Fred Davis, The Looking Glass: Language as Mirror 2013.03.13: Jerry Katz, Nonduality Salon: Rich Murray 2012.03.16
Locked
Fred Davis, The Looking Glass: Language as Mirror 2013.03.13: Jerry Katz, Nonduality Salon: Rich Murray 2012.03.16
 
|
Fred Davis, The Looking Glass: Language as Mirror 2013.03.13: Jerry
Katz, Nonduality Salon: Rich Murray 2012.03.16 http://rmforall.blogspot.com/2013/03/fred-davis-looking-glass-language-as.html Jerry Katz via yahoogroups.com 8:10 AM PST March 16, 2013 (9 hours ago) to AdvaitaToZen, iam, NDS, NDH [hidden email], iam <[hidden email]>, NDS <[hidden email]>, NDH <[hidden email]> The Nonduality Highlights http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NDhighlights/ #4867 Friday, March 15, 2013 -- Editor: Jerry Katz <[hidden email]>, http://awakeningclarity.blogspot.ca/2013/03/the-looking-glass-language-as-mirror.html Awakening Clarity Recognizing and Living as Our True Nature Thursday, March 14, 2013 The Looking Glass: Language as Mirror Fred Davis Notice that you are already awake. Right now, this moment, the only reason you can read these words is that you're awake. You're already awake. You're as awake as it gets. You're already fully awake. Given that you're already fully awake, how then could you wake up further? Since you're already awake, does that idea even make sense? You can't wake up more from where you are right now. And you can't wake up again. If you want to read a book through that body, or watch a video, or send it to a retreat for further clarity or to get some context that has the potential to open to the door to further clarity, that's great. But before you do, notice that you don't need to read another book, watch a video, or go to a retreat in order to wake up, because you're already awake. If you want to do meditation, drum, dance, chant, or what have you, for the sake of grounding yourself in that present human experience you're having, or calming that unit's mind, so that you can better hear yourself talk to yourself, and better watch yourself dance for yourself, terrific. Have at it. But, be absolutely aware that you can't practice yourself into awakening. You can't achieve what you already are. You're just not who you think you are; that's the only issue here. You're undergoing a case of mistaken identity, and all you need today is a little light reflected from this mirror, this mirror of clear language that is also you. There is only you, but you tend to get a bit cloudy sometimes, and forget that. It comes with the territory when your spaciousness contracts around human beings, and it's no big deal. It's fine. When you're ready to be clear, you find a bright mirror, so here you are, back in front of the vanity mirror. Vanity, vanity, all is vanity! This is all you, every bit of it -- you dancing for you, you preening for you, just you showing off for yourself, to yourself and loving it. You think you're the human being reading these words. You're not. Well, you actually are that human also, but you're not that person exclusively. You're the awareness that's reading these words through that human being. The human is not reading the words; you are. The human is a reading tool for you, just as reading glasses are a tool for the human. Reading glasses never mistake themselves for being the reader; humans almost always do. You think you need to wake up. You don't. All that has to occur is for you to recognize yourself as what you are. "Awaken" makes it sound like something really new and different needs to happen. It doesn't. Recognition, on the other hand, is simply about noticing what already is. See how much lighter the idea of recognition is, versus the idea of waking up? Why make it hard on yourself, when you're clearly longing to see/be your true nature again. Be easy on yourself. How much effort does it take for that human to recognize itself in a mirror? None. The same is true for you. You just have to be willing to look in the mirror and see the reflection instead of the projection. Stop seeking outwardly for just a few minutes. After all, you have all the time in the world! Reverse your attention. Take your plain old attention, what feels like your personal attention, and turn it around. Look back, instead of out. Notice how easy it is to move your attention wherever you want to move it. Notice how whatever attention finds, tends to expand. See how easy it is for you to pull globalized awareness, meaning the background, unfocused awareness that is always running, and reform it into localized awareness. Notice how once you've seen what you wanted to see, the apparent localization drops of its own accord, once again leaving boundless globalized awareness in its stead. It just happens; you don't have to do a thing. All of this is working for you. It's always here, always running, and certainly always awake. You have always been awake, always will be, can't not be awake. Awakeness is not a trait of yours, it's what you actually are. Back to the attention exercise. What do you see when you turn back and look for yourself? What do you find? Can you actually find yourself? Check. Really look. Do you find anything? Anyone? No, you can't find yourself, because there's nothing objective there to see. There's a sense of something being there, but there's nothing locatable, because there's nothing objective. But certainly there is something there, and it's certainly alive. You can feel that, can't you? Isn't there a stirring, perhaps behind your eyes, or in your chest, or both. You can feel it, if you let yourself. Let yourself. The we-who-are-you have a word, a sort of name for that undefinable, living presence you discover, when you look back and try to find yourself and can't. We can't call it something, but neither is it nothing, hence we have arrived at no-thing. This no-thing, this pure subjectivity, this keen awareness that's looking out through the eyes of that human you're wearing, is what you are. You have been on an endless search for something unfindable. It ends when you end it, and not before. In Nonduality they say, "The eye can't see itself." They mean that you are that invisible eye. You can't see yourself, when you look back, because you're the thing doing the looking. Let that hit you. Let that settle in. Feel it. Right there, that bit of a line, is enlightenment in a nutshell. What you've been looking with, is what you've been looking for. You can't see yourself, you can't really find yourself, but you can sense yourself. You can know yourself. Right now! In fact, you can't know anything else! And you'll never know yourself later. There is no later. So notice yourself -- know yourself right now! Pay attention to attention! Notice that I didn't have to say, "Wake yourself up and look for yourself." You are always already awake, and you are always already here. Ever since you started this so-called spiritual journey, you've been looking for "some other level" of awakeness. Listen to me closely. There is no other level of awakeness. This everyday awakeness that you've experienced every day of your life is the very same awareness all the saints and sages have talked about since time immemorial. There is only the single awareness, only Not-two! You are that very awareness. You've been looking for "some other kind" of awareness. Hear me. There is no other kind of awareness. It feels like that human body contains consciousness, that it is the holder of the most precious thing -- your awareness. It doesn't. It can't! A human can't hold you! You permeate all humans, ever single one of them, inside and out. You've hitherto thought that there actually is something called "your consciousness". There isn't. You are "your consciousness," and you are simultaneously everyone's "personal consciousness". I say this lightly, because there is no personal consciousness. Consciousness is not something you have, it's what you are. Nothing can take that from you. When that human body dies, you just change channels. Your focused attention goes elsewhere. You dial up another dream. Let's look at the notion that awareness, or consciousness, is something you have. It's quite a convincing story. Shut your eyes for a minute. If you're interested in having that long-sought-after spiritual awakening that particular humans been going on and on about for damn near forever, then don't just read this, do it. Read this all the way through, then close those eyes, relax that body, and go through the exercise. Notice that without benefit of sight, you can still tell that you're alive. You still know you are, sight or no sight. Imagine you're in utter silence. Wouldn't you still know you were alive in the absence of sound? Wouldn't you still be able to sense the aliveness within the body? Of course. You would know. So, without benefit of either sight or hearing, you can still tell that you're alive. The knowledge that you are, is not dependent on certain conditions or tools. You can't not know that you are. In fact, if I took that unit you're wearing and dropped it into a sensory deprivation chamber, you would still know that you're alive. That knowing is not dependent on sensations, perceptions, thoughts, memories, or any other information. It's not dependent on anything. In fact, everything is dependent on it! That knowing is the only thing for which there is no opposite. That knowing is the One True No-thing. But that knowing is really knowingness, is it not? You are not a static knowing. You are not some kind of grand noun. You are beyond noun-ness. You are beyond verbness too, but verb-ness, in a display that is constantly shifting, morphing, changing from one extreme to the other and back again, evolving and devolving, forward and back, is always arising to you, to that-which-does-not-move-but-is-not-static. You arise to yourself. We-who-are-you vaguely call that verbness "the world," which expands or contracts to suit your purposes. It might be a thought, or a room, or it might be a whole universe. Either way, whatever arises, is not other than you. You are what you know, and what you know, you are. The seeker is the sought. Notice that knowingness. Become conscious of it, hold it within attention -- be the attention -- so that you can come to recognize it clearly. Feel it. In the absence of that knowingness, there is no world. In the presence of that knowingness, the world arises, fully formed. Notice that it doesn't need to wake up, in fact cannot wake up, because it's always already awake. See that it's the knowingness that's come to know itself. We call this knowingness-knowing-itself conscious awareness, versus unconscious awareness, which is still awake and alive and aware, but not consciously. Either way, it's you. One way you're cloudy, one way you're clear, but there's just one thing going on, and that one thing is you. If you are already home, how would you ever find it by looking for it? You'd always be looking away from it. You find home when you notice it's where you already are. We don't find it by going; we find it by stopping. Any directions on how to get home are by definition directions leading away from home. But they are great for tiring you out! And it's all good fun, until it's not. Take a quick inventory. What have you been using all these years in your search for enlightenment? Awareness. What has been reading the books? Awareness. What has been watching the videos, and listening to the teachers? Awareness. If you meditate, what is it that watches your breath, or your thoughts, or counts, or tries to let go of doing all that? Awareness. What is it that prays? Awareness. What is it that asks, "Who am I?" Awareness. Awareness has been in a millennia-long search for awareness. It's been looking for some other awareness. Hear me: there is no other awareness. Oneness cannot find otherness, no matter how long or hard it looks, because there is no otherness for oneness to find. The definition of oneness could be said to be no-other-to-find. If you're searching for some other, and there IS no other, how long can you look? If all is oneness, where do you imagine you're standing, while you're looking for the oneness? In the oneness! Always! Forever! So long as you insist on looking forward, so long as you are seeking something outside yourself, you'll never find yourself, never hook up with yourself, never ever "awaken"! So stop. Why keep looking for the unfindable? You've been hot on the trail of a phantom. STOP! Once you sense what you are, once you take that giant leap to the utterly obvious and recognize what you are -- that which is looking -- there may or may not be a sharp sense of realization. It doesn't matter. What matters is the simple recognition, because either way you display yourself to yourself you're going to need to come back to that sensing over and over again. Any bells and whistles are just bells and whistles. They're just pleasant distractions. If the ramifications are not immediately obvious, they will fill in as your understanding increases. You see what you need to see when you need to see it, not before. Work with what you have, and more will come. That's how it works. You may tell yourself, "It can't be that simple." It is. Your recognition starts with seeing the seer -- or rather, not seeing the seer! No seer, no seen, only seeing. Only an object can see, only an object can be seen, and you, of course, are not an object. All objects appear within you, arise to you. You are what is primary. There may be lots of other real stuff, a whole world full of it, but you are the One True