Guest guest Posted August 13, 2002 Report Share Posted August 13, 2002 > > Dan says: UNNAME THAT TUNE. > > eric says: SHAKTI UNNAMED IS SHIVA. NOW,THAT YOU KNOW, NAME THAT > TUNE! Karta: It's Only Rock & Roll and I like it.. I like it --he left out the Stones ...!! Ken Wilber:Is It Only Rock and Roll? " I am constantly asked, why pay any attention to any of it? Isn't this middle brow culture somehow not really s= piritual? What a small God, that. " Great rock groups of the last few years: Elastica, Pulp, The Crystal Method= , Artificial Joy Club, the Chemical Brothers, No Doubt, Garbage, Fluffy, La = Bouche, Lush, Rancid, Texas, Mover, the Muffs, Fastbacks, 60 Ft. Dolls, Bell= y, One Dove, Dance Hall Crashers, Superdrag, En Vogue, Republica, Blackhawk, Goo Goo Dolls, the Fugees, NIN, The Goops, Nitzer Ebb, Sleeper, Bluetones, Offspring, De La Soul, Echo= Belly, Midnight Oil, the Mavericks, Live, Wallflowers, Sleater-Kinney, Lond= on Suede. I am constantly asked, why pay any attention to any of that? Isn't this middle brow culture somehow not really spiritual? I hear the same thing abo= ut TV all the time: really serious scholars, let alone spiritual practitioners, shouldn't find any of it interesting. What a small God, that. All forms are one with Emptiness, no exceptions. Wh= y avoid those particular forms, or look down on them? Are they not equally manifestations of Spirit's ultimate delight, splashing in the effervescent waters of its o= wn exuberance? Are they not equally ripples in the waterfall of One Taste, flavors of the very Divine, playing here and there. The effects that different types of music have are fascinating. Rock music, no question, hits the lower chakras (perhaps 2 to 3, sex and power). Rap music is often street survival music (chakra 1). The best of jazz (say, Charlie Parker, Miles, Wynton) is 3 to 4. (The seven chakras of kundalini yoga are the archetypal presentation of the Great Chain, consisting of seven basic levels of consciousness, each corr= elated with a bodily location.) The great romantic composers (Chopin, Mahler) are quintessential fourth chakra, all heart emotion, sometimes drippingly. Haydn, Bach, Mozart, later Beetho= ven, push into fifth to sixth, music of the spheres, or so it seems to me. You can actually feel your attention gravitate to various bodily centers (gut, heart, head) as these musical types play. I find whenever I am writing about, say, Plotinus, Eckhart or Emerson, the only music that doesn't disturb thought is Mozart and the later Beethoven, some of Haydn. But when I'm doing the drudg= e work of bibliography, footnotes, etc., gimme rock and roll any day. But the crucial point of kundalini yoga and the seven chakras is: all seven, without exception, are radiant forms of Shakti, the energy of the Goddess, = in an eternal embrace with Shiva, the pure formless Witness. All Forms are one with Emptiness: Shakti and Shiva are eternally making love, bound to each other with a fierce devotion that time, turmoil, death and destiny cannot e= ven begin to touch. In Dzogchen Buddhism, the same idea is expressed in the thangka of the Adi-= Buddha Samantabhadra (the very highest Buddha) and his consort, Samantabhadri. Samantabhadra is depicted as a deep blue/black figure, naked, seated in the lotus posture. On his lap, facing him in sexual congress, is = Samantabhadri, also naked, but a luminous bright white. Samantabhadra represents the dharm= akaya or radical Emptiness, which is completely formless and therefore " black " (as = in deep dreamless sleep). Samantabhadri represents the rupakaya, the entire world of Form, which is a brilliant white luminous display. Emptiness and form, consciousness and matter, spirit and the world. But the point is, they are making love; they are one in the ecstatic embrace of each other; they = are united through all eternity by the unbreakable bond of a Love that is i= nvincible. They are, to each other, One Taste. This depiction of Samantabhadra and Samantabhadri (Purusha and Prakriti, Sh= iva and Shakti, emptiness and form, wisdom and compassion, Eros and Agape, ascending and descending) is not mer= ely a symbol. It is a depiction of a direct realization. When you settle back a= s I-I, and rest as the formless Witness, you literally are Samantabhadra; you are the great Unborn, the radically unqualifiable Godhead. You are a great black Emptiness of infinite release. And yet, in the space of that Emptiness that you are, the entire universe is arising moment to moment: the clouds are floating through your awareness, t= hose trees are arising in your awareness, those singing birds are one with you. You, as formless Witness (Samantabhadra), are one with the entire World of Form (Samantabhadri), and it is forever an erotic union. You are literally making love to the entire world as it arises. The brutal, torturous gap between subject and object has collapsed, and you and the world have entered an intimate, sexual, ecstatic union, edged with bliss, radiant in release, the thunder and lightning of only One Taste. It has always been so. Material in this column appears in One Taste: The Journals of Ken Wilber, from Shambhala Publications Inc., Boston. © Ken Wilber 1998. k Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 13, 2002 Report Share Posted August 13, 2002 Dan & Friends, Nisargadatta, " dan330033 " <dan330033> wrote: > Eric - > Yet, how will you name a tune, > when you can't separate yourself > from it, to call it something? > > How will it be named, when its > vibration on the ear, and the > ear itself, are the same? > > :-) > > -- Dan Dan-ji, I've never had any of the experiences you describe, and I don't think you have either. ;-) yours in the bonds, eric > > Nisargadatta, " eblack101 " <EBlackstead@c...