Linda/Creation & Being

[Guest guest]

Re: Linda/Creation & Being

> Fri, 26 Mar 1999

> "Linda Callanan" <shastra

> Re: Tim G/Gene Poole

>

> Dear Gene:

>

> Happy birthday.

 

I thank you, Linda.

> >personal history'. I have lived the destructive effects I (and you)

> >describe. It is not difÞcult for me to 'know' that one is wounded; I have

> >the 'identical wound'. My heart, which I am learning to trust, still

> >upheaves at the unthinking abuse which I see going on in 'the world'.

>

> How true - no matter how disconnected everyone can seem during disagreements

> it appears that for most going through the 'wounded' heart with strong

> feelings of separation is part of the process before we can be at one in the

> healed heart.

 

Yes, it seems so. It seems that wandering the wilderness for 40 years may

be, for some, part of the script.

> >I have also 'seen' (in the past few yearsŠ I am now 51, yesterday was my

> >birthday) that I have somehow been a 'party' to the creation of 'all of

> >this'. Since I have gotten this insight (which I really cannot explain), I

> >have found that I can practice 'creative non-creation', IE, I practice what

> >I call 'abiding', which I deÞne as the deliberate cessation of reaction.

>

> <I have realised that I am 'creating' and 'recreating', and that I have no

> >idea of how this all began. The closest 'match' that I have found, exists

> >as the Tibetan Buddhist conception of 'Karma' and 'samskara'; I have used

> >these concepts to formulate my own 'version' of how this works. Apparently,

> >I have 'created' all of this, including my own perceived 'victimizers'; it

> >is now my task to 'stop creating them'. Have they been 'real' the whole

> >time? Apparently, yes.

>

> You speak of practicing 'creative non-creation' and Þnding the 'closet

> match' through Tibetan Buddhist concepts. Two things stand out strongly to

> me the fact that you state it as a close match and not absolute truth. That

> approach underscores the fact that so many systems speak truth none may

> match another's needs or experiences exactly but that does not make them

> invalid. The fact that you found a technique and use it is of primary

> importance. No matter if one calls it ego, intellectual mind, psychological

> imbalance, etc. there are mind habits that keep us from knowing who we are

> and it is only by consistent practice of some type of offset behavior can we

> actually be who we are rather than trying so hard to believe that we are

> perfect. I think the fact that you consciously and consistently practice

> your chosen technique is more valuable than all of the books, quotes and

> philosophies combined.

 

Yes. When Sandeep speaks of 'seriousness as a disease', I think that so

too, is 'literalness' similarly a 'disease'.

 

Concering 'technology'... I do respect that it is, and can be used. No

qualms there. Just because someone has climbed up a ladder to reach a lofty

height, does not mean that they are correct in stating that 'ladders are

unnecessary'.

 

I 'wish' that I had something to share, which would be 'universally

resolving', but I do not. I must be as tolerant of other's foibles, as I

have been tolerated myself by others. I can always issue myself the

'insurance policy' of 'there is no attainment', as a default-position, to

assure that I am not leading anyone up any particular mountain to meet the

'guru'. I understand that my life and experiences are my own, and that it

is futile to attempt to imitate, as a way of 'attaining'. But that being

said, I do not mind giving commentary when it seems useful or compassionate

to do so. I love it when we can open a dialog concering the 'nuts and

bolts' level of Being.

> >In my own personal life, as I practiced the above, I have had my 'apparent

> >victimizers' come to me to apologize to me, to ask my forgiveness, and to

> >express the desire to be my friend. I stress that this has happened only

> >since I have discovered 'non-reaction/abiding' as a way of 'stopping the

> >recreation' of what I have experienced as a 'bad world'. Has it been bad?

> >Yes it has. Very bad, at times.

>

> My own techniques are from the system of yoga and mantra has been extremely

> helpful. The 'process' has been 'very bad' at times but I too, have seen

> many changes in my external life and in the behavior of others. Before I

> started my own practices it seemed that there was no difference between the

> past 'victim' and the current 'victim'. I can actually remember thinking

> and having others tell me if you didn't have bad luck you would have no luck

>

 

Yes. Thankfully, like the swells of the sea, there are peaks as well as

valleys. Riding the wave as a victim is not much fun.

> >I do not know how it is that I have 'come into all of this heavy karma',

> >but I Þnd that now, since I have been practicing (with difÞculty)

> '>abiding', that things are easing. Not only that, but I am getting what I

> >want, IE, friends, and the 'stuff' that I have always wanted. It has not

> >been easy, but I am experiencing a 'taste of Grace', which indeed seems to

> >re-enforce my decision to 'abide' in the face of what appears to be a

> '>toxic world'. The key for me seems to be to cease the automatic, reactive

> '>recreation' of what has been so bad for me in the past. In the midst of

> >all of this, I have discovered my own 'power of creation', which I have

> >labeled as the 'Highest Siddhe'. It is really _wierd_ that in all of the

> >so-called 'spiritual literature' and preaching that I have been exposed to,

> >that _nobody_ had mentioned that we are born with this 'Highest Siddhe',

> >the power of creation _itself_, fully operational! Good grief! If I had

> >only known this 'earlier', what lot of pain I could have avoided, yes?

>

> >Somehow, the pain and agony of my 'historical life' has led me to this

> >understanding, that I am creating. You can believe that I am very humbly

> >retreating into careful consideration of just what I allow myself to create

> >(or recreate).

> I once learned that the real key to life is not in what happens to one but

> how one reacts to what happens. I do believe that some people choose to

> work through much karma in a particular lifetime but it does appear that

> when you come through it with consciousness and see the "Grace' of each and

> every event you begin to not only tune into creation itself but to realize

> that you yourself are creation.

 

Yes. 'I am creation'.

> Not too long ago my daughter was telling me

> how a close friend was telling her that she felt so bad for how hard my life

> has been that I was so held back by family responsibilities, that I could

> have had so much more in life. I smiled at my daughter and she just laughed

> at me and said 'Mom, it's hard for people to see just how far you've come

> and how peaceful you are, they just don't understand your path.' I thought

> well it's nice that my daughter can see but it's even nicer that none of

> this matters because I simply am and that's really all there is.

 

Agreed.

 

I say that it is fine to talk about the 'elementary mechanics of Being',

realizing it as such. No problem.

> Thanks for listening and sharing.

>

> Linda

 

Thanks again, Linda.

 

==Gene Poole==