--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajradh...@...> wrote: > > > On Apr 23, 2009, at 10:16 PM, grate.swan wrote: > > >> What an utter garbagedump FFL has turned into. > >> > > > > Many in spiritual circles appear attached to the concept of non- > > attachment -- but it appears to me (hardly a strong truth test) they > > are quite attached to aversion. > > Grate, interesting and apropos observation. > > Stuck in polarities... > > > > > Just a few of today's posts I have skimmed and aversion seems to be > > blossoming like spring -- deep (and almost trembling) aversion to > > americans, strippers, enhanced breasts, people who are satisfied > > with TM, and on and on. > > > > One thing I have found in exposure to real spiritual people (and the > > categorization is my own, not an epistimologically pristine claim) > > is that they are interested in everyone, everything and anything. > > Its like they start each moment with a blank slate. Everything is > > new, to be explored. As a friend told me once, "Maharishi could (and > > did) talk for 4 hours on which floor tiles to choose." > > What would you say about those who want OH SO MUCH to talk about "I", > "Me" or "Mine"...groups that gather to talk about "My" experience. > This happened to "Me" and My very interesting shadow. Would it bother > you if I told you I was "Enlightened"? Would it bother you if a bunch > of "Enlightened" people got together and flapped jaw of I, Me and > Mine...all the while flappin' on just how enlighten'd they were? > > No? > > Yes?
I am not sure who does this so I don't have any direct observations (nor the wild and crazy thoughts that arise with most observations.) But in general, I think people do what they need to do. What they do is useful for them, else they would not be doing it. Things that the vast population of people do -- well it may not be for me, but I wish them good luck. And I figure I may have done that in the past, or may be yet in queue to do it in the future. Every season has a purpose and a reason. My points in this post are not criticisms but perosnal observations. And mostly to clarify my own thinking. When I make a chastising or snarked-up observation, I am first and foremost describing myself and something I do, have done or will do. And its a process of working it out -- whether I am conscious at the moment of the process or not. But I guarantee you sometime in the next week or month, I will express some high tootin' aversion to something -- and my words here will come back to me perhaps chastising but also as a nice insight or lesson -- and act as a fulcrum to create change. As for others, I am sure I don't get their lives, have not walked a mile in their moccasins, so if what appears to be aversion to me works for them -- I offer my best wishes. > > > > But enlightenment shalaitzament -- who cares. But a baseline of > > total acceptance, openness, a fresh look at everything, has some > > appeal to me when I see it live, in action. > > Oh yeah. > > > > > TM appears not to be a universal technique to enliven such qualities > > in everyone. Perhaps it does in some. I see people who do TM , and > > other methods, who have these non-attached, non-adverse, > > enthusiastic in each moment for everything. But also see a lot of > > people highly adverse to lots of things, and perhaps attached many > > things similtaneously, to "my program", my diet, my so pure > > lifestyle, my method, my guru, etc. I am not sure, but I am guessing > > St Peter doesn't open the gate to people with a 3' stick up their > > butts. (and man, thats gotta hurt during yogic flying). > > Or block the channels as Shankaracharya folks observe...the channels > of outwardness, the samskaras of vyuthana... > > > If I were King Tony, I would round up all the so holy rajas and > > obsequious hangers-on and take them to the best -- and also the > > diviest -- strip clubs in Amsterdam. Show people how to see and > > enjoy the bliss in everything. Even in silicone breasts. > > Well, good luck with that. Those channels have (IMO) already been > scarred and blocked. > > > As Louis said, "Its a wonderful world". Some long term TMers seem > > too bitter and adverse to enjoy much of it. > > Well, thanks for stating the obvious! >
