Jerry Katz
photography & writings

The wind carves shapes into the beach sand

Search over 5000 pages on Nonduality:


Highlights #483

Click here to go to the next issue.

Wednesday, September 27

Outer space doesn't care.
It will crack you like a toothpick.

Just when you're enjoying
the beautifully dual view
of Gemini from near Orion's Belt,
it sends a meteor shower.

Stroll by the Big Dipper and
suddenly there's a solar flare.

You just don't get no respect in
outer space.

As for Nonduality, it hunches its
shoulders on the dark side of
the moon, lurking to panic
unwary strangers into
surrendering their
lunch money.

-Dan Berkow


OOOOOOhhhh nature,

the sunset with warm rays touch my face
leafes are falling, one by one,
the smell of leaving, change
where am I
who am I

Sweet smell of roses
laughing kids
kiss you so softly
feeling your .....

dogs playing
running water
sweet surrender
where are you


you are always here
never left
how can you




The computer broke,

the I was in panic -

everything gone -

separation from the Salon -

remembering the Self

slowly finding my way back

to the wave of comunication.

It is not about me -

and the river is flowing between us -




Iīve been blissed out and feeling shitty in non-duality and
felt every other feeling to be had there-but so what-so
fuckinīwhat-I got stuck.Thats what I mean about coming back
to do the work.HERE on the ground.Now Iīm intelligent
enough to see the point.Whatīs your experience?Where do you
hang out?



Dear friends, God brought me to this Non–Duality-Salon and
so a simple-minded German good-for –nothing takes the
challenge to follow this beautiful exchange of spiritual
intelligentsia. Maybe you can help me with one question: If
all you can deal with and talk or write about, is mind, and
mind is built on and feeding on concepts of duality: What
are you talking or writing about in a Non-Duality-Salon? My
best wishes, Florian



Dear Florian, everything and all was just silence. And you
woke me up! Do you think we all shouldnt write anymore and
just get lost and disappear into Non-Duality itself? What
then? How would we know each other? These many parts of
ourselves? What concept is "Non-Duality"?



Dear Florian,

I'm given the gift of talking while I am who I am there may
be coming only "la la lalla, uh" it can change into "uh,
alla hu" and after a while it's "allah - hu"

No way to describe it - but the sound is there!

Love Lilly



Dear Florian!

It is the endless speaking of Love... Ahhhh... I love to
speak with myself pretending that it is the "other"...
Ahhhh... I Love myself speaking...Ahhhh...

Beautiful words written in the sky simply to adorn the
never ending emptiness.

Your question is a koan...

Love Michele


why, non-duality of course. .......matthew


Dear Dan,

I believe in the other, in the work with the other. My
growth happened and is still happening through people who
make themselves available for me. It is not necessarily fun
for them to deal with me. We had a famous politician in the
70's , Willy Brandt. He kneeled down in Warsaw in the
former Ghetto to ask for forgiveness for the crimes of
Nazi-Germany. ( he personally fought against Nazi-Germany
in the 40ies). As we already discussed in this group, this
is not the whole truth. But it was an opening, an act of
healing for humanity from my point of view.

Now imagine: the American president asking for forgiveness
fo the crimes against the Red Indians and the Black people.
Kneeling down.

I believe we would experience a movement in consciousness.

Dan, I still believe in a world of brothers and sisters.
Not without pain but with useful ways to live it and feel
it and heal it. The clear understanding of no I is the very
ground for that. No separation. Harry Palmer said, all what
is separating us are our beliefs. And I can change my
beliefs, because they are just thoughts appearing in me. I
believe, the plan right now is to do a jump to the next
level of consciousness for the whole mankind. I really
believe that. And the first step is to heal the wounds of
the past, through admitting the mistakes and atonement.



"I want to be loved" can be simply another way of saying "I
don't want to be alone" and " I don't want to feel my

And giving and getting attention is one way to avoid that
uncomfortable feeling.

"Love" ultimately may not be something one can 'get' or
'give'. In a sense, it is what One IS. The key seems to be:
in the willingness to fully experience and taste that
discomfort... abide loneliness.

What we try to escape from is often our very door to



Uncle Joe Mahiques died a couple of nights ago. Now there
was an arising in consciousness. He was born 92 years ago
in the province of Galicia in Spain and lived there for
about nine years before emigrating to the US with his
parents Pedro and Rosa Mahiques and his five brothers and

Joe used to tell tales of old Mexico and Pancho Villa ---
he was a spell-binding story teller and I can remember him
going on for hours about his adventures. At one time during
the great depression of the 1930s he used to be a hobo and
hang out in the hobo jungles. He would tell of riding the
rails and riding in empty boxcars and being chased by the
railroad police. He loved to sing Spanish songs.

