Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

Wordless Wonder

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Hi Lewis,

In regard to action Vedanta is

very much a clockwork universe. It is

such an absolute law, the doctrine of

karma, that the world is supposed to be

beginningless as the fruit of action is

what keeps the whole thing going and this

implies that there can be no first

generation because there would be no

fruits of action to harvest. On the other

hand Sankara states concerning action that

one faced with a choice 'might do, might

not do or might have done differently'.

It's a legal world so the focus tends to

be on inner freedom. Renouncing the

fruits of action is what leads to

actionless action because in the normal

way we always act with some goal in mind.

Even free association reveals a pattern!

The Bhagavad Gita is all about this form

of surrender or offering everything at the

feet of the Master.

 

Also the Jnana marg is enquiring into 'Who

is it that acts'. The gunas that anchor

the person in the material alone act in

the view of the enlightened. Acausal

action in the material sense is an

impossibility. Asking about the immediate

and remote causes of WW2 is not foolish

though strictly the answer is, everything

that happened up to that time.

 

A.N.Whitehead wrote once that all

contemporary events are not causally

connected. There's a meteor that has

Ander's name on it.

 

What actually is an event if we admit that

a selection of contemporary occurences are

not causally connected?

 

Thanks for the selection from 4 Quartets

and St.John of the Cross. The emptying

that the Easterners do with analysis is

wrought by the Westerners with humility.

 

" Humility is a mirror in which we see how

none of our good deeds has its principle

from ourselves... In doing anything good

and seeing it done, we must give heed to

the source and understand how without this

help we can do nothing. We must begin

immediately to thank God and not think of

ourselves in anything good that we do. "

(Teresa of Avila 'Interior Castle')

 

Previously Stefan, Michael, Lewis wrote:

 

888888888888888888888888888888888888

 

Nisargadatta ,

ombhurbhuva <ombhurbhuva@e...> wrote:

> Stefan wrote:

> The strange thing is that I can watch

all

> this, reflect upon it, feel

> my possible resistance until I

understand

> that even the resistance or

> the desire is part of the inevitable

> dance. The inevitability of

> everything is so obvious to my

> intellectual understanding that I

> wonder why we so often pose as the ones

> who are controlling something.

> It must be a survival mechanism. I can

> even see it in my cat, how it

> is trying to manipulate situations out

of

> desire, although it gives up

> quite easily when it sees the futility.

>

> >Advocates of non-doing

> mislead in talking about non-doing. One

> cannot do non-doing. Non-doing

> is a by product of complete futility, of

a

> natural inability to act

> in a

> >certain way. Non-doing occurs on

account

> of inability.

>

> Commonly we associate " doing " with acts

> that are resulting from

> thoughts and thus seem to be results of

> more or less conscious

> decisions. The thoughts may com from

half-

> darkness or from full

> darkness... where to draw the border

line?

>

> %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

>

>

> Hi Stefan,

> The thing about these

> discussions on free will is that there

is

> often an unannounced veering between the

> absolute and the relative. In the

> practical domain free will implies

> liberty, distinguishing between reasons

> and causes and the like.

>

> If free will is on the relative plane,

in

> the causal arena; can we ever go further

> than freedom as lack of constraint. What

> possible sense can be given to freedom

as

> acausal action? Votaries of the

apophatic

> will raise their cowls and glide away.

 

 

What is freedom? What is causal action?

What is acausal action? Are

there such things as this in experience?

Certainly there is in

thought, and those imbued with thoughts.

When an action occurs or does

not occur what is at the root of it? Can

one say what it is?

Especially since such saying is done after

the action has been

committed? And when an action or inaction

occurs, does one determine

by thought or decision for it to occur?

 

Close examination of experience reveals it

that there are two commonly

experienced experiences in this regard.