No-thing. This seeing is so amazing, that you may want to claim it. But who will it be, that wants to claim it? That unit cannot hold such seeing in its head, cannot store it up for later recall. Only you can behold you -- and then only right now. Realization is all about right now, this moment. Are you consciously awake to this current arising? Yesterday's seeing is yesterday's dust. Other than being a gnawing reminder, it has no present value whatsoever. Freedom is now or never, here or nowhere. This simple recognition of your true nature is not the end of your apparent journey, but it can be the end of all this compulsive seeking you've been doing -- if you let it. It can be the most important step you never take. Just STOP. Look at what's looking. Pay attention to attention. You can overcome this simple seeing you've, if you want to. This is why everyone wants a big spiritual experience. They think if they have a flashy experience, they will not then overcome it with incessant thinking, but people do it all the time anyway. They think that just because they got a big, lazy peek at things, that they can stay awake and lazy at the same time. They can't. They sit on their haunches, and they get cloudier and cloudier. And that's fine, too. But it certainly can't be labeled skillful. You don't ever go to sleep, but you can most certainly delude yourself, and appear to go to sleep. It's what you do. You are always awake, but you are not always consciously awake. In fact, you are rarely consciously awake. And because you've been unconsciously awake for thousands of years in that package -- meaning the DNA and softer conditioning associated with the body you thought you were when you first started reading this -- you'll fall right back into unconsciousness, if you don't consistently and actively nourish it with conscious light. You have to be willing to shine truth, even when you don't feel like yourself, even when you don't want to, on things, you'd rather leave in the dark. You must hold nothing back. Willingness is your bridge into being the shining on an ongoing basis. You give yourself to the light fully, or you don't give yourself at all. Don't bother trying to figure any of this out, or you'll end up right back on the same hamster wheel from which you just hopped off. You don't have to figure anything out. Let the mind live in uncertainty. Let the body do what it does. You do what you do: just watch, just be alert. You are not the watcher, you are the watching, you are the alertness. But when you're watching as conscious awareness, instead of unconscious awareness, then what you see will change. Look at any human life and you'll see lots and lots of hopeless, blind patterns, compulsive energy patterns that are just running themselves, with no one at the wheel, and no good end in sight. You'll see a long trail of unskillful living, a long trail of suffering. If you're willing to really look at the patterns, they will start to change. These patterns are very specific, so each one has to be shined on by the light of your conscious awareness, in order for it to be remedied; in order for there to be clearing. Awareness colonizes the body one bit, one seeing at a time. Don't try to fix that unit. You can't anyway; that body is operating on its own. You are not its minder. It's doing what it does until it does something else. Let it -- it will do so, regardless. It won't do something else, until it sees that what it's already doing isn't helpful, isn't skillful, isn't beneficial to the well being of the unit and the world. But once it does see that, once it truly and thoroughly sees it, then that penetrated pattern will thin, recede, drop away of its own accord. There will be clearing. It may happen quickly, or it may happen slowly, but once an unskillful pattern has been fully penetrated, it's days are numbered. This process of bringing light to all of your dark corners is what we call embodiment. Slowly, sometimes excruciatingly slowly, you will begin to "live up to your seeing," so to speak. There's no rush. When you're done with that body, you have seven billion more to turn to. Your willingness to be consciously awake to this present arising -- is critical. Will you stand as awareness, and see things as they are, or stand as a hypothetical center of consciousness, and see things as you want them to be? In every moment you ally yourself either with experience, or thinking. You have a history of voting for thinking. It'll take some work to shift that default position. It'll take a lot of willingness. This willingness must extend all the way down. Even when you revert to feeling like you are that human character again, you have to be willing take that character's thinking into inquiry. You have to be willing to remain forever open to doubt, to embrace uncertainty. Sureness will be a thing of the past, but living in the mysterious unfolding of yourself is so much more satisfying. Ask yourself again and again, "Is what I'm thinking really true, or is it a belief, an opinion, a position?" Again and again, as you touch truth through actual experience -- as you find truth through continuous inquiry--that touch will bring a longer, stronger, more profound experience of what you always already are -- that which knows that you are. Eventually the inquiry becomes less formal, and more spontaneous. You won't have to take your thoughts about arisings through formal inquiry. Life becomes constant inquiry. Delusion arises, it's questioned, penetrated, and it drops. Pop, pop, pop. Like everything else, it just happens effortlessly. We-who-are-you call this effortless living abiding. We call it abiding enlightenment, because you are then consciously living in the awakeness that you know yourself to be, and operating within the world as that awakeness. Did this nudge you out of cloudiness, and back toward clarity? If it did, be willing to read it again. If it worked at all for you the first time, it'll permeate deeper as you reread it. Repetition is the mother of clarity. © 2013 Fred Davis All rights reserved. Thank you to Jerry Katz for sending this out in his fine newsletter, Nondual Highlights. See his appearance here as a Guest Teacher. http://awakeningclarity.blogspot.com/2012/04/sparks-before-explosion-special-guest.html Thursday, April 5, 2012 The Sparks Before the Explosion: Special Guest Teaching by Jerry Katz Posted by Fred Davis at 12:06 AM within the fellowship of service, Rich Murray, MA Boston University Graduate School 1967 psychology, BS MIT 1964 history and physics, 254-A Donax Avenue, Imperial Beach, CA 91932-1918 [hidden email] 505-819-7388 cell 619-623-3468 home http://rmforall.blogspot.com ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
Re: Fred Davis, The Looking Glass: Language as Mirror 2013.03.13: Jerry Katz, Nonduality Salon: Rich Murray 2012.03.16
|
|
Rich -
I just read through this post/article (twice as "instructed" by the content) and have to say I mostly feel like I've just been visited by a born again Christian who snuck through my front door trying to jack me up on Jesus, or a Carny-Con trying to get me to play his three-card-monty, or Jim Jones offering me Koolaid! The style of writing is at least mildly disturbing... if it doesn't have exactly the cadence, alliteration and general shape of that of a cult leader or a con man or a Jesus-Junky, I still feel like I'm being Snake-Charmed, Stage-Hypnotized, or NLP'd (whatever that would look like). I'm curious if you recognize this feature in this particular piece of writing and/or some of the other things you send us? Do *you* find it at all disturbing? It doesn't really fit into the "normal" styles of discourse such as Exposition, Argument, Description or even Narration. It is sort of a "come to Jesus" lead-through, or Coleridge-esque poetry? The closest description I can find is "Proselytization" or "Faith Healing"... I'm not strongly compelled either way on your usual topics of Russo Fusion, Younger Dryas Cosmic Events, Methylated Spirits (I mean Asparatame), etc... but this particular article was more boldly and obviously some kind of proselytizing message... not unlike the Jesus Junkies who strongly suggest that as soon as you "accept JaiyZuss into your Harrt!" you will suddenly be happy, free of all worries, in the warm embrace of the creator, the spirit, the saviour, etc. I suspect that Eric (Smith and others) can speak more directly to what I'm interpreting as "phonolinguistic" features. But I'm curious what you feel or think about this issue of "style"? - Steve > Fred Davis, The Looking Glass: Language as Mirror 2013.03.13: Jerry > Katz, Nonduality Salon: Rich Murray 2012.03.16 > http://rmforall.blogspot.com/2013/03/fred-davis-looking-glass-language-as.html > > > Jerry Katz via yahoogroups.com > 8:10 AM PST March 16, 2013 (9 hours ago) > > to AdvaitaToZen, iam, NDS, NDH > > [hidden email], > iam <[hidden email]>, > NDS <[hidden email]>, > NDH <[hidden email]> > The Nonduality Highlights http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NDhighlights/ > > #4867 Friday, March 15, 2013 -- Editor: Jerry Katz <[hidden email]>, > > > http://awakeningclarity.blogspot.ca/2013/03/the-looking-glass-language-as-mirror.html > > > Awakening Clarity > Recognizing and Living as Our True Nature > > Thursday, March 14, 2013 > The Looking Glass: Language as Mirror > Fred Davis > > Notice that you are already awake. > > Right now, this moment, the only reason you can read these words is > that you're awake. You're already awake. You're as awake as it gets. > You're already fully awake. > > Given that you're already fully awake, how then could you wake up > further? Since you're already awake, does that idea even make sense? > You can't wake up more from where you are right now. And you can't > wake up again. > > If you want to read a book through that body, or watch a video, or > send it to a retreat for further clarity or to get some context that > has the potential to open to the door to further clarity, that's > great. But before you do, notice that you don't need to read another > book, watch a video, or go to a retreat in order to wake up, because > you're already awake. > > If you want to do meditation, drum, dance, chant, or what have you, > for the sake of grounding yourself in that present human experience > you're having, or calming that unit's mind, so that you can better > hear yourself talk to yourself, and better watch yourself dance for > yourself, terrific. Have at it. But, be absolutely aware that you > can't practice yourself into awakening. You can't achieve what you > already are. > > You're just not who you think you are; that's the only issue here. > You're undergoing a case of mistaken identity, and all you need today > is a little light reflected from this mirror, this mirror of clear > language that is also you. There is only you, but you tend to get a > bit cloudy sometimes, and forget that. It comes with the territory > when your spaciousness contracts around human beings, and it's no big > deal. It's fine. When you're ready to be clear, you find a bright > mirror, so here you are, back in front of the vanity mirror. > > Vanity, vanity, all is vanity! This is all you, every bit of it -- > you dancing for you, you preening for you, just you showing off for > yourself, to yourself and loving it. > > > You think you're the human being reading these words. > > You're not. Well, you actually are that human also, but you're not > that person exclusively. You're the awareness that's reading these > words through that human being. The human is not reading the words; > you are. The human is a reading tool for you, just as reading glasses > are a tool for the human. Reading glasses never mistake themselves for > being the reader; humans almost always do. > > You think you need to wake up. You don't. All that has to occur is > for you to recognize yourself as what you are. "Awaken" makes it > sound like something really new and different needs to happen. It > doesn't. Recognition, on the other hand, is simply about noticing > what already is. See how much lighter the idea of recognition is, > versus the idea of waking up? Why make it hard on yourself, when > you're clearly longing to see/be your true nature again. > > Be easy on yourself. How much effort does it take for that human to > recognize itself in a mirror? None. The same is true for you. You > just have to be willing to look in the mirror and see the reflection > instead of the projection. > > Stop seeking outwardly for just a few minutes. After all, you have > all the time in the world! Reverse your attention. Take your plain > old attention, what feels like your personal attention, and turn it > around. Look back, instead of out. Notice how easy it is to move your > attention wherever you want to move it. Notice how whatever attention > finds, tends to expand. See how easy it is for you to pull globalized > awareness, meaning the background, unfocused awareness that is always > running, and reform it into localized awareness. Notice how once > you've seen what you wanted to see, the apparent localization drops of > its own accord, once again leaving boundless globalized awareness in > its stead. It just happens; you don't have to do a thing. All of > this is working for you. It's always here, always running, and > certainly always awake. > > You have always been awake, always will be, can't not be awake. > Awakeness is not a trait of yours, it's what you actually are. > > Back to the attention exercise. What do you see when