill someone? An interesting question with more implications than one would think at first glance. Namaste, Tim Nisargadatta, " Melody " <melody@s...> wrote: > > >The question that arises for me (assuming > > >your definition of Love is similar to mine) is: > > > > > >what exists *apart* from Love....that > > >Love would need to root in? > > > > My response would be to say that Love is never apart from anything, > it > > is the effort of trying to make it go away that is the 'problem'. > > > This helps me to hear your point. > > In your statement, > > " Karma does seem to answer up to our searching, > but when Love takes root there is nothing that > can be done to stop it " > > you weren't suggesting that Love is something > that comes *into* us, but is what IS seen, once > our desires and fears (which create karma or destiny) > no longer obstruct the View? > > If this is your meaning, I would add that nothing can *stop* karma, > especially the 'desire' to be free of it. > > Freedom from suffering is no longer desiring events > to unfold any way other than the way they are. > It's no longer wanting people to act any differently > than the way they currently are. For example, when > I am not presently identified one way or another, there > is no preference for how people behave, or for what > unfolds for 'me' to do. Only when I get 'hooked into' > self identity/delusion do I care a wit what others do > or don't do. > > That's why what N says doesn't ring true for me, > > > " Sattva, that works for righteousness and orderly development, > must not be thwarted. When obstructed it turns against itself and > becomes destructive. " > > Why hold one of the gunas up as better than another? > > As I understand the 3 gunas (the 3 primary qualities > of nature), the challenge is NOT to choose or aspire to > one or the other: sattva (purity, illumination), rajas > (passion born of desire), and tamas (darkness, ignorance, > crudeness of man). > > The Bhagavad gita seems more on target when it says, > > " What are the qualities of the person who has transcended these three > gunas? how does he behave and how does he does he actually achieve it? > When a man overcomes the three gunas, he neither likes illumination, > activity and delusion when present nor dislikes when they are absent > (14.22). He remains unshaken, unconcerned, knowing that the gunas are > carrying out their actions (14.23). Alike in pleasure and pain, > remaining the same towards a piece of gold, or a lump of clay, towards > the desirable and the undesirable, equal in defamation and > self-adulation (14.24), alike in honor and dishonor, same to friends > and foes, without any egoistic effort in performing actions, he raises > above the gunas (14.25). " > > > more later..... > > Melody Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 16, 2001 Report Share Posted March 16, 2001 > > Hi Melody, Hi Tim.... I appreciated reading your 'take' on these things. A couple of thoughts arise in response.... <snip> > (2) Karma is.. not. From a purely nondual perspective, it never > was. From another perspective, it is " cause and effect. " > Overall, " karma " is overrated as something of much importance. Perhaps if karma were defined as simply 'cause and effect', it could simply be accepted for what it is; and not something to be avoided or transcended. As long as one plays in a phenomenal arena, the game of karma can just be seen as part of that 'play'. > (3) Sattva is said (in hinduism) to " light the way to liberation " > (Shankara). It is not to be aspired to, it is that which > is " closest " to liberation. It can act as a pointer or " grace " ... > such things as goodness, nonviolence, harmony, love, peace. > > Makes sense as seen from here, again from the 'manifest' point of > view. Looking at this question again this morning I can see how the appreciation of illumination and purity *could* bring balance to darkness and ignorance.... just as an appreciation for 'darkness and ignorance' can help break identification and striving for 'purity and illumination " The trick seems to be, as the Gita says, to desire one no more than the other. > > I guess I would put it this way... is it " better " to hug someone, or > to kill someone? An interesting question with more implications than > one would think at first glance. We could say that 'it just depends'. This reminds me of a scene in a movie last night that was so perfect - so true to life - it just about knocked my socks off..... I forget the name of the movie, but to cut it as short as possible: this woman is holding hostage the man she has recognized as one who tortured her several years ago. For the longest time he kept denying what he had done to her, and her rage and 'taste' for revenge grew larger and larger. Finally, just as she has him poised over the top of a cliff....ready to be pushed over.... he begins admitting what he had done. Not only did he confess, but he did it so authentically .....in such exquisite, terrible, hateful, sick, honest detail....that I sat there with mouth gaping... as he described how at first he resisted, and then began enjoying the power, and the pain he was inflicting. He even admitted that he was sorry to see the torture sessions end. After a second of silence...which felt like hours....I knew immediately what this 'fictional tv character' was feeling. I knew that all hatred, all desire for revenge had fallen away. The event was 'finished'. And that's just what happened. She simply turned around and walked away... leaving him standing there. It was the most powerful, authentic moment I had ever known in television. > > Namaste, > > Tim Namaste, Melody 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.