He would have loved to have met you all because he loved
people. He would have wanted a little of his story told.
The world was richer because of him.

So long uncle Joe --- I'll miss you lots.




LARRY: I agree, we do just do it, but I'm not so sure about
the not believing part. Arn't we (you?) instead
substituting one belief for another. Do you truely not
believe in inherent existence or do you believe that you
don't believe in inherent existence?

GENE: I recall, that as I was living in my NonDual RV, and
parked near Grant's Pass, Oregon, watching my little 12VDC
television, a special newscast, which was live from
Rajneeshpuram (Antelope, Ore).

The occasion was Osho, coming out of a prolonged (2-year?)
silence. News-hounds were in abundance, and had submitted
to a lottery, to be the first one to ask Osho a question,
any question of choice. Naturally, the guy who won the
lottery, was very eager. Finally, Osho appeared, and took
his place in a big chair.

With little preamble, the news guy stuck his big microphone
in Osho's face and said:

"What I want to know, and what everyone, every American
wants to know, is this.... DO YOU BELIEVE IN GOD???"

The newsman waited, it was obvious that he assumed that he
had really hit the big-time; now, Osho would be FORCED to
finally reveal himself to all of America, due to this
incredible, pointed question. Certainly, something profound
would be forthcoming!

The room was silent. The camera zoomed in to show Osho's
face; I could see his eyes begin to water... it was obvious
that he was having an emotion, but what? As the tears began
to flow, the camera showed the newsman, also. His face
betrayed his eagerness to hear the outcome of his
prosecutorial splendor. The silence was very loud.

Finally, Osho look directly at the man, and this is what he
said, in response to the question "Do you believe in God?";

He said (having difficulty controlling what was now
obviously great ironic mirth, tears streaming sown his

Osho: "I do not believe... in belief".

With this, the newsman recoiled, as if bitten by a snake;
his face portrayed great shock. Those present, erupted into
both laughter and loud remarks of every sort. Chaos was
supreme for a few moments. Osho continued to shed tears,
now shaking silently in laughter, his face wrinkling,
finally he showed his teeth, then he wiped his eyes. He
adjusted his face into a picture of 'seriousness' for a
moment, but once again succumbed to hilarity.

For me, this was a perfect scene. I had an epiphany at that
moment. It was not so much what Osho had said, but how he
had perfectly 'mastered' the entire scenario. I laughed
until I cried, and kept laughing for days after.

What Osho said, did have a profound impact upon me. I
realized this:


If something is true or real, I do not have to believe in

If something is not true or real, I am a fool to believe in

*** Now, of what use is belief?



Dearest Gene

Kia Ora

It's been a long day and I'm feeling very tired but I will
attempt here to offer one more viewpoint on this topic of

Keeping in mind, this is a concept.

Consciousness that 'I am' in order to experience itself
here in the phenomenal world, does so through belief
filters. Many of these filters are transparent, in other
words, consciousness that 'I am' may not be necessarily
aware of the filter(s) that it is experiencing the
objective world through.

I'm sure you agree or at least understand, the objective
world in itself is utterly meaningless until 'I' assign a
meaning to it.Even if I decide not to assign meaning really
that is still a meaning. How I as consciousness view the
objective world is through beliefs and the belief that I
choose to see it is how I as consciousness here in the
Leela will experience the chosen desire. In this play of
consciousness, the endless continuous rising of the
phenomenal form arising out of the nominal also desires to

Any desired experience that is denied creates the
experience of Samsara or suffering and consciousness enters
into a creation as you and I are in right now. The way I
see it is that consciousness that I am is able to
consciously enter into creation and play. If it is not
conscious of entering into any creation it then experiences
the state of denial, and you know Gene, none of us can
overestimate the power of denial can we? You're a lawyer
aren't you?

So Gene, do you get my drift? Consciousness at rest is not
aware of its own self. In order to experience itself which
is an unexplainable determination creates itself in form
and manifests as you and me here in the phenomenal form.
Deliberately identifies in the objective world as
subject/object and loses itself delightfully.

Gene, if you've even got this far I would imagine that you
know all this stuff already. So now we both agree that you
and I experience all through what we decide to believe.
This too being a belief. By the way, do you know anything
that's not a belief?