> wrote: > > Dan & Friends, > > > > Dan says: UNNAME THAT TUNE. > > > > eric says: SHAKTI UNNAMED IS SHIVA. NOW,THAT YOU KNOW, NAME THAT > TUNE! > > > > yours in t he bonds, > > eric > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta, " dan330033 " <dan330033> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > even pain and > > > > > > suffering will be conquered some day by science. > > > > > > > > > >Dan: This is a personal fantasy about a conquest > > > > > of something deemed expendable and undesirable > > > > > by the person. > > > > > > > > Pete: No fantasy. We are breaking the chemichal code > > > > of the brain as we write. It will happen. > > > > > > Dan: > > > > > > One's life is only now, and ideas > > > about what the future will be > > > are fantasies, which occur now. > > > > > > As there is no real content available > > > about what, if anything, the future is, > > > the content for ideas of the future > > > must be supplied by imagination > > > based on projecting the past, projecting > > > what is believed to be known. > > > > > > Explaining yours and others' suffering > > > as " just the result of chemicals " > > > certainly curtails any usefulness of inquiry > > > in depth. For example, inquiry into > > > suffering as the stress of expectations > > > that aren't fulfilled. > > > > > > > > > > > > Chemistry is the magic kit. We are a dance of > > > > > > chemicals > > > > > > and chemists are the dance masters. > > > > > > One day, not to > > > > > > far in the future there will be a happiness pill. > > > > > No > > > > > > more suffering or pain. > > > > > > > > > Dan: Keep hoping for that magic future. > > > > > A great way to avoid what the present actually is. > > > > > > > > Pete: No hope here, Dan. The present is perfect as it > > > > is. > > > > > > Dan: Perfect or not, it is as it is. Whatever that is :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you think annica (impermanency) doesn't apply > > > > > to > > > > > > your beliefs, > > > > > > your dogmas, your religion, think again. > > > > > > > > > > Do you think that it's a matter of thinking? > > > > > > > > > > > If you think > > > > > > there is an insight, a mental state, a vision of > > > > > > reality, a realization that is permanent, think > > > > > again. > > > > > > Only change is permanent, and only going with its > > > > > flow > > > > > > is liberation. > > > > > > > > > >Dan: Who is supposedly to be liberated by this > > > > approach? > > > > > > > This is not an aproach. it's a fact. > > > > > > D: You sidestepped the question, but that's okay. > > > > > > A belief is not a fact, just an imagined fact :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > What is apart from the flow, that can go with > > > > > it or against it? > > > > > > > > > > > And if you think this is wrong view, that will > > > > > change > > > > > > too. > > > > > > > > > Dan: If you think you have presented > > > > > a view, that, too, will change :-) > > > > > > > > Pete: It already has. > > > > > > D: Yes, and that, too, has changed :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > Happy bouncing along, > > > > > > > > > > Yup. > > > > > > > > > > Row, row, row your boat > > > > > Gently down the stream. > > > > > > > > > > Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily, > > > > > Life is but a dream. > > > > > > > > > > -- Dan > > > > > > > > LOVE THAT TUNE, > > > > > > > > Pete > > > > > > UNNAME THAT TUNE -- > > > > > > -- Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 14, 2002 Report Share Posted August 14, 2002 Nisargadatta, " eblack101 " <EBlackstead@c...> wrote: > Dan & Friends, > > Nisargadatta, " dan330033 " <dan330033> wrote: > > Eric - > > Yet, how will you name a tune, > > when you can't separate yourself > > from it, to call it something? > > > > How will it be named, when its > > vibration on the ear, and the > > ear itself, are the same? > > > > :-) > > > > -- Dan > i'd call it 'nooooooooooooowwwwwwww' :-) > Dan-ji, I've never had any of the experiences you describe, and I > don't think you have either. ;-) > > yours in the bonds, > eric > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta, " eblack101 " <EBlackstead@c...