There is volition as the

exercise of choice between two directions

or things, I will do this

not that, or I will do this and it is

done. This is superficial

decisioning, a common experience. In this

experience, we have the

basis for the doctrine of free will,

however that is expressed and

explained. This experience is common to

those dependedent on thought

and happens all the time. It is a complex

one for all the conditions

that surround and act upon the decider are

not always fully known or

to what extent they influence the will in

choosing x or y. How free is

free will? Why is there an effort to give

up free will in the mystic

traditions. Why is no doership spoken of?

 

Then there is the experience of where such

conscious decisioning does

not occur because there are no thoughts to

decide between. There is

only spontaneous and continuous responses

to an event or events.

Speaking, walking, rescuing someone in

danger, and the unlimited

responses when thoughts are not present to

choose between, to exercise

a choice. Where is the free will in this?

What choices are being made?

 

So in one appearance there is that

experience of free will and all its

complications and influences and the

experience of spontaneous action

without free will, will or decisioning.

 

Then we go to those who experience as a

normal course in their lives

little or no decisioning at all simply

because it has become

unecessary. All is responded to as as it

is, in a darkness, without

effort or doing because there is an

inability or ability to do so.

This means that decisioning is

accomplished not by effortful volition

or thought or vows. It is accomplished in

another way without effort

or deciding pros and cons or choosing

thoughts between this and that

or dedication or holding and grasping and

clinging to ideas to prevent

untoward behavior. It is simply a

response, yes or no, without reason

applied or choice made, without need for

morals or ethics or any sort

of thought of controlling the direction of

behavior. These seem to

have " laws " as it is, that are not held or

cherished or dedicated to

and so on.

 

This may seem to be without constraints

and it is not, that is

mistaken, for there are great constraints

where such persons are not

allowed to do freely as they are bound by

what they are, what ever

that may be conceived as. Some say karma,

others say conditioning,

others say what the Shambalists say about

primordial being. T. S.

Eliot, whatever he was, points to this.

St. John of the Cross wrote

clearly of this in the " Dark Night of the

Soul. " Such descriptions are

common in the mystic traditions and in the

Advaita Vedantists and

Buddhist notions of no doers.

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

 

III

 

O dark dark dark. They all go into the

dark,

The vacant interstellar spaces, the vacant

into the vacant,

The captains, merchant bankers, eminent

men of letters,

The generous patrons of art, the statesmen

and the rulers,

Distinguished civil servants, chairmen of

many committees,

Industrial lords and petty contractors,

all go into the dark,

And dark the Sun and Moon, and the

Almanach de Gotha

And the Stock Exchange Gazette, they of Directors,

And cold the sense and lost the motive of

action.

And we all go with them, into the silent

funeral,

Nobody's funeral, for there is no one to

bury.

I said to my soul, be still, and let the

dark come upon you

Which shall be the darkness of God. As, in

a theatre,

The lights are extinguished, for the scene

to be changed

With a hollow rumble of wings, with a

movement of darkness on darkness,

And we know that the hills and the trees,

the distant panorama

And the bold imposing facade are all being

rolled away—

Or as, when an underground train, in the

tube, stops too long between

stations

And the conversation rises and slowly

fades into silence

And you see behind every face the mental

emptiness deepen

Leaving only the growing terror of nothing

to think about;

Or when, under ether, the mind is

conscious but conscious of nothing—

I said to my soul, be still, and wait

without hope

For hope would be hope for the wrong

thing; wait without love,

For love would be love of the wrong thing;

there is yet faith

But the faith and the love and the hope

are all in the waiting.

Wait without thought, for you are not

ready for thought:

So the darkness shall be the light, and

the stillness the dancing.

Whisper of running streams, and winter

lightning.

The wild thyme unseen and the wild

strawberry,

The laughter in the garden, echoed ecstasy

Not lost, but requiring, pointing to the

agony

Of death and birth.

 

You say I am repeating

Something I have said before. I shall say

it again.

Shall I say it again? In order to arrive

there,

To arrive where you are, to get from where

you are not,

You must go by a way wherein there is no

ecstasy.

In order to arrive at what you do not know

You must go by a way which is the way of

ignorance.

In order to possess what you do not

possess

You must go by the way of dispossession.