When I found my teacher I was not thinking about how long
are 10, 20 years (or a lifetime) and if I am under someone
who is telling me what to do. There is still just this
feeling of expanding more and more and the immense wish to
come closer more and more. A teacher is a mirror for me -
it's myself outside of me with another point of few. - that
helps a lot in expanding. There was and is never a point of
doing what someone else is telling me - that's always what
"I" want - and if not - time to say it, and take the risk
and the consequences. .

I think friends are also my teachers and to some of them I
feel committed too. Same thing, I am offering them honesty,
courage and trust. And I stay to them even its getting

You see for me its no question about being that free - its
a question falling in love.


VALHARDING: Dear Harsh, I have heard it said You have to
steal from the Master, could you explain what this means?
Greetings Valharding.

HARSHA: There is nothing to steal dear Valharding. There is
nothing to give. The transmission from the Master is based
on hearing the Truth, reflecting on the Truth, and
understanding the Truth to Be One's Own Being. The
transmission is part of the dream.

The True Beauty of the Guru Principle is this. The Guru
appears in your dream as Love and tells you that You are
the Self, The Heart, The Love It Self. In the dream, you
believe the Guru. You have faith. Why you believe the Guru
or have faith is hard to say. But you do and you believe.
Then the dream along with the Guru disappears and you are
Fully Awake. You Recognize that You are the Guru, Self,
Heart, and Love and the whole universe exists in you only.
When the Guru appears in the dream with overwhelming
beauty, power, love, and compassion, know that the time of
awakening has come.



GENE POOLE: Greetings, friend David... I am replying to
your brilliant and masterful reply to my quasi-humorous
question of breath. I would have quoted some of it here,
but I cannot locate that letter on my HD.

Your perception of the reality of context, how that reality
itself presets or biases our assumptions, set me to
thinking (a dangerous thing in itself, sometimes) along
certain lines, upon which I had previously pondered. This
is the switching of contexts between 'I' and 'You', as
signaled by speech, and also as conducted as thought. So I
will jot off a few cogent points here and ask you to ponder
a bit, if you would. No hurry.

So here is what I see: A person uses the words 'I' and
'You' quite easily, in conversation. If I say 'I', I mean
'me', and if I say 'you', I am referring to somebody else.
This is the common pattern. But when I _hear_ the word 'I',
I somehow translate that into 'you'. I mean, if someone
else is speaking, and the word 'I' is used, the common
behaviour (and it is very automatic) is to assume that the
'I' referred to is not 'me', but 'you'.

So it goes like this: When you say 'I', you mean 'you'. Or
is it, that when you say 'I', I mean you? So here I am,
putting a meaning on a word we all use rather
automatically, differing only in who is saying it. In fact,
I can say 'I' and 'you' and they both mean the same thing,
but those meanings are automatically switched, due to
assumed _context_. In one context, I am I, and in another
context, I is you. That is, the context being that you are
the one talking, and saying 'I'.

Now, it seems easy to assume that the context is actual;
that if someone other than I says 'I' that they are not
referring to me, but to 'the other who is speaking'. But I
suspect that on some level of awareness, the I and you are
indeed interchangable, so that I am every you and you are
every I. The problems arise from the assumption that
context somehow automatically changes meanings, like,
perceived context actually is an objective reality,
determining exactly how we should hear and understand.

Perhaps we could experiment with disabling the
context-switcher. I would not know, and perhaps would not
even care, who I is and who you is. There would then be no
need for any 'you', because I would serve in both
instances, due to the dissolution of 'ruling' context.

The next step would be to undermine the basis of what
perceives context. This could be difficult; but many places
already serve breakfast around the clock, so that context
has been abolished. We continue to call sunrise 'morning',
even though morning is also when we wake up, regardless of
the many people who arise late in the day, and thus have a
morning out of the context of sunrise.

Context is a fascinating study, especially if we consider
that the assigning of context is so automatic. Could it be,
that a study of context (and the automatic assignment of
context), could reveal exactly how our 'assumption of
separation' arises?

As far-fetched as it may seem, it may be that language
itself, forms the basis of most context. If this is at all
true, it would mean (among other things) that we could
utterly change our world, especially our world of
common-contexts (the world-dream) by simply reworking how
language is used.


Context \Con"text\, n. [L. contextus; cf. F. contexte .]
The part or parts of something written or printed, as of
Scripture, which precede or follow a text or quoted
sentence, or are so intimately associated with it as to
throw light upon its meaning.

According to all the light that the contexts afford.


