Guest guest Posted March 6, 1999 Report Share Posted March 6, 1999 Hi Everyone, As much as I used to respect Jerry M. Katz (founder of the NondualitySalon List), I must say that I am now very disappointed with his attitude, and the prior respect has been lost entirely. (1) Originally he banned me from his list for "being offensive" (no personal attacks were involved, simply an attack on "ideas"). (2) He dissolved his list due to a claimed "hacking attempt." (3) He renewed his list. I find Now that I am still banned, for actions I committed in the now-dead past. To all who consider Jerry a friend, please forgive me this judgement. But I do not think that deep in his heart, he believes what he says. I think he enjoys the sense of community in his NondualitySalon list, but that is all. He is tied up in the dualistic world. His actions and speech are of a dualistic nature. He holds grudges. He cannot "forgive" an "offense" that was never really committed, for nobody was there to commit such an offense! I AM. There was no 'me' really there to sin against Jerry and His list. In continuing to ban 'me', he precludes the possibility that I may have changed, grown and learned since the last time I posted to his list. Thus, I have no choice but to conclude that Jerry Katz mentally believes the concepts of nondualism, and perhaps even in his heart. But his soul remains empty of I AM. At the deepest level of himself, he can only be a dualist. In confusion and disappointment, Tim ----- The CORE of Reality awaits you at: http://www.serv.net/~fewtch/ND/index.html - Poetry, Writings, even Live Chat on spiritual topics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 6, 1999 Report Share Posted March 6, 1999 In a message dated 3/6/1999 12:11:59 AM Pacific Standard Time, fewtch writes: << Tim Gerchmez <fewtch Hi Everyone, As much as I used to respect Jerry M. Katz (founder of the NondualitySalon List), I must say that I am now very disappointed with his attitude, and the prior respect has been lost entirely. (1) Originally he banned me from his list for "being offensive" (no personal attacks were involved, simply an attack on "ideas"). (2) He dissolved his list due to a claimed "hacking attempt." (3) He renewed his list. I find Now that I am still banned, for actions I committed in the now-dead past. To all who consider Jerry a friend, please forgive me this judgement. But I do not think that deep in his heart, he believes what he says. I think he enjoys the sense of community in his NondualitySalon list, but that is all. He is tied up in the dualistic world. His actions and speech are of a dualistic nature. He holds grudges. He cannot "forgive" an "offense" that was never really committed, for nobody was there to commit such an offense! I AM. There was no 'me' really there to sin against Jerry and His list. In continuing to ban 'me', he precludes the possibility that I may have changed, grown and learned since the last time I posted to his list. Thus, I have no choice but to conclude that Jerry Katz mentally believes the concepts of nondualism, and perhaps even in his heart. But his soul remains empty of I AM. At the deepest level of himself, he can only be a dualist. In confusion and disappointment, Tim >> Hello Tim. I believe you have a lot to contribute to this list. But this is not the right way. Jerry is loved and respected by many and so are you. We all desire to be loved and respected. It is an education by itself to try to treat people as we would wish that they would treat us. We follow the purest teachings of nonviolence and love. We have no other aim and wish for nothing else other than all living beings mutually support each other on the path. Self-Realization leads to Ahimsa and following the philosophy of nonviolence leads to Self-Recognition. Let us be Silent in Love. All beings wish for that love, comfort and support and nourishment. Sending my love to all. Harsha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 6, 1999 Report Share Posted March 6, 1999 Harsha, A question please. If one is free of ego, which I assume is true for those who reached a state of nonduality, is one free of the need for approval and acceptance. This question isn't meant to be argumentative or anything. I will be the first to admit to a lot of ego needs for approval and acceptance. Everybody who knows me knows this is true of me. But I was under the impression that those who were further along the path were free of those needs. Love, Judy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 6, 1999 Report Share Posted March 6, 1999 On Sat, 6 Mar 1999, Tim Gerchmez wrote: > > In continuing to ban 'me', he precludes the possibility that I may have > changed, grown and learned since the last time I posted to his list. Thus, > I have no choice but to conclude that Jerry Katz mentally believes the > concepts of nondualism, and perhaps even in his heart. But his soul > remains empty of I AM. At the deepest level of himself, he can only be a > dualist. nope. noone is at heart dual and deluded. every being shares the same stuff. dharmakaya stuff if you will. colours, even tho they are shrouded, are still there in the dark. see like, others are the mirror. what u see there has to be asked where it came from. not busting your chops, but making a small point. maitri, --janpa