you turn back > and look for yourself? What do you find? Can you actually find > yourself? Check. Really look. > > > Do you find anything? > > Anyone? No, you can't find yourself, because there's nothing > objective there to see. There's a sense of something being there, but > there's nothing locatable, because there's nothing objective. But > certainly there is something there, and it's certainly alive. You can > feel that, can't you? Isn't there a stirring, perhaps behind your > eyes, or in your chest, or both. You can feel it, if you let > yourself. Let yourself. > > The we-who-are-you have a word, a sort of name for that undefinable, > living presence you discover, when you look back and try to find > yourself and can't. We can't call it something, but neither is it > nothing, hence we have arrived at no-thing. > > This no-thing, this pure subjectivity, this keen awareness that's > looking out through the eyes of that human you're wearing, is what you > are. You have been on an endless search for something unfindable. It > ends when you end it, and not before. > > In Nonduality they say, "The eye can't see itself." They mean that > you are that invisible eye. You can't see yourself, when you look > back, because you're the thing doing the looking. Let that hit you. > Let that settle in. Feel it. Right there, that bit of a line, is > enlightenment in a nutshell. What you've been looking with, is what > you've been looking for. > > You can't see yourself, you can't really find yourself, but you can > sense yourself. You can know yourself. Right now! In fact, you > can't know anything else! And you'll never know yourself later. > There is no later. So notice yourself -- know yourself right now! > Pay attention to attention! > > Notice that I didn't have to say, "Wake yourself up and look for > yourself." You are always already awake, and you are always already > here. Ever since you started this so-called spiritual journey, you've > been looking for "some other level" of awakeness. Listen to me > closely. There is no other level of awakeness. This everyday > awakeness that you've experienced every day of your life is the very > same awareness all the saints and sages have talked about since time > immemorial. There is only the single awareness, only Not-two! You > are that very awareness. You've been looking for "some other kind" of > awareness. Hear me. There is no other kind of awareness. > > > > It feels like that human body contains consciousness, that it is the > holder of the most precious thing -- your awareness. > > It doesn't. It can't! A human can't hold you! You permeate all > humans, ever single one of them, inside and out. You've hitherto > thought that there actually is something called "your consciousness". > There isn't. > > You are "your consciousness," and you are simultaneously everyone's > "personal consciousness". I say this lightly, because there is no > personal consciousness. Consciousness is not something you have, it's > what you are. Nothing can take that from you. When that human body > dies, you just change channels. Your focused attention goes > elsewhere. You dial up another dream. > > Let's look at the notion that awareness, or consciousness, is > something you have. It's quite a convincing story. > > Shut your eyes for a minute. If you're interested in having that > long-sought-after spiritual awakening that particular humans been > going on and on about for damn near forever, then don't just read > this, do it. Read this all the way through, then close those eyes, > relax that body, and go through the exercise. > > > > Notice that without benefit of sight, you can still tell that you're alive. > > You still know you are, sight or no sight. Imagine you're in utter > silence. Wouldn't you still know you were alive in the absence of > sound? Wouldn't you still be able to sense the aliveness within the > body? Of course. You would know. So, without benefit of either > sight or hearing, you can still tell that you're alive. The knowledge > that you are, is not dependent on certain conditions or tools. You > can't not know that you are. > > In fact, if I took that unit you're wearing and dropped it into a > sensory deprivation chamber, you would still know that you're alive. > That knowing is not dependent on sensations, perceptions, thoughts, > memories, or any other information. It's not dependent on anything. > In fact, everything is dependent on it! That knowing is the only > thing for which there is no opposite. > > That knowing is the One True No-thing. > > But that knowing is really knowingness, is it not? You are not a > static knowing. You are not some kind of grand noun. You are beyond > noun-ness. You are beyond verbness too, but verb-ness, in a display > that is constantly shifting, morphing, changing from one extreme to > the other and back again, evolving and devolving, forward and back, is > always arising to you, to that-which-does-not-move-but-is-not-static. > You arise to yourself. We-who-are-you vaguely call that verbness "the > world," which expands or contracts to suit your purposes. It might be > a thought, or a room, or it might be a whole universe. Either way, > whatever arises, is not other than you. > > You are what you know, and what you know, you are. > > The seeker is the sought. > > Notice that knowingness. Become conscious of it, hold it within > attention -- be the attention -- so that you can come to recognize it > clearly. Feel it. In the absence of that knowingness, there is no > world. In the presence of that knowingness, the world arises, fully > formed. Notice that it doesn't need to wake up, in fact cannot wake > up, because it's always already awake. See that it's the knowingness > that's come to know itself. We call this knowingness-knowing-itself > conscious awareness, versus unconscious awareness, which is still > awake and alive and aware, but not consciously. Either way, it's you. > One way you're cloudy, one way you're clear, but there's just one > thing going on, and that one thing is you. > > If you are already home, how would you ever find it by looking for it? > You'd always be looking away from it. You find home when you notice > it's where you already are. We don't find it by going; we find it by > stopping. Any directions on how to get home are by definition > directions leading away from home. But they are great for tiring you > out! And it's all good fun, until it's not. > > > > Take a quick inventory. > > What have you been using all these years in your search for > enlightenment? Awareness. What has been reading the books? > Awareness. What has been watching the videos, and listening to the > teachers? Awareness. If you meditate, what is it that watches your > breath, or your thoughts, or counts, or tries to let go of doing all > that? Awareness. What is it that prays? Awareness. What is it that > asks, "Who am I?" Awareness. > > Awareness has been in a millennia-long search for awareness. It's > been looking for some other awareness. Hear me: there is no other > awareness. > > Oneness cannot find otherness, no matter how long or hard it looks, > because there is no otherness for oneness to find. The definition of > oneness could be said to be no-other-to-find. If you're searching for > some other, and there IS no other, how long can you look? If all is > oneness, where do you imagine you're standing, while you're looking > for the oneness? In the oneness! > > Always! Forever! > > So long as you insist on looking forward, so long as you are seeking > something outside yourself, you'll never find yourself, never hook up > with yourself, never ever "awaken"! So stop. > > Why keep looking for the unfindable? You've been hot on the trail of > a phantom. STOP! > > > > Once you sense what you are, once you take that giant leap to the > utterly obvious and recognize what you are -- that which is looking -- > there may or may not be a sharp sense of realization. > > It doesn't matter. What matters is the simple recognition, because > either way you display yourself to yourself you're going to need to > come back to that sensing over and over again. Any bells and whistles > are just bells and whistles. They're just pleasant distractions. > > If the ramifications are not immediately obvious, they will fill in as > your understanding increases. You see what you need to see when you > need to see it, not before. Work with what you have, and more will > come. That's how it works. > > You may tell yourself, "It can't be that simple." It is. Your > recognition starts with seeing the seer -- or rather, not seeing the > seer! No seer, no seen, only seeing. Only an object can see, only an > object can be seen, and you, of course, are not an object. All > objects appear within you, arise to you. You are what is primary. > There may be lots of other real stuff, a whole world full of it, but > you are the One True No-thing. > > This seeing is so amazing, that you may want to claim it. But who > will it be, that wants to claim it? That unit cannot hold such seeing > in its head, cannot store it up for later recall. Only you can behold > you -- and then only right now. > > Realization is all about right now, this moment. Are you consciously > awake to this current arising? Yesterday's seeing is yesterday's > dust. Other than being a gnawing reminder, it has no present value > whatsoever. Freedom is now or never, here or nowhere. > > > > This simple recognition of your true nature is not the end of your > apparent journey, but it can be the end of all this compulsive seeking > you've been doing -- if you let it. > > It can be the most important step you never take. Just STOP. > > Look at what's looking. > > Pay attention to attention. > > You can overcome this simple seeing you've, if you want to. This is > why everyone wants a big spiritual experience. They think if they > have a flashy experience, they will not then overcome it with > incessant thinking, but people do it all the time anyway. They think > that just because they got a big, lazy peek at things, that they can > stay awake and lazy at the same time. They can't. They sit on their > haunches, and they get cloudier and cloudier. And that's fine, too. > But it certainly can't be labeled skillful. > > You don't ever go to sleep, but you can most certainly delude > yourself, and appear to go to sleep. It's what you do. > > You are always awake, but you are not always consciously awake. In > fact, you are rarely consciously awake. And because you've been > unconsciously awake for thousands of years in that package -- meaning > the DNA and softer conditioning associated with the body you thought > you were when you first started reading this -- you'll fall right back > into unconsciousness, if you don't consistently and actively nourish > it with conscious light. > > You have to be willing to shine truth, even when you don't feel like > yourself, even when you don't want to, on things, you'd rather leave > in the dark. You must hold nothing back. Willingness is your bridge > into being the shining on an ongoing basis. You give yourself to the > light fully, or you don't give yourself at all. > > Don't bother trying to figure any of this out, or you'll end up right > back on the same hamster wheel from which you just hopped off. You > don't have to figure anything out. Let the mind live in uncertainty. > Let the body do what it does. You do what you do: just watch, just be > alert. You are not the watcher, you are the watching, you are the > alertness. > > But when you're watching as conscious awareness, instead of > unconscious awareness, then what you see will change. Look at any > human life and you'll see lots and lots of hopeless, blind patterns, > compulsive energy patterns that are just running themselves, with no > one at the wheel, and no good end in sight. You'll see a long trail > of unskillful living, a long trail of suffering. If you're willing to > really look at the patterns, they will start to change. > > These patterns are very specific, so each one has to be shined on by > the light of your conscious awareness, in order for it to be remedied; > in order for there to be clearing. Awareness colonizes the body one > bit, one seeing at a time. > > > > Don't try to fix that unit. > > You can't anyway; that body is operating on its own. You are not its > minder. It's doing what it does until it does something else. Let it > -- it will do so, regardless. It won't do something else, until it > sees that what it's already doing isn't helpful, isn't skillful, isn't > beneficial to the well being of the unit and the world. But once it > does see that, once it truly and thoroughly sees it, then that > penetrated pattern will thin, recede, drop away of its own accord. > There will be clearing. It may happen quickly, or it may happen > slowly, but once an unskillful pattern has been fully penetrated, it's > days are numbered. > > This process of bringing light to all of your dark corners is what we > call embodiment. Slowly, sometimes excruciatingly slowly, you will > begin to "live up to your seeing," so to speak. There's no rush. > When you're done with that body, you have seven billion more to turn > to. > > Your willingness to be consciously awake to this present arising -- is > critical. Will you stand as awareness, and see things as they are, or > stand as a hypothetical center of consciousness, and see things as you > want them to be? In every moment you ally yourself either with > experience, or thinking. You have a history of voting