ONe wORD Game/ on the other hand ---and re Eric, Judi and Pete

[Guest guest]

Hi. I did not write this message to Eric, but to Pete, and did not even realize

that Pete had posted my message that was was written on another list, until I

received your message just now. It is a coincidence that I joined this list at

the same time that he posted it, and I apologize to you, Eric. It was not

written to you, a person whom I do not even know, and am open to getting to

know, but to Pete, a person whom I do NOT respect, and it was designed

specifically for the people on that particular list, not for the people on this

list. I still am not sure who wrote this. Eric, was it you? When did you write

it? It is good what you said about the milk burning. That is our condition. I

should have realized that Pete could not write something like this. Pete put

this material on this other list as if it were his own. " Xerox copyromania " was

at the end, but I had no idea what it meant and did not realize it was a

signature of someone else. Moreoever, I referenced the material that was touched

on in your? message into what I already knew about Pete. Ignorant people, such

as Pete, create great disorder, and I guess you now have an enemy on the

internet, Pete. Her name is Wry. Your behavior is not okay. It is immoral.

Anyway, see below.

-

sk000005

Nisargadatta

Monday, December 01, 2003 12:50 AM

Re: ONe wORD Game/ on the other hand

 

 

Hi Wry!

 

congratulations for the message and greetings!

 

 

You wrote in part:

 

 

<<You are looking at it as something thought is trying to achieve,

but real awareness is not about that. It is about making a practice

of being attentive.<<

 

 

sk: could you expand on this? and, why should stand this in

controversy to your interpretation of Eric's message " that one is

already attentive " .

---------

Wry: This is not what I expected to be responding to, nor the subject I have

chosen to be responding to on this list, as someone else, Pete, posted my

material out here. He is very coarse, writing poems about his " dick pointing at

the moon. " It is not the sexual imagery I am speaking of when I say " coarse, "

but something else. The mind is not quick. There is a pretending. I shoould have

known he didn't write that, as the person talking about his situation was more

honest. In any case, one is already NOT attentive. This has been previously

verified. Something needs to be fully attentive to that condition, and then it

is transformed, little by little, over-a -continuum, for the purpose of speaking

about it, but actually the transformation always occurs at the moment of

awareness of what is happening in present time. There is a reason it is not

transformed all at once, as the person does not have the muscle to focus, as the

way the brain-body has come to function, mechanically, leaks the very energy

that is required to see all of the jucntures, the connections that are causing

the psychological complex. That is work. If one does not do the work, it is not

transformed.

----------------

 

 

>>You are saying that one is already attentive, can be attentive

without being attentive, that one is not functioning

in a dull, conditioned state. There is also a hint in all of this

that you, yourself, believe " awareness " to exist on its own side, as

an entity.<<

 

 

sk: as what kind of entity you think that Eric believes

that " awareness " exists?

-----------

Wry: I would need to refer to the original message to better answer this. The

subject will come up again in other peoples' material, and then maybe I will go

into it. There is a way to work with dualism in that one does not grasp at

awareness, because when I am grasping I am obviously using up the energy

required to be aware. We all understand this point, but then it needs to be

taken to the next tier, as awareness does not exist on its own side. When

something is aware of myself trying to be aware, that something is a facet of

the functioning of the human brain and body, not an awareness from outside,

though the perspective may create the illusion that is is outside of that.

 

 

>> In other words, you are implying you are already aware. To say

this is ignorant.<<

 

 

sk: Where lies the ignorance-relevant difference between saying " I'm

already attentive " or saying " making a practice out of being

attentive, is what awareness is really about. "

----------

Wry: The answer is that there is not really only one moment, in that we

function on a continuum. In the moment I realize I am not aware, there is

awareness. Three hours later there is again awareness. Now the memory function ,

not as a reactive complex. but simply as the tool it was (not very perfectly)

designed for or evolved into, realizes that sometimes there is no awareness for

great amounts of time, and during that span, I did great damage to the world.

Observe this situation a few more times and one can come to the conclusion that

there are only flickers of awareness. Then one can make a plan to address this

situation. It may not be perfect, but it is better than nothing. Some people

understand this right away and it makes perfect sense. To others, it does not.

These two kinds of people have different kinds of understanding about their

situation and how to address it. To me, the first kind are lost in la la, and,

generally speaking, it is hopeless to work with them, as there is no grp (grip.

----------

 

 

Of course people invariably think they are already fully attentive,

and so, nothing is attentive to what is happening. This is waking

sleep.

 

 

sk: What do you mean with " fully attentive " , Wry? I'm not sure in

which sense you use the term " entity " too but, in my opinion, this

sounds like you were doing with " what is happening " the same as you

opine Eric does, with " awareness " , i.e. putting it on its own side,

as en entity.This sounds also, as if you would know what's " really "

happening. So then, be so kind and tell me, is this the result of

your practice of being attentive? that you now know, that there are

people who think, they are fully attentive but are, in effect,

waking sleep. Are you trying to wake this people up? If yes, why and

what can you offer instead of waking sleep? Are you not positioning

yourself on the same place you critisized, Pete was postioning

himself with his Koan regarding consciousness? Your response

implies, in my opinion, that you are able to discern between those

who are waking sleep and those who don't. So, Wry, tell me please

what's really happening in the realm of the blinds? Do you know that?

----------

Wry: In all sincerity, this material was written for another list, in which

much water has gone under the bridge, and we have all learned and grown

together. Even if you were to read all the material, it would not be the same,

as it would not be recorded into your functioning in a way that is time

appropriate. Plus this message was made for specific people, on this other list,

at a specific time and in a specific way. I am not on here to wake people up, as

I do not believe it is possible on this kind of email list, if possible at all.

Moreover,I am still subject at times to the afflictive mind.I joined this list

for other reasons. I was looking for another list to hang out on, due to Pete

and Will and a couple of others, one who is on here (but not KKT), ruining the

other list, in my opinion, and I happened to come across this one, which I would

not have joined either, as it seemed similar in tone and quality to the others

list in many way, not enough contrast, people lost in la la. I only joined

because Judi was on here, quite honestly. Some people here do not know me , but

people on the other list know that I am a board specialist (in my own opinion.

Ha ha) in that that my ongoing passionate study of almost twelve years is the

use of the bulletin board format (such as an email list or a telephone

community) as a learning tool to affect trends and tendencies in broader

humanity and in regards to this, the theory of active information systems of

David Bohm. I have written about this on other lists. If Judi is kicked off, I

will probably leave, too, as she is the only reason I joined, in that once I saw

that Pete is on here, I would have gone elsewhere. Sincerely, Wry

 

p.s. I finished writing most of this several hours ago and left to go

somewhere. When I returned, I saw the message Pete has written about me as well

as several other messages, but just quickly skimmed them. Something about

nipples, Pete? These sexual words do not intimidate me. Though I am a slim,

attractive, heterosexual Grandmother (ha ha), in the case of this email list, I

am the man here and you are the woman, as you are merely reacting, so whatever I

do, which is much more intentional then your dreamins, will tend to reorganize

you and everything around you, whether you like it or not. But I am not even on

here to reorganize you, in that this is not even about you. Even though I do not

respect you, I am still sorry to be stirring you up. In ordinary life, I would

treat someone like yourself with courtesy and respect, as I know you are both

confused and suffering. In this format to do so would be harmful to too many

people, as the bulletin board format is one of extraordinary potential.

 

 

smile

sk