Context \Con*text"\, v. t. To knit or bind together; to
unite closely. [Obs.] --Feltham.

The whole world's frame, which is contexted only by
commerce and contracts. --R. Junius.


Context \Con*text"\, a. [L. contextus, p. p. of contexere
to weave, to unite; con- + texere to weave. See {Text}.]
Knit or woven together; close; firm. [Obs.]

The coats, without, are context and callous. --Derham.


DAVID HODGES: I loved your example of the removal of
context: places that serve breakfast throughout the day!
Other examples: banks where you can buy and sell stocks.
Workplaces that have day care centers and rec rooms.

I appreciated the various definitions of "context" that you
provided. I wish I could find an exact definition, from
computer science, of context switching. I remember the
delight with which, when I was studying operating system
theory, I realized that a computer could switch user's
entire address spaces in and out of memory many times a
second, this including their current set of running
programs, stack space, display space (i.e. the contents of
their screen), interrupt vectors, etc etc. And then to
encounter IBM's operating system (now ancient history)
called "VM" for Virtual Machine, which gave each user the
illusion of having an entire 370 at his or her disposal!

This leads me to further thoughts. The *speed* at which
contexts are switched creates different effects.

1. In written or spoken discourse, when one consciously
manipulates context for effect, it is called "irony". For
example, in yesterday's post which I wrote in response to
Polar's "Duality in New York City", I was in full "irony"
mode, otherwise known as "tongue in cheek" - knowing full
well that some would not get the context switch I was doing
and take it "straight". That is part of the game of being a
poet, I suppose. Being misunderstood or understood in a way
not intended is not an occasion for taking umbrage, it is
an occasion for the pleasure the puppeteer gets when his
puppet starts to walk on its own.

2. This leads to a more sustained context switching which
is called "art". When actors get up on stage and create a
context switched environment it is called "theater". When
painters put different colored paints on a canvas in such a
way as to suggest some other context, like, for example, an
image of a woman called "Mona Lisa", it is, again, called
"art". When a writer puts down words that create a made-up
sequence of effects tied together by cause and effect it is
called "fiction". And so on.

The philosopher Susanne Langer created a term for this in
the early 50's, well before the computer era took hold.

She called it "virtual experience". Her book "Feeling and
Form" is highly recommended in this regard.

In the case of the arts the context switch is easily
discerned. We can look away from the stage or screen, put
down the book, etc., at will, and then rejoin the context
again when ready. And the context switch, or virtual
experience, gives us pleasure. The gap between what we
consider to be "Reality" and what the artist is presenting
to us as a model of reality creates a frisson of enjoyment.
This is called "aesthetic pleasure".

It is on this level that what you said about language is
true. Language creates a virtual experience and a virtual
environment which is pervasive, controlling, and usually
unquestioned. As a "language engineer" (i.e. poet) this is
the virtual environment in which I like to play the most.
Politicians play consciously in this arena, as do
marketers, managers, public relations specialists, lawyers,
psychiatrists, and on and on.

3. The arts create virtual experience at human speed.
Computers create virtual experiences at machine-speed. This
is called "virtual reality." Last summer's movie "The
Matrix" was a brilliant demonstration of a virtual reality
scenario. In such cases the context switch is sustained so
quickly that the human subject cannot easily see the Gap
between the context switches. The frisson of enjoyment of
VR is wearing off quickly, though. A few years ago people
thought virtual reality was "cool" just because the gap
wasn't apparent. Now there's a kind of "so what" about VR
which will last until its uses become more pervasive and

4. The next order of speed-up of context switching, or
virtual experience, is what humans normally just call
"reality". Because the level of switching is so fast, and
because the "switcher" is not apparent to the physical
senses (unlike the computer which is always somewhere under
the desk or in the next room), "reality" is taken for
reality, behind which there is no other referent. However,
the fact that there may be other contexts besides the one
you are in is an awareness that is available to some
people. People such as shamans and schizophrenics
experience multiple contexts. In the case of the former, it
is with curiosity. In the case of the latter, it is with

5. The level beyond this is the quantum level. Since I am
not a scientist I will not attempt to state whether this is
the final level or not. However I do know that current
theory points to context switching that occurs even here,
as when a particle disappears and reappears somewhere else
instantaneously, leading to speculation about possible
applications to time/space travel and such.

Getting back to the level of virtual experiences created at
human speed, I return to the original basis of your
statement about language, and I quote:

"Context is a fascinating study, especially if we consider
that the assigning of context is so automatic. Could it be,
that a study of context (and the automatic assignment of
context), could reveal exactly how our 'assumption of
separation' arises?"

