Eric & 2nd Hand Inference

[Guest guest]

Hi Eric --

 

Dan,

 

Ask yourself this: when you answer El's statements about guru devotion

with

your intellectual observations, aren't those observations based on a

 

mechanical and second hand report of an assumed identity that may be

garbled

in transmission?

Only if you read them that way.

It all depends on what the reader brings.

As for how they were written -- they arose

and departed. *What is* remains.

The words aren't offered as a means to provide

*what is* -- but to facilitate going beyond words

and concepts while the words and concepts

are processed. Devotion and intellect aren't

truly separated or separable. Thus, this moment as

is is pure intelligence and pure love. Yet the love

has no object. Devotion, if it involves making a

particular

object necessary for expression of love, depends on

preference

and valuation. Where then is the love that doesn't depend

on

any particular object, and doesn't prefer one thing or being

to another?

 

So you see, devotion isn't nonconceptual.

It is also to be gone beyond. You may go beyond

the devotional concept and process while that very

process unfolds. I am not against anything, and

nothing is against me. Thus, all arises as it arises,

and all departs when it is time to depart.

 

Perfection! Who *this* is!

 

Ask

yourself further, but in the same spirit, how are you

and your opinions perceived by us, your supposed audience? Are you, as

you

present yourself on our computers, a second hand report about an infered

idea

of relationship?

No, Eric.

There is only *who you are*, *who this is* --

if it seems divided into me, an audience, someone

presenting to someone else -- you can ask yourself, how

do these divisions come to appear as real to me?

 

 

 

Finally,

let me suggest that the Jnani's game of self analysis only works for

 

the Jnani himself, not in some second hand projection onto an assumed

 

" other " . this sadhana has never been given, at least by a any

Jnani guru that

I''m familiar with, for the purpose of torturing the logic of

relationship

and the deeply felt statements of a devotee, particularly when that

 

relationship is so obviously enjoyed by the would-be jnani.

 

Funny that you can say this, but seem not to

notice

the projection involved in the words that Eric presents.

 

 

 

Think

of this teaching of Ramana Maharshi. He was giving his usual lecture on

 

" self inquery " , when his questioner said, " but what if I

can't sustain asking

myself ' Who am I?' " Ramana said, " Then you must take

refuge in a guru and

do everything that he asks you to do " .

Ah, the resort to quoting an authority.

From the same one who wants things first-hand?

 

 

 

The

path of Jnana is a clear one and easily conveyed to an intellectual for

 

whom that particular path was designed.

There is no intellectual and no path, except

when that construction seems real to a mind

wanting to hold its constructions as reality.

 

 

The

path of Surrender to a guru is

not so easily analysed.

This living moment is the guru.

Its surrender is to its own nature.

 

 

The

injunctions to the devotee or disciple are

readily available; one need look no farther than the poetry of Kabir,

 

Tukaram, Jnaneshvar or Rumi. Narada's Bhakti Sutras sum it all up in a

 

succinctly pithy fashion. But none of these documents presumes to

describe

what is actually taking place in the inwardly realized relationship

between

the guru and his or her devotee. Consider this Sufi story that I came by

in

one of Idries Shah's books.

 

A great spiritual Sheik was dying. His first born who had not been

initiated

into his father's work asked him, " Father, they say you are running

a 'secret

school' here. What is a secret school? The Sheik regarded his son for a

 

moment, then replied, " Son, a secret school is where you rub one

thing

against another. "

 

yours in the bonds,

eric

Enjoy your secret

school, Eric.

All is freely open and shouting:

Here I am.

This is *what is*!

 

Love,

Dan

[Guest guest]

When you answer El's statements about guru devotion..........

whatever they are, at the time,

they are meaningful to El,

whatever they are, at the time.......

 

As for how meaningfull or meaningless

they are to the reader, at the time........

it all depends on what the reader brings.

 

As for how they were written --

 

they arose

  and departed. 

 

*What is* remains.

 

 

El

 

 

 

 

..