Click here to go to the next issue
Highlights Home Page | Receive the Nondual Highlights each day
#1920 - Monday, September 13, 2004 - Editor: Jerry
This issue features an excerpt from a newly published book, The Nature of Man According to the Vedanta, by John Levy. This series will constitute the first lengthy quotation of Levy on the internet; there is virtually nothing at present. Also there are quotations from the thoughtful Alpha World list. And there is an installment of In Nonduality Salon.
The Nature of Man According to the
by John Levy
from Chapter III: Dreamless Sleep and the Real Self
The Singleness of Non-Mental Experience
Unconditioned being, non-dual consciousness, and perfect peace, these three characteristics of profound sleep correspond to the three constituents of individual experience, namely, life, thought and feeling. But they are not more than aspects of the real self which must be single and immutable, single because it observes, and therefore transcends, the variety of objective experience, whenever the latter arises; and immutable because it remains unaffected by the appearance or the non-appearance of that variety. We could not, however, know anything about it if we departed from our unconditioned state on seeming to enter the objective domain. It follows that non-duality continues as the background of duality. Not until we approach the end of this work will all the implications of the present paragraph have been appreciated.
The Interval between Two Thoughts
Mental action is not continuous. Each thought, feeling or sensory perception has a beginning and an end. It follows that between one conscious mentatation and another there is an interval. From the dualistic point of view, the interval will appear to be infinitesimally brief. But in itself, it transcends the notion of time, time being experienced only when there is mental activity. Here there is none and so it normally escapes our attention. If we try to think of it, it will appear as a state of nescience. Now this periodic suspension of mental activity is identical with dreamless sleep, which we thus experience at every other moment, so to say, in the midst of waking and dreaming experience. I have stated in another connection (The Singleness of Non-Mental Experience) that non-duality continues as the background of duality. It may be compared to the paper on which these words are printed.
~ ~ ~
The Nature of Man According to the Vedanta
by John Levy
history is always written by the winners.
When two cultures clash, the loser is
obliterated, and the winner writes the history books - books which glorify their own
cause and disparage the conquered foe. As Napoleon once said, What is history, but a
fable agreed upon? He smiled. By its very nature, history is always a one-sided
(Robert Langdon) Dan Brown, The Da Vinci Code.
~ ~ ~
The primordial image, or archetype, is a figure -- be it
a daemon, a human being, or a
process -- that constantly recurs in the course of history and appears wherever creative
fantasy is freely expressed. Essentially, therefore, it is a mythological figure In each
of these images there is a little piece of human psychology and human fate, a remnant of
the joys and sorrows that have been repeated countless times in our ancestral history.
C.G. Jung, On the Relation of Analytical Psychology to Poetry
~ ~ ~
Considering Language then as some mighty potentate, into
the majestic audience-hall of
the monarch ever enters a personage like one of Shaksperes clowns, and takes position
there, and plays a part even in the stateliest ceremonies. Such is Slang, or indirection, an attempt
of common humanity to escape from bald literalism, and express itself illimitably, which
in highest walks produces poets and poems, and doubtless in pre-historic times gave the
start to, and perfected, the whole immense tangle of the old mythologies.
Walt Whitman, Slang in America, 1892
~ ~ ~
"Nations! What are nations? Tartars! and Huns! and
Chinamen! Like insects they swarm. The
historian strives in vain to make them memorable. It is for want of a man that there are
so many men. It is individuals that populate the world."
Henry David Thoreau
~ ~ ~
"That is what the highest criticism really is, the record
of one's own soul. It is more
fascinating than history, as it is concerned simply with oneself. It is more delightful
than philosophy, as its subject is concrete and not abstract, real and not vague. It is
the only civilized form of autobiography."
http://firelight63.blogspot.com ICQ # 238728919
In Nonduality Salon
The Highlights of the Nonduality Salon list from between August, 1998 and May, 1999, the period of time prior to the creation of The Highlights.
~ ~ ~
Marcia Paul and Jan Barendrecht
I can't seem to locate your post where you said (I think) that
to qualify as a Buddhist I
would need to understand the world as suffering. I am probably making a mess out of that.
But the idea was I wasn't going to get it by reading books.
This is a subject which has been of some interest to me. I
think I arrived at it from a
different route but I think the result was the same. It was interesting because I think
that most people get there through actual suffering and my experience was in an altered
state. What was interesting to me was that the memory is exactly the same as a memory of
something which might have actually happened to me. I read all sorts of books afterwards
to try to come to some understanding of what I had experienced. But the experience was
first. It felt as if I had accessed an entirely different level of consciousness. I
describe it as a planetary level of consciousness as my sense was that of all mankind and
not as a personal me at all.
But it was through the personal that I got there. My personal
heart was broken wide open.
It was an extremely painful moment. It was so painful that there was nothing at all to be
"done" about it. Then it just "gave way" and I "was in". Inside the pain and I accessed
my higher mind. Or my higher mind accessed me. :-) Everything expanded. I saw large time
cycles. All on the level of mankind and not me personally.
Then I started reading Steven Levine. In one of his books he
talks about a really mean
spirited woman with back cancer in a hospital dying. She was so mean the nurses did not
like to go into her room. She had alienated all her family and so was alone. During the
middle of one night she was in such pain and agony and she just suddenly became awares of
all people who had had that kind of pain. Men dying in battle with back wounds. Women in
labor with back pain. Stuff like that. She accessed that planetary level. She was
transformed. She immediately began to make the necessary calls and healed the wounds. She
still died of back cancer but as a different person.
Is this what you mean?
