Re : Bill's Account of Inner Exploration

[Guest guest]

> >

>

> I'm amazed...

>

> Doh... if there is no preference to what comes up,

> then the

> pain of another is not an " inconvenience " , it is

> simply what

> is and there is an ability to be completely present

> with that.

> Caring is not pathos, we agree on that right? Caring

> is not

> some sentimental emotion of " oh gee shucks, that's too

> bad!

> I really feel for you! "

>

> In my work with the mentally ill I am able to be very

> present

> with them (something most of the other staff won't or

> can't do),

> and there is an interaction in the " space between "

> that is not

> based on any particular intent on my part. Amazing

> things happen

> in the very brief five minute or so interactions I am

> able to

> have with them.

>

> They *know* that I am there and open, present. They

> *know* that

> I see them without predjudice. And they really respond

> to that.

> Particularly as they get very little of that in their

> lives.

>

> It was the same when I worked with emotionally

> disturbed children.

> I have been practicing what I am talking about.

>

> Bill

>

> What you just wrote evoque my last post, and it is a

> lot about not being in the way, and yet fully

> blossomed in what is :

> a flower fully is,

> it doesn`t give or care,

> it is the full exxpression of its beauty and

> fragrance, no matter what.

> Those aren`t mystical words.

> They are an ultimate reality as far as I can see.

> And it has to be tasted.

>

> Patricia

 

Interesting word you use there: " tasted "

Nisargadatta makes frequent use of the term " taste " ,

as in:

[the jnani's] state is not so desolate. It tastes

of the pure, uncaused, undiluted bliss.

 

And I am brought to recall the words of a friend who

himself has gone " beyond " into silence when once I

spoke of the " sweetness " of inner silence and emptiness.

He said, " That's a sure sign of someone who has really

experienced it, to speak of the 'sweetness' of it! "

 

Your fluid words speaking of the fragrance and the

taste are evidence that you speak from an actuality

of experience, and not from cogitations. [Will the

cogitators will find your words heretical and declare

them as nonsense?]

 

re:

> What you just wrote... is a

> lot about not being in the way, and yet fully

> blossomed in what is :

> a flower fully is,

> it doesn`t give or care,

> it is the full exxpression of its beauty and

> fragrance, no matter what.

 

You are absolutely right about the " not being in

the way " . The work I described with the mentally

ill is just like that... there is no doer, and

so the " magic " can happen, which you refer to here

with the image of a blossom unfolding. And your

image of the flower conveys the futher meaning that

what unfolds is not arbitrary or chance, but as

rooted in the depth of What Is as the unfolding of

a flower is rooted in the seed.

 

In short, what you say here is astonishingly

profound. But I had to really read carefully

to grasp the many layers of meaning. I'm afraid

many readers here will not take that trouble.

 

You refer to your immediately prior post. I went

back and looked at that. It is very short:

 

There is a very center of what is.

There is only that very very center, allowing

whatever, being quiet, attentive and small so as not

to shadow anything.

Not here but with...

 

I already responded to that, saying that I didn't

get what you meant by " center of what is " . Now that

I have read your comments in *this* post I better

understand what you mean by " center of what is " .

It seems to me that what you mean by the " center "

in relation to " what is " is like the relation of

the seed to the flower. And seeing it that way

what you wrote in that previous post makes beautiful

sense. And you have shown me a profound,

deeper way of looking at the matter of being

quite simply and openly in the Now.

 

You are so completely outside the [mainstreet

nondual] box in what you have to say!

 

Some (many?) here seem to speak as if from a central

doctrine of some sort. Certain things are clearly

" wrong " from such a view. But there is a big

difference betweeen nondualism as a " philosophy "

and nondual living/being in dynamic manifestation.

Such dynamic manifestation cares not for rules

and says what it pleases. How unruly!

 

But anything else (read: less) is simply vapors

of yearning.

 

Bill

 

The rules of the game here is called : the willingness to make mistakes!

Your understanding is gold.

 

Patricia

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

**

 

If you do not wish to receive individual emails, to change your subscription,

sign in with your ID and go to Edit My Groups:

 

/mygroups?edit=1

 

Under the Message Delivery option, choose " No Email " for the Nisargadatta group

and click on Save Changes.