In order to arrive at what you are not

You must go through the way in which you

are not.

And what you do not know is the only thing

you know

And what you own is what you do not own

And where you are is where you are not.

 

EAST COKER

No. 2 Stanza III of " Four Quartets " , T.S.

Eliot

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

CHAPTER IX

 

 

 

How, although this night brings darkness

to the spirit, it does so in

order to illumine it and give it light.

 

 

IT now remains to be said that, although

this happy night brings

darkness to the spirit, it does so only to

give it light in

everything; and that, although it humbles

it and makes it miserable,

it does so only to exalt it and to raise

it up; and, although it

impoverishes it and empties it of all

natural affection and

attachment, it does so only that it may

enable it to stretch forward,

divinely, and thus to have fruition and

experience of all things, both

above and below, yet to preserve its

unrestricted liberty of spirit in

them all. For just as the elements, in

order that they may have a part

in all natural entities and compounds,

must have no particular colour,

odour or taste, so as to be able to

combine with all tastes odours and

colours, just so must the spirit be

simple, pure and detached from all

kinds of natural affection, whether actual

or habitual, to the end

that it may be able freely to share in the

breadth of spirit of the

Divine Wisdom, wherein, through its

purity, it has experience of all

the sweetness of all things in a certain

pre-eminently excellent way.

And without this purgation it will be

wholly unable to feel or

experience the satisfaction of all this

abundance of spiritual

sweetness. For one single affection

remaining in the spirit, or one

particular thing to which, actually or

habitually, it clings, suffices

to hinder it from feeling or experiencing

or communicating the

delicacy and intimate sweetness of the

spirit of love, which contains

within itself all sweetness to a most

eminent degree.

 

Dark Night of the Soul, Book II Chapter 9,

Saint John of the Cross,

 

 

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

 

>

> The Bodhisattva allows himself to be

bound

> by a vow. Freedom said someone is the

> knowledge of necessity. The wave does

not

> move, local water moves up and down

> sequentially. We bob sometimes with the

> asuras and sometimes with the devas.

That

> is early sadhana, later we identify with

> the beginningless energy that moves upon

> the waters.

 

It can be said vows are for two. It is for

those incapable at the

moment of doing that which the vow demands

as it is as ordinary

living. Without effortful adherence to the

vow their behavior is

untoward, unruly, out of the order with

what the vow describes and

prescribes. Adherence brings the

appearance into line and readies it

for an occurrence.

 

It is also for those who need no vow for

their behavior needs no

governance by such rules and

prescriptions. These take a vow to do

that which is for them compassion for

others. Not taken, these would

not be of service to others in their

suffering and they do so soley

for others.

 

 

> It is probably known to you all but can

I

> recommend '4 Quartets' by T.S.Eliot as a

> profound meditation on time and action.

 

 

FOUR QUARTETS

 

T.S. Eliot

 

http://www.tristan.icom43.net/quartets/

 

 

> Michael.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Michael,

 

ombhurbhuva wrote:

> Hi Lewis,

> In regard to action Vedanta is

> very much a clockwork universe. It is

> such an absolute law, the doctrine of

> karma, that the world is supposed to be

> beginningless as the fruit of action is

> what keeps the whole thing going and this

> implies that there can be no first

> generation because there would be no

> fruits of action to harvest. On the other

> hand Sankara states concerning action that

> one faced with a choice 'might do, might

> not do or might have done differently'.

> It's a legal world so the focus tends to

> be on inner freedom. Renouncing the

> fruits of action is what leads to

> actionless action because in the normal

> way we always act with some goal in mind.

> Even free association reveals a pattern!

> The Bhagavad Gita is all about this form

> of surrender or offering everything at the

> feet of the Master.

 

And there is another experience. Renouncing is not necessary. There is

also no need for any thought or reason or philosophy or goal required or

anything to be understood. No offerings made. No sacrifices given. No

explanation needed. There is liberty and none at all. There is will and

no will at all. There are constraints and no constraints at all. There

no need for a doer or no-doer. There are inabilities and abilities. It

is not of words and it is done without doing. How is this so? No one can

say, for it will be savaged with arguments. It is infused. It is to be

experienced and in that understood.

