*note* this post was written in some forum,I forgot who wrote it.Anyway,it is interesting. -added by danny-
"Self-realization, a fact of experience
Enunciation of the nature of the Atman (soul, Self) forms the central theme of the Bhagavad Gita and the Upanishads. A common feature of their approach is that this abstract spiritual knowledge is conveyed through a dialogue between the Guru (preceptor) and the Sishya (syudent). In the Bhagavad Gita for instance, the teaching unfolded in the battlefield when Arjuna expressed his despondency to Lord Krishna. The Lord who had till then been his charioteer assumed the role of his teacher.
In the second chapter is the Lord's teaching of the nature of the Atman to convince Arjuna about its eternal nature so that he would not grieve over death which was inevitable in the war. The Lord pointed out to him, "There is no permanent existence for the destructible bodies. The soul, on the contrary never ceases to be." Only the wise understands the real nature of these two. Understand that the soul which pervades, penetrates and comprehends is imperishable and not being liable to destruction, nothing can cause its destruction."
In his lecture on the Bhagavad Gita Swami Paramarthananda said that consciousness was intrinsic to the soul and it was external and could exist independently of matter. This is a very important feature of Vedanta which holds consciousness as the basis of existence. This is opposed to the predominant view of science which postulates matter as the fundamental principle and consciousness as adventitious to matter. So according to Vedanta matter is only a temporary phenomena.
Consciousness is always the experiencer and cannot become the object of experience. Further it is not subject to growth and decay; and is not a doer (akarta) or an enjoyer (abhokta). So it can never be touched by Karma. Birth and death which take place according to the dictates of Karma thus does not afflict the soul.
This is the reason why the Lord has said that it was only a wise person (Jnani) who could truly know the nature of the Self. What is the Jnani's understanding? He has the knowledge of the Atman as the eternal consciousness which is indestructible, changeless, birthless and decayless. This knowledge takes place in two stages.
When the student learns this from his teacher he first identifies himself with his mind and body and is under the assumption that he has an Atman which is eternal, unlike his body. By internalizing this knowledge through constant meditation the student identifies himself with the Self and understands that his body is adventitious to it, which is the result of Self-realization. The whole process is not just verbalization but a fact of experience." (Pragati, Vol.21, No.12 - Dec. 2005)
Does a person have to be enlightened to do what Christ is supposed to have done?"
"Not necessarily. Some people have a way of maintaining that state of mindlessness that proves to be creative. Somehow they stumble on a condition of high indifference, and from there you dream it--you will it--then you forget it."
"But there must be limits," I said. "You never read about anything really incredible."
Rose paused a moment as if thinking how to phrase his words so that even I might understand. "Once a person has the formula," he said finally, "anything can be changed, even the future. Through determination, a man can discover how to completely change his destiny. There’s thoughts--which are not yours, but come from elsewhere--and there gaps between thoughts. When you get into that gap between thoughts, you have the opportunity to completely reshuffle you life. This may sound impossible to you now, but try not to let your ignorance get in the way of understanding. I have just told you something of priceless value."
I quietly opened the side door to the sanctuary and stepped inside. Rose stood behind a podium on the small stage, speaking to an audience of about seventy-five people who were staring at him with confused, skeptical, even angry faces.
"Maybe it's for the best," Rose was saying to a heavy-set man standing at the end of a row of chairs, as if ready to walk out at any moment. "If people really thought about what they're promised in church, they'd realize how absurd it all is. I mean, who wants to spend eternity sitting around with a bunch of cherubs playing harps? After awhile people would want to go to Hell just for the change of scenery."
"Well, I don't agree with everything organized religions may espouse," the man said, in a tone that indicated their disagreement had been going on for some time. "But they do give people a reason to strive for goodness and for a better world." Many in the audience nodded their heads or voiced their agreement.
"No they don't," Rose said firmly. "What they do is give people an excuse to keep from working to improve their personal state of being, and perhaps their after-death state as well. Religion tells you we're all going to the same place. People think God has to operate under the human concept of justice, and it wouldn't be fair if we all didn't go to the same place. So they figure they can just sit back and ride the tide of humanity into Self-Realization.
"The worst of it is that these kinds of beliefs keep people from looking for real answers," Rose went on. "Every sentient being needs to know his cause, needs to know if he was created or merely the product of accident. What he doesn't need is to be placated or silenced by some political social group that hands out fairy tales and calls them the word of God."
The questioner had been moving toward the door and now stood right next to me as he turned back to Rose.
"These 'political social groups,' as you so disparagingly call them, provide great solace for a great many people," he said. The crowd nodded its approval again.
"Maybe," Rose shot back, "but for how long? If a man has even a shred of curiosity or self-honestly, he'll wake up one day and realize he's been deluding himself for thirty years. Society and religion brainwash a man into thinking he has to believe a certain way. So he tries to assume a posture he thinks will mesh with what's expected of him. First he puts one over on society--convincing them he fits in, that he's a nice fellow, that sort of thing. Then he puts one over on himself by believing his own act. By this time he’s hopelessly caught in the web of lies that has become his life.
"But the thing is," Rose said, his voice rising, "there will come a time in everyone's life when you come to doubt everything you ever thought. Unfortunately, for most people it doesn't occur until it's too late to do anything about it. In the meantime, the majority of people just slide along, reasoning that because the public doesn't complain about their social behavior, they must be on the right track on all levels. They pay their taxes, get along with the fellow next door, do a decent job at work. To them, these are the signs of a sufficient theology."
"What your alternative, then?" the man persisted.
"You mean something I can explain to your satisfaction in twenty-five words or less? Forget it. It would take twenty-five hundred just to get you confused, then a lot more to try and explain away the confusion."
"Well, then I'd say the problem lies with your inability to communicate," the man said. Then, as if suddenly realizing he'd just spoken a perfect exit line, he hurriedly opened the door and left. Rose watched impassively, then turned to the rest of the audience.
"Maybe he's got a point. There's times I find it difficult to even know how to begin delivering a lecture. I have trouble communicating because when you find out that this whole existence is a projection, you lose enthusiasm for feeding people what they want to hear about the significance or appeal of the illusion.
"You see, I don't want to bring you peace of mind. I want to bring you trouble. I want to stir you, to shake you. Because protoplasm tends to inertia. You have to keep irritating it to keep it alive, so to speak. It has to be continually stimulated. Complacency is a very negative trait for a person who wants to progress in his mental capacities.
"In fact, if you’re interested in finding your self-definition, you need to abandon any philosophy or system that quiets you down. You need to continually awaken yourself, to arouse yourself mentally, to attack your systems of thinking. Because you don't want peace, you want an answer."
"The ego is the single biggest obstruction to the achievement of anything," he said. "Between-ness is the act of acting without ego. You act, but you are not the actor. You do things, but you are not the doer--and you know you are not the doer. It’s the ability to hold the head at a dead standstill in order to effect certain changes. You desire the change, but you do not care if it comes to pass.
"Between-ness does not change the eternal fact. It’s a way of discovering the eternal fact. It occurs when you want what is right, independent of your own desires. There's a mechanism for holding your head in this half-way state, in between caring and not caring. You will it, then forget it--without fear of failure or hope of gain. Between-ness is the product of a lifetime of egoless-ness.
"Children know about this," he said. "I stayed at an orphanage for awhile when I was a boy to be near the Catholic school I was going to. I remember seeing this kid with his nose pressed against the window one day, saying, 'Snow, snow go away. Come again some other day.' The rest of us wanted it to snow, so I asked him why he didn’t. He said, 'I want it to snow, too, but if you want something too much, it knows, and you won’t get it."
He looked at me intently. "Did you pick up on that? He said ‘It knows.’ That kid knew something
Most people, even though they don't know it, are asleep. They're born asleep, they live asleep, they marry in their sleep, they breed children in their sleep, they die in their sleep without ever waking up. They never understand the loveliness and the beauty of this thing that we call human existence. You know, all mystics -Catholic, Christian, non-Christian, no matter what their theology, no matter what their religion -- are unanimous on one thing: that all is well, all is well. Though everything is a mess, all is well. Strange paradox, to be sure. But, tragically, most people never get to see that all is well because they are asleep. They are having a nightmare.
Last year on Spanish television I heard a story about this gentleman who knocks on his son's door. "Jaime," he says, "wake up!" Jaime answers, "I don't want to get up, Papa." The father shouts, "Get up, you have to go to school." Jaime says, "I don't want to go to school." "Why not?" asks the father. "Three reasons," says Jaime. "First, because it's so dull; second, the kids tease me; and third, I hate school."
And the father says, "Well, I am going to give you three reasons why you must go to school. First, because it is your duty; second, because you are forty-five years old, and third, because you are the headmaster." Wake up, wake up! You've grown up. You're too big to be asleep. Wake up! Stop playing with your toys.
Most people tell you they want to get out of kindergarten, but don't believe them. Don't believe them! All they want you to do is to mend their broken toys. "Give me back my wife. Give me back my job. Give me back my money. Give me back my reputation, my success." This is what they want; they want their toys replaced. That's all. Even the best psychologist will tell you that, that people don't really want to be cured. What they want is relief; a cure is painful.
Waking up is unpleasant, you know. You are nice and comfortable in bed. It's irritating to be woken up. That's the reason the wise guru will not attempt to wake people up. I hope I'm going to be wise here and make no attempt whatsoever to wake you up if you are asleep. It is really none of my business, even though I say to you at times, "Wake up!" My business is to do my thing, to dance my dance. If you profit from it, fine; if you don't, too bad! As the Arabs say, "The nature of rain is the same, but it makes thorns grow in the marshes and flowers in the gardens."
