Pragmatic Truth revisited

[Guest guest]

I found it necessary to set this forum aside for a while due to time

constraints, not able to keep up with various whitehorse posts and related

discussion, and now that I have a moment, here I am contributing to that

discussion

again, and so I apologize, but I wanted to try to take a larger perspective

which might help me out at least.

 

Since it's my belief that our human experience is essentially a dreamscape

of a focus of consciousness which amounts to an exploration of our boundaries

of awareness, then there is perfection in that exploration, and all

experiences are a reflection of that focus. This is how we transcend our limits

of

ignorance, by creating our experience/perception, and then learning something

about those illusory creations so that we might recognize them as such and let

them go.

 

Given that, I was reading through the daily digest and pondering why we, as

a group, might have drawn one member who believes himself to be the voice of

God as well as another who regularly posts " divine messages " , both of which

seem to be designed specifically to preach against the dominant philosophy of

this forum's namesake.

 

Then I came to Bill's post about " pragmatic Truth " wherein he says :

 

" And that, I think, is a very pragmatic way

of looking at the often so very lofty

notion of " truth " . It is easy to think of

truth/Truth as some transcendental

absolute. But being oneself in a simple,

heartful, authentic way, and treating all

others *from there* with deep respect and

dignity... a very *human* notion of truth

as it were, perhaps that is all we really

need. "

 

 

and it rang a chord with me. In addition to some inspiring and thoughtful

perspectives, my impression of the overall 'tone' of this forum prior to the

stampede, was that Truth was being pursued in a rather cold, negating way, some

seemingly wishing to simply disappear. This is why Anna's words are so

welcome here, at least by me. In spite of declarations of love as a valued

divine

quality, there was sometimes little tolerance or acceptance being offered

from a human perspective.

 

I need not accept everything that comes right from the horse's mouth in

order to heed the self created warnings of Nihilism and to be reminded that love

begins within the human heart before it can ever be noticed in the heart of

God. It's also a good reminder for me that, as enamored as I am of concepts,

they are, after all just concepts and I truly know nothing. There are lessons

in humility here for all of us who forget this from time to time. Beliefs can

so easily become dogma that we would have others swallow whole.

 

As far as the potential of banning, we might notice that control is an

illusion for consciousness which creates a dream and then struggles against it's

own creation. Permanent change never comes about through such human struggles

but rather through a clear understanding of One's own 'purpose' in creating

it's experiences.

 

In the end, we'll all recognize the Truth of our being, and that Truth will

not dispense with our humanity, but rather embrace it as a part of the

Totality of Self.

 

Phil

 

 

 

 

 

 

In a message dated 12/10/2005 4:36:14 AM Pacific Standard Time,

Nisargadatta writes:

 

" billrishel " <plexus

Pragmatic Truth

 

On another list someone writing about

their experiences working in a health

and yoga center wrote:

 

" ...and the process exposed the sordid

underbelly of their humanity... All

those rough edges get exposed and you

can't help but bump up against them.

In the end I became very grateful for

them, and my experience there. "

 

It is interesting how working in the

" spiritual trenches " as it were can bring

forth some of the deepest forms of spiritual

growth.

 

I have had/am having similar experiences in

my work with first emotionally disturbed

children and teenagers, and now with

mentally ill adults.

 

The key in what the person wrote, as I see

it, is the part about the exposed

underbelly of humanity. That is what at

first may seem ugly, but in the end is

(hopefully) seen to be the great beauty.

It is really that one is seeing the truth,

as the challenges are too deep for the

dainty formalities of society, for all the

" cover-ups " .

 

In this kind of work I have found that

simply " being in my heart " is the key. I

don't mean anything particularly mystical

by that. I mean simply being centered in a

very authentic way. The emotionally

disturbed and the mentally ill seem to have

a very keen sense of whether one is being

authentic with them.

 

And because I am able to *genuinely* like

them, to appreciate the person hidden

inside (even if the outer behavior is not

entirely pleasant), again and again I find

them really opening to me, sometimes with

words, sometimes with just a look or a

smile.

 

I've been thinking about this recently, and

it does seem to me that what people want

the most is to be treated with genuine

dignity and respect. Many of the people I

work with haven't had much of that. But

when they *do* receive it, it is amazing

the deep ways they will respond. It is as

if they just need someone to believe in

them to help them get back to believing in

themselves.

 

When I speak of " being in my heart " , what I

am really talking about is being myself in

a true, authentic way. And one way I see

that in relation to the clients I work with

is that I am being like a tuning fork. If I

set up a true reference vibration, that

helps them get back to finding that same

true vibration in themselves. It's there,

but they may have lost track of it along

the way.

 

And that, I think, is a very pragmatic way

of looking at the often so very lofty

notion of " truth " . It is easy to think of

truth/Truth as some transcendental

absolute. But being oneself in a simple,

heartful, authentic way, and treating all

others *from there* with deep respect and

dignity... a very *human* notion of truth

as it were, perhaps that is all we really

need.

