> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajranatha@> wrote:
> In any event, the point here is that unless one is doing 
> a non-dual form of quiescence/transcendence meditation, 
> there will--by it's very nature always be not only some 
> dualism or some subtle meditational "effort" involved. 

To continue this morning's train of thought
in the context of meditation, perhaps a style 
of meditation that involves trying to move 
from "What is" to "What should be" (whether
that "should be" is coming back to the mantra
or achieving transcendence) is, in Buddhist
terms, indulging and thus perpetuating the 
desire/aversion cycle and taking the actor
further away from immersion in "What is."

Whereas a technique of meditation that involves 
nothing more than paying attention to "What is" 
or even a concentrated focus *on* "What is" is 
facilitating immersion in "What is."

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing

To subscribe, send a message to:

Or go to: 
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:

Reply via email to