Dave/Physical changes

[Guest guest]

Hi Dave,

 

Nisargadatta, " D. Sirjue " <dsirju@n...> wrote:

> >If one examines the sages --

> >[cut]

> >Each sages appears as different as each

> > snowflake. So who to turn to?

> >Which of the thousands of sages,

> > teachings, scriptures, which to turn to?

>

> ..or do you mean which of the sages to cling to.

 

Either/or. Sometimes near the beginning of the discovery

of 'spirituality', the words (and even persona) of the sages can

be 'useful'. " Self-centered " becomes " other-centered, " thus

loosening the grasp of " self-centeredness. " But if extended too

long, the situation appears like a teenager still wearing diapers.

 

> Is it possible to grasp at transitory snowflakes ?

 

Of course -- not only is it possible, but happens (or appears to

happen) constantly, even consistently. Of course, nothing is

grasped. The 'hands' remain empty. Eventually, if there's any

clarity, the situation might be noticed.

 

> The tighter the grip on snowflakes, the quicker it melts and

> escapes us but since continued grabbing further numbs

> the pain caused by frost bites, why allow it to thaw and

> feel the suffering ?

 

That sounds like a reasonable analogy.

 

> What an absurd game of trying to cling to anything

> transitory. We violate all the natural laws of this universe

> - the unitary movement - conceptualized as a process of

> creation, preservation and destruction.

 

Absolutely absurd, and absolutely attractive, when the transitory

is " all that's known. " Who has the courage to abandon the known and

venture into the unknown/unknowable without support? Rare is such

a 'quality'.

 

> We want to hold on the preservation of the " I "

> while struggling with the other gods only to pay the price of

> frustration, even to the point of psychological disorders,

> mental derangement.

 

Yes, everyone wants 'enlightenment' but nobody wants to " pay the

piper. " Understandable.

 

<snip>

 

> ..finding out for yourself occurs when we cease to cling,

> borrow or steal other peoples belongings whether it's thoughts,

> ideas or property and copyright laws nowadays when violated

> carries a hefty penalty, just as impersonating others (which we

> do all the time while chasing our self-image) carries a heavy

> fine :-)

 

Copyright laws seem a " moral agenda " outside the scope of this

discussion, but I see what you're getting at. The concept of a " free

lunch " seems deeply embedded in the human psyche.

 

> In other words it occurs when we become truthful about what

> belongs to me and who I am, (since an (imaginary) identity equates

> with acquired possessions) or when we stop lying to ourself

> of who we are, when we stop hiding behind the 'persona'.

 

We *are* the persona. Without the persona or " self-image " there is

no " I. " The " I " is " I-dentical " to the persona

(person/personality). There is nobody separate from it to 'stop

hiding from it'.

 

> Does anything really belong to 'me' or are they society's burdens,

> problem and imprisonment to maintain the status quo,

> or as Dan expressed so eloquently recently - to maintain and

> perpetuate the social mind.

 

" Society " is a conceptualized entity. There is no such " real " thing

as society. It's a conditioned concept, existing entirely

in/as 'individual' minds. The " collective " is entirely illusory.

 

Getting beyond concepts like 'collectives' is moving from

multiplicity to duality. 'Nonduality' hasn't even been touched 'at

that point'.

 

Namaste,

 

Tim