 

>

> Also the Jnana marg is enquiring into 'Who

> is it that acts'. The gunas that anchor

> the person in the material alone act in

> the view of the enlightened.

 

 

I have heard differently, that one may be liberated from the gunas. I do

not know much about the gunas.

 

 

Acausal

> action in the material sense is an

> impossibility. Asking about the immediate

> and remote causes of WW2 is not foolish

> though strictly the answer is, everything

> that happened up to that time.

 

Yes.

 

>

> A.N.Whitehead wrote once that all

> contemporary events are not causally

> connected. There's a meteor that has

> Ander's name on it.

 

How could one know what is connected or not in a precise chain of

causation? It would require knowledge of all things in precision.

 

>

> What actually is an event if we admit that

> a selection of contemporary occurences are

> not causally connected?

 

There would be no understandable events or events as they are conceived.

Just random happenings, this and that.

 

>

> Thanks for the selection from 4 Quartets

> and St.John of the Cross. The emptying

> that the Easterners do with analysis is

> wrought by the Westerners with humility.

 

 

You are welcome, Michael.

 

 

 

>

> " Humility is a mirror in which we see how

> none of our good deeds has its principle

> from ourselves... In doing anything good

> and seeing it done, we must give heed to

> the source and understand how without this

> help we can do nothing. We must begin

> immediately to thank God and not think of

> ourselves in anything good that we do. "

> (Teresa of Avila 'Interior Castle')

>

> Previously Stefan, Michael, Lewis wrote:

>

> 888888888888888888888888888888888888

>

> Nisargadatta ,

> ombhurbhuva <ombhurbhuva@e...> wrote:

>

>>Stefan wrote:

>>The strange thing is that I can watch

>

> all

>

>>this, reflect upon it, feel

>>my possible resistance until I

>

> understand

>

>>that even the resistance or

>>the desire is part of the inevitable

>>dance. The inevitability of

>>everything is so obvious to my

>>intellectual understanding that I

>>wonder why we so often pose as the ones

>>who are controlling something.

>>It must be a survival mechanism. I can

>>even see it in my cat, how it

>>is trying to manipulate situations out

>

> of

>

>>desire, although it gives up

>>quite easily when it sees the futility.

>>

>>

>>>Advocates of non-doing

>>

>>mislead in talking about non-doing. One

>>cannot do non-doing. Non-doing

>>is a by product of complete futility, of

>

> a

>

>>natural inability to act

>>in a

>>

>>>certain way. Non-doing occurs on

>>

> account

>

>>of inability.

>>

>>Commonly we associate " doing " with acts

>>that are resulting from

>>thoughts and thus seem to be results of

>>more or less conscious

>>decisions. The thoughts may com from

>

> half-

>

>>darkness or from full

>>darkness... where to draw the border

>

> line?

>

>>%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

>>

>>

>>Hi Stefan,

>>The thing about these

>>discussions on free will is that there

>

> is

>

>>often an unannounced veering between the

>>absolute and the relative. In the

>>practical domain free will implies

>>liberty, distinguishing between reasons

>>and causes and the like.

>>

>>If free will is on the relative plane,

>

> in

>

>>the causal arena; can we ever go further

>>than freedom as lack of constraint. What

>>possible sense can be given to freedom

>

> as

>

>>acausal action? Votaries of the

>

> apophatic

>

>>will raise their cowls and glide away.

>

>

>

> What is freedom? What is causal action?

> What is acausal action? Are

> there such things as this in experience?

> Certainly there is in

> thought, and those imbued with thoughts.

> When an action occurs or does

> not occur what is at the root of it? Can

> one say what it is?

> Especially since such saying is done after

> the action has been

> committed? And when an action or inaction

> occurs, does one determine

> by thought or decision for it to occur?

>

> Close examination of experience reveals it

> that there are two commonly

> experienced experiences in this regard.