Yes, it is a good example. Suffering can only be known by
experience and the experience
enables one to recognize suffering in others. Because all suffering was kept far from
prince Gautama, the shock of being confronted with old age, disease and death caused him
to find deliverance. He practiced a form of meditation / asceticism for 5 years and it
was in vain. Consider the state of mind, having abandoned loved ones and having sought
salvation for 5 years without result. It was suffering and when it is strong enough, the
identification with self is broken; one recognizes one's true nature. So Gautama became
the Buddha; compassion and suffering became the central theme of his speeches.
The Buddha was thoroughly familiar with nondualism. Once he
addressed two young Brahmins
who asked him to explain to them the requirements for achieving union with Brahman. Yet,
five years of it did bring (ex) prince Gautama to desperation.
So realizing that one's suffering isn't unique and that it
always can be worse, often
causes one to spontaneously give up identifications. Dropping all identifications reveals
one's true nature, one aspect being a peaceful kind of happiness (bliss) and the contrast
with the state of suffering couldn't be higher. For some, a little suffering combined
with insight can do the same, as the process of dying means suffering from the (forceful)
ending of all identifications. It is the end of self and unavoidable. The alternative is
to undergo the process of dying while the body is alive and then it is found there is no
self; the identifications with a non existing self were preventing the "experience" of
the natural state of spontaneous, quiet bliss.
~ ~ ~
Robert and Dustin
When you think about the fact that a movie is made up of
images, and those images placed
one after the other in a sequence create the illusion of moving pictures. And sounds out
of speakers, add to the suspension of disbelief, we are left with what there has always
been, sound and light. These are basic ideas of course to a group who is familiar with
the subject we're discussing, but is there anyone out there who watches their life like a
play on stage or a film on a screen? That's what I'd like to know. Thanks.
Robert, this movie metaphor is one to which I myself have
given a lot of thought
throughout recent months. I try to spend my day simply observing that play as the
"objective witness" within me. I also agree with the tone of Harsha's excellent musing:
The play, is the play, is the play. It is a never-ending cycle of sameness and illusion.
Where is that place with no origin from which the play originates?
Yours in service, Dustin
~ ~ ~
A Being abiding, abides being
A Being abiding, abides abiding Beings
A Being nonabiding, does not abide being
A Being nonabiding, does not abide abiding Beings
A Being nonabiding, does not abide nonabiding Beings
Abiding, abides nonabiding
To abide, tolerate. To tolerate is to admit that there is something to
tolerate. The honest admission that there is something to tolerate, is the
same as the honest admission of nonattachment; nonattachment admits that
there is something to be attached to, that there is a reality which is of
by either desire or aversion born.
The internal conversation which we have with others as we read and write
this, is to the point of obviating all conversation; and this point is the
point of true relationship with other. Thus, our internal conversation is
for the point of establishing abidance of other.
By tolerating, and eventually abiding other, we come to the point of
tolerating the self of other; and this may be the first practical step
towards tolerating and eventually abiding self.
By tolerating and eventually abiding self, self and other may become known
as only self.
One who abides self, also abides Self. One who abides self, eventually
abides as Self.
One who abides as Self, may abide self as Self.
One who abides, abides as Self.
Self-abiding is Self, for there is no other to abide.
~ ~ ~
I have been studying the Sermon on the Mount.
Particularly the Beatitudes as the "conditions"
for the Kingdom of Heaven as a state of being.
The Kingdom of Heaven may be other things
"Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the
Kingdom of Heaven."
To me 'poor in spirit' means empty or nothing.
In other words blessed are those who have
seen their own nothingness.
And it is spiritual nothingness as it says poor in
spirit. As long as I labor under the illusion that
I possess spiritual wealth I am not able to enter
the Kingdom of Heaven.
I know nothing and in that nonknowing, I know.
Here's another way to see it:
I know nothing and in that non knowing, I am humbled.
In humility, I surrender.
Thru Grace, I AM.
He who knows that it is incomprehensible,
He who conceives of it comprehends it not.
It is unknown to the knowing ones;
Known to the unknowing.
I reckon the person who wrote this had an outrageous sense of humour, and a
twinkle in their eye.
prior to concept I am
mist steams off the valley
whip birds sing and black cockatoos screech
drunk on morning dew
~ ~ ~
Hello, this came in from Spirit Web,
EXPERIMENT: POINTING AT WHO YOU REALLY ARE
Look at any object in front of you. In order to direct your
clearly, in a focused way, point your finger at that object. (Using your
finger in this way will become particularly important at the end of the
experiment.) Look along your finger at the object and notice that it is a
'thing' - in other words, it has form, colour, edges, detail, opacity
etc. After a moment move your finger and point at the floor. Notice that it
too is a 'thing' with the same kind of general characteristics. Now point at
your feet, or your shoes. These also are things - wiggle them about and
watch them move! Now point at your tummy - this too is a 'thing' with
form, colour, opacity etc. Point at your chest and notice it is a 'thing' as
Now we come to the most important bit - looking back at you the Looker.
Point at where others see your face. Turn your finger around and point
back at yourself, at you the Looker. Are you pointing at a 'thing' now? Going
by present evidence, not by memory or belief, is there any colour or shape
or opacity or thingness here?
Only you are in a position to say since you alone are your side of that
pointing finger. And all I am asking you to do is look - not think, or
work anything out.
Here is my experience: When I point here, at this place where others see
my face, I see nothing. Over there is my pointing finger with a background
around it, but over here is no face, no background. I am 'space' here,
empty for that finger and for the rest of the world.
This is who I really am.
What do you find?
top of page