Paradox

[Guest guest]

Yogi Amrit Desai taught Hatha Yoga but blended it with meditation

someway so that if one were successful in practicing his method the

asanas seemed to do themselves.He said:You have to know that you can't

do anything and you have to act as though you can. I must say this

seems to me the verbal equivalent of one of those etchings or drawings

of Escher where impossible situations or objects are given visual

form.A wall that is also a floor etc. Is it possible to know you can

do nothing and at the same time act as though you can? Seems to me it

might be better to investigate the first part of the statement: You

can do nothing. Is this true?Maybe if you see that this is true enough

times it will sink in at last and you can begin to enjoy watchng your

life live itself and not be bothered acting as though it were not and

you were the actual actor. Snuff.

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " tom " <jeusisbuen wrote:

>

> Yogi Amrit Desai taught Hatha Yoga but blended it with meditation

> someway so that if one were successful in practicing his method the

> asanas seemed to do themselves.He said:You have to know that you can't

> do anything and you have to act as though you can. I must say this

> seems to me the verbal equivalent of one of those etchings or drawings

> of Escher where impossible situations or objects are given visual

> form.A wall that is also a floor etc. Is it possible to know you can

> do nothing and at the same time act as though you can? Seems to me it

> might be better to investigate the first part of the statement: You

> can do nothing. Is this true?Maybe if you see that this is true enough

> times it will sink in at last and you can begin to enjoy watchng your

> life live itself and not be bothered acting as though it were not and

> you were the actual actor. Snuff.

 

I am with you that " acting as though...etc. " is a bother and bogus

hokey-poke.

 

Re watching your life live itself... with you there as well,

as in this account:

 

Is there any choice? At some point I concluded that *if*

there is any choice then the direction of attention must

sometime be subject to choice (though certainly not

always). But at any rate, it seemed to me, if there is

no choice regarding attention then there is no choice at

all.

 

So I began to simply observe the movement of attention.

Whereupon it became clear that attention moved of its own.

No steering required. Very interesting to simply observe

the movement of attention, and how everything unfolds of

its own accord. It's like taking the hands off the wheel

and watching the car still stay on the road, navigate turns,

etc.

 

And noticing also there is a *second attention* watching the

" ordinary attention " .

 

So in that process no will is involved, except perhaps paying

attention to attention.

 

But what becomes quite clear is that any choice is pretty

d*mn insignificant. Vanishing in significance.

 

It is the path of becoming transparent.

 

As (in due course) even the " witness " disappears....

 

and all *just happens*...

 

 

And that is pretty much how it was for me...

just watching the movement of attention until

the " trail of somebody doing something " became

fainter and fainter until dissolving as into

thin air.

 

In this process time collapses... gross events

blur into out-of-focus as apparent movements of

attention become shorter and more subtle...

 

until there are just cycles and epicycles of

oscillating vibrations...

 

as all collapses into a shimmering moment of

tumbling cascades of vibration...

 

all is accounted for in this vibratory present...

 

effort is no longer even conceivable...

 

nor any " I " or " me " ...

 

perhaps this is what the ancients meant by

the " dance of Shiva " ...

this ever-scintillating domain

of pulsing, twirling, whorling light.

 

 

Bill