> There is volition as the

> exercise of choice between two directions

> or things, I will do this

> not that, or I will do this and it is

> done. This is superficial

> decisioning, a common experience. In this

> experience, we have the

> basis for the doctrine of free will,

> however that is expressed and

> explained. This experience is common to

> those dependedent on thought

> and happens all the time. It is a complex

> one for all the conditions

> that surround and act upon the decider are

> not always fully known or

> to what extent they influence the will in

> choosing x or y. How free is

> free will? Why is there an effort to give

> up free will in the mystic

> traditions. Why is no doership spoken of?

>

> Then there is the experience of where such

> conscious decisioning does

> not occur because there are no thoughts to

> decide between. There is

> only spontaneous and continuous responses

> to an event or events.

> Speaking, walking, rescuing someone in

> danger, and the unlimited

> responses when thoughts are not present to

> choose between, to exercise

> a choice. Where is the free will in this?

> What choices are being made?

>

> So in one appearance there is that

> experience of free will and all its

> complications and influences and the

> experience of spontaneous action

> without free will, will or decisioning.

>

> Then we go to those who experience as a

> normal course in their lives

> little or no decisioning at all simply

> because it has become

> unecessary. All is responded to as as it

> is, in a darkness, without

> effort or doing because there is an

> inability or ability to do so.

> This means that decisioning is

> accomplished not by effortful volition

> or thought or vows. It is accomplished in

> another way without effort

> or deciding pros and cons or choosing

> thoughts between this and that

> or dedication or holding and grasping and

> clinging to ideas to prevent

> untoward behavior. It is simply a

> response, yes or no, without reason

> applied or choice made, without need for

> morals or ethics or any sort

> of thought of controlling the direction of

> behavior. These seem to

> have " laws " as it is, that are not held or

> cherished or dedicated to

> and so on.

>

> This may seem to be without constraints

> and it is not, that is

> mistaken, for there are great constraints

> where such persons are not

> allowed to do freely as they are bound by

> what they are, what ever

> that may be conceived as. Some say karma,

> others say conditioning,

> others say what the Shambalists say about

> primordial being. T. S.

> Eliot, whatever he was, points to this.

> St. John of the Cross wrote

> clearly of this in the " Dark Night of the

> Soul. " Such descriptions are

> common in the mystic traditions and in the

> Advaita Vedantists and

> Buddhist notions of no doers.

>

> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

>

>

> III

>

> O dark dark dark. They all go into the

> dark,

> The vacant interstellar spaces, the vacant

> into the vacant,

> The captains, merchant bankers, eminent

> men of letters,

> The generous patrons of art, the statesmen

> and the rulers,

> Distinguished civil servants, chairmen of

> many committees,

> Industrial lords and petty contractors,

> all go into the dark,

> And dark the Sun and Moon, and the

> Almanach de Gotha

> And the Stock Exchange Gazette, the

> Directory of Directors,

> And cold the sense and lost the motive of

> action.

> And we all go with them, into the silent

> funeral,

> Nobody's funeral, for there is no one to

> bury.

> I said to my soul, be still, and let the

> dark come upon you

> Which shall be the darkness of God. As, in

> a theatre,

> The lights are extinguished, for the scene

> to be changed

> With a hollow rumble of wings, with a

> movement of darkness on darkness,

> And we know that the hills and the trees,

> the distant panorama

> And the bold imposing facade are all being

> rolled away—

> Or as, when an underground train, in the

> tube, stops too long between

> stations

> And the conversation rises and slowly

> fades into silence

> And you see behind every face the mental

> emptiness deepen

> Leaving only the growing terror of nothing

> to think about;

> Or when, under ether, the mind is

> conscious but conscious of nothing—

> I said to my soul, be still, and wait

> without hope

> For hope would be hope for the wrong

> thing; wait without love,

> For love would be love of the wrong thing;

> there is yet faith

> But the faith and the love and the hope

> are all in the waiting.