Yes, I agree. I think that Ramana's self-inquiry method
does exactly that, it forces one to look at context and
deconstruct the things that we have taken for granted about
our identity. This makes me wonder if there might not be
other means or technologies available for effectively
accomplishing the same thing.

"As far-fetched as it may seem, it may be that language
itself, forms the basis of most context. If this is at all
true, it would mean (among other things) that we could
utterly change our world, especially our world of
common-contexts (the world-dream) by simply reworking how
language is used."

I don't think that is far-fetched at all. Language creates
an all-encompassing sphere of significance in which most of
human society moves and lives and has its being. I myself
woke up to the "virtual" nature of language long before I
took it the next step to the "virtual" nature of identity.
Whether that represents a path that others could or should
take, I don't know. But it was pretty effective for me.
Once one begins examining how reality is, in fact, a
construction, there is no turning back.

Virtually speculating, David



Dear Melody, thank you for your warm response to the
collective shame issue, where the vietnam-war was
mentioned. I can totaly understand what you mean by your
experience with the veterans of that cruel
war-activities.And ofcourse that they are very strongly
shattered with all kind of remembrance of brutal sceneries
that really existed once in their life. I also think that
some kind of human experience is for ever gone for them, to
open up again a real difficulty. Also that one is giving a
colour to the whole appearance of the human culture arround
your place or in former times with the nazi-brutality here
or in ex- and so on. And all of that
creates some fog all arround that is not just dissolving
but has to be felt and acknowledged before itīs possible to
let it go. And thatīs not only the work of the involved
person but open to everybody. Thatīs why it is so worthy to
say yes to this shame issue, as it is a part of the healing
process even for our following generation. As the time has
gone by, you already wrote about opening the heart which
resonated again with me. I like verymuch how you describe
it, that there was a path that you went on already,and that
Rajneesh was there one helpful hand. Thatīs what I also
experienced until a certain point, from which onwards it is
necessary to have it found here and now not in old imprints
and projections. And yes it is helpfull and supportive to
read and simply to be here on this list! Thank you all for
that forum



"I am not, but the Universe is my Self" (Shit-t'ou,

Logical analysis of this intuition By Wei Wu Wei

"All we can say about this which we are, which to us must
be objectified as 'it' in order that we may speak of it at
all, is to regard 'it' as the noumenon of phenomena, but,
since neither of these exists objectively, phenomenally
regarded it may be understood as the ultimate absence from
which all presence comes to appear.

But consciousness, or 'Mind', does not project the
phenomenal universe: 'it' IS the phenomenal universe which
is manifested as its self."

The rest of this very short article may be found here:



greetingsyou all, Iwant to share this,I didn't speak about
with anyone yet. Once working on a painfull foot of an old
lady,feeling it,I came to see, I and the creator are one.I
got afraid of this power and the big responsibility.So I
forgot about it again . Today working with a paralised
woman ,feeling the sacrum and axis percieving a great
tension between this two points,just watching the tension
left and what's felt was an great energy and joy wanting to
dance.I thought my god this woman is healing me . Another
day I touched a croocked spine percieving massive
resistance,feeling much discomfort myself but staying in
touch with and thinking " this is my creation" there was an
immedeate release the tissue became like butter and the
spine flexible. This morning sitting tired at the
breakfasttable thinking about difficulties feeling
frustrated about my life I stopped and suddenly the
formless ,eternity, stillness .My backpain was gone.

top of page


Home Search Site Map Contact Support

Non-duality books

Specialises in book and audio resources on Advaita and non-duality

Awakening to the Dream

The Gift of Lucid Living.

"This book will be of great assistance to the seeming many." Sailor Bob Adamson
"The Enlightenment Trilogy"
by Chuck Hillig
Enlightenment for Beginners Read the Reviews
The Way IT Is
Read the Reviews
Seeds for the Soul
Read the Reviews | Order now
"Pure Silence:
Lessons in Living and Dying"
Audio CD by Mark McCloskey
Highly recommended."
--Jan Kersschot, M.D.
Reviews | sample track | Buy Now
The Texture of Being
by Roy Whenary
"We do not need to search in order to find our true Being. We already are it, and the mind which searches for it is the very reason why we cannot find it."
Reviews, excerpts and ordering info.
For over two years this website has been hosted expertly by Experthost
~ ~ ~
Search engine sponsored by
Spiritually Incorrect Enlightenment