-- excerpt of dialogue from Vasistha to Rama in "The Story of Gadhi" from Vasistha's Yoga
Showing posts with label ideas. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ideas. Show all posts
Friday, January 8, 2010
perfection..
"Live in the present, with your consciousness externalised momentarily but without any effort: when the mind stops linking itself to the past and to the future, it becomes no-mind. If from moment to moment your mind dwells on what is and drops it effortlessly a once, the mind becomes no-mind, full of purity. It is only as long as the mind continues to be agigated that it experiences the diversity of its own projection or expansion, even as rain falls only as long as there are clouds. And, it is only as long as the infinite consciousness limits itself into the finite mind, that such agitation and expansion take place. If consciousness ceases to be the finite mind, then know that the very roots of cyclic world-illusion (of birth and death) are burnt and there is perfection."
Monday, August 10, 2009
pearls
i wake up each day with a profound emptiness. it is as if i haven't even the energy to write this. empty words that fill an empty page. wanting nothing and possessing nothing i wander aimlessly. devoid of love or hate with only an occasional disruption of desire or outrage.. and.. a dull feeling that perhaps there should be something more.. not even filled with depression.. perfectly content in one moment, even joyful, then sad or hopeless in the next.. no preferences nor distinguishing features between them.. only endless moments strung together like an ancient, fragile string of pearls.. and even now the string breaks, and the beads fall one by one into the silt below.. and are swallowed into the earth, melted into molten lava, and spat out again thru an oyster-like womb only to be found, and admired, and bored, and strung, and broken, and swallowed, and spat out again.. and again..
Thursday, July 23, 2009
Monday, March 30, 2009
in pursuit?
the softest thing in the universe overcomes the hardest thing in the universe.
that without substance can enter where there is no room, hence i know the value of non-action.
teaching without words & work without doing are understood by very few..
- tao te ching (no. 43)
In the pursuit of learning, everyday something acquired.
In the pursuit of the tao, everyday something is dropped.
less & less is done until non-action is achieved.
when nothing is done, nothing is left undone..
- tao te ching (no. 48)
- tao te ching (no. 43)
In the pursuit of learning, everyday something acquired.
In the pursuit of the tao, everyday something is dropped.
less & less is done until non-action is achieved.
when nothing is done, nothing is left undone..
- tao te ching (no. 48)
Monday, January 19, 2009
insidious violence
violence: the exertion of force with the intent to injure (physically or psychologically) or destroy. -- paraphrased from wikipedia
this morning I awoke thinking of violence & how to address it in a meaningful way.. violence needn't be the extreme exertion of physical force that first comes to mind when when approaching the idea. violence is more simply the use of power to overcome some "other."
it may not draw physical blood from it's victims. it may only metaphorically drain the life's blood from them. it can be as subtle as the need to be "right" because in doing so, one must make the other "wrong." thereby diminishing the ego (material existence) of the "other."
violence is a device of the ego to exert itself & to make itself real by drawing a forceful distinction from some other. by destroying the other or overcoming it, I have now proven my superiority & indeed my existence!
contrary to the tone of this post, I am not necessarily opposed to violence when the situation deems it appropriate. instead I am proposing only that one be aware of the impact of violence in his or her life.
I am not faint to argue a point, or to throw a punch when called for.. & I relish the ability to do it the light of day more than under the cover of darkness & ignorance.
to exert one's ego in awareness is to be alive & extends the boundaries of consciousness from a distinct perspective. to unconsciously throw punches at some imagined other is akin to being undead, a lumbering, clumsy, sleep-walking oaf.
often times I catch myself attempting to be right & it brings a smile to my heart that my ego is still plugging away in the battle with it's own existence.. with as much energy as a two-year-old's tantrums.. pushing itself out and taking no prisoners as it goes! punching holes in the fabric of time & throwing weary carcasses thru them.. lol but now I am only waxing dramatic. :P
Tuesday, January 6, 2009
a haunting
I can't help but notice that someone I love is being haunted by death.
and it's not someone u might expect. it is someone very young and thoughtful and funny and bright and talented and beautiful. but death seems to follow him like a shadow.
I don't know if he has noticed it, or what he makes of it in his impressionable young mind. I won't use his name or make any direct reference. it is someone I see only infrequently, maybe a few times a year & even during those times i've noticed on each occasion, if the attention is too focused between us, odd things start to happen. he rides in my car and suddenly the automatic windows stop working and the door jams shut. on a second occasion the driver's side front tire blew and flew off completely! these things happen separated in time & only when he visits.. I don't believe in coincidences so the occurrences struck me as odd, but then I realized how frequently people around him & especially close to him have dropped dead from sudden heart-attacks or brain hemorrhages, or other peculiar sudden natural circumstances.