tsomo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 6, 1999 Report Share Posted March 6, 1999 Judy Walden wrote: > > Judy Walden <judyw > > Harsha, > > A question please. If one is free of ego, which I assume is > true for those who reached a state of nonduality, is one > free of the need for approval and acceptance. This question > isn't meant to be argumentative or anything. > > I will be the first to admit to a lot of ego needs for > approval and acceptance. Everybody who knows me knows this > is true of me. But I was under the impression that those > who were further along the path were free of those needs. > > Love, > Judy I am sure that Harsha will share beyond my scope of understaning but from here, the new 'state' still needs to be validated. This is not an ego issue. To get to where we are now, we have all been labelled as mentally ill in one form or another. We have demonstrated actions and thoughts that are deemed 'crazy' to those around us. For the doctor to say "You are fine. Go on home." Is not enough. What if you could help the elimination of starvation efforts. 33,000 children starve to death every day how many more adults? (World Vision Statistics). What if no one would listen to you because you were labelled as menatlly ill. How would this make you feel? Is this ego? I don't think so. Regards. Tim Harris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 6, 1999 Report Share Posted March 6, 1999 Very well, Harsha... I defer to your teaching on this matter. Thank you for the teaching, and you are right. It's not really my place to bring an issue involving a person or another list to this list. Please accept my apology (I let the emotional pain I was feeling affect my actions, and thus acted "dualistically" myself - a typical ironic effect of judging "another" dualistic). With humility I accept your teaching, and although I can never absolutely "promise" what I will do in any given Now, in THIS NOW and in all the NOWs I know of to come, I won't allow these fingers type a post like that again. In humility, and love, Tim At 10:47 AM 3/6/99 EST, you wrote: >Hello Tim. I believe you have a lot to contribute to this list. But this is >not the right way. Jerry is loved and respected by many and so are you. We all >desire to be loved and respected. It is an education by itself to try to treat >people as we would wish that they would treat us. We follow the purest >teachings of nonviolence and love. We have no other aim and wish for nothing >else other than all living beings mutually support each other on the path. >Self-Realization leads to Ahimsa and following the philosophy of nonviolence >leads to Self-Recognition. Let us be Silent in Love. All beings wish for that >love, comfort and support and nourishment. Sending my love to all. > >Harsha ----- The CORE of Reality awaits you at: http://www.serv.net/~fewtch/ND/index.html - Poetry, Writings, even Live Chat on spiritual topics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 6, 1999 Report Share Posted March 6, 1999 > Judy Walden <judyw > > Harsha, > > A question please. If one is free of ego, which I assume is > true for those who reached a state of nonduality, is one > free of the need for approval and acceptance. This question > isn't meant to be argumentative or anything. > I will be the first to admit to a lot of ego needs for > approval and acceptance. Everybody who knows me knows this > is true of me. But I was under the impression that those > who were further along the path were free of those needs. > > Love, > Judy It is possible to give an answer without involving the nondual issue (and avoiding debate on that one). When the sense of ego it diminished to the extent that the unconditional bliss of one's real nature cannot be clouded anymore, the dependence on any feeling will be diminished to the same extent. So there is no more need for approval, acceptance, comfort, support, company etc.. The feelings still "are there" but they are mere drops in the ocean and eventually, they will disappear altogether. It is not just a matter of "further on the path"; egos can differ a lot (like "ripe" ones that will fall apart almost by themselves and ones that are tenacious). Jan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 6, 1999 Report Share Posted March 6, 1999 Hi Jan, This probably shows my ignorance but I sort of thought nondual and enlightenment were synonymous. I also thought that the degree of diminishment of the ego was dependent upon how far along one was on the path toward enlightenment. =========== To Everyone: If I may I will report a recent experience I had which might give you all a chuckle and point to the problems of ego and illusion. I recently found these string like looking things on my carpet and became sure that my dogs had worms. I was totally repulsed even to the point that one night I considered spending the night somewhere else. I went around with a kleenex picking these things up and then flushing them down the commode. I vacuumed several times a day. I moved all the furniture out of the way. I went over the floor on my hands and knees with wrapping tape thinking that maybe if there were eggs I could capture them this way. I wormed my dogs and I gave them baths every day. I was totally exhausted and stressed. My dad came over