'MASTER, I HAVE AN UNGOVERNABLE TEMPER -- HOW CAN I CURE IT?'
'SHOW ME THIS TEMPER,' SAID BANKEI, 'IT SOUNDS FASCINATING.'
'I HAVEN'T GOT IT RIGHT NOW,' SAID THE STUDENT, 'SO I CAN'T SHOW IT TO YOU.'
'WELL THEN,' SAID BANKEI, 'BRING IT TO ME WHEN YOU HAVE IT.'
'BUT I CAN'T BRING IT JUST WHEN I HAPPEN TO HAVE IT,' PROTESTED THE STUDENT. 'IT ARISES UNEXPECTEDLY, AND I WOULD SURELY LOSE IT BEFORE I GOT IT TO YOU.'
'IN THAT CASE,' SAID BANKEI, 'IT CANNOT BE PART OF YOUR TRUE NATURE. IF IT WERE, YOU COULD SHOW IT TO ME AT ANY TIME. WHEN YOU WERE BORN YOU DID NOT HAVE IT, AND YOUR PARENTS DID NOT GIVE IT TO YOU -- SO IT MUST COME INTO YOU FROM THE OUTSIDE. I SUGGEST THAT WHENEVER IT GETS INTO YOU, YOU BEAT YOURSELF WITH A STICK UNTIL THE TEMPER CAN'T STAND IT, AND RUNS AWAY.'
THE TRUE NATURE IS your eternal nature. You cannot have it and not have it, it is not something that comes and goes -- it is you. How can it come and go? It is your BEING. It is your very foundation. It cannot BE sometimes, and NOT BE sometimes; it is always there. So this should be the criterion for a seeker of truth, nature, tao: that we have to come to the point in our being which remains always and always -- even before you were born it was there, and even when you are dead it will be there. It is the center. The circumference changes, the center remains absolutely eternal; it is beyond time. Nothing can affect it, nothing can modify it, nothing really ever touches it; it remains beyond all reach of the outside world. Go to the sea, and watch the sea. Millions of waves are there, but deep in its depth the sea remains calm and quiet, deep in meditation; the turmoil is just on the surface, just on the surface where the sea meets the outside world, the winds. Otherwise, in itself, it always remains the same, not even a ripple; nothing changes. It is the same with you. Just on the surface where you meet others there is turmoil, anxiety, anger, attachment, greed, lust -- just on the surface where winds come and touch you. And if you remain on the surface you cannot change this changing phenomenon; it will remain there. Many people try to change it THERE, on the circumference. They fight with it, they try not to let a wave arise. And through their fight even more waves arise, because when the sea fights with the wind there will be more turmoil: now not only will the wind help it, the sea will also help -- there will be tremendous chaos on the surface. All the moralists try to change man on the periphery. Your character is the periphery: you don't bring any character into the world, you come absolutely characterLESS, a blank sheet, and all that you call your character is written by others. Your parents, society, teachers, teachings -- all are conditionings ....
A citizen said to a famous reformer, "Please explain. You condemn society for violence, yet your protests are equally violent."
"There is a big difference," said the reformer.
"You demand that other people respect you, but you never speak of your need to respect them."
"There's a big difference."
"You criticize other groups for putting on pressure, yet the entire purpose of your group is to apply pressure."
"There is a big difference."
"What is the big difference?"
"How stupid you are. We are good, while others are evil."
LESSON: A man can be empowered by delusion or by self- knowledge, but only self-insight changes anything.
CHALLENGE: Break Free of Conditioning (From: Zen)
Somehow, we are able to confuse reality and the make-believe worlds we create. And much of what we create is based on what we have been told as we were growing up. We are conditioned by our culture, parents, teachers, and peers, and then we proceed to live our entire life out of that conditioning. That conditioning defines who we think we are. All of these authoritative people have told us who we are, so we go on to manifest their predictions. This practice, every bit of it, is about going beyond all that conditioning, finding out for ourselves who we are, and then living our life in accordance with what we have realized. That is what freedom is all about.
TOM'S COMMENT: The challenge is to dare to live what you have found to be true, even though you will make a thousand mistakes in the process.
ESSENCE … HEART … CENTER:
Come, you lost atoms, to your Center draw And be the eternal mirror you saw; Rays that have wander'd into Darkness wide Return and back your sun subside.
— Farid ud-Din Attar Conference of the Birds
TOM'S COMMENT: Many of the great religious classics teach (usually by symbolism and allegory) a return to your Center, into the region of your breath. Here is the domain of renewal, receptivity and authentic confidence. It is now flowing as a trickle, but with awareness this Source expands and turns into rivers. (See John 7:38 KJV)
It rarely occurs to spiritual travelers to let go of frantic activity in the brain, and simply let things settle into the region of the Heart. If frantic mental activity could have found anything, would it not have done so by now?
Thinking has its place, but Knowing has its quiet and sacred domain. When we put Knowing first, thinking serves. When we put thinking first, thinking imprisons. What Source will direct your life? It is for you(YOU) alone to decide.
"Your vision will become clear only when you look into your heart ... Who looks outside, dreams. Who looks inside, awakens." (Carl Jung)
So I found a reason to stay alive
Try a little harder see the other side
Talking to myself
Too many sleepless nights
Trying to find a meaning to this stupid life
I don't want your sympathy
Sometimes I don't know who to be
Hey what you're looking for
No one has the answer
They just want more
Hey who's gonna make it right
This could be the first
Day of my life
So I found a reason
To let it go
Tell you that I'm smiling
But I still need to grow
Will I find salvation in the arms of love
Will it stop me searching will it be enough
I don't want your sympathy
Sometimes I don't know who to be
Hey what you're looking for
No one has the answer but you just want more
Hey who's gonna make it right
This could be the first day of my life
The first time to really feel alive
The first time to break the chain
The first time to walk away from pain
Hey what you're looking for
No one has the answer we just want more
Hey who's gonna make it right
This could be the first day of your life
Hey what you're looking for
No one has the answer they just want more
Hey who's gonna shine a light?
This could be the first day of my life .....
Twenty-five years I'm alive here still
Trying to get up that great big hill of hope
For a destination
I realized quickly when I knew I should
That the world was made up of this brotherhood of man
For whatever that means
And so I cry sometimes
When I'm lying in bed Just to get it all out
What's in my head
And I, I am feeling a little peculiar.
And so I wake in the morning
And I step outside
And I take a deep breath and I get real high
And I scream from the top of my lungs
What's going on?
And I say: HEY! yeah yeaaah, HEY yeah yea
I said hey, what's going on?
And I say: HEY! yeah yeaaah, HEY yeah yea
I said hey, what's going on?
ooh, ooh ooooooooooooooooh
ooh, ooh ooooooooooooooooh(I kinda like this part..yes..:))
and I try, oh my god do I try(trust me..I do try)
I try all the time, in this institution(of sahaja yoga)
And I pray, oh my god do I pray
I pray all sanctity
For a revolution.(in sahaja yoga)
And so I cry sometimes
When I'm lying bed
Just to get it all out
What's in my head
And I, I am feeling a little peculiar(sometimes..and always..)
And so I wake in the morning
And I step outside
And I take a deep breath and I get real high
And I scream from the top of my lungs(trust me!!!)
What's going on?
And I say, hey hey hey hey
I said hey, what's going on?
And I say, hey hey hey hey
I said hey, what's going on?
And I say, hey hey hey hey
I said hey, what's going on?
And I say, hey hey hey hey
I said hey, what's going on?
ooh, ooh ooooooooooooooooh ooooooooooooooooh
Twenty-five years I'm alive here still
Trying to get up that great big hill of hope
for a destination
mmh mh
Acknowledgments of greatness are generally postmortem. We seem to need a bit of "psychological distance" to see the full stature of some fellow human if that stature is out of the ordinary. The Roman church grants sainthood only well after-the-fact, usually, when the possibility of actual contact with said saint would take a bit of doing. This allows and encourages what Mircea Eliade spoke of as "mythological overlay," in which we tend to attribute greater-than-life characteristics to a deceased person. Thus Abraham Lincoln grew so strong posthumously that he reportedly had picked up a chicken house seven men couldn't lift and carried it ten miles, the weight and mileage increasing with the passing years. Eliade also points out, however, that such overlay doesn't take place with ordinary persons; only genuine heavy-weights are apt to bring on this historic process. So beneath the fanciful hyperbole with which we deck our dead heroes generally lies a personage powerful enough to attract such fancies. Over time such theatrics add to that very magnetic attraction for overlay, leading to inevitable distortion, but there is generally fire somewhere beneath all that tale-telling smoke.
In regard to someone still with us, however, we generally hear the equivalent of that famous query: "Can any good come out of Galilee" or, in the case of Richard Rose, "...the West Virginia mountains?" A reporter went to Oxford, Mississippi to gather impressions held by the local citizenry concerning their famous native son, Nobel laureate William Faulkner. "William who?" was the common rejoinder, "You mean Bill Faulkner? That old drunk?" Indeed, a prophet is not without honor....
In the case of Richard Rose, the subject of the following chapters, we find neither a Nobel Laureate nor an old drunk, but a West Virginia farmer who had, all evidence indicates, achieved the highest spiritual state, that spoken of in classical eastern terms as one with God. Even more heretical to our western ears is Rose's own comment of having "become God." Just as expressed in the old adage: "If you're so smart, why aren't you rich?" our first reaction to the report of a West Virginia farmer having become "one with the Absolute" would be "Why wasn't he on the cover of Time Magazine?" Or why hasn't anyone heard of him? Where was his following; who were his PR managers, business accountants; where were his bank accounts in Switzerland, his hideaways in the Bahamas or Fijis?
