Tim G/History & Mine

[Guest guest]

Hi Tim, thanks for writing. My comments are woven in, below;

>Dear Gene,

>

>At 11:46 AM 3/26/99 -0800, you wrote:

>

>>I am "familiar" with what you describe above, as a broad facet of my own

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

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

>>the 'identical wound'.

>

>It's a natural thing for Self to recognize Self, more uncommon in the realm

>of 'small self'. I bow to you again for your perceptiveness.

 

Thank you. It is only possible when I am relaxed.

>>My heart, which I am learning to trust, still

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

>

>And mine as well. We share the same heart, it seems. At times it's

>difficult to to sit here in this cave of an apartment, alone, focusing on

>'my own' spiritual state, when 'out there' man is senselessly killing

>fellow living creature. I've spent some time homeless/on the streets (I

>strongly recommend it to everyone) and know well the state of man at the

>'lowest levels.' And I can tell you, it's a state of utter despair, of the

>ultimate blindness of Tamas.

 

Understood. It is good that you have this insight. Few do.

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

>>birthday)

>

>I wish your body a happy 51st birthday :-) As I see it, you've used those

>51 years of incarnation well.

 

"The fool who persists in his folly... "

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

>>this'.

>

>Yes, I have begun to see this as well. I don't know if I'm a very old soul

>that chose a difficult incarnation purposely, or just a youngun' paying for

>some karmas in previous lifetimes, but the 'cause' seems to me unimportant.

> "What to do now" is far more important.

 

Also 'what not to do now', yes?

><snipped but read>

>

>>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.

>

>I no longer feel myself the victim, although this knowingness perhaps has

>yet to penetrate to the very deepest levels of my being.

 

Believe me, it can take a long time. It is a job of work to allow this to

scrub deeply. Easy does it.

>>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.

>

>Lately, my relationship with my parents has improved drastically as well,

>but not necessarily as a result of the type of practice you detailed

>previously; rather as a result of ego-dissolution on my part. As long as

>two (or more) egos are in conflict, with neither willing to give an inch,

>there is no healing between people. But when just one of those egos

>loosens, even a fraction, healing begins as a natural and unstoppable

>force, gathering momentum as it goes.

 

Well-stated. This is a 'rule'. If you look deeply, you may find that

resentment is what is going on, in these 'ego-battles'. It is a way of life

(resentment) for the 'western mind'.

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

>>but I find that now, since I have been practicing (with difficulty)

>>'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.

>

>I'm finding that the "stuff" I thought I always wanted brings no

>satisfaction, and so our paths differ in this regard. Last night in

>meditation I pictured myself removing everything from this apartment, all

>this junk, this stuff that will be dust or belong to someone else in 20 or

>30 years, even the clothes on my back, throwing it away in a dumpster, and

>simply walking away naked into the world. A great sense of release and

>freedom accompanied these thoughts. This wanting of "stuff" has got to be

>the ultimate bondage. My practice is unattachment, renunciation. It's

>bearing fruit. The Springtime of the Soul has arrived for me.

 

For myself, I have done that (given/thrown away my stuff) about 3 times, to

varying degrees of self-deprivation. I do not see myself doing it again. I

am not as young and adaptable as I once was.

 

Chiefly, my new computer; Mac G3/350mHz/256RAM/24GBHD w/Firewire/17" HiRes

monitor is my much worked-for prize of the 'moment'. I am teaching myself

NLE (Non-Linear Editing) of digitally input video. It is a trip! And guess

what; I am unashamed of my utilization of this fine tool. I am by no means

well-off financially, and live with my oldest son, who is an HTML whiz and

budding programmer, at 17YO.

 

I have several close/intimate friends, who stayed with me for the years of

my confusion and discontent. We have usually suported each-other in times

of crisis.

 

Things have been far from ideal, outwardly, but inwardly, I cannot say that

I have ever been in better shape. I do see us as sharing certain

characteristics, Tim, and I encourage you to express yourself. Spiritual

idealism aside, you are not alone. Us 'mutants' have a 'rough row to hoe'.

I know.

><snip>

>

>>I now state here, what I have said only to myself so far, in this

>>'chronicle of transformation'; I applaud your courage, Tim,

>

>Ultimately the courage is not 'mine', but I appreciate the recognition, and

>will pass it along to Self :-)

 

Understood.

>>I myself am a raw, open Being, entirely improper most of the time, by the

>>judgement of many who 'know me'.

>

>I'm getting to that point as well. I still practice "correctness" most of

>the time in the general public (when I remember to), but around others whom

>I feel are on spiritual paths, I am usually entirely raw and open as well.

>Perhaps this has been somewhat to 'my own' detriment, as not all

>understand, nor do they want such a person around.

 

Perhaps I should say that I did not mean to imply that I am 'usually overly

demonstrative'; on the contrary, I have learned to reserve comment, much to

my convenience, if you see what I mean, that it causes me less trouble. But

by open and raw, I meant that I am like an 'open wound'; my sensitivity is,

I can say, incredible. It took me a LONG time to 'get' that I am different

in that way. It makes all the difference for me to know this about myself;

I simply avoid aggrevations and I am happy. This, of course, after years of

diagnosing myself as being a 'hopeless case'. The worst of all aggrevations

are the self-critical internal dialogs which I used to continually run.