for thinking. > It'll take some work to shift that default position. It'll take a lot > of willingness. > > This willingness must extend all the way down. Even when you revert > to feeling like you are that human character again, you have to be > willing take that character's thinking into inquiry. You have to be > willing to remain forever open to doubt, to embrace uncertainty. > Sureness will be a thing of the past, but living in the mysterious > unfolding of yourself is so much more satisfying. > > Ask yourself again and again, "Is what I'm thinking really true, or is > it a belief, an opinion, a position?" > > Again and again, as you touch truth through actual experience -- as > you find truth through continuous inquiry--that touch will bring a > longer, stronger, more profound experience of what you always already > are -- that which knows that you are. > > Eventually the inquiry becomes less formal, and more spontaneous. You > won't have to take your thoughts about arisings through formal > inquiry. Life becomes constant inquiry. Delusion arises, it's > questioned, penetrated, and it drops. Pop, pop, pop. Like everything > else, it just happens effortlessly. > > We-who-are-you call this effortless living abiding. We call it > abiding enlightenment, because you are then consciously living in the > awakeness that you know yourself to be, and operating within the world > as that awakeness. > > Did this nudge you out of cloudiness, and back toward clarity? If it > did, be willing to read it again. If it worked at all for you the > first time, it'll permeate deeper as you reread it. Repetition is the > mother of clarity. > > © 2013 Fred Davis > All rights reserved. > > Thank you to Jerry Katz for sending this out in his fine newsletter, > Nondual Highlights. > See his appearance here as a Guest Teacher. > http://awakeningclarity.blogspot.com/2012/04/sparks-before-explosion-special-guest.html > Thursday, April 5, 2012 > The Sparks Before the Explosion: > Special Guest Teaching by Jerry Katz > > Posted by Fred Davis at 12:06 AM > > within the fellowship of service, > > Rich Murray, > MA Boston University Graduate School 1967 psychology, > BS MIT 1964 history and physics, > 254-A Donax Avenue, Imperial Beach, CA 91932-1918 > [hidden email] > 505-819-7388 cell > 619-623-3468 home > http://rmforall.blogspot.com > > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
Re: Fred Davis, The Looking Glass: Language as Mirror 2013.03.13: Jerry Katz, Nonduality Salon: Rich Murray 2012.03.16
|
|
Well, I can guarantee that I did not read the article twice. I quickly discovered that reading just the first semi-hysterical sentence of each semi-hysterical paragraph was quite enough to convey the quality of the content to me. From which I am tempted to conclude that mystics see content where many of the rest of is do not. -Doug On Mar 16, 2013 11:22 PM, "Steve Smith" <[hidden email]> wrote:
Rich - ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
Re: Fred Davis, The Looking Glass: Language as Mirror 2013.03.13: Jerry Katz, Nonduality Salon: Rich Murray 2012.03.16
|
|
Doug -
I am glad you said "Mystic", because that is the way I have generally taken Rich's more extreme postings. I have a soft spot for mysticism. Among the many sects of the Ibrahamic religions, I have to say I love the Sufi's most of all, bless their little whirling-till-they-fall-down dirvish hearts, though not so much the Jewish Kabbalists or Hasadics or even the Christian Gnostics. All the Eastern religions seem fundamentally mystical... but maybe that is just the East/West translation. I'll take the I Ching over Astrology any day! After all it is binary encoded and only restricts you to imagining that there are only 64 "situations" in the world as opposed to only 13 "kinds of people". But then I'm an Aquarian on the Cusp of Pisces (right in the middle of my second Saturn Return) and we *all* know what *that* means! As for "Mystics seeing content where the rest of us do not", I agree and that is precisely what draws me to it (up to a point). I'm a big proponent of "negative space" in visual art and I love poetry for what can be written "between the lines". What I'm feeling here is something else though, not hidden/encoded content but rather an odd sense of persuasiveness at a subliminal level. Is NLP steganographic? I also wouldn't have used the term "hysterical" so easily, but I guess I have to agree now that you have... I usually reserve the term "hysterical" for a more re-active and less pro-active narrative. I never imagined you reading it twice. I'm not sure why I did, I guess because I wanted to flirt with the trance-like state the prose was *trying* to tease me into? Maybe if phone-scammers used this type of hypnotic language, they would get somewhere with the various people who seem to *like* that kind of experience? Or maybe they do, I no longer answer and even when I did, it didn't take much to allow me to hang up guilt free. I'm starting to feel shades of Snow Crash here. Maybe this is why our resident fASCIIsts stay plain-text, they want to avoid having their neocortex (ok SnowCrash was about crashing the Brainstem, but I'm taking license here) crashed by a nasty semantic virus encoded into HTML or something. Maybe I'll start working on an ASCII-ART version to not make them feel left out! - Steve PS. Go to bed, you have a big date tomorrow!
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
Re: Fred Davis, The Looking Glass: Language as Mirror 2013.03.13: Jerry Katz, Nonduality Salon: Rich Murray 2012.03.16
|
|
In reply to this post by Douglas Roberts-2
And all my whining about the "style" of Rich's message aside, I have to
say the content reminds me a great deal of the truism (as I've heard it) from Buddhism of: "The only thing different between after enlightenment and before enlightenment is that after enlightenmen you realize you have always been enlightened". I find this quite compelling, even more so than: "When you meet the Buddha on the Path, kill him!" Doug can decide if I'm in need of an "intervention"... maybe I *shouldn't* have read it twice! ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
Re: Fred Davis, The Looking Glass: Language as Mirror 2013.03.13: Jerry Katz, Nonduality Salon: Rich Murray 2012.03.16
|
|
In reply to this post by Steve Smith
Hi Steve Smith,
I enjoyed your spirited, unspiritual missive of misgivings -- Fred Davis is talking to an ingroup culture called "nonduality" -- there's a saying in Zen: two thieves who meet each other at night in a rich neighborhood recognize each other instantly... this "thiefistic" recognition is not necessarily theistic... It refers to what Dr. John C. Lilly, or maybe it was Dr. Russel Targ, calls, "state specific communication", which refers to the sharings between people who are, often deliberately, in a somewhat similar altered, hopefully "expanded" states of awareness, comparable to the way jazz musicians often get stoned and improvise music together for hours at high speed in jam sessions -- these sharings may not be at all understandable by observers or participants who are not in similar states at that time -- the writings are designed artfully to guide more innocent minds down the primrose path beyond the unrecognized, limited horizons of their experience to date -- now, this particular piece is superb, which is why I sent it on to Friam, and so is the piece by Jerry Katz, the link at the end -- well, I've been in the priceless jewel donation charity since age 23 in 1965, when I read Aldous Huxley's last novel "Island" -- he died of throat cancer the day John Kennedy died -- so that work has plenty of same kind of crafty suggestions, enthusiastic exhortations, and plain good advice to wrap your mind around. Call me up some evening in Imperial Beach, CA, 10 miles south of San Diego, as I can show you quickly how easy it is to find new levels of awareness in your own mind with gentle playful conversation 619-623-3468 or ask me anything via email ... puzzled, intrigued, curious? within the fellowship of service, Rich On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 10:21 PM, Steve Smith <[hidden email]> wrote: > Rich - > > I just read through this post/article (twice as "instructed" by the content) > and have to say I mostly feel like I've just been visited by a born again > Christian who snuck through my front door trying to jack me up on Jesus, or > a Carny-Con trying to get me to play his three-card-monty, or Jim Jones > offering me Koolaid! > > The style of writing is at least mildly disturbing... if it doesn't have > exactly the cadence, alliteration and general shape of that of a cult leader > or a con man or a Jesus-Junky, I still feel like I'm being Snake-Charmed, > Stage-Hypnotized, or NLP'd (whatever that would look like). > > I'm curious if you recognize this feature in this particular piece of > writing and/or some of the other things you send us? Do *you* find it at > all disturbing? > > It doesn't really fit into the "normal" styles of discourse such as > Exposition, Argument, Description or even Narration. It is sort of a "come > to Jesus" lead-through, or Coleridge-esque poetry? The closest description > I can find is "Proselytization" or "Faith Healing"... > > I'm not strongly compelled either way on your usual topics of Russo Fusion, > Younger Dryas Cosmic Events, Methylated Spirits (I mean Asparatame), etc... > but this particular article was more boldly and obviously some kind of > proselytizing message... not unlike the Jesus Junkies who strongly suggest > that as soon as you "accept JaiyZuss into your Harrt!" you will suddenly be > happy, free of all worries, in the warm embrace of the creator, the spirit, > the saviour, etc. > > I suspect that Eric (Smith and others) can speak more directly to what I'm > interpreting as "phonolinguistic" features. But I'm curious what you feel > or think about this issue of "style"? > > - Steve > > >> Fred Davis, The Looking Glass: Language as Mirror 2013.03.13: Jerry >> Katz, Nonduality Salon: Rich Murray 2012.03.16 >> >> http://rmforall.blogspot.com/2013/03/fred-davis-looking-glass-language-as.html >> >> >> Jerry Katz via yahoogroups.com >> 8:10 AM PST March 16, 2013 (9 hours ago) >> >> to AdvaitaToZen, iam, NDS, NDH >> >> [hidden email], >> iam <[hidden email]>, >> NDS <[hidden email]>, >> NDH <[hidden email]> >> The Nonduality Highlights http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NDhighlights/ >> >> #4867 Friday, March 15, 2013 -- Editor: Jerry Katz >> <[hidden email]>, >> >> >> >> http://awakeningclarity.blogspot.ca/2013/03/the-looking-glass-language-as-mirror.html >> >> >> Awakening Clarity >> Recognizing and Living as Our True Nature >> >> Thursday, March 14, 2013 >> The Looking Glass: Language as Mirror >> Fred Davis >> >> Notice that you are already awake. >> >> Right now, this moment, the only reason you can read these words is >> that you're awake. You're already awake. You're as awake as it gets. >> You're already fully awake. >> >> Given that you're already fully awake, how then could you wake up >> further? Since you're already awake, does that idea even make sense? >> You can't wake up more from where you are right now. And you can't >> wake up again. >> >> If you want to read a book through that body, or watch a video, or >> send it to a retreat for further clarity or to get some context that >> has the potential to open to the door to further clarity, that's >> great. But before you do, notice that you don't need to read another >> book, watch a video, or go to a retreat in order to wake up, because >> you're already awake. >> >> If you want to do meditation, drum, dance, chant, or what have you, >> for the sake of grounding yourself in that present human experience >> you're having, or calming that unit's mind, so that you can better >> hear yourself talk to yourself, and better watch yourself dance for >> yourself, terrific. Have at it. But, be absolutely aware that you >> can't practice yourself into awakening. You can't achieve what you >> already are. >> >> You're just not who you think you are; that's the only issue here. >> You're undergoing a case of mistaken identity, and all you need today >> is a little light reflected from this mirror, this mirror of clear >> language that is also you. There is only you, but you tend to get a >> bit cloudy sometimes, and forget that. It comes with the territory >> when your spaciousness contracts around human beings, and it's no big >> deal. It's fine. When you're ready to be clear, you find a bright >> mirror, so here you are, back in front of the vanity mirror. >> >> Vanity, vanity, all is vanity! This is all you, every bit of it -- >> you dancing for you, you preening for you, just you showing off for >> yourself, to yourself and loving it. >> >> >> You think you're the human being reading these words. >> >> You're not. Well, you actually are that human also, but you're not >> that person exclusively. You're the awareness that's reading these >> words through that human being. The human is not reading the words; >> you are. The human is a reading tool for you, just as reading glasses >> are a tool for the human. Reading glasses never mistake themselves for >> being the reader; humans almost always do. >> >> You think you need to wake up. You don't. All that has to occur is >> for you to recognize yourself as what you are. "Awaken" makes it >> sound like something really new and different needs to happen. It >> doesn't. Recognition, on the other hand, is simply about noticing >> what already