David Gold intends that we should, indeed, hear of Richard Rose. From early college days, Lawyer Gold was a student of Rose, and hung in there for decades, surviving Rose's disciplinary demands. Now, with help from his friend and fellow-student, Bart Marshall, Gold has given us an account of this most unordinary of farmers, as seen by one disciple. Gold worked fifteen years on this manuscript, and our debt to him is incalculable. For here is what will surely prove to be a timeless and classic spiritual treatise. Further, Gold's telling-of-this-tale proves one of the most gripping, intensely interesting, dramatic, and indeed romantically-heroic-mythic yet poignantly human accounts I have ever read. It would make a fantastic, if unbelievable film, and is a profoundly important document. This book throws light on the perennial what-and-why enigma of our species; reveals the makings of a "new cosmology", and surely gives glimpses into as-yet undeveloped potentials we humans hold within us. That all this is found in an utterly absorbing narrative proves the old adage that truth is stranger than fiction.
As the narrator of the following, David Gold is everyman, the archetypical human longing to transcend that destructive dark shadow that haunts our species. Gold speaks to me because he is speaking all for us, and his account is not just a superb narrative but the universal drama, with the evolution of a species the underlying plot.
Richard Rose's own history proves yet another adage, that the creative "spirit" that sparks things "bloweth where it listeth" and no man knows its comings and goings. Rose, while coming out of a Catholic background, went beyond any and all inherited frameworks and calls to question nearly every notion we have of religions in general and the making of a saint or man of God in particular. Surely the ironclad and rather mechanistic, inviolable lock-step stages of enlightenment espoused by popular spiritual philosophers is called to question by the likes of Rose. While an intensely self-disciplined man, with a steely self-control, Rose followed no set discipline in his search for self, and his actual moment of awakening to his true nature came out of the most unlikely of all possible trigger-events, and in the most unexpected way. (Which actually bears out the truth of what a will-o-the-wisp "spirit" is.)
Rose thunders at us the conventional theme that our first and greatest challenge as humans is to become aware of who we are. Equally he states both an eastern and "Gospel" truism that we are ourselves the very God we so avidly seek elsewhere. In his ceaseless attempt to get his students to "see" who he was and become likewise, Rose employed "non-ordinary" phenomena of the first order, the heady stuff of miracles, that food for the ego's power-hunger that feeds so much of our new-age literature (though possibly few souls, as found in the Gospels, nothing new here.) Becoming one with the Absolute, or going beyond one's fragmentations into a state of wholeness, leads to miraculous powers, it seems, but miraculous powers can be had without becoming one with the Absolute, and Rose's focus was on that unity-state, not miraculous gimmicks. I saw fakirs in India who could do things that defied every concept we have concerning reality; who could completely reverse the ordinary causal processes of our world, within their own straits. But these were "psychic phenomena" and the gulf between psychic and spiritual is wide. The spiritual can encompass and even engender the psychic, but not the other way around, just as the infinite contains the finite, but not vice-versa.
Rose referred to a state called between-ness which involves suspension of our ordinary split between thought, feeling, and action. That is, we average citizens think one thing, feel something else, and act differently to either most of our time, making us truly a house divided against itself . We all exemplify Freud's famous trio of id, ego and super-ego, eternally at war with each other. We "do that which we would not do and do not do that which we ought to do, and there is no health (or wholeness) in us"' as Paul and the Book of Common Prayer lament.
In a state of actual wholeness of being, an undivided house, we have dominion over our world, a condition not as yet explored by us humans. Dominating nature a la science-technology is vastly different than this state of dominion, and Rose's "between-ness" is the gateway to that dominion. There one can function "in the world" but free of its crippling and harsh judgments and restrictions.
The Institute of Heartmath speaks of "entrainment between heart and brain," an alignment of frequencies clearly detectable on EEG and ECG machinery. In this state of entrainment between head and heart all the body oscillators go into sync and one's entire being is a single, integrated frequency. This opens up whole neural areas of brain previously unused, and makes available heretofore unexplored domains of experience and action. Alignment between heart-frequency and brain frequency is a new expression of an old problem, how one's individual will and a universal or "global" will can be brought into alignment. What one does with such alignment isn't quite open to individual whim and fancy, either, but subject to a further state, a "higher frequency" which the fusion of head and heart brings about.
There is also a condition of mind called "unconflicted behavior," through which non-ordinary events can be brought about (and, in fact, disastrous influences set into motion). Unconflicted behavior is simply functioning without internal conflict--easier said than done, but not necessarily either unifying or benevolent. Id, ego, and superego can go into sync so that thought, feeling and action are an undivided whole and one can then invest every vestige of self in a venture without reserve; throw caution, logic, emotion, rafionality, to the wind and, holding only to one's intent, bring about a "suspension of the ontological rules." At that point almost anything is possible and a person can employ this effect in ordinary affairs, take on tremendous power in situations and determine outcomes to an indeterminable extent. There is, however, no divine universal ethic monitoring the results, the function works positively or negatively, since such niceties as good-bad, positive-negative are the very criteria set up by our ordinary logic and reasoning--and set aside in order to function as unconflicted behavior. (Nothing can so debilitate us as moral conflict.)
In Heartmath entrainment and Rose's "between-ness" the same single-eminded intent and suspension of self-concern is necessary, but without the kind of investment or concern over outcome that ordinarily drives us. One's intent isn't for a singular goal or event, but for an alignment of wills, which alignment then determines outcome along lines unavailable to, and not restricted by, reason and logic. The negative possibilities of unconflicted behavior can't manifest in such entrainment, since a unified system can't work against itself.
Unconditional commitment to some act, with yet a total indifference to either the content, course of action, or outcome of that action, is similar to the central theme of Carlos Castaneda's semi-mythic hero, don Juan; the state of "faith" central to Jesus; clearly stated by Krishna in the Bhagavad Gita, and implied in James P. Carse's Infinite Play. One must be in some form of this state to willfully bring about non-ordinary phenomena, but far more importantly, this is the very state necessary to "merge with the Infinite" or become "one with the Absolute" - whatever metaphor fits one's spiritual -esthetic. So between-ness offers unlimited potential in our ordinary world, or the chance to go completely "beyond this world."
Rose considered his state of oneness-with-the-Absolute Zen-like, but, as with Zen or any spiritual "way, " problems arise when the teacher prescribes for the student a path and goal by which they too might become one with the Absolute. For we then have a closed, finite, goal-oriented struggle, with boundaries and established end results in mind. And this is the heart of the perennial paradox in the perennial Philosophy. Following goal-oriented, bounded procedures sets up a win-loose game of seriousness, and deadly serious too, because "soul" is concerned. This seriousness inevitably produces a guilt-producing criteria. Infinite openness and play close at that point, boxed into a finite game, which game or pursuit the student is anxious to conclude so that he or she might be "realized" and get on with real life. And so life is spent trying to "get there" so one can really live -- missing in fact the present moment in which everything takes place. "Today is the day" involves a paradox found in most spiritual disciplines, since most disciplines are ways to get-there someday, maybe.
The issue is that a finite pursuit can't lead beyond its own boundaries. The finite can't lead to the infinite. They are separate logical sets, so to speak. The logic of one cannot suggest or lead to the other. Yet, stuck in this finite structure as we are, we have no other materials with which to work than our all-too-finite mind and understanding. There is a real, true paradox here, but one which, as George Jaidar would say, is a threshold to a truth beyond paradox. Classical logic claims, rightly, that we can't have "both category A and Not-A simultaneously." We can't entertain two different and mutually exclusive logical sets at the same time; an unyielding either-or "law of the excluded middle" separates them. But this excluded middle, as that between finite and infinite, is the "crack in the cosmic egg," the true between-ness through which we can slip to the freedom of the infinite game. We are, however, either "there" or not. There is no bridge between, and we can't think our way there since thought is a product of our very finite orientation.
Rose was caught on the horns of this ageless paradoxical dilemma, as every spiritual teacher has been: how to lead one to the unbounded infinite through finite process. In trying to help others catch his same light, as spiritual teachers seem impelled to do, Rose inevitably set up finite boundaries, disciplines and practices he hoped would break through the students perceptual-conceptual blocks. But such endgoaling, working for enlightenment, finitizes the infinite openness involved, and grounds the hapless student in a double-bind, for, as Jim Carse explains it, he who must play, can't play.
I know of no spiritual teacher who has solved this dilemma, even that giant of history, Jesus. Perhaps, though, the dilemma is more apparent than real. Perhaps the value of someone who has "broken through" and moved to a higher dimension of life is not their guidance so much as their presence, their beingness. "If I be lifted up I draw all humankind toward me" may be the point. The "model imperative" operates here. The great value of our great beings may not be "secrets of the masters" or prescriptions for sure-fire spiritual success, but simply their having actually lived among us, emblazoning their image on our collective consciousness and memory, stirring us from our sleep with glimpses of a new way of being.
I have never met a full "graduate" from any of the many spiritual systems I have come across or participated in since the participants in all those systems seemed eternally struggling to "achieve the goal." Should they do so, perhaps they would simply disappear, drop into anonymity, with only the charlatans hitting the media, waving their enlightenment degrees in the air and competing for the paying students. An eastern saying is that the true Sufi is always anonymous, never known, except by another true Sufi . Small wonder Richard Rose never made the big-fish time, not even in his own tiny West Virginla pond.
But I think extraordinary people such as Richard Rose pop up continually in history, in varying degrees of intensity, to act as target cells for the rest of us. The target cell phenomenon in found in brain growth, and is a mysterious and awesome event that may well be carried throughout the whole of our life process.
