on seeing changes

[Guest guest]

on 4/2/03 6:27 PM, devianandi at devi wrote:

 

 

> devi: haha, i wish i hadn't have met them, some of them can be down

> right nasty...mean...haven't changed at all from the unenlighted

> beings they were.

 

Yes, makes you wonder,hmmm? Not that there are any 'rules of behavior,' but

if there is not a profound marked difference in befor-after

thinking-behavior, I tend to distrust their proclamations. And don't get me

wrong, Devi, you are included. The thing is, an enlightened being should not

be affected either way, unless there *is* some personal agenda in movement(

like wanting to be looked upon as special or in gathering devotees, etc) I

have a friend who I know is enlightened and she never says anything about it

unless I ask. Be that as it may, Ramana sees no difference between the

unenlightened and the enlightened...how could he? This is the very nature of

Advaita Vedanta.

 

<snip>

> shawn: Everytime i think I am this body-mind and I am a doer, there

> is confusion.

> devi: oh, well you just have to change the angle of your mind...think

> God does everything, it's true too, you have no choices in this life,

> everything is just happening. nisargaddatta says that he is just the

> looker...everything just happens..thats your whole problem, you still

> think you do something,,,just stop...

 

Yesss,,,,,easy for you to say!

 

> shawn: Enlightenment to me, means this doesn't happen anymore at all.

> The ego is seen thru so completely that the natural state of Being

> Only is Ever-apparent and natural....this to me represents what I call

> enlightenment. But then again, I turn to Sri Ramana Maharshi and Mr.

> Natural for my inspiration.

>

> devi: oh i see, i understand what your saying..i think this has

> something to do with that adyashanti quote i pasted,,a few posts

> back,,about how there are alot of beings who have had an experience

> of the Self but the beauty of sri ramana was that He embodied It.

 

No, it has to do with the obliteration of the ego. Your identity as Devi,

are you still desiring and fearful? The obliteration of the very foundation

and feeling of seperatness must go the way of the 8-tract. Ramana and

Nisargadatta both said stuff about keeping quiet and ripening after the

initial awakening " experience. " Saniel Bonder says this is the " shakedown "

period. A time when the awakened disposition is continually confronted with

the stuff of the ego ( ie. samskaras) In otherwords the new disposition must

shine through and make obsolete all the still-active tendencies.

 

My general skeptisism about awkened people popping up everywhere is of

course reinforced by the fact that they all seem to be in Sothern Cal.

 

 

> well, i consider just having that nirvan/nirvikalp the goal, if

> someone didn't come back to the body after that expereince they would

> be considered muktied, liberated...

 

 

I really don't think about it in those terms. I feel that my great " urge to

realization " is born out of total boredom and discomfort with " life as

usual. " (meaning the feeling-identification with the body-mindling) Freedom

from the " me! "

 

 

> that's enlightenement, but still, after enlightenement, and this is

> my undersatnding, and coming back into creation ,there for some of

> us are still residual karmas working themselves out. and those karmas

> are not selfish karmas, there special yoga yoga sanskaras

 

I think this is a bit doting. It is all just identity crap and either you're

free of it, or your unaware and a slave, or you're " seeing' it and the

seeing burns 'em off. (the tendencies relating to fear and desire)

 

 

....liberated

> sanskaras....you know i can't imagine you reaching that goal to be

> like ramana or nisargadatta until you retire from the world,,,so you

> better hope that what happens is that you make alot of money fast so

> you can retire and just sit and be that SELF..

 

I and Ramana are already the same, there is no desire to " be like " someone,

only to understand " me. "

 

 

 

>> <snip>

 

> devi: i think meher baba was a bigger guy then ramana or

> nisargaddats, no offence<snip>

 

I guess I really led you into that one. Let's not do the " my guru's bigger "

thing! My fault....

 

>and I realise that Any ideas I may

> have that

> are so strong as to cause an emotional flustering when contradicted

> by

> another is a sign of attatchment and identification that needs to

> be looked

> at more closely by myself.

>

> devi: why do you have to look at it.? just stop thinking

 

Only in understanding do thigs fall away. It has to do with " seeing " not

thinking.

 

 

>> That being said, I do think it serves a pupose to argue nicely

> without

>> getting personal and without malice. And if all this spiritual

> stuff does

>> not end up in love, then it is really worthless from the get-go,

> hmmm?

>> ))))))))))))

>

> devi: i totally agree, i'm sad that those other realizers are the way

> they are, they make it difficult for me to love them, but sometimes i

> tell myself that i'm not supposed to love people, i'm supposed to

> love God, supposed to just be love without necessarily seeking iton

> the outside..>

 

 

You sound like a normal ego to me!))))))))))))

 

 

that's okay...don't flinch. ;-)

 

))))))))))Shawn