I do not feel he is in any way to blame, don't get me wrong.. quite the contrary. he often suffers most directly from the losses. it is as if death uses his bright shining hopefulness as bait for life's weary travelers whose time has come. it is tragic & extreme almost to the point of comedy.. I don't know if anyone else has noticed this except me. no one who knows me that well reads this blog, and I dare not share this little insight.
I am sometimes given to.. I don't know what to call it.. I will use the word premonition for lack of a better word.. but I think in this case the better word is insight, and I know what I see goes beyond what people call coincidence without giving away too much detail..
*sigh* what does one do when someone you love dearly is being haunted by death? ha! the answer is nothing.. but continue to love him. it is not as if the boy's dark spectre of a friend can be shaken off by any of us.. but I am not too keen on riding him around in my car any more than necessary. :)
Thursday, December 11, 2008
beyond boundaries..
so today arising after very little sleep, I began contemplating anahata nada & sanatana dharma, my favorite subjects. :)
interesting how in my life I happened upon, and was drawn to these principles.. I don't even know when it began. seems they have always been there, but the blessing of sanskrit has given them a name.. giving form to the formless..
anahata nada is soundless (or unstruck) sound.. the sound of the silence from which all sounds (forms) arise..
sanatana dharma is the eternal supporting principle of existence, or literally, eternal supporting mother (natural law).. it is often used in reference to hinduism and indeed hinduism falls into that definition, but sanatana dharma is even more inclusive than what is generally thought of as hinduism..
it is this very inclusiveness that make these principles so beautiful. to me they represent that from which everything emerges, that in which everything exists, and that to which all things return..
when, for brief moments, one allows one'e ego (attachment to form) to dissolve, these principles represent what remains..
it is blissful to return & return again to this boundless state before reincarnating into this thought-form, or that one. that is the dance of life from formlessness into form, and the music that plays is anahata nada..
so many people seem to think that one state is preferable over another. constantly chasing eternal bliss, one never catches it. we believe that formlessness is better than form, or vice-versa.. and it is the impossible moment between the two, the dance itself where joy abounds.
interesting how in my life I happened upon, and was drawn to these principles.. I don't even know when it began. seems they have always been there, but the blessing of sanskrit has given them a name.. giving form to the formless..
anahata nada is soundless (or unstruck) sound.. the sound of the silence from which all sounds (forms) arise..
sanatana dharma is the eternal supporting principle of existence, or literally, eternal supporting mother (natural law).. it is often used in reference to hinduism and indeed hinduism falls into that definition, but sanatana dharma is even more inclusive than what is generally thought of as hinduism..
it is this very inclusiveness that make these principles so beautiful. to me they represent that from which everything emerges, that in which everything exists, and that to which all things return..
when, for brief moments, one allows one'e ego (attachment to form) to dissolve, these principles represent what remains..
it is blissful to return & return again to this boundless state before reincarnating into this thought-form, or that one. that is the dance of life from formlessness into form, and the music that plays is anahata nada..
so many people seem to think that one state is preferable over another. constantly chasing eternal bliss, one never catches it. we believe that formlessness is better than form, or vice-versa.. and it is the impossible moment between the two, the dance itself where joy abounds.
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
on relating
so on this idea of relationships.. now I am focusing not on relationships as static concepts, but on relating as a dynamic.
I think this has been in the works for some time now, perhaps starting with ambc. I feel I learn a lot in relating to her. I think this approach could serve me well in relating to others too.. especially where there are challenges.
it's difficult not to conceptualize a relationship. just as it is to not conceptualize a human being, & instead to relate to what is presented in the moment without being mired in past formulations. this applies too in relating to self.
not a lot to think about. I suppose it is just a a matter of remembering to practice as the opportunites are presented.
how does one strike balance between remembering, and relating not based on the past, nor on hopes for the future (desire) for that matter?
I am not trying to abolish desire. desire is the thing that moves us forward, pushes the limits of existence. to reject desire is no more relevant than to become lost in it. it is the space between the two that is elusive.
I find that I am filled with desire even when in the moment, I want for nothing. it is like being balanced on an invisible thread, without fear of falling.. only feeling yourself there, suspended, timeless.
sometimes I don't know why I bother to write about these things. I guess there is an impetus for self-expression. that is enough of a reason. maybe no different from the reason we are here. :)
I think this has been in the works for some time now, perhaps starting with ambc. I feel I learn a lot in relating to her. I think this approach could serve me well in relating to others too.. especially where there are challenges.
it's difficult not to conceptualize a relationship. just as it is to not conceptualize a human being, & instead to relate to what is presented in the moment without being mired in past formulations. this applies too in relating to self.
not a lot to think about. I suppose it is just a a matter of remembering to practice as the opportunites are presented.
how does one strike balance between remembering, and relating not based on the past, nor on hopes for the future (desire) for that matter?
