ONe wORD Game\wry

[Guest guest]

Ah thank you, dear Wry, i understand, i usually forget what i wrote

as soon as i hit " send " and sometimes even faster so that i cannot

even finish a sentence; it is something like a 3 sec. span maximum

memory; i use stickits all over the 'puter and sometimes on me own

hands ( " don't bite your nails " , " don't stick this finger in your ear "

etc.) this also to explain to you the story about milk and awareness;

Wry i read carefully your message below (quite interesting) and i am

going to read it once more before going to bed, 12:30 a.m. local

time; i am glad you contemplate staying longer than just to spank our

dear Judi ;-)

xerox database eraser

 

Nisargadatta , " wry " <wry1111@e...> wrote:

> 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

>

>

>

>

>