For the first four months or so of growth in our mother's womb, our brain grows as a simple homogenized "soup" of randomly mixed neurons, a chaos of unformed material. This growth hits a "critical mass" somewhere between the fourth and fifth month, at which point certain large and unique "target cells" appear. No one can explain the sudden manifestation of these strange and powerful cells, which immediately send out a signal which reads, in effect: "link up with me." This instantly galvanizes those billions of random cells into a frenzy of activity, throwing out axons and dendrites, pushing and shoving to make dendritic connection with that great cell that has appeared among them. The full signal seems to read more like: "link up with me or a cell that has linked up with me," for through some simple directive that chaotic soup of cells is lifted, with astonishing rapidity, into the most magnificent order known in the universe, a human brain, with its many uniquely different forms and structures functioning in perfect synchrony to build, through their trillions of linkages, the infinitely diverse universe of our experience.
Note that on linking up with the target cell the neuron doesn't become a target cell itself. It becomes a fully functional neuron, linked with its neighbors in powerful, productive and creative ways. An isolated neuron is powerless and rather worthless, but through this tranformative and unifying act it then lends itself to creating that fully functional miracle between our ears. Were all neurons to become target cells, an irremediable chaos would apparently result. (At least there would be no brain as we know it.) So the target cell appears to lift chaos into order, not to create other target cells.
In the same way, great beings just suddenly and inexplicably appear among us when some critical mass need demands them. And they don't necessarily have to rush off to do their stint of education in the Himalayas or wherever. When they appear they appear in full-bloom ready to go to work, and not to clone themselves but to bring about a linkage of separated, isolated, alienated and scared-lonely cells into fully human and functional souls, in turn moving to lift a social chaos into a new order.
I felt a great empathy with and respect for lawyer Gold, when he lamented that after all these years he felt he had still failed to realize the potential Rose saw in him. That is, he was still Dave Gold and not Richard Rose II. Most people on spiritual paths nurse a similar feeling of failure. But, though I have found no fully finished "graduates" of the various spiritual systems encountered, I have observed legions of people who have undergone tremendous personal growth, change, improvement in character and quality of life through their spiritual discipline or contact with a great being; people who live far richer and more rewarding lives, and contribute richly to their society and larger body of earth as a result. And the David Gold I met was a prime example, an exceptional human, mature, kind, intelligent, responsible, the kind of citizen our society and earth need so badly. May his number increase. And in him, I think, Richard Rose succeeded.
So the reader of the following is fortunate indeed, for even reading about Rose can plant a seed in our minds. And target-cell seeds can take root and those roots can split boulders, mountains, worlds, even closed minds and their cosmic eggs. Those seeds become priceless pearls that can lead us to new and fuller life. So the following work is a pearl, a pearl without price, dropped into this endless field of human folly to bring to order that individual finding it. May Rose's hints and cues into that pearl's whereabouts aid the reader in his search. For seek and we shall find, it is said -- the only game in town.
................................................................
This is for admiration of such pure and strong desire...hard to come by these days from people....Thank you,Richard..
You may remember the story of how the devil and a friend of his were walking down the street, when they saw ahead of them a man stoop down and pick up something from the ground, look at it, and put it away in his pocket. The friend said to the devil, "What did that man pick up?" "He picked up a piece of Truth," said the devil. "That is a very bad business for you," said his friend. "Oh, not at all," the devil replied, "I am going to let them organize it."
The Parrot
Source: Vernon Howard
There was once a parrot who trained himself to speak excellently. This enabled him to teach other parrots to speak, for which he was honored and applauded. But he had a secret sorrow. He did not know how to fly. But he devised a clever method for concealing his humiliation. Using his superb command of words, he told other parrots how to fly.
His lectures on flying were a huge success. Thousands assembled each week to hear his dynamic exhortations.
And few of his hearers ever suspected that the parrot himself did not know how to fly.
Lesson: A man seldom realizes that spiritual lessons apply to him personally, thus making him an eager reformer of other people.
"v_koa" wrote: SIMPLE THOUGHTS > > 1)The rain falls on my head, the thunder claps showing his > appreciation , > > as the drops of water make their way down my body and into the > flower bed/ > > 2)Where i sleep, so i can feel alive, immortal like the fragrance of > roses, i cannot die/ > > 3)Protected, nourished, i sip the sweet necter, > > and praise the rain for filling the flowers veins- their beauty is > my protecter/ > > 4)-From what, i cannot say, > > for the mere mention of its name ,will cast me in a reoccuring role > in this play; of life
This is a beautiful poem,Kyyan.. I talk from my experience...when the Sahasrara opens,it feels actually like rain,and you can actually feel the drops of water !!..I am not kidding.As kundalini goes up...the Holy Spirit descends down on your channels.And it feels like rain...rain drops,that's it.. love,danny Jai Shri Mataji!!
Dear Friends...
What is the pure desire?.there is such thing as pure desire?...can
anybody force someone to have the pure desire if the one does not
desire it,and wants to play in the realm of illusions?
The answer is NO.There is only ONE pure desire,and that is to be one
with GOD.All the others are just tips and tricks.You can play as you
want,for that's why you are here,on this material realm..to
experience..BUT..never forget the pure desire.You can enjoy as you
want,smoke as many cigarettes as you want..but NEVER forget the pure
desire.You can build an empire like Bill Gates...be whatever you want
to be..but NEVER forget the pure desire.You may have a family and 12
kids ..BUT...NEVER forget the PURE DESIRE.You may get sick,and you may
see your friends die...yet..never FORGET the pure desire.To be one
with GOD.
> > Dear All, > > In the first chapter about Buddha it says: > > During this period, the Blessed One gave teaching on nonself, or > non- ego.
Dear Chuck..the nonself or non-ego in Buddhism is based on the idea of not-permanence of the ,,false self,,..in order to differentiate from the ,,real,, self or spirit within.In other words my false, nonself, transitory and not eternal self has the name of danny and assumes that this is the real me. Attaining Buddha nature is infact this ,,union,, or dissolution of the false,nonself named danny into the real self,or spirit, therefore escaping the cycles of births/rebirths on this particular physical plane.
The idea of an eternal self, an ego or soul, connected > with an eternal divine principle in the universe and > transmigrating from rebirth to rebirth, was a central tenet of > Hinduism.
What hinduism regard as ,,eternal soul,, which transmigrates is the very nonself in Buddhism.For being entangled in the chains of Karma is it not ,,permanent,, as nature,but transient.The eternal divine principle is the very ,,universal spirit,,and is the only one permanent,and unchangeable.
The Buddah taught that there is no such self, but only > the illusion of a self. If a real self did exist, he explained, > it would only be a cause of suffering, and if it were eternal it > would be a cause of suffering that could never be removed.
If the soul would be permanent then the cause of suffering could never be removed.This is not the case,as the soul is transitory on this realm, and reincarnates if not,,united with the spirit within,, therefore attaining Buddha nature.
That > eternal self would enter again and again into the web of > experience, into the cycle of rebirth. Then there would be no > Third Noble Truth of the cessation of suffering and thus no > enlightenment.
The soul is not the eternal self.We have plenty evidence supporting this buddhist theory from other religions,like Christianity or Islam,where there are plenty warnings that in the worst scenario the souls will simply ,,die,,or be distroyed on the end of times,unless one connects with the eternal source(spirit) within.
As it is, he taught, there is only an illusion of a > self, but even that is enough to function as the principal > obstacle to liberation, to the cessation of suffering. But the > obstacle of an illusionary self, taught the Tathagata-the > Perfected One-who was fresh from victory, falls away when it is > seen as it is. Rather than being a solid, eternal entity, it is > merely a temporary composite of form, feeling, perception, > conceptual formations, and consciousness, which are called the > five skandhas, or aggregates. Rather than a definite self to cling > to, and which in turn clings to other things, there is just an > ever-shifting mosaic composed of those five aggregates. Once this > is recognized, one becomes dispassionate toward what one formerly > clung to. Desire fades away, and the heart is liberated. Nothing > remains that is subject to the round of suffering and rebirth.
Again we are talking about the reincarnation of the ,,false self,, or non-self.But reincarnation theory in Buddhism is a bit different than that in Hinduism.In Buddhism they acknowledge the reincarnation of the latent impressions of the non-self(soul,and not the real self as,,spirit)which is exactly the idea that only the subconscious reincarnates...In other words,if I ,danny will reincarnate,it surely won't be danny again.Therefore this danny form is nonself, transitory. What it will reincarnate will be my subconscious, whatever I'll be a woman or a man next time,and surely I won't recollect my former life of danny(as danny was a nonself) The real self is the spirit within,and immortality(avoiding the wiping out of the conscious memories)is this very union between my soul(nonself) with my spirit/source(real-self). Thus,liberation is obtained for the soul,for the spirit does not need liberation,being eternal. But when the 2 become ONE then the Buddha nature/salvation pure consciousness takes place.Freedom,my friend..as William Walace cried out in the movie ,,Braveheart,,?..Freeeeeeddddddddddooooooooommmmm!!!! love,danny
ps. When Buddha talked about nonself he meant to direct attention to the real self(spirit).By anihilation of the illusion of the non-real-self(as soul) he meant to express,,integration,, with the real self.From his prospective,as a Buddha,we can understand now why he regards the soul as ,,nonself,, and an illusion.For only after ,,integration,, it becomes permanent.From Buddha's point of view,everything wich is not permanent,unchangeable and being pure conscious of itself is not-real,if we translate not-real as ,,transient,,.and this is DANNY TAKING.