>>But what seems to escape 'them' is that I have had the 'gonzo

>>courage' to be myself

>

>Do you have the 'courage' to dis-own that courage, and acknowledge it as

>Divine Will working through you?

 

I am that Divine Will.

>>Of course. I cannot argue wth this. As you know, for some of 'us' it is a

>>long and potentially exhausting struggle.

>

>I don't know... speaking as a disinterested observer, the dissolution of

>this ego known as 'Tim Gerchmez' has been proceeding at a remarkable pace,

>considering the complete lack of formal instruction, gurus, or anything

>else. The 'conflicts' that have taken place on these mailing lists have in

>fact accelerated the pace of dissolution of ignorance. If this has been at

>the 'expense' of others, I cannot but apologize. This would be the last

>method I would choose "on purpose" for spiritual growth.

 

Yes. But you do have license to be yourself.

>Bruce Morgen spoke to me once of "Kundalini Yoga" ("The way of the

warrior").

 

Kundalini, eh? Have you looked into that?

>>You may be interested to know that I perceive you as a 'cast-out particle

>>of myself' (so to speak).

>

>An interesting way of putting it.

>

>>I have nothing to lose, and everything to gain,

>>by re-incorporating 'you' back into myself.

>

>There may ultimately be more to gain, however, by forgetting self and

>remembering Self. Doing thusly, no re-incorporation is necessary. But if

>you wish to reincorporate this mote that is 'me,' please feel free to do

>so. In fact, take the whole thing if you like, completely. I give the

>'me' to you, to do with as you wish!

 

Thanks anyway, I already have one.

>>This 'acceptance' is the

>>acceptance of my own _wholeness_. Thus, I need you.

>

>Speaking from the purely monistic standpoint, you *ARE* Me, in the literal

>sense. But from a slightly different standpoint, you should know that the

>'little me' here is being seen for what it is more and more on a minute by

>minute basis, and thus if it is that 'little me' you need, it may not be

>around in a second or a day or a week or a month or a year or a few.

 

Granted. Got one of those, too.

>Given these things, I would like to present the possibility that it's no

>accident 'you' and 'i' share the same time period of incarnation. Not a

>single subatomic particle in this universe moves save by the will of Divine

>Grace, in spite of the dictates of "chaos theory" (or perhaps *because of

>them*).

 

Yes. Nothing is excluded from Divine Grace. There is no separation.

>>I am glad that you have

>>persisted in showing yourself, and again, congratulate you on your humility

>>in doing so, though I know it has seemed otherwise at times.

>

>I'm mostly choiceless in the matter. I really don't 'act' any longer. Nor

>do I truly believe in 'free will' anymore.

>

>Thy Own Self,

>

>Tim

 

I have nothing but choice, yet no choices.

 

An aspect of your Living Environment,

 

==Gene Poole==

[Guest guest]

At 02:51 PM 3/27/99 -0800, you wrote:

>>Yes, I have begun to see this as well. I don't know if I'm a very old soul

>>that chose a difficult incarnation purposely, or just a youngun' paying for

>>some karmas in previous lifetimes, but the 'cause' seems to me unimportant.

>> "What to do now" is far more important.

>

>Also 'what not to do now', yes?

 

Actually, no. :-)... both are incorrect. A better statement might be "What

to BE now" rather than "What to DO now." To Be or Not To Be is indeed "the

question," and the answer for this Self is "To Be." Doing may spring from

Being, but it never occurs the other way around, as I see it.

>>Bruce Morgen spoke to me once of "Kundalini Yoga" ("The way of the

warrior").

>

>Kundalini, eh? Have you looked into that?

 

Kundalini has different meanings in different contexts - but if you're

speaking of the typically described "Kundalini energies" as perceived by

the mind and by the subtle and gross bodies, I've never experienced any of

that. I would guess mostly because the path of jnana is a very direct

path, straight to the Source, that bypasses most of that nonsense (no

offense to anyone else on different paths, or who may be interested in

'K'). I simply have no interest in experiencing funny energies traveling

through my body, or psychic powers, or anything of that nature; I'm just

interested in renouncing everything that is false until only Truth remains,

I.E. "Neti, Neti," wiping the glass clean so that Self may shine through

it. This is the path Divine will has chosen for me. A somewhat

"unpopular" path these days, as bhakti and raja seem to be the two "most

common" yogas in the "modern world," particularly in the West. Of course,

no path is 'pure,' and mine incorporates elements of bhakti, raja and

karma, but the main focus is jnana.

 

BTW, a few words (far wiser than mine) from Sri Ramana Maharshi concerning

this:

 

"The eternal, unbroken, natural State of abiding in the Self is Jnana. To

abide in the Self, you must love the Self. Since God is verily the Self,

love of the Self is love of God; and that is Bhakti. Jnana and Bhakti are

thus one and the same."

 

With Love,

 

Tim

 

 

-----

The CORE of Reality awaits you at:

http://start.at/the.core

Poetry, Writings, Live Chat on spiritual topics.