 

 

Bill

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , ADHHUB@A... wrote:

>

 

Nice to see you come back to the table, or circle. oddly enough

yesteday which is still today is was going back ove posts in my inbox

because i noticed you resumed posting at GR, which triggered a

thought of you before, so i went back awhile and noticed you had

posted here. Interesting isn't it what one in the Spirit can make

connections. Now you may take the wrong way, but in time we shall

oncover these realities and remove even the dualities existing still

among this nondualistic topic here____(:.

 

Peace my friend,

 

yesterday, i caught a two hour full documentary on the the life and

times of John's life with Yoko, produced by yoko, called ' imagine'

no less, but it was quite interesting, he had a pretty cool heart

under the covers, ole johnny. despite himself.

 

whitehorse rides

 

 

 

>

> I found it necessary to set this forum aside for a while due to

time

> constraints, not able to keep up with various whitehorse posts and

related

> discussion, and now that I have a moment, here I am contributing to

that discussion

> again, and so I apologize, but I wanted to try to take a larger

perspective

> which might help me out at least.

>

> Since it's my belief that our human experience is essentially a

dreamscape

> of a focus of consciousness which amounts to an exploration of our

boundaries

> of awareness, then there is perfection in that exploration, and

all

> experiences are a reflection of that focus. This is how we

transcend our limits of

> ignorance, by creating our experience/perception, and then

learning something

> about those illusory creations so that we might recognize them as

such and let

> them go.

>

> Given that, I was reading through the daily digest and pondering

why we, as

> a group, might have drawn one member who believes himself to be the

voice of

> God as well as another who regularly posts " divine messages " , both

of which

> seem to be designed specifically to preach against the dominant

philosophy of

> this forum's namesake.

>

> Then I came to Bill's post about " pragmatic Truth " wherein he says :

>

> " And that, I think, is a very pragmatic way

> of looking at the often so very lofty

> notion of " truth " . It is easy to think of

> truth/Truth as some transcendental

> absolute. But being oneself in a simple,

> heartful, authentic way, and treating all

> others *from there* with deep respect and

> dignity... a very *human* notion of truth

> as it were, perhaps that is all we really

> need. "

>

>

> and it rang a chord with me. In addition to some inspiring and

thoughtful

> perspectives, my impression of the overall 'tone' of this forum

prior to the

> stampede, was that Truth was being pursued in a rather cold,

negating way, some

> seemingly wishing to simply disappear. This is why Anna's words are

so

> welcome here, at least by me. In spite of declarations of love as

a valued divine

> quality, there was sometimes little tolerance or acceptance being

offered

> from a human perspective.

>

> I need not accept everything that comes right from the horse's

mouth in

> order to heed the self created warnings of Nihilism and to be

reminded that love

> begins within the human heart before it can ever be noticed in the

heart of

> God. It's also a good reminder for me that, as enamored as I am of

concepts,

> they are, after all just concepts and I truly know nothing. There

are lessons

> in humility here for all of us who forget this from time to time.

Beliefs can

> so easily become dogma that we would have others swallow whole.

>

> As far as the potential of banning, we might notice that control is

an

> illusion for consciousness which creates a dream and then struggles

against it's

> own creation. Permanent change never comes about through such human

struggles

> but rather through a clear understanding of One's own 'purpose' in

creating

> it's experiences.

>

> In the end, we'll all recognize the Truth of our being, and that

Truth will

> not dispense with our humanity, but rather embrace it as a part of

the

> Totality of Self.

>

> Phil

>

 

>

[Guest guest]

In the end, we'll all recognize the Truth of

our being, and that Truth will not dispense

with our humanity, but rather embrace it as a

part of the Totality of Self.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

 

Yes... so it seems to me, but...

I wonder if it is more that Truth

realizes us than the other way around...

 

And whatever Truth is, and whatever the

Totality of Self is, mustn't they be the

same?

 

In other words, perhaps this whole -- at

times very confusing -- process is Truth

realizing Truth as Truth. And yes the

humanity is a precious part of that, but

that Truth coming into full consciousness

of itself as such ...

 

well, perhaps that is going off a metaphysical

deep end.

 

But what does seem true is that there is

an incredible luminousness at the core of

this sometimes absurd, sometimes awkward,

and yet fundamentally wonderful humanness.

The many different senses of identity come

and go, like yesterday's paper, but the

luminousness at the core remains.

 

And the luminousness at the core, if there

is anything I understand to which I can

attach such a label as Truth, surely that

is it.

 

And so as the fads of self-identity fade

away in the ever-growing light of the

luminousness within, all that is *truly*

human (i.e. *not* the self-identities)

remains but ever more illumined, ever more

distilled and clarified in the light of

what is.