The Indian Religion of the Goddess Shakti
DR. HANS KOESTER
THE JOURNAL OF THE SIAM SOCIETY
Vol.23, part 1
1929 July
During the three years which I spent in India, from 1925 to 1927, I had the good fortune to travel in many different parts of that vast territory, both east, north, west, and south, visiting in turn the Shan States in Burma, Kashmere, the west coast of Bombay, and Southern India and Ceylon. There were two things which from a spiritual point of view attracted my attention most, and these were the type of Buddhism prevailing in Burma and Ceylon, and that special branch of Indian religion and philosophy, almost unknown in its essence in Europe, called the Religion of the Goddess Shakti, which flourishes in Bengal and Kashmere. Personal contact with many Indian friends, whose acquaintance I had the pleasure to make, gave me the chance of studying Indian spiritual thought more deeply and, if I may say so, in a more live manner than it is possible to do from books only, even if they are old Sanskrit texts. I was honoured by an invitation from the President of the Mahabodi Society in Calcutta to speak before an audience of well-known Buddhists on two anniversaries of the birthday of the Lord Buddha, and I also had the opportunity to deliver lectures at meetings of the Indian Philosophical Congress at Calcutta in 1925 and at Benares in 1926. There, while staying for some time with Indian friends with whom I was in sympathy by reason of a certain similarity in our spiritual-philosophical researches, I realised the strength and depth of eastern spiritual thought.
I do not wish to speak about Buddhism ere in this country, where Buddhism plays such an important role, before learned people from whom I would prefer to learn. I have written a short article on "Living Buddhism" in the newly started magazine of the Buddhist Society in Calcutta, which, I was glad to see, was kindly received by its readers. My object to night is to give you a short lecture on a particular branch of Indian spiritual thought, the religion of the Goddess Shakti, which is still unknown in its true meaning in Europe and, I must say, even in the greater part of India. What I have read about it in the different books on Indian philosophy have been only simple and short allusions, containing more often than not rather erroneous ideas. In that excellent work on "Hinduism and Buddhism," by Sir Charles Eliot, there are only a few remarks on Sakthism, as this religions is usually called, and these describe its deep philosophy and ritualism in a way which cannot be regarded as altogether impartial. The European attitude towards this religions system seems to me to be much influenced by not particularly well-informed opponents of it, from whom, I imagine, Sir Charles Eliot has gathered his information. That is understandable because, as he himself remarks in a footnote, the new textbooks of Sakthism, which have now been published by Arthur Avalon, were at that time not available to him. These textbooks, which include introductions and philosophic foundation to this religious system and throw an illuminating light on this very important branch of human thought. I have the privilege to be personally acquainted with and, I may add, to be a friend of that Indian personality, Arthur Avalon, the editor of the textbooks of Sakthism,who from modesty, and following an old and good Indian tradition, is hiding his personal name under the above pseudonym. There are now, I believe, over twenty volumes, including the most important Maha Nirvana Tantra, which means the Philosophy of the Great Liberation, published under the patronage and with the financial assistance of the great Maharaja of Mithita on the borders of Bengal. It is good to know that there are in India men like this Maharaja, whom I had the pleasure to meet personally and who spends a good part of his great fortune in furthering the revival of the spiritual influence of Sakthism, to which he personally adheres. There has been founded by him, for the purpose of enlightening the learned public on this subject, a special society of which he is the founder-president. This society which, if small in the number of its members, is important by reason of their personalities, intends to dedicate a complete collection of all the published books on Sakthism to His Majesty the King of Siam, who, as "the Upholder of the Buddhist Faith," is regarded by them at the same time as the principal stronghold and spiritual rock of eastern culture and thought.
In making an attempt to describe to you Sakthism, my object to day is to present you with a sketch of the metaphysical aspect of the religion as compared with other systems of philosophical thought. It is not my intention here to dwell on the ritual and ceremonial aspect of the religion, which would require a lecture of its own. However, at the close I propose to give you a line of comparison which may be drawn between one of the fundamental tenets of Sakthism, and a certain aspect of Christianity and Northern Buddhism.
The expression Sakthism, is derived from the word "Shakti." The word Shakti means "Power" both latent and manifest. When personalised it means the Devi of Power; she is Devaa. The Devi Shakti is the power aspect of the supreme spirit. The doctrines and ritual of Sakthism are contained in a special branch of the Holy Scriptures of India, called Tantra Shastra, which acknowledges the authority of the great Veda. "Veda" means the God inspired word, which has from the oldest times been the foundation of Indian spiritual thought and culture; but it is not confined to what is called the four Vedas. They are but parts of it and based on the one Veda--for 'Vak' or 'Logos' is one.
Sakthism is an eminently practical religion. Practically the whole content of its scriptures consists in rules and ritual by which the higher realisation of the spiritual truth may be gained.
This way of personal spiritual attainment, or Yoga, which is known to all Indian religions, is called in Sakthism, Sadhaana. Very often the remark can be found in the Tantrik texts that by merely pondering about the husks of words nothing is done, i.e., mere book-knowledge is useless--but that only by practically touching the truth itself can liberation, bliss and the highest consciousness be won.
This truth, to which Sakthism is devoted with all its energy, is represented by the conception of the goddess Shakti. Such a conception, that truth unveils itself spiritually in a female aspect, can only be grasped with difficulty by the European mind. The European mind is not accustomed to see differences between male and female in the spiritual world, and finds them only as far as physical sexual differences can still be discerned. But the idea of a female quality of the spirit has always been known to the deeper minds of humanity and stretches through the whole inner history of culture. Leaving aside the cults of aboriginal tribes, animism, etc., there may be mentioned, in addition to the Goddess Shakti of Indian culture, the conception of Isis in the Egyptian religion, of the figure Kwannon in China, the idea of Eve in Babylonian times and many others leading up to that connected with the Madonna of the Roman Catholic Church. Certainly there are very interesting and important differences in all these great conception; but it would go too far here to treat of this special subject. It is mentioned only to show that female spirituality has always played an important role in human thought.
The Goddess Shakti is the "power" which pervades the whole of the universe, and from which the Universe has emanated. There is nothing within the manifest world , which is not Shakti in its essence. The manifest world is mind and matter, that is to say, all that we call our thought, will, imagination, etc. is mind, and all the realm of nature is matter.
She--in her highest aspect--is pure spirit or pure consciousness --as such she is called Chit-Shakti--but her nature and essence become apparent also in all that we are aware of through our senses. So She is matter--substance too--and as such She is called Maya-Shakti. Here is no antagonism between the spiritual and the natural sides of the universe, since she is both of them. In order to illustrate more clearly this important principle of Sakthism, I would like to compare it with the structure of other philosophical systems in Europe or India. It may be said that all the great and well-known philosophical expressions of human thought are either monistic or dualistic, that is to say, have as their basis one or two original eternal units. Let me show it in a diagrammatic way. The dualistic view presupposes two basic units, Mind and Matter:
Both of these are absolute and ultimate, and everything can be derived from either of them; whereas monism takes either mind or matter as the single existing principle, of which the other is only an appearance, a different aspect or a mere effect. Taking mind as such a principle, the expression is called "Spiritual Monism", meaning that the Spirit is the ultimate true reality and all the material world is an "illusion" or its effect, issuing from it (a downward line would indicate this); on the other hand, regarding matter as the only basic ultimate reality, mind and spirit have no substance of their own and are mere products of matter, which could be shown by a line going upwards. Now Sakthism is something quite different from the denominations of Monism and Dualism, in so far as Shakti lies behind both mind and matter, without giving preponderance to either of them. Mind and matter as represented by the created universe are Shakti, and Shakti is bound up with Shiva, the male spiritual element whose position in the system it is difficult to describe to the European mind, but who may be taken to represent the inert Spirit lying apart from, and unconnected with, the Universe, but whose touch is necessary to give to Shakti the impulse to create. Both of them, female universal Power, Shakti, and the male impulse-giver, Shiva, constitute therefore the spiritual background of the Universe. Thus in terms of philosophical thought Sakthism is neither wholly dualistic nor wholly monistic, but constitutes a monistic dualism or dualistic monism, a "two in one" or "one in two".
The follower of Sakthism, the worshipper of Shakti, is called Shakta. His conception of the Goddess is described in the Shakti Tantra Shastras, i.e., the holy scriptures of Sakthism, often in a very poetical way. Whereas we speak of Mother Nature only in a comparative manner, for the Shakta it is absolute reality. Nature is Her body. Her presence is personally felt by him, when he is standing on the fertile ground of the earth; he touches Her life in the blossoms of the pure lotus-flower. She animates all living creatures. His own body is a part of Her great body. Worshipping Her in all Her different forms, he will find Her light, too, within his mind and consciousness. Thus, to the Shakta the whole universe of mind and matter reveals itself in its unity; he see before him Her great body which he adores; Her sacred feet, Her heart, Her mind.
It might be useful to describe this poetical view, which is at once physical and transcendental, by means of another diagram. We may for this purpose represent matter and mind by two circles , which intersect each other.
