Guest guest Posted June 25, 2005 Report Share Posted June 25, 2005 Dear friends, It seems as though we always talk the high talk - as though what we can *understand* and communicate on the level of non-duality, consciousness, intergal living and so on, is a reflection of our actual state. It is as though there is this desparate attempt not to appear not to be enlightened -whatever that word may mean. So our talk often takes place in the context of the high things, while most of us may still be struggling with many aspects of our spiritual practice. But if we are really honest with ourselves, and begin to share from the level where we are, i.e from the level of our confusion about many things, having many questions and reservations about our spiritual path, how to birng it into our living reality etc., we might discover that others also share these with us on many different levels of understanding, insight and holistic unfolding. So why pretend? Why make out as if we are all discussing these high things as though they are really where we are at, and as though these are our living truth? My sense is that for as long as we try to fool one another about these matters, for just as long will our enquiries remain unrewarding and unfulfilling. Self consciousness is unconsciousness. Reality beats Ideality hands down. Love ,Doug Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 25, 2005 Report Share Posted June 25, 2005 Nisargadatta , " chefboy2160 " <chefboy2160> wrote: > Dear friends, > > It seems as though we always talk the high talk - as though what we > can *understand* and communicate on the level of non-duality, > consciousness, intergal living and so on, is a reflection of our > actual state. It is as though there is this desparate attempt not to > appear not to be enlightened -whatever that word may mean. > > So our talk often takes place in the context of the high things, > while most of us may still be struggling with many aspects of our > spiritual practice. But if we are really honest with ourselves, and > begin to share from the level where we are, i.e from the level of > our confusion about many things, having many questions and > reservations about our spiritual path, how to birng it into our > living reality etc., we might discover that others also share these > with us on many different levels of understanding, insight and > holistic unfolding. > > So why pretend? Why make out as if we are all discussing these high > things as though they are really where we are at, and as though these > are our living truth? My sense is that for as long as we try to > fool one another about these matters, for just as long will our > enquiries remain unrewarding and unfulfilling. > > Self consciousness is unconsciousness. > Reality beats Ideality hands down. > Love ,Doug Good one, Doug, as usual. The reality is we are at war. See Gita and Bible for more on that. The holy war is for the soul of mankind. Do we bow down to money or do we bow down to God? That is the question. If you wanna know " Who am I? " , ask " Who do I serve? " " No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon. " (Matthew 6:24) fuzzie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 25, 2005 Report Share Posted June 25, 2005 Nisargadatta , " chefboy2160 " <chefboy2160> wrote: > Dear friends, > > It seems as though we always talk the high talk - as though what we > can *understand* and communicate on the level of non-duality, > consciousness, intergal living and so on, is a reflection of our > actual state. It is as though there is this desparate attempt not to > appear not to be enlightened -whatever that word may mean. > > So our talk often takes place in the context of the high things, > while most of us may still be struggling with many aspects of our > spiritual practice. But if we are really honest with ourselves, and > begin to share from the level where we are, i.e from the level of > our confusion about many things, having many questions and > reservations about our spiritual path, how to birng it into our > living reality etc., we might discover that others also share these > with us on many different levels of understanding, insight and > holistic unfolding. > > So why pretend? Why make out as if we are all discussing these high > things as though they are really where we are at, and as though these > are our living truth? My sense is that for as long as we try to > fool one another about these matters, for just as long will our > enquiries remain unrewarding and unfulfilling. > > Self consciousness is unconsciousness. > Reality beats Ideality hands down. > Love ,Doug Hi Doug, I think intellectual discussions about nonduality e t c can be a good tool even if we ourselves are not yet sages. Describing our own actual spiritual practice can also be a good tool I believe. al. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 25, 2005 Report Share Posted June 25, 2005 Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > Nisargadatta , " chefboy2160 " <chefboy2160> > wrote: > > Dear friends, > > > > It seems as though we always talk the high talk - as though what we > > can *understand* and communicate on the level of non-duality, > > consciousness, intergal living and so on, is a reflection of our > > actual state. It is as though there is this desparate attempt not > to > > appear not to be enlightened -whatever that word may mean. > > > > So our talk often takes place in the context of the high things, > > while most of us may still be struggling with many aspects of our > > spiritual practice. But if we are really honest with ourselves, and > > begin to share from the level where we are, i.e from the level of > > our confusion about many things, having many questions and > > reservations about our spiritual path, how to birng it into our > > living reality etc., we might discover that others also share > these > > with us on many different levels of understanding, insight and > > holistic unfolding. > > > > So why pretend? Why make out as if we are all discussing these > high > > things as though they are really where we are at, and as though > these > > are our living truth? My sense is that for as long as we try to > > fool one another about these matters, for just as long will our > > enquiries remain unrewarding and unfulfilling. > > > > Self consciousness is unconsciousness. > > Reality beats Ideality hands down. > > Love ,Doug > > > Hi Doug, > > I think intellectual discussions about nonduality e t c can be a good > tool even if we ourselves are not yet sages. Describing our own > actual spiritual practice can also be a good tool I believe. > > al. ************ Cause like beating your head against a wall, it feels so good when you stop. Judi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 25, 2005 Report Share Posted June 25, 2005 Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " <anders_lindman> wrote: > Nisargadatta , " chefboy2160 " <chefboy2160> > wrote: > > Dear friends, > > > > It seems as though we always talk the high talk - as though what we > > can *understand* and communicate on the level of non-duality, > > consciousness, intergal living and so on, is a reflection of our > > actual state. It is as though there is this desparate attempt not > to > > appear not to be enlightened -whatever that word may mean. > > > > So our talk often takes place in the context of the high things, > > while most of us may still be struggling with many aspects of our > > spiritual practice. But if we are really honest with ourselves, and > > begin to share from the level where we are, i.e from the level of > > our confusion about many things, having many questions and > > reservations about our spiritual path, how to birng it into our > > living reality etc., we might discover that others also share > these > > with us on many different levels of understanding, insight and > > holistic unfolding. > > > > So why pretend? Why make out as if we are all discussing these > high > > things as though they are really where we are at, and as though > these > > are our living truth? My sense is that for as long as we try to > > fool one another about these matters, for just as long will our > > enquiries remain unrewarding and unfulfilling. > > > > Self consciousness is unconsciousness. > > Reality beats Ideality hands down. > > Love ,Doug > > > Hi Doug, > > I think intellectual discussions about nonduality e t c can be a good > tool even if we ourselves are not yet sages. Describing our own > actual spiritual practice can also be a good tool I believe. > > al. Yes al, good discussion is a good tool.This is part of a post from a friend of mine on another site who was just giving all of us a reality check including himself. All over this and other advaita sites people speak from the ultimate understanding useing the same flowery terms and trying to outdo each other in there ability to show everybody that they are enlightened or that they are allready there. Perhaps instead of fooling ourselves we should take a real hard look at ourselves(self inquiry) and just see all of the components that keep us from our non-dual nature as humans. No Atnman,Self,God or Oneness to muff up the ground of our investigation though or we just weave the net of illusion tighter. When the search stops and you see the uninspected unconscious conditioned way you live life(god and self are part of this), then you can begin the practice of deprogramming yourself which slowly lets the light of your non-dual nature shine through. The search ends with the practice beginning.Non-dual living is avaiable to all of us as humans and it needs to be de-mystified. There is no magical instant attainment of enlightenment.A lifetime of conditioned living does not just dissappear but rather needs to be seen for what it is and transcended useing our own natural inner intelligence as our guide. With flashes of wholeness we might think we have attained a goal but, its the memory of these moments that tighten our chains even tighter and keep us in the bondage of mind.My friend has a really good saying, " Mind is the slayer of truth " . Peace all, Doug........ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 25, 2005 Report Share Posted June 25, 2005 Nisargadatta , " chefboy2160 " <chefboy2160> wrote: > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " chefboy2160 " > <chefboy2160> > > wrote: > > > Dear friends, > > > > > > It seems as though we always talk the high talk - as though what > we > > > can *understand* and communicate on the level of non-duality, > > > consciousness, intergal living and so on, is a reflection of our > > > actual state. It is as though there is this desparate attempt > not > > to > > > appear not to be enlightened -whatever that word may mean. > > > > > > So our talk often takes place in the context of the high things, > > > while most of us may still be struggling with many aspects of > our > > > spiritual practice. But if we are really honest with ourselves, > and > > > begin to share from the level where we are, i.e from the level > of > > > our confusion about many things, having many questions and > > > reservations about our spiritual path, how to birng it into our > > > living reality etc., we might discover that others also share > > these > > > with us on many different levels of understanding, insight and > > > holistic unfolding. > > > > > > So why pretend? Why make out as if we are all discussing these > > high > > > things as though they are really where we are at, and as though > > these > > > are our living truth? My sense is that for as long as we try > to > > > fool one another about these matters, for just as long will our > > > enquiries remain unrewarding and unfulfilling. > > > > > > Self consciousness is unconsciousness. > > > Reality beats Ideality hands down. > > > Love ,Doug > > > > > > Hi Doug, > > > > I think intellectual discussions about nonduality e t c can be a > good > > tool even if we ourselves are not yet sages. Describing our own > > actual spiritual practice can also be a good tool I believe. > > > > al. > > Yes al, good discussion is a good tool.This is part of a post from > a friend of mine on another site who was just giving all of us a > reality check including himself. All over this and other advaita > sites people speak from the ultimate understanding useing the same > flowery terms and trying to outdo each other in there ability to > show everybody that they are enlightened or that they are allready > there. Perhaps instead of fooling ourselves we should take a real > hard look at ourselves(self inquiry) and just see all of the > components that keep us from our non-dual nature as humans. > No Atnman,Self,God or Oneness to muff up the ground of our > investigation though or we just weave the net of illusion > tighter. When the search stops and you see the uninspected > unconscious conditioned way you live life(god and self are part of > this), then you can begin the practice of deprogramming yourself > which slowly lets the light of your non-dual nature shine through. > The search ends with the practice beginning.Non-dual living is > avaiable to all of us as humans and it needs to be de-mystified. > There is no magical instant attainment of enlightenment.A lifetime > of conditioned living does not just dissappear but rather needs > to be seen for what it is and transcended useing our own natural > inner intelligence as our guide. > With flashes of wholeness we might think we have attained a goal > but, its the memory of these moments that tighten our chains even > tighter and keep us in the bondage of mind.My friend has a really > good saying, " Mind is the slayer of truth " . > Peace all, Doug........ One spiritual techer, which is not a teacher at all, but is learning all the time is David Icke, the English former soccer player, BBC reporter e t c who went totally 'crazy' and began investigating conspiriacies in the world. I have not read any of his books as I find conspiracy theories fun, but not _that_ interesting. But now he has come up with a new book that I did order at a book shop in Stockholm. First print sold out in a month! Now finally a copy of the second print has arrived at my shop in Stockholm, and when I am back home (I am abroad on vacation now) I will run to the shop and get it. :-) Here is a review from Amazon: ------ It has taken David Icke 15 years (since his epiphany in 1990) and umpteen books to reach the same conclusions that he could have jumped to in 15 minutes spent reading about Ramana Maharishi. Stripped of all the breathless scattershot verbiage, the message boils down to (as the title says) " Everything is an illusion " . Individual human consciousness units are game pieces trapped in an artificial Matrix - a web of deception designed to milk fear and other negative emotions for use as energy for its own sustenance and expansion. Pretty much everything you could roll out as a topic for conversation is just another brick in that wall - space, time, nature, DNA, science, religion, technology, art, education, medicine, and of course the financial system and the endless wars - you name it. The shape-shifting reptilians for which David Icke was once radically famous are now pretty much demoted to minor bit-player operatives in the overall scheme (and even come in for a bit of sympathy). The book's message really is pure " Advaita " - the ancient Hindu doctrine that, well, " Everything is an illusion " . The part about Infinite Love is so removed from regular human garden variety love (which all its pressures, pains, and fears) that you might as well tag Icke's concept as Advaitic " Self " (big S!) and be done with it. A book like this (in fact most of Icke's books) also really show the influence of the Web on authorship. Anybody can be an instant expert on anything, but that fact-finding power doesn't necessarily confer logic or organization skills. So given all this kvetching, why my 5 Star rating? Simple! I mean the answer to that is simple, and