 

 

Bill

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " billrishel " <illieusion@h...>

wrote:

>

>

> In the end, we'll all recognize the Truth of

> our being, and that Truth will not dispense

> with our humanity, but rather embrace it as a

> part of the Totality of Self.

> >>>>>>>>>>>>>

 

 

just as a catch all phrase to let one or all off the hook is this " in

the end " as you may not know, this does not cut the mustard.

 

obviously i can't let this slip by without comment.

 

Bceause of many factors

 

first off it's the end now.

the realized soul is not contrained by time as " in the end " .

Truth is present, in the now, and that is the end

 

 

> Yes... so it seems to me, but...

> I wonder if it is more that Truth

> realizes us than the other way around...

 

well as a child, father is recognizing the child as one, but the

child is not recognizing through intellect but more a trust in love

and the emotions are being effected. A child cries because of

uncomfort not because it's not depressed or hates, it desires food or

somthing, ie mother or the embrace and comfort of being held which is

a natural emotion emanating from the soul, the true self. There's not

let's see i'm internalizing, i'm intellectually processing going on.

Its in a pure active pushing of desiring love and attention.

 

That's a 'with' condition, not independent. The seperated child is

pained or dies. This is why love and attention to a child is

important so the child feels the bond or connect to love. So that in

the matured state of that child, into is later years and development,

can it then recieve the transmition of love of God the original

Mother/FAther._____contrary to the Datta, krishna nonsense dude.

 

 

> And whatever Truth is, and whatever the

> Totality of Self is, mustn't they be the

> same?

 

in quality yes, but not quantity.

>

> In other words, perhaps this whole -- at

> times very confusing -- process is Truth

> realizing Truth as Truth. And yes the

> humanity is a precious part of that, but

> that Truth coming into full consciousness

> of itself as such ...

 

yes Truth as Truth, but not as a need. Nor does the whole need to

recognize itself. Again the child learns to recognize father/mother.

Not to recognize it has become mother/father.

Seperation is there.

 

>

> well, perhaps that is going off a metaphysical

> deep end.

>

> But what does seem true is that there is

> an incredible luminousness at the core of

> this sometimes absurd, sometimes awkward,

> and yet fundamentally wonderful humanness.

> The many different senses of identity come

> and go, like yesterday's paper, but the

> luminousness at the core remains.

 

 

it's luminious only if its lighted. light bulbs are dark unless

connected to the power source, just as all souls are dark unless

connected. _____hear carefully connected not become the source.

This is perfectly written in Genesis that the living are the

firmament that maintains. i've said this before but it appears

everything i say is blocked no one acknowledges or says 'i went and

read. _____________________WHY_________________________?

 

What's the real hang up with saying i see or yes that it's written

like that. Did not the NIZ quote his guru, and follow him.

so i too say m there it's written the Bible Guru has it.

 

Do people hate the Bible or just christianity, which i have

categorically called liars, corrupt cronies and associates of the

evil kings of capitolism. i can't state my position more simply, but

yet i say the Bible has just not had the Guru represented. God is

perfect and so are the teachings. People are having a hard time with

the God of the Bible, not me, i know nothing, just like NIZ claimed.

YOu must know nothing before you can learn, like going back to the

womb, and coming out and starting all over.

 

So if you become childlike then knowledge can be imparted. That's

why i've said women will take to this even before men b/c of it's

simplicity in purity. And where the women are, there will be men. But

with women, b/c they are often more in touch with their emotions,

daah!!! no revelation there.

>

> And the luminousness at the core, if there

> is anything I understand to which I can

> attach such a label as Truth, surely that

> is it.

 

yes, Truth, and little Truths.

 

>

> And so as the fads of self-identity fade

> away in the ever-growing light of the

> luminousness within, all that is *truly*

> human (i.e. *not* the self-identities)

> remains but ever more illumined, ever more

> distilled and clarified in the light of

> what is.

 

Yes, that's true if you want to accept the label of human ( or as

*not*)as that self, which will draw a negative here in the Niz, i'm

not world.

Also that the distilled still remains 'distinct' and not dissolved,

but clarified in the whole as one light as part of Whole light.

 

Always distinction, then connection results in cooperation whcih then

becomes a part to the illumined.

 

now my objective is to homogenize the homogeneous even the

heterogeneous illuminated. Therefore increase the volume of light to

create a large and ever present glow.

 

Becasue individual lights scattered throughout cannot have as much

concentrated light, and are lost in all the prevailing darkeness.

 

That's why i'm courting ana in cyberspace,lolololololoanajee.

one candle lights another that lights another and so on. but she's

sometimes like the loose light bulb that flickers, lol.

 

but you gotta love the semi-romantic spaceangel poetess. (:-

 

whitehorserides

but a traveller

in 'not time'.

 

always reserving the right to add for clarification.

 

>

>

> Bill

>