Where they intersect, there is Shakti, so to speak, in Herself. But Her influence, Her being spreads into the whole realm of matter as well as that of mind. Nowhere is She absent, but Her presence is less distinct, is somehow veiled in those parts, which are further from the centre, where She is in Herself. Thus, for the sake of linear explanation, the mineral world--the solid matter--would have to be situated the furthest from Her, because there, as for instance in stone, she--Life Herself--is, much veiled, stone to the ordinary human view appearing to be dead. Nearer to Her is the realm of plants, where, with their growing and blossoming, She already becomes more apparent. I need hardly remind you of the well-known researches by Sir Jagadish Bhose of the University of Calcutta, who is endeavouring to make visible the actual heartbeat of plant life. Then, in due order with regard to Her would come the world of animals, which being animated have within their life--although perhaps still unconsciously--some access to Her. Lastly, within the highly developed organism of man She, for the first time, is inherent in her essential being. There She finds the possibility of being consciously awakened, so that she appears to him, who is looking and striving for her, in Her true nature as Shakti herself. The other side--the mind circle--comprises the mental faculties of man such as consciousness, will, feeling and logical perception, which, with regard to their aptitude for Her realisation, may be put in such order. The directions of development therefore go in the matter-circle from left to right--from stone, vegetable, animal to man, where Shakti will be realised; in the mind-circle, from right to left--from mere logical thinking to feeling, will-power, consciousness to man--where Shakti may be realised. Thus, as you can see from this diagram, everywhere there is Shakti. She is inherent in everything and at the same time transcends every thing; by meditation and religious ceremonies She may be realized everywhere, being inherent in the whole physical universe as it is given to us. And, moreover, above this we may touch Her in Her transcendental aspect as well. When She appears in Her true nature, then there is no more mind or matter, but only She Herself, in no sense bounded by such limitations. As such a one She may well be represented by a circle, the universe in its true aspect.
To the European it may perhaps at first sight appear to be a mere poetical presentment and but little different from the theory of vitalism of modern natural science or from ancient animism in the religious aspect. But with regard to Vitalism, even if there be similarities the essential difference seems to me, that the Vitalism of the natural sciences is based principally upon the conception of a material world which is regarded as being animated by, for instance, the "lan vitale" of Bergson. But Sakthism holds its standpoint entirely on the spiritual side. She, the great mother, exists, and what in the material world is vitalised or animated, certainly comes from Her, but is only a veiled appearance of Her, who in Her true being can be experienced spiritually. And Sakthism is also not animism, if by animism may be understood the primitive idea of everything being ghost-like, being animated by "Phi" or spirits, resulting in as many ghostly spirits as there are different things. Sakthism represents a spiritual unity, all different things being united within Her always-greater aspect.
The principal doctrine of "Sakthism", that the whole Universe of mind and matter is created by Her, the Powerful Goddess Shakti, is described in full detail, with Indian accuracy in spiritual matters, in the Cosmogony of Sakthism. It must be understood that every great Indian philosophical system has its own Cosmo-Genesis, that is, its special conception of the evolution of the world and its beginning. As a matter of fact, every conception of life and the Universe requires such a foundation to give it the necessary firm hold. For Sakthism this source, out of which the Universe as mind and matter has evolved, is the female spiritual Power, Shakti, who is the Great Mother of the Universe. In Her most concentrated form, when Her Power is just ready to expand, She is represented by a point called Bindu. This Bindu Point is mere Spirit. Everything manifested and created in this Universe has Spirit. Everything manifested and created in this Universe has Spirit as its source and essence. In the Christian Cosmo-Genesis of the Gospel of St. John it is called "logos" or "the word". By expansion the Spiritual Power Shakti becomes, going through many different stages, Mind, Life, and Matter. She--the Goddess--is contained, in all the manifestations of the universe, but She remains, so to speak, unexhausted by being the material cause of the Universe. She in Her essence remains unaffected and greater than all the created world.
In a diagrammatic way this cosmogenetic evolution can be represented like this. The active, most concentrated Point Bindu is red, the colour of activity. From this point the lines of evolution expand through the stages of mind and life towards matter, the mineral world. So the material world stands not first but last in the evolution of the Universe.
According to the general doctrine of Indian metaphysics, this whole created universe is not everlasting but will one day be dissolved. The life or appearance of the universe lasts, as it is figuratively expressed, one day of Brahma, the Almighty, that is, millions and millions of years. After that the whole expansion contracts again in the opposite direction; first, matter will be dissolved, then life and mind will disappear till it reaches the state of the beginning, the spiritual Point, Bindu, where it will find its rest; until the dawn of a new day of Brahma, when a new creation will start. This Bindu Point is the great Goddess, the universal mother--womb--yoni--the creator and receiver of the Universe, which, as Shakti, is worshipped by the followers of Sakthism.
So the whole created world has as its creative Power Shakti, the goddess, just as in this world the female element is constantly maintaining it. But She, the creative Goddess, can do nothing without Him, the God, Shiva, just as no woman can bear fruit without the co-operation of the male element. The relation of Shakti to Shiva, is of a very subtle, spiritual nature. He, Shiva is in contrast to all creation, be it mind or matter. He is the underlying pure consciousness , which is independent of, and superior to, all creation. In a very famous picture of Sakthism the goddess Shakti stands black-coloured on the white-coloured Shiva who lies inert. The symbolism is this. Shiva is white to represent a colourless form, since all colours belong to the created world, which is the domain of Shakti. He lies at absolute rest, since movement and activity belong to the created world, which is dependent on him, but not he on it, She, the Goddess, is black-coloured because, compared with the light of the spiritual world unmixed with any objective realisation, she is dark as the night; in all creation she is veiled in darkness, both her face and her raiment.
I have mentioned already that there can be found traces of Shakti in the conception of the Madonna of the Catholic Christian Church. As some of you may know, there exists in Czenstochau in Poland the famous sculpture of the so-called Black Madonna, who is much adored by the population. Why is she black? Well whatever kind of outer-influence may have taken place, the spiritual reason must be the same as in Sakthism. She, the Madonna, the creatrix femina, is dark, is spiritually veiled in darkness during the process of creation. She is the deep and creative night. Darkness, compared with the light of day, has always been regarded spiritually as the deeper element. The darkness of the body is intended to show that the personality belongs to the spiritual world as the creative background of all physical appearance. It is very remarkable, too, that near Barcelona in Spain, on Mount Serrat, a black Madonna with the Christ child on her knees is worshipped by the Catholic Church. This famous sculpture, is said to have been on this holy mountain for over a thousand years. Her throne shows an uncommon shape. She holds in her right hand a globe, representing the Universe. Thus here, too, the conception seems to be that She, the Goddess-Madonna, is the Creator and Upholder of the whole Universe. In my opinion these figures--in their spiritual meaning--show the very deep connection , which exists spiritually between East and West. And Sakthism may help to bring an understanding between East and West, the importance of which is always becoming more apparent.
One of the deepest secrets of Sakthism is the union of the highest spiritual male consciousness, Shiva, with the all-pervading female power, Shakti.As I have already mentioned, the all-powerful Shakti would not be able to create the universe out of Herself; She needs the touch of Shiva. This union of Shiva and Shakti takes place in the highest spiritual regions before anything has been created, so to speak, in the night of Brahma. Out of this union the Universe is born--Shakti evolves as mind and matter, whereas Shiva remains as the underlying background, unaltered, This highest spiritual state of union is inexpressible by words; but it is approximately circumscribed by the Sanskrit words; Sat--Chit--Ananda. Sat means Being; Chit means Consciousness, and when these are united with one another, there Ananda--Bliss--the highest spiritual bliss, is the issue. For the Shakta, as for the Hindu generally, the essence of the world is joy, bliss, ananda. Whenever truth, living truth, is approached or touched by man, then he feels that bliss of the union of Shiva and Shakti, which is the origin of all life. The highest state of consciousness or liberation (Mukthi) in Sakthism is the attainment, the spiritual realisation, of the highest, unchanging, eternal, absolute union of Shiva and Shakti within himself, into which his being is to be ultimately absorbed. The man who has realised this and transplanted himself into it is in his lifetime called Jivanmukta (liberated though living) . In this union is everything essential contained. But within space and time, within the world of separate things and forms,--in this world of limited experience in which we are living--this highest union is interrupted. Shakti, being separated from Him, is, so to speak, in Her actual body distributed among all objective experience.
Shiva & Shakti merged into one
There is a deep and striking picture, a story of Indian mythology, which tells how the body of Shakti has been dismembered and has fallen in pieces into this world. Wherever any part of Her holy body is supposed to be lying, there an Indian temple has been built; to a certain extent comparable to the Stupas which are erected by Buddhists for the relics of the sacred body of Gautama. Everything in the objective appearance is individual on account of its being separated from that union, and its material substance or embodiment can be measured by the interval of that separation; the further away from the union, the more its spiritual essence is veiled.
It follows consequently that in every individual being, which to a certain extent becomes conscious of itself, there must be living a tendency to become liberated from this separation, to come back to this primordial union. "Back to the mother", it may be said, is the shortest expression for the spiritual aim of the whole of Indian culture and especially of Sakthism. A deeply--felt longing prevails within the religious mind of India; a longing like that of a child for its mother. It is important to note this, since it is this longing , which gives the impulse to the means by which the aim of coming back to the Mother may be attained. These means are called the Yoga of Sakthism, i.e., Sadhaana. The principles of Yoga are almost the same in all the different Indian systems, of which they form an essential part. By urging concentration of thought upon certain important ideas, they aim at giving to these ideas more strength and clearness than they usually have.
The meditator excludes himself from all outer influences, in order to bring his mind into direct contact with the spiritual world. In the end he will eventually realise what his Scriptures have taught him, that his essence is Spirit, and his mind and body its manifestations. I may mention here that a modern "western" way of "Yoga" has been introduced into Europe by the spiritual system, "Anthroposophy", of Dr.Rudolf Steiner. In all ages such kinds of spiritual endeavour have been practised. If man succeeds in actually realising the inner meaning of metaphysics, he becomes, as it is called, "initiated", that is, he becomes a citizen of the spiritual world, just as he is a citizen of the natural world by his physical birth. The Yoga of Sakthism specializes in conceptions of the Goddess Shakti. If She appears to the Shakta, as She is in Herself, the highest realisation, the Union with the mother is attained. Then the Shakta says: She I am, and feels himself full of the greatest spiritual bliss.