to see what he could do to help me. Being braver than me, he picked up one of these things with his hand and on close examination realized that it was bits and pieces of dead moss. I live in Florida where moss from the trees falls to the ground. These ''strings/worms" even had a fuzzy appearance to them but it was nothing more than pieces of moss. I hate to think of the reactions and resistances I have experienced in my life because I was unwilling to really examine my perceptions. Times when I let my desire to avoid unpleasantness keep me from really look at all that needed to be seen. Love, Judy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 6, 1999 Report Share Posted March 6, 1999 Sounds very much like the classical analogy about Maya: seeing a snake where there's actually a rope. .... Phil ... Judy Walden <judyw < > Saturday, March 06, 1999 6:04 PM Re: Surprised... and disappointed. >Judy Walden <judyw > >Hi Jan, > >This probably shows my ignorance but I sort of thought nondual and enlightenment >were synonymous. I also thought that the degree of diminishment of the ego was >dependent upon how far along one was on the path toward enlightenment. >=========== >To Everyone: > >If I may I will report a recent experience I had which might give you all a >chuckle and point to the problems of ego and illusion. I recently found these >string like looking things on my carpet and became sure that my dogs had worms. >I was totally repulsed even to the point that one night I considered spending >the night somewhere else. I went around with a kleenex picking these things up >and then flushing them down the commode. I vacuumed several times a day. I >moved all the furniture out of the way. I went over the floor on my hands and >knees with wrapping tape thinking that maybe if there were eggs I could capture >them this way. I wormed my dogs and I gave them baths every day. I was totally >exhausted and stressed. > >My dad came over to see what he could do to help me. Being braver than me, he >picked up one of these things with his hand and on close examination realized >that it was bits and pieces of dead moss. I live in Florida where moss from the >trees falls to the ground. These ''strings/worms" even had a fuzzy appearance >to them but it was nothing more than pieces of moss. > >I hate to think of the reactions and resistances I have experienced in my life >because I was unwilling to really examine my perceptions. Times when I let my >desire to avoid unpleasantness keep me from really look at all that needed to be >seen. > >Love, >Judy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 6, 1999 Report Share Posted March 6, 1999 Excuse me Judy just want to make a point by your example. Is it not easier to understand one another when we describe our experience as it is below. Are these not terms that we 'all' understand? Is this not a situation that we have all found ourselves in or, at the least can identify with? Do we need to talk of the absolute in absolute terms? Is this story below not also contained within the absolute? Does it not explain a phenomena? A glitch in the time space model? Is it that all philosophy, all beliefs, political, religious, scientific or otherwise can be explained this simply? Neighbors talking over the fence? Whats more, is this not the language that we 'all' speak? Then is it also possible that 'all' are enlightened regardless of terms? Do we judge them because they do not use the 'same' words as we do. Because they do not call the condition of man dual and the absolute as nondual? Does this mean they do not know what they mean? Just a thought. We are one in purpose is our purpose to be right? We are. Is our purpose to win? We did. Then why do we wish to be the above in relation to the below. Are they not the same? I challenge you to view your world within a this model for a day. Tell me that all is not wisdom and that each one of us does not walk with the 'strength of a thousand generations'? Tell me that if you were they, you would not feel the same way as they do? Regards. Tim Harris Judy Walden wrote: > > Judy Walden <judyw > > Hi Jan, > > This probably shows my ignorance but I sort of thought nondual and enlightenment > were synonymous. I also thought that the degree of diminishment of the ego was > dependent upon how far along one was on the path toward enlightenment. > =========== > To Everyone: > > If I may I will report a recent experience I had which might give you all a > chuckle and point to the problems of ego and illusion. I recently found these > string like looking things on my carpet and became sure that my dogs had worms. > I was totally repulsed even to the point that one night I considered spending > the night somewhere else. I went around with a kleenex picking these things up > and then flushing them down the commode. I vacuumed several times a day. I > moved all the furniture out of the way. I went over the floor on my hands and > knees with wrapping tape thinking that maybe if there were eggs I could capture > them this way. I wormed my dogs and I gave them baths every day. I was totally > exhausted and stressed. > > My dad came over to see what he could do to help me. Being braver than me, he > picked up one of these things with his hand and on close examination realized > that it was bits