is. See how much lighter the idea of recognition is, >> versus the idea of waking up? Why make it hard on yourself, when >> you're clearly longing to see/be your true nature again. >> >> Be easy on yourself. How much effort does it take for that human to >> recognize itself in a mirror? None. The same is true for you. You >> just have to be willing to look in the mirror and see the reflection >> instead of the projection. >> >> Stop seeking outwardly for just a few minutes. After all, you have >> all the time in the world! Reverse your attention. Take your plain >> old attention, what feels like your personal attention, and turn it >> around. Look back, instead of out. Notice how easy it is to move your >> attention wherever you want to move it. Notice how whatever attention >> finds, tends to expand. See how easy it is for you to pull globalized >> awareness, meaning the background, unfocused awareness that is always >> running, and reform it into localized awareness. Notice how once >> you've seen what you wanted to see, the apparent localization drops of >> its own accord, once again leaving boundless globalized awareness in >> its stead. It just happens; you don't have to do a thing. All of >> this is working for you. It's always here, always running, and >> certainly always awake. >> >> You have always been awake, always will be, can't not be awake. >> Awakeness is not a trait of yours, it's what you actually are. >> >> Back to the attention exercise. What do you see when you turn back >> and look for yourself? What do you find? Can you actually find >> yourself? Check. Really look. >> >> >> Do you find anything? >> >> Anyone? No, you can't find yourself, because there's nothing >> objective there to see. There's a sense of something being there, but >> there's nothing locatable, because there's nothing objective. But >> certainly there is something there, and it's certainly alive. You can >> feel that, can't you? Isn't there a stirring, perhaps behind your >> eyes, or in your chest, or both. You can feel it, if you let >> yourself. Let yourself. >> >> The we-who-are-you have a word, a sort of name for that undefinable, >> living presence you discover, when you look back and try to find >> yourself and can't. We can't call it something, but neither is it >> nothing, hence we have arrived at no-thing. >> >> This no-thing, this pure subjectivity, this keen awareness that's >> looking out through the eyes of that human you're wearing, is what you >> are. You have been on an endless search for something unfindable. It >> ends when you end it, and not before. >> >> In Nonduality they say, "The eye can't see itself." They mean that >> you are that invisible eye. You can't see yourself, when you look >> back, because you're the thing doing the looking. Let that hit you. >> Let that settle in. Feel it. Right there, that bit of a line, is >> enlightenment in a nutshell. What you've been looking with, is what >> you've been looking for. >> >> You can't see yourself, you can't really find yourself, but you can >> sense yourself. You can know yourself. Right now! In fact, you >> can't know anything else! And you'll never know yourself later. >> There is no later. So notice yourself -- know yourself right now! >> Pay attention to attention! >> >> Notice that I didn't have to say, "Wake yourself up and look for >> yourself." You are always already awake, and you are always already >> here. Ever since you started this so-called spiritual journey, you've >> been looking for "some other level" of awakeness. Listen to me >> closely. There is no other level of awakeness. This everyday >> awakeness that you've experienced every day of your life is the very >> same awareness all the saints and sages have talked about since time >> immemorial. There is only the single awareness, only Not-two! You >> are that very awareness. You've been looking for "some other kind" of >> awareness. Hear me. There is no other kind of awareness. >> >> >> >> It feels like that human body contains consciousness, that it is the >> holder of the most precious thing -- your awareness. >> >> It doesn't. It can't! A human can't hold you! You permeate all >> humans, ever single one of them, inside and out. You've hitherto >> thought that there actually is something called "your consciousness". >> There isn't. >> >> You are "your consciousness," and you are simultaneously everyone's >> "personal consciousness". I say this lightly, because there is no >> personal consciousness. Consciousness is not something you have, it's >> what you are. Nothing can take that from you. When that human body >> dies, you just change channels. Your focused attention goes >> elsewhere. You dial up another dream. >> >> Let's look at the notion that awareness, or consciousness, is >> something you have. It's quite a convincing story. >> >> Shut your eyes for a minute. If you're interested in having that >> long-sought-after spiritual awakening that particular humans been >> going on and on about for damn near forever, then don't just read >> this, do it. Read this all the way through, then close those eyes, >> relax that body, and go through the exercise. >> >> >> >> Notice that without benefit of sight, you can still tell that you're >> alive. >> >> You still know you are, sight or no sight. Imagine you're in utter >> silence. Wouldn't you still know you were alive in the absence of >> sound? Wouldn't you still be able to sense the aliveness within the >> body? Of course. You would know. So, without benefit of either >> sight or hearing, you can still tell that you're alive. The knowledge >> that you are, is not dependent on certain conditions or tools. You >> can't not know that you are. >> >> In fact, if I took that unit you're wearing and dropped it into a >> sensory deprivation chamber, you would still know that you're alive. >> That knowing is not dependent on sensations, perceptions, thoughts, >> memories, or any other information. It's not dependent on anything. >> In fact, everything is dependent on it! That knowing is the only >> thing for which there is no opposite. >> >> That knowing is the One True No-thing. >> >> But that knowing is really knowingness, is it not? You are not a >> static knowing. You are not some kind of grand noun. You are beyond >> noun-ness. You are beyond verbness too, but verb-ness, in a display >> that is constantly shifting, morphing, changing from one extreme to >> the other and back again, evolving and devolving, forward and back, is >> always arising to you, to that-which-does-not-move-but-is-not-static. >> You arise to yourself. We-who-are-you vaguely call that verbness "the >> world," which expands or contracts to suit your purposes. It might be >> a thought, or a room, or it might be a whole universe. Either way, >> whatever arises, is not other than you. >> >> You are what you know, and what you know, you are. >> >> The seeker is the sought. >> >> Notice that knowingness. Become conscious of it, hold it within >> attention -- be the attention -- so that you can come to recognize it >> clearly. Feel it. In the absence of that knowingness, there is no >> world. In the presence of that knowingness, the world arises, fully >> formed. Notice that it doesn't need to wake up, in fact cannot wake >> up, because it's always already awake. See that it's the knowingness >> that's come to know itself. We call this knowingness-knowing-itself >> conscious awareness, versus unconscious awareness, which is still >> awake and alive and aware, but not consciously. Either way, it's you. >> One way you're cloudy, one way you're clear, but there's just one >> thing going on, and that one thing is you. >> >> If you are already home, how would you ever find it by looking for it? >> You'd always be looking away from it. You find home when you notice >> it's where you already are. We don't find it by going; we find it by >> stopping. Any directions on how to get home are by definition >> directions leading away from home. But they are great for tiring you >> out! And it's all good fun, until it's not. >> >> >> >> Take a quick inventory. >> >> What have you been using all these years in your search for >> enlightenment? Awareness. What has been reading the books? >> Awareness. What has been watching the videos, and listening to the >> teachers? Awareness. If you meditate, what is it that watches your >> breath, or your thoughts, or counts, or tries to let go of doing all >> that? Awareness. What is it that prays? Awareness. What is it that >> asks, "Who am I?" Awareness. >> >> Awareness has been in a millennia-long search for awareness. It's >> been looking for some other awareness. Hear me: there is no other >> awareness. >> >> Oneness cannot find otherness, no matter how long or hard it looks, >> because there is no otherness for oneness to find. The definition of >> oneness could be said to be no-other-to-find. If you're searching for >> some other, and there IS no other, how long can you look? If all is >> oneness, where do you imagine you're standing, while you're looking >> for the oneness? In the oneness! >> >> Always! Forever! >> >> So long as you insist on looking forward, so long as you are seeking >> something outside yourself, you'll never find yourself, never hook up >> with yourself, never ever "awaken"! So stop. >> >> Why keep looking for the unfindable? You've been hot on the trail of >> a phantom. STOP! >> >> >> >> Once you sense what you are, once you take that giant leap to the >> utterly obvious and recognize what you are -- that which is looking -- >> there may or may not be a sharp sense of realization. >> >> It doesn't matter. What matters is the simple recognition, because >> either way you display yourself to yourself you're going to need to >> come back to that sensing over and over again. Any bells and whistles >> are just bells and whistles. They're just pleasant distractions. >> >> If the ramifications are not immediately obvious, they will fill in as >> your understanding increases. You see what you need to see when you >> need to see it, not before. Work with what you have, and more will >> come. That's how it works. >> >> You may tell yourself, "It can't be that simple." It is. Your >> recognition starts with seeing the seer -- or rather, not seeing the >> seer! No seer, no seen, only seeing. Only an object can see, only an >> object can be seen, and you, of course, are not an object. All >> objects appear within you, arise to you. You are what is primary. >> There may be lots of other real stuff, a whole world full of it, but >> you are the One True No-thing. >> >> This seeing is so amazing, that you may want to claim it. But who >> will it be, that wants to claim it? That unit cannot hold such seeing >> in its head, cannot store it up for later recall. Only you can behold >> you -- and then only right now. >> >> Realization is all about right now, this moment. Are you consciously >> awake to this current arising? Yesterday's seeing is yesterday's >> dust. Other than being a gnawing reminder, it has no present value >> whatsoever. Freedom is now or never, here or nowhere. >> >> >> >> This simple recognition of your true nature is not the end of your >> apparent journey, but it can be the end of all this compulsive seeking >> you've been doing -- if you let it. >> >> It can be the most important step you never take. Just STOP. >> >> Look at what's looking. >> >> Pay attention to attention. >> >> You can overcome this simple seeing you've, if you want to. This is >> why everyone wants a big spiritual experience. They think if they >> have a flashy experience, they will not then overcome it with >> incessant thinking, but people do it all the time anyway. They think >> that just because they got a big, lazy peek at things, that they can >> stay awake and lazy at the same time. They can't. They sit on their >> haunches, and they get cloudier and cloudier. And that's fine, too. >> But it certainly can't be labeled skillful. >> >> You don't ever go to sleep, but you can most certainly delude >> yourself, and appear to go to sleep. It's what you do. >> >> You are always awake, but you are not always consciously awake. In >> fact, you are rarely consciously awake. And because you've been >> unconsciously awake for thousands of years in that package -- meaning >> the DNA and softer conditioning associated with the body you thought >> you were when you first started reading this -- you'll fall right back >> into unconsciousness, if you don't consistently and actively nourish >> it with conscious light. >> >> You have to be willing to shine truth, even when you don't feel like >> yourself, even when you don't want to, on things, you'd rather leave >> in the dark. You must hold nothing back. Willingness is your bridge >> into being the shining on an ongoing basis. You give yourself to the >> light fully, or you don't give yourself at all. >> >> Don't bother trying to figure any of this out, or you'll end up right >> back on the same hamster wheel from which you just hopped off. You >> don't have to figure anything out. Let the mind live in uncertainty. >> Let the body do what it does. You do what you do: just watch, just be >> alert. You are not the watcher, you are the watching, you are the >> alertness. >> >> But when you're watching as conscious awareness, instead of >> unconscious awareness, then what you see will change. Look at any >> human life and you'll see lots and lots of hopeless, blind patterns, >> compulsive energy patterns that are just running themselves, with no >> one at