As I have already mentioned, Sakthism is an eminently practical Religion. It attempts an immediate realisation of truth by the practical methods of "Yoga" and has an abundance of rites and ceremonies. These vary according to the competency of the Shakta. The ritual has been rightly called the Art of Religion. The worshipper follows certain prescribed rules in his adoration, which give him the right direction. Every Religion knows the value of ritual--Buddhism as well as Christianity and Sakthism. I may mention here only a few special points, which distinguish the rites from all other similar cults in India.
It is well known what an important role the caste-system has always played in India. Even now the distinctions of the different castes are much observed, especially in the case of marriage. Principally the Brahmins, as the caste of priests--now there are Brahmins who are doctors of medicine, barristers, watchmen, etc., --would never mix with other castes in their ritual worship. The Shakta, however, the worshipper of Shakti, does not pay any regard to these caste distinctions. The Brahma Shakta has no objection to worshipping the Goddess even with the Shudra outcast, the Pariah. Such a non-Indian uncommon attitude shows that the rites of Sakthism may have their source from abroad; it is not yet quite certain, but it is probable that the special rites of Sakthism have come to India from China through Tibet.
This would explain, too, the other striking feature of the Shakta-worship, which is also non-Indian--that during the ritual worship of Shakti it is allowed to eat meat and to drink wine. Everyone knows how the Hindus abhor the slaughter of animals; how the adoration of the cow is an essential part of their religion, which has been again and again emphasised, especially by Gandhi himself. The Shakta, however, eats meat and drinks wine during his worship of the Goddess Shakti. He feels himself spiritually above this custom. As in his view everything is She--the Goddess--there can be made no exception with regard to the offerings to Her.
The third unique quality of the Shakti-worship is the active participation of women in the ceremonies. Ordinarily women are always kept apart in India.Everyone has heard of the Purdah system, which holds in some parts of India the women-folk life-long in their houses. But the Shakta treats them as altogether equal; even more. She, his Wife, is regarded by him as his Shakti Goddess; She, the mother of his children, represents to him the Great Mother. Such an attitude is naturally reflected in the daily life of Shakti Hindu families, where the mother--quite contrary to Miss Mayo's statements in "Mother India"--is much venerated. There is the so-called Panchatattva Ritual--the most important ritual of Sakthism, which is still nowadays performed in Bengal. The name "Panchatattva" is derived from the words "Pancha", five, and "Tattva", elements. The five elements of this ritual are Wine, Meat, Fish, Parched Corn and Sexual Union. Men and women meet as equal partners. They sit together--the man beside the women--in a circle, called Chakra. Following elaborate rites, they offer to the Goddess wine, meat, fish and corn. After that they take their meal, which consists these four elements; the idea being that they unite themselves with Shakti in these products and fruits. The highest presentment of the Goddess for the Shakta is the women who is sitting by his side. By uniting with her--according to the Maithuna rites--he experiences the bliss of the great union of Shiva and Shakti. Pro-creation is the individual counterpart of Cosmic Creation. It must be understood that the purpose of the physical union of the Shakta with his Shakti in this ritual is not satisfaction of his physical senses but the spiritual realisation of the highest union of the individual with the Goddess, the Cosmic-Whole. It may be mentioned that, as far as I have heard, during the ceremonies in Bengal the last mentioned Maithuna rites are not actually performed but are only indicated, as for example by bowing to the woman sitting at his side in the Chakra. Nothing is wrong or forbidden according to Sakthism, if it is done with a pure heart and spiritual feeling.
Certainly it is possible that, weak as man's nature is, abuses of this special rite have taken place--and it would be wrong to deny that they are in fact happening. But my intention here is to show its spiritual meaning and intention; which, in my opinion, cannot be affected by abuse in its interpretation; and the principle of the rite is sound, grand and spiritual.
All the rites of Sakthism, of which I have here mentioned only one, tend in such a direction as to awaken within him the spiritual and aesthetically productive forces of man. As soon as these usually slumbering forces are awakened, the Shakta knows and feels himself as being born again within the spiritual world. The Shakta says, "As I am born in my physical body from my mother, so I must be spiritually born again from my spiritual mother, the Goddess Shakti." By the grace of Shakti the Shakta himself becomes Brahma. As a matter of fact, every spiritual man strives for the attainment of such a state, of being reborn in the spiritual sense. Only the expressions are different and the means and ways vary. In Sakthism it is striking to notice with what absoluteness and how independently of all other systems of religion the physical appearance and the highest spiritual realisation are combined together. If Shakti is everywhere, then she is, too, in the bodily appearance of the women and there, however veiled, in her fullest essence. So he makes use of her for the greatest spiritual aim of man, namely to be reborn by the grace of Shakti.
Now I have said that this aim of being reborn within the spiritual motherhood is known to almost every religion, and, although Buddhism in its fundamental basis at first seems to be utterly different from Sakthism, yet Northern Buddhism knows well what is meant by Shakti. Mahayana Buddhism, as it is prevalent in Tibet, by which country Sakthism too has been much influenced, has introduced into its system during its development the Goddess Tara. She represents what Shakti is for Sakthism. She is the embodiment of all that within the spiritual realisation is distinctly female; and it is a very secret saying in esoteric Northern Buddhism that man, by being reborn from Tara, will become a Buddha, that is, will attain the highest spiritual state of life to which man is destined and for which he is striving. Within esoteric Christianity there is the picture of Jesus Christ lying in the stable-manger as the new-born child before the immaculate Virgin Mary. It is intended to portray not only the story of the historical birth of Jesus, but at the same time a representation of the idea that we all have to be reborn as such a Christ-child of the Virgin Mary, the Shakti of Christianity.
You see, there can be discovered, within so widely differing religious systems as Sakthism, Northern Buddhism and Christianity, the same important idea as that of being reborn by the grace of Shakti as Brahma, of being reborn by Tara as a Buddha, and of being reborn by Madonna as a Christian. As a matter of fact, the female spiritual element as it is venerated by Sakthism, being a living truth, can to a certain extent become a combining factor to embrace the great cultural outlook both of the East and the West. Humanity is one over all the earth, and Womanhood is its essential part. In Sakthism the idea of the spiritual creative force of Womanhood finds its most absolute and exclusive expression. For this reason this system is so interesting and striking for anyone who takes the trouble to go more deeply into it. Shakti, as she is pleased to reveal herself to day, is present, too, within the depths of European culture. It would take me too far a field to prove it by further details. I would only mention that Goethe concludes his great poem, "Faust", with the words: "The eternal female is raising us". Certainly, Goethe had no knowledge of the system of Sakthism and of those texts, which we are now privileged to study. But by his poetical inspiration he touched by himself the truth, which we find so clearly expressed in the system of Sakthism. If one would try to express the deepest meaning which Sakthism may have for us in our days, it cannot be done better than by those words which the mystical chorus sings at the end of this great poem: Das Ewig Weibliche zieht uns hinan. "The eternal female is raising us".
An American businessman was at the pier of a small coastal Mexican village when a small boat with just one fisherman docked. Inside the small boat were several large yellowfin tuna. The American complimented the Mexican on the quality of his fish and asked how long it took to catch them.
The Mexican replied only a little while. The American then asked why didn't he stay out longer and catch more fish? The Mexican said he had enough to support his family's immediate needs.
The American then asked, "But what do you do with the rest of your time?"
The Mexican fisherman said, "I sleep late, fish a little, play with my children, take siesta with my wife Maria, stroll into the village each evening where I sip wine and play guitar with my amigos. I have a full and busy life, senor."
The American scoffed, "I am a Harvard MBA and I could help you. You should spend more time fishing and with the proceeds buy a bigger boat, with the proceeds from the bigger boat you could buy several boats, eventually you would have a fleet of fishing boats. Instead of selling your catch to a middleman you would sell directly to the processor, eventually opening your own cannery. You would control the product, processing and distribution. You would need to leave this small coastal fishing village and move to Mexico City, then LA and eventually NYC where you will run your expanding enterprise."
The Mexican fisherman asked, "But senor, how long will this all take?"
To which the American replied, "15-20 years."
"But what then, senor?"
The American laughed and said, "That's the best part. When the time is right you would announce an IPO and sell your company stock to the public and become very rich, you would make millions."
"Millions, senor? Then what?"
The American said, "Then you would retire. Move to a small coastal fishing village where you would sleep late, fish a little, play with your kids, take siesta with your wife, stroll to the village in the evenings where you could sip wine and play your guitar with your amigos."
This is a funny thing...people ask me how is possible to ,,jump,, from
one extreme to the other?..How is possible to be something now,then,be
the opposite?
It comes down to whom YOU are,the real you I mean...not the fake
mental-temporal projections of what YOU are.
Not the ,,imagined,, you (for the ego must protect itself,and does it
in myriads way..)
Who are you?
Are you the college student?..the housewife?..the mighty Bill
Gates?..the one who knows?..the one who is single?..the one who is
married?..
What IF..what if ...you ARE not that?..
Once you ARE in the middle,you can become anything,this is the answer.
For you are stuck with the personal subconscious.
And that one is connected with the collective one.
And if you do NOT go back to the SOURCE(real you/spirit) you will
loose your attention.And the others will mold you according to their
image about you,sooner or later.
If I tell you a truth now..this is the greatest.
EVERYBODY you meet..it will try to mold you in their own
image.EVERYBODY you meet ..it will try to protect his self-image(fake
one) and will try EVERYTHING to protect his self-image.
The problem here is not the logical brain,but the subsconscious one.
If one could just ,,detach,, and be the ,,observer,,(spirit within)
One would understand the contradictions.
This is NOT possible without the meditation practice.Simple
impossible.Because one must direct the attention to the spirit
within,and to do that,one must meditate,and be in SILENCE.The sound of
Silence...