> wrote: > > > Dan & Friends, > > > > > > Dan says: UNNAME THAT TUNE. > > > > > > eric says: SHAKTI UNNAMED IS SHIVA. NOW,THAT YOU KNOW, NAME THAT > > TUNE! > > > > > > yours in t he bonds, > > > eric > > > > > > > > > > > > Nisargadatta, " dan330033 " <dan330033> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > even pain and > > > > > > > suffering will be conquered some day by science. > > > > > > > > > > > >Dan: This is a personal fantasy about a conquest > > > > > > of something deemed expendable and undesirable > > > > > > by the person. > > > > > > > > > > Pete: No fantasy. We are breaking the chemichal code > > > > > of the brain as we write. It will happen. > > > > > > > > Dan: > > > > > > > > One's life is only now, and ideas > > > > about what the future will be > > > > are fantasies, which occur now. > > > > > > > > As there is no real content available > > > > about what, if anything, the future is, > > > > the content for ideas of the future > > > > must be supplied by imagination > > > > based on projecting the past, projecting > > > > what is believed to be known. > > > > > > > > Explaining yours and others' suffering > > > > as " just the result of chemicals " > > > > certainly curtails any usefulness of inquiry > > > > in depth. For example, inquiry into > > > > suffering as the stress of expectations > > > > that aren't fulfilled. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Chemistry is the magic kit. We are a dance of > > > > > > > chemicals > > > > > > > and chemists are the dance masters. > > > > > > > One day, not to > > > > > > > far in the future there will be a happiness pill. > > > > > > No > > > > > > > more suffering or pain. > > > > > > > > > > > Dan: Keep hoping for that magic future. > > > > > > A great way to avoid what the present actually is. > > > > > > > > > > Pete: No hope here, Dan. The present is perfect as it > > > > > is. > > > > > > > > Dan: Perfect or not, it is as it is. Whatever that is :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you think annica (impermanency) doesn't apply > > > > > > to > > > > > > > your beliefs, > > > > > > > your dogmas, your religion, think again. > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you think that it's a matter of thinking? > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you think > > > > > > > there is an insight, a mental state, a vision of > > > > > > > reality, a realization that is permanent, think > > > > > > again. > > > > > > > Only change is permanent, and only going with its > > > > > > flow > > > > > > > is liberation. > > > > > > > > > > > >Dan: Who is supposedly to be liberated by this > > > > > approach? > > > > > > > > > This is not an aproach. it's a fact. > > > > > > > > D: You sidestepped the question, but that's okay. > > > > > > > > A belief is not a fact, just an imagined fact :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What is apart from the flow, that can go with > > > > > > it or against it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > And if you think this is wrong view, that will > > > > > > change > > > > > > > too. > > > > > > > > > > > Dan: If you think you have presented > > > > > > a view, that, too, will change :-) > > > > > > > > > > Pete: It already has. > > > > > > > > D: Yes, and that, too, has changed :-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Happy bouncing along, > > > > > > > > > > > > Yup. > > > > > > > > > > > > Row, row, row your boat > > > > > > Gently down the stream. > > > > > > > > > > > > Merrily, merrily, merrily, merrily, > > > > > > Life is but a dream. > > > > > > > > > > > > -- Dan > > > > > > > > > > LOVE THAT TUNE, > > > > > > > > > > Pete > > > > > > > > UNNAME THAT TUNE -- > > > > > > > > -- Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 14, 2002 Report Share Posted August 14, 2002 --- sphurna <sphurna wrote: > Nisargadatta, " eblack101 " > <EBlackstead@c...> wrote: > > Dan & Friends, > > > > Nisargadatta, " dan330033 " > <dan330033> wrote: > > > Eric - > > > Yet, how will you name a tune, > > > when you can't separate yourself > > > from it, to call it something? > > > > > > How will it be named, when its > > > vibration on the ear, and the > > > ear itself, are the same? > > > > > > :-) > > > > > > -- Dan > > > > i'd call it 'nooooooooooooowwwwwwww' :-) > > > Yeah, now it is! Pete HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs http://www.hotjobs.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 21, 2002 Report Share Posted August 21, 2002 -- In Nisargadatta, " eblack101 " <EBlackstead@c...> wrote: > Dan & Friends, > > Nisargadatta, " dan330033 " <dan330033> wrote: > > Eric - > > Yet, how will you name a tune, > > when you can't separate yourself > > from it, to call it something? > > > > How will it be named, when its > > vibration on the ear, and the > > ear itself, are the same? > > > > :-) > > > > -- Dan > > Dan-ji, I've never had any of the experiences you describe, and I > don't think you have either. ;-) > > yours in the bonds, > eric Hi Eric -- If I have never separated from this, then the I that separates and knows that it had an experience, wouldn't be able to, and never could have. Is it not that the I that can name experiences and tunes isn't on the scene in actuality, only after the fact? Bonded namastes, Dan 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.