the wheel, and no good end in sight. You'll see a long trail >> of unskillful living, a long trail of suffering. If you're willing to >> really look at the patterns, they will start to change. >> >> These patterns are very specific, so each one has to be shined on by >> the light of your conscious awareness, in order for it to be remedied; >> in order for there to be clearing. Awareness colonizes the body one >> bit, one seeing at a time. >> >> >> >> Don't try to fix that unit. >> >> You can't anyway; that body is operating on its own. You are not its >> minder. It's doing what it does until it does something else. Let it >> -- it will do so, regardless. It won't do something else, until it >> sees that what it's already doing isn't helpful, isn't skillful, isn't >> beneficial to the well being of the unit and the world. But once it >> does see that, once it truly and thoroughly sees it, then that >> penetrated pattern will thin, recede, drop away of its own accord. >> There will be clearing. It may happen quickly, or it may happen >> slowly, but once an unskillful pattern has been fully penetrated, it's >> days are numbered. >> >> This process of bringing light to all of your dark corners is what we >> call embodiment. Slowly, sometimes excruciatingly slowly, you will >> begin to "live up to your seeing," so to speak. There's no rush. >> When you're done with that body, you have seven billion more to turn >> to. >> >> Your willingness to be consciously awake to this present arising -- is >> critical. Will you stand as awareness, and see things as they are, or >> stand as a hypothetical center of consciousness, and see things as you >> want them to be? In every moment you ally yourself either with >> experience, or thinking. You have a history of voting for thinking. >> It'll take some work to shift that default position. It'll take a lot >> of willingness. >> >> This willingness must extend all the way down. Even when you revert >> to feeling like you are that human character again, you have to be >> willing take that character's thinking into inquiry. You have to be >> willing to remain forever open to doubt, to embrace uncertainty. >> Sureness will be a thing of the past, but living in the mysterious >> unfolding of yourself is so much more satisfying. >> >> Ask yourself again and again, "Is what I'm thinking really true, or is >> it a belief, an opinion, a position?" >> >> Again and again, as you touch truth through actual experience -- as >> you find truth through continuous inquiry--that touch will bring a >> longer, stronger, more profound experience of what you always already >> are -- that which knows that you are. >> >> Eventually the inquiry becomes less formal, and more spontaneous. You >> won't have to take your thoughts about arisings through formal >> inquiry. Life becomes constant inquiry. Delusion arises, it's >> questioned, penetrated, and it drops. Pop, pop, pop. Like everything >> else, it just happens effortlessly. >> >> We-who-are-you call this effortless living abiding. We call it >> abiding enlightenment, because you are then consciously living in the >> awakeness that you know yourself to be, and operating within the world >> as that awakeness. >> >> Did this nudge you out of cloudiness, and back toward clarity? If it >> did, be willing to read it again. If it worked at all for you the >> first time, it'll permeate deeper as you reread it. Repetition is the >> mother of clarity. >> >> © 2013 Fred Davis >> All rights reserved. >> >> Thank you to Jerry Katz for sending this out in his fine newsletter, >> Nondual Highlights. >> See his appearance here as a Guest Teacher. >> >> http://awakeningclarity.blogspot.com/2012/04/sparks-before-explosion-special-guest.html >> Thursday, April 5, 2012 >> The Sparks Before the Explosion: >> Special Guest Teaching by Jerry Katz >> >> Posted by Fred Davis at 12:06 AM >> >> within the fellowship of service, >> >> Rich Murray, >> MA Boston University Graduate School 1967 psychology, >> BS MIT 1964 history and physics, >> 254-A Donax Avenue, Imperial Beach, CA 91932-1918 >> [hidden email] >> 505-819-7388 cell >> 619-623-3468 home >> http://rmforall.blogspot.com >> >> ============================================================ >> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College >> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >> > > > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
Re: Fred Davis, The Looking Glass: Language as Mirror 2013.03.13: Jerry Katz, Nonduality Salon: Rich Murray 2012.03.16
|
|
In reply to this post by Steve Smith
Hi Steve,
You're already thoroughly innoculated with the meme of nonduality -- if you call me, we'll leave Kansas within 30 minutes -- try this: Thank you to Jerry Katz for sending this out in his fine newsletter, Nondual Highlights. See his appearance here as a Guest Teacher. http://awakeningclarity.blogspot.com/2012/04/sparks-before-explosion-special-guest.html Thursday, April 5, 2012 The Sparks Before the Explosion: Special Guest Teaching by Jerry Katz There's no evidence except direct subjective experience of fleeting perceptions and remembered perceptions within the present moment of your own awareness -- so the son of man has no place to lay his head... -- turns out that awareness has no limits -- no boundaries... Rich On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 11:30 PM, Steve Smith <[hidden email]> wrote: > And all my whining about the "style" of Rich's message aside, I have to say > the content reminds me a great deal of the truism (as I've heard it) from > Buddhism of: > > "The only thing different between after enlightenment and before > enlightenment is that after enlightenmen you realize you have always been > enlightened". > > I find this quite compelling, even more so than: > "When you meet the Buddha on the Path, kill him!" > > Doug can decide if I'm in need of an "intervention"... maybe I *shouldn't* > have read it twice! > > > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
Re: Fred Davis, The Looking Glass: Language as Mirror 2013.03.13: Jerry Katz, Nonduality Salon: Rich Murray 2012.03.16
|
|
On 3/17/13 12:49 AM, Rich Murray wrote:
> There's no evidence except direct subjective experience of fleeting > perceptions and remembered perceptions within the present moment of > your own awareness -- so the son of man has no place to lay his > head... -- turns out that awareness has no limits -- no boundaries... > > Rich Maybe that explains why I keep getting fleeting images of Nick fighting his Caps-Lock key, Stephen Guerin Breaking Symmetry (kinda like breaking wind only more Complex) and Doug winding up to do some Cat Bowling? And I thought it was just a hyperactive imagination or some bad mold on that Poppyseed-Hemp Rye Bread! Carry On! - Steve ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
Re: Fred Davis, The Looking Glass: Language as Mirror 2013.03.13: Jerry Katz, Nonduality Salon: Rich Murray 2012.03.16
|
|
In reply to this post by Rich Murray-2
I think you have all gone crazy. I would sooner be hugged with arms and
reasoned to with words, than the other way around. N -----Original Message----- From: Friam [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Rich Murray Sent: Sunday, March 17, 2013 12:50 AM To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Fred Davis, The Looking Glass: Language as Mirror 2013.03.13: Jerry Katz, Nonduality Salon: Rich Murray 2012.03.16 Hi Steve, You're already thoroughly innoculated with the meme of nonduality -- if you call me, we'll leave Kansas within 30 minutes -- try this: Thank you to Jerry Katz for sending this out in his fine newsletter, Nondual Highlights. See his appearance here as a Guest Teacher. http://awakeningclarity.blogspot.com/2012/04/sparks-before-explosion-special -guest.html Thursday, April 5, 2012 The Sparks Before the Explosion: Special Guest Teaching by Jerry Katz There's no evidence except direct subjective experience of fleeting perceptions and remembered perceptions within the present moment of your own awareness -- so the son of man has no place to lay his head... -- turns out that awareness has no limits -- no boundaries... Rich On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 11:30 PM, Steve Smith <[hidden email]> wrote: > And all my whining about the "style" of Rich's message aside, I have > to say the content reminds me a great deal of the truism (as I've > heard it) from Buddhism of: > > "The only thing different between after enlightenment and before > enlightenment is that after enlightenmen you realize you have always > been enlightened". > > I find this quite compelling, even more so than: > "When you meet the Buddha on the Path, kill him!" > > Doug can decide if I'm in need of an "intervention"... maybe I > *shouldn't* have read it twice! > > > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe > at St. John's College to unsubscribe > http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
Re: Fred Davis, The Looking Glass: Language as Mirror 2013.03.13: Jerry Katz, Nonduality Salon: Rich Murray 2012.03.16
|
|
In reply to this post by Rich Murray-2
Hi Steve Smith and fellow friams,
Is the Mandelbrot Set linear? I like it as a simple mathematical system, just a simple iteration on the real line continuum, similar to the infinite iterations for e or pi -- as you may have heard that it is an infinitely long and crooked single "line", without any "enclosed areas" -- moreover, it contains infinitely many complete replicas of itself, smaller and smaller forever, with exactly the same "amount of infinity" each, just as does any size segment of the ordinary simple real line continuum... these mathematical models offer helpful metaphors for the status of our universe bubble, a quantum vacuum fluctuation 13,700 million years ago in a source thing with 10 dimensions of space and one of time, that adds up to total zero at every moment, all potential and kinetic energy, momentum, angular momentum, positive and negative charge, and so on for many such items in abstract geometries -- just as the waves on a vast flat pond also all add up to zero no matter how long and complex the forever evolving geometric patterns with a frictionless fluid -- so, I offer this as a modern metaphor: each of us is uniquely all of single entire unified creative open fractal hyperinfinity... I need also an adjective for: "every "point" and "instant" are in completely intimate contact with every other, without any "travel" delays" -- as an analogy, pink and heavy and happy and vanilla and five and loud coexist and cocreate in "awareness" without any actual separation -- no possibility of defining a metric in awareness for awareness that would define a measurable space or time location label -- so, as a corrolary, no size or location can be ascribed to awareness, "this very instant of experience" -- it's definitely your mind I'm deconstructing this moment... so, awareness, the home of all speculation, is itself immune to speculation -- it's definitely your mind that I'm exalting this moment... if you feel strange, focus awareness on the actual varying sensations that comprise "feeling strange" -- they too are transient flickerings within awareness... good strategy to choose evolving without limit into new territories, while simply asking for help... !!! within the fellowship of service, Rich On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 11:51 PM, Steve Smith <[hidden email]> wrote: > Rich - > > Thanks for the well-articulated response which was (mostly) responsive to my > observations. At the very least, your much more linear/lucid narrative here > gives me hope that I've not stumbled into a new branch of the Moonies or > Scientologists. > > I've had in-person conversations with you in the past (at the Agua Fria > Campus of SFX) and know that you do not always sound like Coleridge on > 'shrooms. It is nice to get a hit of that (non-Coleridge) again online. > > However, the following is *most* responsive to what I was asking: > > > -- the writings are designed artfully to guide > more innocent minds down the primrose path beyond the unrecognized, > limited horizons of their experience to date -- > > this really does remind me of the rhetoric used by my druggie acquaintances > in middle school when trying to talk others into dropping acid. If they > had been less creepy kids (with creepier pushers in their shadows) I might > have taken them up on it, but there was nothing about their affect that made > me feel like I was going to have a "nice trip" in their hands. > > I'm sure there are some (many?) here who dipped their sticks into the > psychadelic drug culture and maybe even have some strong > opinions/experiences from that (probably most are not willing to share those > in an open forum), but despite my interest in altered states, there is > something about this that seems inherently untrustworthy... kinda like Doug > (and others) singing the siren song of LINUX <grin>, promising infinite > enlightenment just by making the "right" choice at bootloader time! > > Thanks for the (linear) engagement here. I was hoping you would offer the > whole group a little more linearity to leaven the more common non-linearity > we see of you. But I'll leave that to you... I don't think I'm the only > one who gets a little weirded by this stuff. > > - Steve > > > Hi Steve Smith, > > I enjoyed your spirited, unspiritual missive of misgivings -- Fred > Davis is talking to an ingroup culture called "nonduality" -- there's > a saying in Zen: > > two thieves who meet each