Daniel
.......
The Sound Of Silence
Hello darkness, my old friend. I've come to talk with you again.
Because a vision softly creeping left its seeds while I was sleeping
and the vision that was planted in my brain still remains within the
sound of silence.
In restless dreams I walked alone, narrow streets of cobblestone
`neath the halo of a street lamp, I turned my collar to the cold and damp
when my eyes were stabbed by the flash of a neon light
that split the night and touched the sound of silence.
And in the naked light I saw ten thousand people, maybe more.
People talking without speaking, people hearing without listening.
People writing songs that voices never shared, no one dared disturb
the sound of silence.
"Fools," said I, "you do not know, silence like a cancer grows.
Hear my words that I might teach you, take my arms that I might reach
you."
But my words like silent raindrops fell and echoed in the wells of
silence.
And the people bowed and prayed to the neon god they made
and the sign flashed out its warning in the words that it was forming.
And the sign said "The words of the prophets are written on the subway
walls
and tenement halls and whispered in the sound of silence."
All of us share in the same fundamental nature. If we all come from the same original source, how could it be otherwise?
Furthermore, think about it: if everything is made of "Godstuff," nothing can made of more Godstuff than anything else since it is all Godstuff. Get it?
If so then fundamentally we are all liberated, all enlightened, all "saved" by virtue of sharing in that same fundamental substrate, that same fundamental nature, that same Godstuff, that same original being, that same .... whatever you want to call it or whatever religions choose to call it. You don't need to believe in anything or do anything to already be saved or liberated. You just have to REALIZE it. Not mentally realize it, but experientially realize it by experientially realizing that fundamental All-State.
Remember,that fundamental ground state is NOT a samadhi, or skandha experience, or experiential realm or visaya. It is formless, empty, beyond is and is not, being and no-being.
Now, it just so happens that one of the functions issuing from this original nature is consciousness, or awareness. If that wasn't one of its functions, we wouldn't have awareness or consciousness at all.
Why does our original nature possess this ability? It just does, that's just the way it is, so there's no use asking about. In religious striving, you simply try to get to the ultimate source behind awareness, the Ground state of All That Is, the primordial mind ground, the Suchness. You try to get to the ULTIMATE state, not any of the creations, however refined they are, such as the samadhi.
The problem as humans is, due to what we call "Ignorance" or mental clinging, we turn away from realization of our fundamental nature and hold on to things that screen us from our fundamental nature. That's why we are unenlightened. How do you get enlightened? You turn away from clinging to mental images, feelings, forms, sensations, impulses, mental scenarios, gong-fu and all sorts of forms, appearances, things that arise and depart.
None of them are real, but we cling to them in subtle ways which is like coating a film of ignorance over our perceptive capabilities of being fully enlightened. We are fundamentally enlightened but we cover over that fundamental enlightenment with ignorance and cling to what's non-real rather than the REAL fundamental nature. We cling to the realm of illusion or delusion that's always changing and never stays, that's defined by cause and effect ("interdependent origination"). If we let go of clinging to these things, by non-clinging, we can reach a state called emptiness, voidness, non-discriminative thinking, no-thought, selflessness, and so forth
That, fundamentally, is a description of the ontology of the spiritual path and the soteriology of the spiritual path.
So guess what always gives me a chuckle?
I know fundamental Christians who declare that because they believe in Christ, and you don't, they are saved and you are not. In fact, they are the ONLY ones saved. Pity on you! It seems you have to believe something or do something in order to be saved and if you were born thousands of years ago before those things were defined, tough luck.
I meet Jewish people who declare that God created a special Covenant with the Jewish people, and no one else, and therefore they are the elect and saved and no one else is. You have to be born into the Jewish faith to be part of this group, so lucky them and ... because you aren't part of the group, you don't really matter. They matter, you don't. After all, the Covenant is with them ... they are the elect. Ignore all the bad karma of the nation, that's part of the deal.
I meet Moslems who believe that only those who follow Mohammed are saved, whereas ALL others are not. So their job is to convert everyone. If you become Moslem -- if the whole world becomes Moslem -- then their job is done. How that further saves you, I don't know, but that's the goal.
I meet Taoists who believe they have secret methods for spiritual attainment, and you do not, so they are superior to you and will achieve immortality whereas you won't because you don't have those techniques. It doesn't even matter that THEY don't personally succeed with the techniques, but just having them makes them superior.
I know Tibetans who believe they carry the highest and truest cultivation path. In fact, they don't even believe Westerners can achieve samadhi or enlightenment, and even deny teachings to foreigners because non-Tibetans are not qualified for the path. Uh-huh, tell me about it.
I meet Buddhists who believe their own little sect is the right one, and that other Buddhist groups (from Tibet, or Chinese Mahayana, etc.) are not even Buddhist. Strange ideas abound also ... such that just reciting Amitofo's name can get you reborn in Amitofo's Land where you will live forever and never be reborn. When did Buddha ever say you could get rid of reincarnation? He simply said to try to get reborn in other places so you could further your spiritual progress. When you get enlightened you can CONTROL the process of reincarnation and where you will go next and what you will do, but there's no way to escape the Three Realms and no place of permanent rest.
What group did I forget? Oh, what the heck ... there are too many to go into.
These folks, like all the others, just create whatever they want to believe so that THEY ARE SAVED, THEIR GROUP IS SPECIAL AND SAVED and you are not, and THEY personally have very little work to do in terms of the work or practice of spiritual cultivation. Just believe something and you're saved or just become a member of the group-- that's the formula. Just go to church once a a week and you're okay and will be reborn in heaven. Just follow the Commandments or Islamic injunctions and up you'll go to heaven when it's time. No other work to be done.
Forget trying to teach such people. They want it spiritual practice to be easy, they want to be the elect, they want little responsibility, ... and I can't blame them. But it doesn't work that way.
Here's how it works.
We all share in the same fundamental nature. You CAN realize that fundamental nature through spiritual practice. All the spiritual practices rely on the principle letting go of experiential realms so that you are always in seamless tune or union with the fundamental nature. Usually they involve principles of cessation and contemplation as practice vehicles until you make the big breakthrough.
Spiritual practice takes training ... effortless training. Why? Because it's not training in doing something. It's training in LETTING go of the underlying, undercurrent, subtle ever present habit of clinging to mental realms, i.e. fundamental ignorance. That's why we say you cultivate emptiness. That's why the spiritual path is one of "non-effort" but it takes practice to achieve it. Spiritual practice is the practice of breaking habits so you are FREE. Get it? But don't interpret those words too superficially because there's lots of gong-fu involved -- physical transformations, samadhi, spiritual realms, and so on.
Here's what else is important. The path is nondenominational, and there is such a thing as gong-fu, or various ranks of partial realization.
You practice and you CAN achieve spiritual stages and experiences, no matter who you are or what religion you belong to. Sorry about the "saved elect" notions. The spiritual stages of attainment, as explained in my course, can be ranked in terms of gong-fu, skandhas, samadhi, levels of consciousness and so on. Anyone who practices, regardless of religion, can make spiritual progress. Gong-fu is nondenominational. No one is barred from spiritual progress.
So while Roman Catholicism says you can be excommunicated and barred entry into Heaven, and so does Mormonism, and so does etc. etc., is that logical? You decide. Wisdom is YOU figuring it out rather than me saying it for you. Wisdom is YOU figuring out why certain groups say these things and how it helps them.
All these sects would like to think they are unique and particular and different, and in many respects they are, but everyone shares in the fundamental nature, everyone is liberated or saved. So are animals -- so are any beings that have consciousness! You just have to practice to realize your fundamental, inherent enlightenment as the spiritual path. That's what's real. The conventional realm isn't real in the REAL sense. In the conventional sense it's real, but not in the ultimate sense. It's an effervescent, never staying, undependable realm that's defined by interdependence of infinite links between all phenomena. That's cause and effect, or karma.
In terms of the regular world, there's karma and the expression of interdependent origination through society, customs, and family relationships. They exist, but they're not real, but you cannot say they aren't real and ignore them because them karma will come up and bite you. So they are neither real nor non-real, get it? You act that way in accordance with societal rules, but you continue cultivating to realize your original nature. THE original nature.
So the spiritual practices you choose to follow as your spiritual path and doing them correctly and making progress with them -- along with proper conduct in the material realm of society with karmic entanglements -- are ALL the spiritual path. You have to honor both, recognize both, master both or you're one-sided, or lop-sided.
Get it?
Next time you hear someone say they are saved and you are not, just chuckle. That pencil in front of you has the same amount of Godstuff as you and your thoughts. That's why saints, adepts, masters, etc. say there is no such thing as a being. It's all one. Read the Diamond Sutra and maybe you'll realize what I just wrote, for I'm only seeding the thoughts to get you started.
Moral or conclusion?
It still all comes down to the personal responsibility and the discipline of personal spiritual practice to realize your Buddha nature. It also comes down to honoring/satisfying/corresponding to societal engagements, purifying your conduct and behavior, creating merit and cultivating virtue in the realm of karmic, interdependent origination that though non-real, still functions.
That's the Middle Path. I hope you realize it. Just focus on one side and you neglect the other. Complete enlightenment, perfect enlightenment is to realize your original nature and vow continue working in the realm of samsara, as unreal as it ULTIMATELY is, to help the beings there get rid of suffering and realize the Tao, even though they don't ultimately exist and are thereby ultimately saved.
That's the real path of spiritual practice. That's what I call pure cultivation. Now you know it, and hopefully have a little clarity on the issue.
THE MASTERY
OF YOUR ATTENTION WILL COME
WHEN YOU WILL START SEEING the truth..