I am not trying to abolish desire. desire is the thing that moves us forward, pushes the limits of existence. to reject desire is no more relevant than to become lost in it. it is the space between the two that is elusive.
I find that I am filled with desire even when in the moment, I want for nothing. it is like being balanced on an invisible thread, without fear of falling.. only feeling yourself there, suspended, timeless.
sometimes I don't know why I bother to write about these things. I guess there is an impetus for self-expression. that is enough of a reason. maybe no different from the reason we are here. :)
Saturday, November 17, 2007
The War on Terror
-FDR Inaugural Address, March 1933
And the question becomes, if or when something terrible happens are we propelled by fear to participate in a tug-of-war with terror, or are we the visionaries who are inspired to move toward a new thought that creates something great?
"I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past, I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain."
-Bene Gesserit Rite from Frank Herbert's Dune
Friday, November 16, 2007
Gayatri Maha Mantra
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
Wage Slavery & The Cost of Ethics
Ok, so I suppose I could make some sort of very subjective ethical statement about why I am opposed to wage slavery (only in regard to myself, of course, as I think everyone has the right to make her/his own choices.)
As I understand it, chattel slavery is a condition where human beings are bought and sold as property for use at the discretion of the owner. Chattel slaves, as property have little or no say in the management of their day-to-day lives and livelihood.
Wage slavery, on the other hand is a condition where human beings sell their time to an employer in exchange for a livelihood. Once employed, the livelyhood of wage slaves is almost entirely dependent on their employer, who in effect periodically "owns" the wage slave. Wage slaves do not participate in ownership of the means of production, and are therefore not equitably compensated for their time and labor. They are instead compensated at the discretion of their employer.
The issue seems not to be one of simply selling one's time to an employer, rather it is an issue of equality, equitable compensation, ownership, and control. In the selling of blocks of time, the individuals agrees to submit to an authoritarian (unequal) employer-employee dynamic. What is the justification for the inequality? The employer owns the means of production and controls the relationship. For the agreed upon period, the employer also owns the time/labor of the wage slave. The wage slave then owns nothing and is therefore stripped of any equal footing with the employer.
One possible solution, then would be for the laborer to participate in ownership of the means of production during the period of employment and to receive equitable compensation for that participation.
All of this brings up several complex questions about ownership of private property and other means of production (land, buildings, machinery, tools, equipment, intellectual property?)
Having been conditioned through the usual Western institutions to believe that inequality of ownership is acceptable and ethical, it's difficult to navigate around this idea. Something at the core of my being tells me that we are capable of a more humane arrangement. Competing for control of scarce resources is antithetical to my primary assumption of Abundance.
If scarcity of resources is a fallacy, and Abundance is Truth, would it not be in our best interest to practice cooperation over competition. Afterall, "resources" is a very broad, and creative category that encompasses everything from land & labor, to water, air, and light. Almost any material energy, or potential energy may be considered a resource (including human beings.) There is unlimited energy, much of it untapped, and competing for such abundance is reduced to nothing more than counter-productive distraction.
That is not to say that competition does not have its place as an exercise, a way of breaking out of a staid positions, and as a way of shifting paradigms. However, adopting competition as an organizing principle for society might want to give us pause.
As for the cost of these ethics, that remains to be seen. . . a subject for follow-up.
As I understand it, chattel slavery is a condition where human beings are bought and sold as property for use at the discretion of the owner. Chattel slaves, as property have little or no say in the management of their day-to-day lives and livelihood.
Wage slavery, on the other hand is a condition where human beings sell their time to an employer in exchange for a livelihood. Once employed, the livelyhood of wage slaves is almost entirely dependent on their employer, who in effect periodically "owns" the wage slave. Wage slaves do not participate in ownership of the means of production, and are therefore not equitably compensated for their time and labor. They are instead compensated at the discretion of their employer.
The issue seems not to be one of simply selling one's time to an employer, rather it is an issue of equality, equitable compensation, ownership, and control. In the selling of blocks of time, the individuals agrees to submit to an authoritarian (unequal) employer-employee dynamic. What is the justification for the inequality? The employer owns the means of production and controls the relationship. For the agreed upon period, the employer also owns the time/labor of the wage slave. The wage slave then owns nothing and is therefore stripped of any equal footing with the employer.
One possible solution, then would be for the laborer to participate in ownership of the means of production during the period of employment and to receive equitable compensation for that participation.
All of this brings up several complex questions about ownership of private property and other means of production (land, buildings, machinery, tools, equipment, intellectual property?)
Having been conditioned through the usual Western institutions to believe that inequality of ownership is acceptable and ethical, it's difficult to navigate around this idea. Something at the core of my being tells me that we are capable of a more humane arrangement. Competing for control of scarce resources is antithetical to my primary assumption of Abundance.
If scarcity of resources is a fallacy, and Abundance is Truth, would it not be in our best interest to practice cooperation over competition. Afterall, "resources" is a very broad, and creative category that encompasses everything from land & labor, to water, air, and light. Almost any material energy, or potential energy may be considered a resource (including human beings.) There is unlimited energy, much of it untapped, and competing for such abundance is reduced to nothing more than counter-productive distraction.
That is not to say that competition does not have its place as an exercise, a way of breaking out of a staid positions, and as a way of shifting paradigms. However, adopting competition as an organizing principle for society might want to give us pause.
As for the cost of these ethics, that remains to be seen. . . a subject for follow-up.
On Ki (Chi) and Serenity
So I woke up this morning thinking about Ki (or Chi,) and the validity of the Serenity Prayer just within the context of my own personal beliefs. Of course, I acknowledge that the prayer is valid for many people and it helps them navigate their lives, but what about me? The prayer goes:
God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.
courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.
Just nitpicking, In writing, would address "G_d" rather than "God." Not that it really matters, except in theory. The reason I use "G_d" to symbolize "The-All-That-Is" is because it's shorter than writing "The-All-That-Is" and because it's a reminder that no utterance captures the full meaning of that Being. Well, that's the short explanation anyway.
One of my first thoughts upon waking was that there exists nothing I cannot change in my life, because I can change the way I think about anything. That alone transforms it. Is that unwise? Now, I am always saying that you can't change other people. . . but if you change the way you think about a person, effectively isn't it the same thing?
If I think Joe Schmoe is an a*shole, in reality who knows, doesn't matter. He is an a*shole to me. Then, I choose to think of Joe differently, Joe's got issues that have nothing to do with me. He can behave in whatever manner he likes. I choose to practice removing my attention from Joe, and to focus instead on something more pleasant. Eventually, Joes ceases to negatively affect my mood. Joe's a*sholeness is now a non-issue for me. The result is that I have just changed something (Joe) that normally, I would not think was in my power to change.
I am inspired by people who do this all the time, people who take situations that seem hopeless, and turn them around 180 degrees.
People with disabilities, people with terminal illnesses are frequently able to change the way they think about their [physical] condition and miraculously they are transformed. What is this miracle? The grace of allowing The Creative Spirit, a paradigm shift, a new thought to flow through one's being, thereby creating a new reality.
It does take practice to allow such a shift, as we are mostly trained from birth to focus on our fear.
So, this morning I took some time to allow an increase in the flow of Chi, that endless energy that imbues everything. I felt its warmth and I am blessed. When I look around me that is what I see, the abundance of Chi. I truly believe that I live in an abundant universe, and I intend to remain focused on that Truth.
One of my first thoughts upon waking was that there exists nothing I cannot change in my life, because I can change the way I think about anything. That alone transforms it. Is that unwise? Now, I am always saying that you can't change other people. . . but if you change the way you think about a person, effectively isn't it the same thing?
If I think Joe Schmoe is an a*shole, in reality who knows, doesn't matter. He is an a*shole to me. Then, I choose to think of Joe differently, Joe's got issues that have nothing to do with me. He can behave in whatever manner he likes. I choose to practice removing my attention from Joe, and to focus instead on something more pleasant. Eventually, Joes ceases to negatively affect my mood. Joe's a*sholeness is now a non-issue for me. The result is that I have just changed something (Joe) that normally, I would not think was in my power to change.
I am inspired by people who do this all the time, people who take situations that seem hopeless, and turn them around 180 degrees.
People with disabilities, people with terminal illnesses are frequently able to change the way they think about their [physical] condition and miraculously they are transformed. What is this miracle? The grace of allowing The Creative Spirit, a paradigm shift, a new thought to flow through one's being, thereby creating a new reality.
It does take practice to allow such a shift, as we are mostly trained from birth to focus on our fear.
So, this morning I took some time to allow an increase in the flow of Chi, that endless energy that imbues everything. I felt its warmth and I am blessed. When I look around me that is what I see, the abundance of Chi. I truly believe that I live in an abundant universe, and I intend to remain focused on that Truth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
