Gene/present

[Guest guest]

>Gene: Further, on the level that you seem to be pointing to, it is the

continual

>'giving of meaning' which creates the illusion of a flow of time and

>experience. Meaning which is given, comes from past association; this is

>how humans assign meaning, and a side-effect of this behaviour (that of

>assigning meaning) is counteracted by the 'nondual perspective' (we can

>argue about what that is, later).

>

>The side-effect of assigning meanings to the present emanation of the

>unknown, is that the unknown is masked by those pasted-on meanings; the

>'nondual perspective' is designed to inform the practitioner that movement

>is an illusion, an assesment, a judgement, an opinion, an assumption.

>

>For those so informed, the present loses it's connection with the past.

>Each instant is a complete universe in itself, which speaks clearly it's

>own story; the total emanation, at once, is an expression which is usually

>disregarded by those who, like archeologists, keep digging for what is

>hidden, and thus miss cues to a coming storm.

 

Dan: Wonderful! This is the "brilliant point" - emanation with no distance.

Yes - and memory and present unfold from this point simultaneously.

It's a wonderful crystal snowflake - each in perfect order -

each complete and unique - time is snowing - -

>The voice of the universe speaks loudly and is called 'reality'. Debating

>over the past utterances of the living universe is no more logical than

>arguing with the author of Moby Dick, over how he used his words. We may if

>we dare, be in the way of the living universe; we may find ourselves to be

>a totality of present emanation, with no hidden factors and no mysteries.

 

Dan: With nothing hidden, there is nothing known - no detective work to be

done - this is real mystery - when "everything" is revealed...

 

>In this regard, consider the nature of radio waves after they 'leave' the

>antenna of the braodcaster; we cannot argue with those signals once they

>have been sent. We can only receive them in the form that they are in as

>they emanate from the antenna.

 

Dan: And when the "receiver" and the "emanator" are the same -- what then?

What is being transmitted other than totality? Each moment so total -

yet always unique, always moving in perfect stillness...

 

>Similarly, we cannot argue with 'what is'; but we can make tomorrow's 'what

>is' into what we want it to be, if we know how.

 

Dan: Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow - moving on into ... what?

Making it into our image (as we wish) - and then what?

Our image dissolves into the "One Face"

>So, it is the superimposition of thoughts upon the unknown which obscure

>the present real-time voice of the living universe; we shout louder than

>'reality' because we want a different 'what is' than the one we think we

>are getting. We shout in desire, and we shout in aversion. We react, only

>because of set standards as to 'what should be'. This shouting is the

>theme-song of Camp Wouldashouldacoulda.

 

Dan: Let's form a circle and sing "Kumbaya" :-)

>Gene: You are noticing change, but do you notice sameness?

 

Dan: The last time I noticed sameness, it was exactly the

same as this time ...

>The attempt to find salvatory meaning _only in change_, masks the salvatory

>meaning in (unseen) sameness. Not 'similarity' but sameness. It is all one

>thing, thus it is the same as it is, and never changes.

 

Dan: There is no meaning in perfect sameness. That is its meaning.

>It is always the self-emanation that it is. It is all the self-display that

>it is; it is always DISPLAY.

>

 

Dan: Thanks Gene. Now you see me, now you don't....

Reminds me of the skier Pikaboo Street.

Whoosh.... effortless as gravity moves her while

she remains unmoving