and pieces of dead moss. I live in Florida where moss from the > trees falls to the ground. These ''strings/worms" even had a fuzzy appearance > to them but it was nothing more than pieces of moss. > > I hate to think of the reactions and resistances I have experienced in my life > because I was unwilling to really examine my perceptions. Times when I let my > desire to avoid unpleasantness keep me from really look at all that needed to be > seen. > > Love, > Judy > > ------ > If you like orange and blue, then you will love our new web site! > > Onelist: Fostering connections and information exchange Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 6, 1999 Report Share Posted March 6, 1999 At 06:11 PM 3/6/99 -0600, you wrote: >"Phillip Burton" <p_burton > >Sounds very much like the classical analogy about Maya: seeing a snake where >there's actually a rope. > >... Phil ... Ah yes, Adi Shankara's famous analogy (I am a "student" of His, although not directly, for obvious reasons :-). There are many definitions of "enlightenment," and many paths to whatever that particular definition may be. Many don't even like the words "Realization" or "Enlightenment" because they have so many different meanings to different people. Words are dualistic in nature and can only hint at nondual meanings. With Love, Tim ----- The CORE of Reality awaits you at: http://www.serv.net/~fewtch/ND/index.html - Poetry, Writings, even Live Chat on spiritual topics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 7, 1999 Report Share Posted March 7, 1999 > Judy Walden <judyw > > Hi Jan, > > This probably shows my ignorance but I sort of thought nondual > and enlightenment > were synonymous. I also thought that the degree of diminishment > of the ego was > dependent upon how far along one was on the path toward enlightenment. [...] It isn't ignorance Judy, it is that literature is rather vague about these matters. For instance, one can be "lifted" into nirvikalpa samadhi where are no thoughts and perceptions, just one's true nature. This is nonduality and how or even if this is reflected in one's daily life depends on the impressions left in the mind. If the ego is defined as: 1. The self, especially as distinct from the world and other selves. 2. In psychoanalysis, the division of the psyche that is conscious, most immediately controls thought and behavior, and is most in touch with external reality. It is clear that nirvikalpa samadhi will blow 1. to smithereens but not 2.. In the course of sadhana the "inner" reality (there is only One) will gradually start matching "outer" reality. This means the transparency (that was subject in a previous thread) will eventually develop into its extreme where literally there is no more awareness or feeling of "inner" or "outer" and 2. no longer applies. As this is beyond the imagination of many, it made me muse about a space station as an ideal place for meditation. In a closed, dark room at the station, there are no perceptions and there is hardly any feeling of body as there is no gravity. "All" that remains is to silence the monkey-mind chatter. Jan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 7, 1999 Report Share Posted March 7, 1999 Hi Jan, At 10:58 AM 3/7/99 -0000, you wrote: >As this is beyond the imagination of many, it made me muse about a space >station as an ideal place for meditation. In a closed, dark room at the >station, there are no perceptions and there is hardly any feeling of body as >there is no gravity. "All" that remains is to silence the monkey-mind >chatter. I've found that an adequate (and cheaper :-) replacement for the above can be very long, extended periods of meditation with no physical movement whatsoever. A good night's sleep is required, or it's easy to fall asleep when meditating for more than 45 minutes (in my case, at least). After about an hour of no movement, I've found that the body can no longer be felt, nor any particular sensation of gravity. Earplugs or pink noise with headphones (or soft music to help quiet that mental chatter) can be used for "silence," and smell/taste can simply be ignored. Perhaps not as effective as a space station, but a workable alternative. Another alternative that is actually possible is the use of what's known as an "isolation tank" where the body floats in darkness, in salt water at exact body temperature. But one of these would be outrageously expensive to buy, and probably couldn't be used unless a person had access to a laboratory of some sort. With Love, Tim ----- The CORE of Reality awaits you at: http://www.serv.net/~fewtch/ND/index.html - Poetry, Writings, even Live Chat on spiritual topics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 7, 1999 Report Share Posted March 7, 1999 Hi Jan, >As this is beyond the imagination of many, it made me muse about a space >station as an ideal place for meditation. In a closed, dark room at the >station, there are no perceptions and there is hardly any feeling of body as >there is no gravity. One of those isolation tanks would be easier to achieve... you know, the kind with heavy salt water so you float easily, and the lid closes over you... Since I float like a cork, I like to go late in the evening to the pool here to meditate. Only trouble is, people walking by tend to panic... they think there's