> Wait without thought, for you are not

> ready for thought:

> So the darkness shall be the light, and

> the stillness the dancing.

> Whisper of running streams, and winter

> lightning.

> The wild thyme unseen and the wild

> strawberry,

> The laughter in the garden, echoed ecstasy

> Not lost, but requiring, pointing to the

> agony

> Of death and birth.

>

> You say I am repeating

> Something I have said before. I shall say

> it again.

> Shall I say it again? In order to arrive

> there,

> To arrive where you are, to get from where

> you are not,

> You must go by a way wherein there is no

> ecstasy.

> In order to arrive at what you do not know

> You must go by a way which is the way of

> ignorance.

> In order to possess what you do not

> possess

> You must go by the way of dispossession.

> In order to arrive at what you are not

> You must go through the way in which you

> are not.

> And what you do not know is the only thing

> you know

> And what you own is what you do not own

> And where you are is where you are not.

>

> EAST COKER

> No. 2 Stanza III of " Four Quartets " , T.S.

> Eliot

>

> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

>

> CHAPTER IX

>

>

>

> How, although this night brings darkness

> to the spirit, it does so in

> order to illumine it and give it light.

>

>

> IT now remains to be said that, although

> this happy night brings

> darkness to the spirit, it does so only to

> give it light in

> everything; and that, although it humbles

> it and makes it miserable,

> it does so only to exalt it and to raise

> it up; and, although it

> impoverishes it and empties it of all

> natural affection and

> attachment, it does so only that it may

> enable it to stretch forward,

> divinely, and thus to have fruition and

> experience of all things, both

> above and below, yet to preserve its

> unrestricted liberty of spirit in

> them all. For just as the elements, in

> order that they may have a part

> in all natural entities and compounds,

> must have no particular colour,

> odour or taste, so as to be able to

> combine with all tastes odours and

> colours, just so must the spirit be

> simple, pure and detached from all

> kinds of natural affection, whether actual

> or habitual, to the end

> that it may be able freely to share in the

> breadth of spirit of the

> Divine Wisdom, wherein, through its

> purity, it has experience of all

> the sweetness of all things in a certain

> pre-eminently excellent way.

> And without this purgation it will be

> wholly unable to feel or

> experience the satisfaction of all this

> abundance of spiritual

> sweetness. For one single affection

> remaining in the spirit, or one

> particular thing to which, actually or

> habitually, it clings, suffices

> to hinder it from feeling or experiencing

> or communicating the

> delicacy and intimate sweetness of the

> spirit of love, which contains

> within itself all sweetness to a most

> eminent degree.

>

> Dark Night of the Soul, Book II Chapter 9,

> Saint John of the Cross,

>

>

>

> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

>

>

>

>>The Bodhisattva allows himself to be

>

> bound

>

>>by a vow. Freedom said someone is the

>>knowledge of necessity. The wave does

>

> not

>

>>move, local water moves up and down

>>sequentially. We bob sometimes with the

>>asuras and sometimes with the devas.

>

> That

>

>>is early sadhana, later we identify with

>>the beginningless energy that moves upon

>>the waters.

>

>

> It can be said vows are for two. It is for

> those incapable at the

> moment of doing that which the vow demands

> as it is as ordinary

> living. Without effortful adherence to the

> vow their behavior is

> untoward, unruly, out of the order with

> what the vow describes and

> prescribes. Adherence brings the

> appearance into line and readies it

> for an occurrence.

>

> It is also for those who need no vow for

> their behavior needs no

> governance by such rules and

> prescriptions. These take a vow to do

> that which is for them compassion for

> others. Not taken, these would

> not be of service to others in their

> suffering and they do so soley

> for others.

>

>

>

>>It is probably known to you all but can

>

> I

>

>>recommend '4 Quartets' by T.S.Eliot as a

>>profound meditation on time and action.

>

>

>

> FOUR QUARTETS

>

> T.S. Eliot

>

> http://www.tristan.icom43.net/quartets/

>

>

>

>>Michael.

>

>

>

>

>

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...