the reason is that Icke presents the same message more SIMPLY and more humorously than the regular Neo-Advaitic authors. The presentation of core concept " Everything is an illusion " by the current crop of Neo- Advaitic authors (no, " Neo " isn't a reference to The Matrix here, it just means the Western 21st century appropriation of classical Advaita by such as John Wheeler, Nathan Gill, Jan Kersschot, and so on) are so bloodless, dull, and humorless that Icke's version cuts through them like a top-end Harley Davidson hog through a kid's tricycle race. Admittedly though Icke gilds the lily a LOT more than those purist Neo-Advait's mentioned, with his digressions about natural health maintenance, sexuality, 9-11 conspiracy, Jewish religious law (he should've gone easier on that particular one, why continue to feed the spurious charges of anti-Semitism?), and on and on. Icke delivers the goods with a lot more sauce and fun than anybody else. However, as usual it is more diagnosis than practical working prescription (maybe it has to be this way, as in Icke's world, one sign you are dealing with The Matrix is the prevalance of RULES governing everything). That does leave us with a bit of a quandry - how to actually eject ourselves from The Matrix? Hmmm, maybe those Neo-Advaita authors are looking a bit better ... One area where Icke is a bit naiive is that he seems to accept some kind of unit of " consciousness " as the subject for all the deception. " Your consciousness is trapped " type of thing. What is that - " consciousness " ? Is there some base unit of inviduation there that we need to deal with? I remember somebody once asked Ramana - " How should we treat others? " His answer - " There are no others. " But I think Icke differs in one small way from the Neo-Advaits in that they seem to say that there is no escape apart from acceptance. 'Lie back and enjoy it' type of thing. Whereas Icke seems to feel you could really jump ship entirely, into a pool of pure infinite Love. Anyway, I want to know HOW to escape! For now, this book will at least get you out of your cell and into the prison yard. ------ I think David Icke is an example of a person who does not claim himself to be a sage, but remains on a 'human' level, yet has interesting teachings to deliver. All people who claim to be sages today are maybe correct, in a RELATIVE way. I will only call a person a true (beginner) sage if he or she can walk on water and fly like Neo in the Matrix movies. Ha! Sorry Balsekar, Liquorman and Nisargadatta, you don't qualify as sages IMNSHO (in my not so humble opinion) )))) al. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 25, 2005 Report Share Posted June 25, 2005 ********* I can see it now, :-), " Will Martha ever get Enlightened, will Brad merge with God, will Susie go to the Great Beyond??? Stay tuned for the next episode of As The Stomach Turns!! :-) *********** And here's a good one, " Will Moller integrate hisself into the Wholeness and be a perfect human? " Stay tuned!! :-) ROFL * ************* And will it be gradual or will it be sudden? Stay tuned! :-) LOL Judi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 26, 2005 Report Share Posted June 26, 2005 Nisargadatta , " Judi Rhodes " <judirhodes@c...> wrote: > Nisargadatta , " anders_lindman " > <anders_lindman> wrote: > > Nisargadatta , " chefboy2160 " > <chefboy2160> > > wrote: > > > Dear friends, > > > > > > It seems as though we always talk the high talk - as though what > we > > > can *understand* and communicate on the level of non-duality, > > > consciousness, intergal living and so on, is a reflection of our > > > actual state. It is as though there is this desparate attempt > not > > to > > > appear not to be enlightened -whatever that word may mean. > > > > > > So our talk often takes place in the context of the high things, > > > while most of us may still be struggling with many aspects of our > > > spiritual practice. But if we are really honest with ourselves, > and > > > begin to share from the level where we are, i.e from the level > of > > > our confusion about many things, having many questions and > > > reservations about our spiritual path, how to birng it into our > > > living reality etc., we might discover that others also share > > these > > > with us on many different levels of understanding, insight and > > > holistic unfolding. > > > > > > So why pretend? Why make out as if we are all discussing these > > high > > > things as though they are really where we are at, and as though > > these > > > are our living truth? My sense is that for as long as we try to > > > fool one another about these matters, for just as long will our > > > enquiries remain unrewarding and unfulfilling. > > > > > > Self consciousness is unconsciousness. > > > Reality beats Ideality hands down. > > > Love ,Doug > > > > > > Hi Doug, > > > > I think intellectual discussions about nonduality e t c can be a > good > > tool even if we ourselves are not yet sages. Describing our own > > actual spiritual practice can also be a good tool I believe. > > > > al. > > ************ > Cause like beating your head against a wall, it feels so good when > you stop. > > Judi Hi Judi, One can also use tools in other ways than symbolically beating our heads with them! al. 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.