a dead body in the pool. )) Love, Dharma Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 7, 1999 Report Share Posted March 7, 1999 At 05:30 AM 3/7/99 -0600, you wrote: >Since I float like a cork, I like to go late in the evening to the pool >here to meditate. Only trouble is, people walking by tend to panic... >they think there's a dead body in the pool. )) ROFL... Thank you for that, Dharma, that was funny :-)) ----- The CORE of Reality awaits you at: http://www.serv.net/~fewtch/ND/index.html - Poetry, Writings, even Live Chat on spiritual topics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 7, 1999 Report Share Posted March 7, 1999 At 10:58 AM 3/7/99 -0000, you wrote: >If the ego is defined as: >1. The self, especially as distinct from the world and other selves. >2. In psychoanalysis, the division of the psyche that is conscious, most >immediately controls thought and behavior, and is most in touch with >external reality. > >It is clear that nirvikalpa samadhi will blow 1. to smithereens An interesting way of putting it :-)... I prefer Dr Richard Moss's analogy of the self (or ego) being a sugar cube, and the Infinite being a glass of warm water. Let the self melt into the warm water (at whatever pace is natural) until the sugar-cube of the self is dissolved. The self is not "lost" (the sugar is still sugar, and the water is still water) but rather has become At-One with the Infinite and has lost nothing but separation (which truly it never had in the first place, only illusion of separation). A more pleasant definition than the thought of blowing the self to bits with dynamite (grin)... ----- The CORE of Reality awaits you at: http://www.serv.net/~fewtch/ND/index.html - Poetry, Writings, even Live Chat on spiritual topics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 7, 1999 Report Share Posted March 7, 1999 > Tim Gerchmez <fewtch > > At 10:58 AM 3/7/99 -0000, you wrote: > > >If the ego is defined as: > >1. The self, especially as distinct from the world and other selves. > >2. In psychoanalysis, the division of the psyche that is > conscious, most > >immediately controls thought and behavior, and is most in touch with > >external reality. > > > >It is clear that nirvikalpa samadhi will blow 1. to smithereens > > An interesting way of putting it :-)... I prefer Dr Richard Moss's analogy > of the self (or ego) being a sugar cube, and the Infinite being a glass of > warm water. Let the self melt into the warm water (at whatever pace is > natural) until the sugar-cube of the self is dissolved. The self is not > "lost" (the sugar is still sugar, and the water is still water) but rather > has become At-One with the Infinite and has lost nothing but separation > (which truly it never had in the first place, only illusion of > separation). > A more pleasant definition than the thought of blowing the self to bits > with dynamite (grin)... No doubt Mr. Moss had Some Eastern masters and yogis who had come to the West in mind when he made the analogy. Solubility depends on temperature so cooling down the solution will cause the sugar to crystallize again. Jokingly, the analogy is a bit ridiculous considering that "all" selves have to be dissolved in the same water. When the solution is saturated, nothing will dissolve anymore. If in practice I would have had to put up with the analogy of Mr. Moss, the package called spirituality would have been returned to sender with a request for a refund Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 7, 1999 Report Share Posted March 7, 1999 At 03:20 PM 3/7/99 -0000, you wrote: >> I prefer Dr Richard Moss's analogy >> of the self (or ego) being a sugar cube, and the Infinite being a glass of >> warm water. Let the self melt into the warm water (at whatever pace is >> natural) until the sugar-cube of the self is dissolved. > >No doubt Mr. Moss had Some Eastern masters and yogis who had come to the >West in mind when he made the analogy. Solubility depends on temperature so >cooling down the solution will cause the sugar to crystallize again. >Jokingly, the analogy is a bit ridiculous considering that "all" selves have >to be dissolved in the same water. When the solution is saturated, nothing >will dissolve anymore. If in practice I would have had to put up with the >analogy of Mr. Moss, the package called spirituality would have been >returned to sender with a request for a refund Hey, whatever works for you. It's just a simple analogy for dissolution of ego structure into a greater Reality. You're mentally limiting the size of the "glass" though, based on preconceptions of how big a "glass" should be. Think of the "glass of warm water" as being infinitely large, and an eternal "heat source" (Consciousness?) being applied to keep it warm, and your "complaints" fall apart. :-) Using your same type of "complaints," I could say that to "blow the ego to smithereens," no matter how powerful the "explosion," some "chunks" are going to remain, you'll never get total and complete dissolution (except maybe with a thermonuclear explosion, and I doubt that comes into the picture of Nirvikulpa Samadhi ;-) Tim ----- The CORE of Reality awaits you at: http://www.serv.net/~fewtch/ND/index.html - Poetry, Writings, even Live Chat on spiritual topics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.