other at night in a rich neighborhood > recognize each other instantly... > > this "thiefistic" recognition is not necessarily theistic... > > It refers to what Dr. John C. Lilly, or maybe it was Dr. Russel Targ, > calls, "state specific communication", which refers to the sharings > between people who are, often deliberately, in a somewhat similar > altered, hopefully "expanded" states of awareness, comparable to the > way jazz musicians often get stoned and improvise music together for > hours at high speed in jam sessions -- these sharings may not be at > all understandable by observers or participants who are not in similar > states at that time -- the writings are designed artfully to guide > more innocent minds down the primrose path beyond the unrecognized, > limited horizons of their experience to date -- now, this particular > piece is superb, which is why I sent it on to Friam, and so is the > piece by Jerry Katz, the link at the end -- well, I've been in the > priceless jewel donation charity since age 23 in 1965, when I read > Aldous Huxley's last novel "Island" -- he died of throat cancer the > day John Kennedy died -- so that work has plenty of same kind of > crafty suggestions, enthusiastic exhortations, and plain good advice > to wrap your mind around. Call me up some evening in Imperial Beach, > CA, 10 miles south of San Diego, as I can show you quickly how easy it > is to find new levels of awareness in your own mind with gentle > playful conversation 619-623-3468 > or ask me anything via email ... puzzled, intrigued, curious? > > within the fellowship of service, Rich > > On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 10:21 PM, Steve Smith <[hidden email]> wrote: > > Rich - > > I just read through this post/article (twice as "instructed" by the content) > and have to say I mostly feel like I've just been visited by a born again > Christian who snuck through my front door trying to jack me up on Jesus, or > a Carny-Con trying to get me to play his three-card-monty, or Jim Jones > offering me Koolaid! > > The style of writing is at least mildly disturbing... if it doesn't have > exactly the cadence, alliteration and general shape of that of a cult leader > or a con man or a Jesus-Junky, I still feel like I'm being Snake-Charmed, > Stage-Hypnotized, or NLP'd (whatever that would look like). > > I'm curious if you recognize this feature in this particular piece of > writing and/or some of the other things you send us? Do *you* find it at > all disturbing? > > It doesn't really fit into the "normal" styles of discourse such as > Exposition, Argument, Description or even Narration. It is sort of a "come > to Jesus" lead-through, or Coleridge-esque poetry? The closest description > I can find is "Proselytization" or "Faith Healing"... > > I'm not strongly compelled either way on your usual topics of Russo Fusion, > Younger Dryas Cosmic Events, Methylated Spirits (I mean Asparatame), etc... > but this particular article was more boldly and obviously some kind of > proselytizing message... not unlike the Jesus Junkies who strongly suggest > that as soon as you "accept JaiyZuss into your Harrt!" you will suddenly be > happy, free of all worries, in the warm embrace of the creator, the spirit, > the saviour, etc. > > I suspect that Eric (Smith and others) can speak more directly to what I'm > interpreting as "phonolinguistic" features. But I'm curious what you feel > or think about this issue of "style"? > > - Steve > > ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
Re: Fred Davis, The Looking Glass: Language as Mirror 2013.03.13: Jerry Katz, Nonduality Salon: Rich Murray 2012.03.16
|
|
Again Steve Smith and fellow friams,
continuing, I used the adjective "open" to counter the tendency to count and thus en-counter putative boundaries and limits -- but every boundary is a horizon of expanding innovation, as in the exponential evolution of math or science and everything else -- in the Mandelbrot Set, each level of magnification reveals a huge increase in the amount of detail in the crooked line, in which each point, magnified, reveals unique huger increases in detail -- imagine such a fractal system that reenters itself, as the infinitely small in 2D curves back through 3D to become the original outer boundary of itself, so that an explorer within it may be unable to escaped increasing infinity of unique details whether moving "in" or "out" -- 3D Mandelbrot Sets have been tentatively explored, so they might be able to "curve back to their own outer boundary through a wider 4D space, creating a fractal 3D toy universe, allowing infinite magnification or shinkage without limit to encounter unique details forever -- that's a hint about the true status of our universe bubble... the true status of "awareness"... Here, I'm functioning as a mythic cognitive bard poet prophet, spreading helpful, highly contagious memes... within the fellowship of service, Rich On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 11:51 AM, Rich Murray <[hidden email]> wrote: > Hi Steve Smith and fellow friams, > > Is the Mandelbrot Set linear? > > I like it as a simple mathematical system, just a simple iteration on > the real line continuum, similar to the infinite iterations for e or > pi -- as you may have heard that it is an infinitely long and crooked > single "line", without any "enclosed areas" -- > > moreover, it contains infinitely many complete replicas of itself, > smaller and smaller forever, with exactly the same "amount of > infinity" each, just as does any size segment of the ordinary simple > real line continuum... > > these mathematical models offer helpful metaphors for the status of > our universe bubble, a quantum vacuum fluctuation 13,700 million years > ago in a source thing with 10 dimensions of space and one of time, > that adds up to total zero at every moment, all potential and kinetic > energy, momentum, angular momentum, positive and negative charge, and > so on for many such items in abstract geometries -- just as the waves > on a vast flat pond also all add up to zero no matter how long and > complex the forever evolving geometric patterns with a frictionless > fluid -- > > so, I offer this as a modern metaphor: > > each of us is uniquely all of single entire unified creative open > fractal hyperinfinity... > > I need also an adjective for: "every "point" and "instant" are in > completely intimate contact with every other, without any "travel" > delays" -- as an analogy, pink and heavy and happy and vanilla and > five and loud coexist and cocreate in "awareness" without any actual > separation -- > > no possibility of defining a metric in awareness for awareness that > would define a measurable space or time location label -- > > so, as a corrolary, no size or location can be ascribed to awareness, > "this very instant of experience" -- > > it's definitely your mind I'm deconstructing this moment... > > so, awareness, the home of all speculation, is itself immune to speculation -- > > it's definitely your mind that I'm exalting this moment... > > if you feel strange, focus awareness on the actual varying sensations > that comprise "feeling strange" -- they too are transient flickerings > within awareness... > > good strategy to choose evolving without limit into new territories, > while simply asking for help... > > !!! within the fellowship of service, Rich > > > > On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 11:51 PM, Steve Smith <[hidden email]> wrote: > >> Rich - >> >> Thanks for the well-articulated response which was (mostly) responsive to my >> observations. At the very least, your much more linear/lucid narrative here >> gives me hope that I've not stumbled into a new branch of the Moonies or >> Scientologists. >> >> I've had in-person conversations with you in the past (at the Agua Fria >> Campus of SFX) and know that you do not always sound like Coleridge on >> 'shrooms. It is nice to get a hit of that (non-Coleridge) again online. >> >> However, the following is *most* responsive to what I was asking: >> >> >> -- the writings are designed artfully to guide >> more innocent minds down the primrose path beyond the unrecognized, >> limited horizons of their experience to date -- >> >> this really does remind me of the rhetoric used by my druggie acquaintances >> in middle school when trying to talk others into dropping acid. If they >> had been less creepy kids (with creepier pushers in their shadows) I might >> have taken them up on it, but there was nothing about their affect that made >> me feel like I was going to have a "nice trip" in their hands. >> >> I'm sure there are some (many?) here who dipped their sticks into the >> psychadelic drug culture and maybe even have some strong >> opinions/experiences from that (probably most are not willing to share those >> in an open forum), but despite my interest in altered states, there is >> something about this that seems inherently untrustworthy... kinda like Doug >> (and others) singing the siren song of LINUX <grin>, promising infinite >> enlightenment just by making the "right" choice at bootloader time! >> >> Thanks for the (linear) engagement here. I was hoping you would offer the >> whole group a little more linearity to leaven the more common non-linearity >> we see of you. But I'll leave that to you... I don't think I'm the only >> one who gets a little weirded by this stuff. >> >> - Steve >> >> >> Hi Steve Smith, >> >> I enjoyed your spirited, unspiritual missive of misgivings -- Fred >> Davis is talking to an ingroup culture called "nonduality" -- there's >> a saying in Zen: >> >> two thieves who meet each other at night in a rich neighborhood >> recognize each other instantly... >> >> this "thiefistic" recognition is not necessarily theistic... >> >> It refers to what Dr. John C. Lilly, or maybe it was Dr. Russel Targ, >> calls, "state specific communication", which refers to the sharings >> between people who are, often deliberately, in a somewhat similar >> altered, hopefully "expanded" states of awareness, comparable to the >> way jazz musicians often get stoned and improvise music together for >> hours at high speed in jam sessions -- these sharings may not be at >> all understandable by observers or participants who are not in similar >> states at that time -- the writings are designed artfully to guide >> more innocent minds down the primrose path beyond the unrecognized, >> limited horizons of their experience to date -- now, this particular >> piece is superb, which is why I sent it on to Friam, and so is the >> piece by Jerry Katz, the link at the end -- well, I've been in the >> priceless jewel donation charity since age 23 in 1965, when I read >> Aldous Huxley's last novel "Island" -- he died of throat cancer the >> day John Kennedy died -- so that work has plenty of same kind of >> crafty suggestions, enthusiastic exhortations, and plain good advice >> to wrap your mind around. Call me up some evening in Imperial Beach, >> CA, 10 miles south of San Diego, as I can show you quickly how easy it >> is to find new levels of awareness in your own mind with gentle >> playful conversation 619-623-3468 >> or ask me anything via email ... puzzled, intrigued, curious? >> >> within the fellowship of service, Rich >> >> On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 10:21 PM, Steve Smith <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >> Rich - >> >> I just read through this post/article (twice as "instructed" by the content) >> and have to say I mostly feel like I've just been visited by a born again >> Christian who snuck through my front door trying to jack me up on Jesus, or >> a Carny-Con trying to get me to play his three-card-monty, or Jim Jones >> offering me Koolaid! >> >> The style of writing is at least mildly disturbing... if it doesn't have >> exactly the cadence, alliteration and general shape of that of a cult leader >> or a con man or a Jesus-Junky, I still feel like I'm being Snake-Charmed, >> Stage-Hypnotized, or NLP'd (whatever that would look like). >> >> I'm curious if you recognize this feature in this particular piece of >> writing and/or some of the other things you send us? Do *you* find it at >> all disturbing? >> >> It doesn't really fit into the "normal" styles of discourse such as >> Exposition, Argument, Description or even Narration. It is sort of a "come >> to Jesus" lead-through, or Coleridge-esque poetry? The closest description >> I can find is "Proselytization" or "Faith Healing"... >> >> I'm not strongly compelled either way on your usual topics of Russo Fusion, >> Younger Dryas Cosmic Events, Methylated Spirits (I mean Asparatame), etc... >> but this particular article was more boldly and obviously some kind of >> proselytizing message... not unlike the Jesus Junkies who strongly suggest >> that as soon as you "accept JaiyZuss into your Harrt!" you will suddenly be >> happy, free of all worries, in the warm embrace of the creator, the spirit, >> the saviour, etc. >> >> I suspect that Eric (Smith and others) can speak more directly to what I'm >> interpreting as "phonolinguistic" features. But I'm curious what you feel >> or think about this issue of "style"? >> >> - Steve >> >> ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
Re: Fred Davis, The Looking Glass: Language as Mirror 2013.03.13: Jerry Katz, Nonduality Salon: Rich Murray 2012.03.16
|
|
In reply to this post by Rich Murray-2
Steve,
