Guest guest Posted June 8, 1999 Report Share Posted June 8, 1999 Comments by Jerry Katz on the NondualitySalon may be relevant to this thread so I am posting them here...................................Harsha Jerry: I want to comment not on the wisdom from which each of you comes, which may be the same highest wisdom, but the approach each of you is taking. Gene speaks of abiding as an instructional imperative. One must abide. That resonates throughout Gene's writings. Skye understands that because one cannot abide, or really do anything at all, that a whole other way of expressing ourselves is required if we are to commune via email at all. In other words, If we can't really do anything, then how do we do anything? It's a deep and valid Zen-like question. An understanding of it may require abiding at the hub around which the question rotates, but extreme nondualism does away even with the abiding. So how does one talk about the doing away with the abiding? And then how do you talk about doing away with what was done away with? Skye's extreme nondual point of view is very difficult for many to do anything with. Texts such as the Avadhuta Gita and the Ashtavakra Gita are extremely nondual. (They are available through my website at <http://www3.ns.sympatico.ca/umbada> These texts successfully speak from the nondual disposition without instructing anyone on how to get to that level. They simply confess what is beyond the abiding, the transcendence of abiding. That seems to be the disposition Skye would care to take. Often people mis-interpret the extreme nondual expressions as meaning it's okay to do nothing, no practice, no responsibility, no ethics, even no abiding! People use them as an excuse to avoid facing who they are physically, emtionally, mentally, spiritually. People need instruction on practice. That's why discussions on diet, depression, dealing with and facing life events, kundalini activity, meditation, witnessing, abiding, and so on, are often seen here. They have a relationship to understanding the nondual nature of reality. A person somehow has to get to nondual understanding. It's effective to have two perspectives, one coming from the Skye of nonduality, and one coming from the Gene Poole of human practice. You both meet in the same wisdom. One shows us where we're going, and the other gets us there. Jerry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 8, 1999 Report Share Posted June 8, 1999 >From Jerry: > In other words, If we can't really do anything, then how do we do anything? > It's a deep and valid Zen-like question. An understanding of it may require > abiding at the hub around which the question rotates, but extreme nondualism > does away even with the abiding. So how does one talk about the doing away > with the abiding? And then how do you talk about doing away with what was > done away with? (...) > It's effective to have two perspectives, one coming from the Skye of > nonduality, and one coming from the Gene Poole of human practice. You both > meet in the same wisdom. One shows us where we're going, and the other gets > us there. > Jerry >From another perspective, it's "effective" to have an infinity of perspective "looking" for where to go and "getting" there. Until there is no place to look for or to place get to, for all will be already there... As it is. It creates this wonderful illusion of Life, this eternal transmutation process that only All can deny totally. Antoine Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.