I really enjoy and on a deep level trust your sharings with me -- you are a kindred pioneer, which is a rare treat in my life to find. I've noticed I'm unable to tell if someone is "far ahead of me", so I aim at "accepting the fullness of the other's power" and "letting them all the way in" as my default mode -- my life at 70 is a daily meandering, rather unfettered by scheduled duties, allowing many daily episodes of deeper experience -- my local space becomes more open pretty and pleasant -- watching a man practicing letting the beach wind raise his parawing on my left, and on my right a lady competently flying a 4 foot hawk shaped kite from 10 to 60 feet up, repeatedly -- on the Net, starting to deepen my collaboration with an age 25 MD multiple sclerosis researcher in Isfahan, Iran since Christmas, editing his team's papers in English, and suggesting ways in which they could rapidly check out the WC Monte methanol formaldehyde toxicity paradigm, my personal heroic crusade now for 14 years -- never having studied biochemistry or medicine -- yet able to support intrepid scientists -- you might be interested in glancing at some of my recent posts, not the notably Woo Woo ones, on rmforall.blogspot.com , to see me at my linear best... within the fellowship of service, Rich On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 3:13 PM, Steve Smith <[hidden email]> wrote: > Rich - > > Thank you for "yet another" attempt to bridge the more familiar, linear (in > several senses of the term) style of our discourse here with your own > usually somewhat non-linear (in several senses of the term) mode of speech. > This group was formed roughly along the ideals of informally discussing > Complexity theory which is a close Correlate of Nonlinear Dynamical Systems. > > Notable scientists have indulged (embraced, depended on) near-mystical > language and metaphors to try to grasp and to explain the universe as they > apprehended it. My most notable example (in my mind) is Physicist David > Bohm's work in QM and explanations of the EPR Paradox. His _Wholeness and > the Implicate Order. His own Rheomode, while not as mystical sounding as > what Doug referred to as semi-hysterical sentences leading semi-hysterical > paragraphs (referring to Fred Davis' work you presented us with), does > attempt to establish a language based in familiar natural English but > without some of the assumptions specifically about causality implied in > Subject-Verb-Object distinctions. I'm very compelled by this work. By > all of his work. > > I accept what you are referring to as "state-specific communication" and in > fact believe that except for languages as deliberately formalized to > *remove* implicit state (e.g. computer languages eliminating "side > effects"), *ALL* communication is state-specific. I do (almost) resonate > with some of the language of your posts but am put on caution by a couple of > things: The most notable is the regular use of *absolutes* (my emphasis > below): > > *all* potential and kinetic > energy, momentum, angular momentum, positive and negative charge, and > so on for many such items in abstract geometries -- just as the waves > on a vast flat pond also *all* add up to zero no matter how long and > complex the *forever* evolving geometric patterns with a *frictionless* > fluid -- > > Accepting the literary license of hyperbole, I can read past it and take in > something of what (I think) is intended. Among the high tech crowd (present > company specifically included), the tendency toward "mega-giga-hyper" is > annoying sometimes, but in the "new age" spirituality crowd, there is a > similar "adjective inflation" that tends to be off-putting. > > I hope this is not landing on you as criticism in the negative sense, as I > myself "have a style" that sure grates (or confounds) many here. Pots and > Kettles as it were. Instead I'm seeking a little more context so that these > things might not be so "jangly" to my neurochemistry. It seems that we have > others here who might be inclined to weigh in on the topic, whether it be > about language and neuroscience or about nonlinear vs linear or > self-similarity about many worlds interpretations of QM. These *are* the > topics that seem to inhabit the boundary between the spiritual mystics and > the most modern of physics concepts. This *is* what we need a Pidgen > language to talk about... > > - Steve > > > Hi Steve Smith and fellow friams, > > Is the Mandelbrot Set linear? > > I like it as a simple mathematical system, just a simple iteration on > the real line continuum, similar to the infinite iterations for e or > pi -- as you may have heard that it is an infinitely long and crooked > single "line", without any "enclosed areas" -- > > moreover, it contains infinitely many complete replicas of itself, > smaller and smaller forever, with exactly the same "amount of > infinity" each, just as does any size segment of the ordinary simple > real line continuum... > > these mathematical models offer helpful metaphors for the status of > our universe bubble, a quantum vacuum fluctuation 13,700 million years > ago in a source thing with 10 dimensions of space and one of time, > that adds up to total zero at every moment, all potential and kinetic > energy, momentum, angular momentum, positive and negative charge, and > so on for many such items in abstract geometries -- just as the waves > on a vast flat pond also all add up to zero no matter how long and > complex the forever evolving geometric patterns with a frictionless > fluid -- > > so, I offer this as a modern metaphor: > > each of us is uniquely all of single entire unified creative open > fractal hyperinfinity... > > I need also an adjective for: "every "point" and "instant" are in > completely intimate contact with every other, without any "travel" > delays" -- as an analogy, pink and heavy and happy and vanilla and > five and loud coexist and cocreate in "awareness" without any actual > separation -- > > no possibility of defining a metric in awareness for awareness that > would define a measurable space or time location label -- > > so, as a corrolary, no size or location can be ascribed to awareness, > "this very instant of experience" -- > > it's definitely your mind I'm deconstructing this moment... > > so, awareness, the home of all speculation, is itself immune to speculation > -- > > it's definitely your mind that I'm exalting this moment... > > if you feel strange, focus awareness on the actual varying sensations > that comprise "feeling strange" -- they too are transient flickerings > within awareness... > > good strategy to choose evolving without limit into new territories, > while simply asking for help... > > !!! within the fellowship of service, Rich > > > > On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 11:51 PM, Steve Smith <[hidden email]> wrote: > > Rich - > > Thanks for the well-articulated response which was (mostly) responsive to my > observations. At the very least, your much more linear/lucid narrative here > gives me hope that I've not stumbled into a new branch of the Moonies or > Scientologists. > > I've had in-person conversations with you in the past (at the Agua Fria > Campus of SFX) and know that you do not always sound like Coleridge on > 'shrooms. It is nice to get a hit of that (non-Coleridge) again online. > > However, the following is *most* responsive to what I was asking: > > > -- the writings are designed artfully to guide > more innocent minds down the primrose path beyond the unrecognized, > limited horizons of their experience to date -- > > this really does remind me of the rhetoric used by my druggie acquaintances > in middle school when trying to talk others into dropping acid. If they > had been less creepy kids (with creepier pushers in their shadows) I might > have taken them up on it, but there was nothing about their affect that made > me feel like I was going to have a "nice trip" in their hands. > > I'm sure there are some (many?) here who dipped their sticks into the > psychadelic drug culture and maybe even have some strong > opinions/experiences from that (probably most are not willing to share those > in an open forum), but despite my interest in altered states, there is > something about this that seems inherently untrustworthy... kinda like Doug > (and others) singing the siren song of LINUX <grin>, promising infinite > enlightenment just by making the "right" choice at bootloader time! > > Thanks for the (linear) engagement here. I was hoping you would offer the > whole group a little more linearity to leaven the more common non-linearity > we see of you. But I'll leave that to you... I don't think I'm the only > one who gets a little weirded by this stuff. > > - Steve > > > Hi Steve Smith, > > I enjoyed your spirited, unspiritual missive of misgivings -- Fred > Davis is talking to an ingroup culture called "nonduality" -- there's > a saying in Zen: > > two thieves who meet each other at night in a rich neighborhood > recognize each other instantly... > > this "thiefistic" recognition is not necessarily theistic... > > It refers to what Dr. John C. Lilly, or maybe it was Dr. Russel Targ, > calls, "state specific communication", which refers to the sharings > between people who are, often deliberately, in a somewhat similar > altered, hopefully "expanded" states of awareness, comparable to the > way jazz musicians often get stoned and improvise music together for > hours at high speed in jam sessions -- these sharings may not be at > all understandable by observers or participants who are not in similar > states at that time -- the writings are designed artfully to guide > more innocent minds down the primrose path beyond the unrecognized, > limited horizons of their experience to date -- now, this particular > piece is superb, which is why I sent it on to Friam, and so is the > piece by Jerry Katz, the link at the end -- well, I've been in the > priceless jewel donation charity since age 23 in 1965, when I read > Aldous Huxley's last novel "Island" -- he died of throat cancer the > day John Kennedy died -- so that work has plenty of same kind of > crafty suggestions, enthusiastic exhortations, and plain good advice > to wrap your mind around. Call me up some evening in Imperial Beach, > CA, 10 miles south of San Diego, as I can show you quickly how easy it > is to find new levels of awareness in your own mind with gentle > playful conversation 619-623-3468 > or ask me anything via email ... puzzled, intrigued, curious? > > within the fellowship of service, Rich > > On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 10:21 PM, Steve Smith <[hidden email]> wrote: > > Rich - > > I just read through this post/article (twice as "instructed" by the content) > and have to say I mostly feel like I've just been visited by a born again > Christian who snuck through my front door trying to jack me up on Jesus, or > a Carny-Con trying to get me to play his three-card-monty, or Jim Jones > offering me Koolaid! > > The style of writing is at least mildly disturbing... if it doesn't have > exactly the cadence, alliteration and general shape of that of a cult leader > or a con man or a Jesus-Junky, I still feel like I'm being Snake-Charmed, > Stage-Hypnotized, or NLP'd (whatever that would look like). > > I'm curious if you recognize this feature in this particular piece of > writing and/or some of the other things you send us? Do *you* find it at > all disturbing? > > It doesn't really fit into the "normal" styles of discourse such as > Exposition, Argument, Description or even Narration. It is sort of a "come > to Jesus" lead-through, or Coleridge-esque poetry? The closest description > I can find is "Proselytization" or "Faith Healing"... > > I'm not strongly compelled either way on your usual topics of Russo Fusion, > Younger Dryas Cosmic Events, Methylated Spirits (I mean Asparatame), etc... > but this particular article was more boldly and obviously some kind of > proselytizing message... not unlike the Jesus Junkies who strongly suggest > that as soon as you "accept JaiyZuss into your Harrt!" you will suddenly be > happy, free of all worries, in the warm embrace of the creator, the spirit, > the saviour, etc. > > I suspect that Eric (Smith and others) can speak more directly to what I'm > interpreting as "phonolinguistic" features. But I'm curious what you feel > or think about this issue of "style"? > > - Steve > > > ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
Re: Fred Davis, The Looking Glass: Language as Mirror 2013.03.13: Jerry Katz, Nonduality Salon: Rich Murray 2012.03.16
|
Administrator
|
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 9:22 PM, Rich Murray <[hidden email]> wrote:
Steve, Lovely insight. Although for me, at 70, I find myself way too busy for deeper experiences (well lent/taize), unless you include the love towards my friends etc. Do you follow Taize?
I have grand children, children and parents .. all of whom are joys and stimulating. I've also got a fun hack I'm doing with Redfish/SimTable .. people who constantly put me in awe of their insights.
I'd really love your posts a bit more if you could precede them with a pair of paragraphs about their significance. Early earth small-body encounters are fascinating. BTW: do you follow brother Consolmagno? Head of the Vatican observatory an a small body specialist. He's really a fascinating dude. http://goo.gl/gAw4E
Mail is nice, but Twitter delivers far more info per sq in. Why? 140, a magic number. -- Owen ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com |
«
Return to Friam
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |