--- In [email protected], t3rinity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], Peter <drpetersutphen@> wrote:
> >

> > It was thinking the mantra in a certain area of the
> > body. It is one of the last advanced techniques. I can
> > see why the term "chakra" was not used because chakra
> > for most people is just a concept that could confuse
> > things.
> 
> I also got it that way. There is certainly an advanced technique were
> you have to have your attention at a certain area. If it's the exact
> location of the (heart)-chakra is another question. I was pointed to
> an anatomical spot, that is not normally considered to be the heart
> center, but its close enough.Kunyaka


"Just be innocent with it. Take it as it comes." I have found these
useful guides in life as well as meditation. 

And with TM and other spiritual practices comes "innocence" -- which
is to me, a looking at every new situation and occurence without
preconceptions, without the boundaries of past mental structures,
models, preferences and inclination. Just see what is. 

Later, as appropriate, one can apply all past learning, models,
insights etc. to evaluate the new "perception". But in the first
moment or each new "instance" -- just be innocent, take it as it comes. 

I mention this, because of Trinity's statement, "I was pointed to
> an anatomical spot, that is not normally considered to be the heart
> center, but its close enough." 

I may have had similiar inpterpretations as Trinity at one point, and
thus I am as much an example of "loss of innonence" as this current
example.

While I like Trinity and his posts, -- and we appear to have similar
views and experience on some key things (like the non-ownership of
action, the self-sufficent domains of mind, memory and intellect) --
the above statement appears to me as symptomatic of something "odd" --
though quite pervasive amongst posters -- and most people I know, and
commentators i read or hear.  It is pervassive in modern life.

(And I am probably misunderstanding Trinity's point and his statement
above may not even apply.) However, the statements "apparent" meaning
is a great example of what I am referring to -- and is such a huge key
to things, IMO.

Let me explain.

I know there is a looseness of understanding about this particular
advanced technique. (And perhaps different teachers were given
instructions to teach different things -- but that doesn't seem to
"fit" in this example.) I received a technique some stages beyond the
one in question. The teacher asked about my prior techniques, my
instructions, etc. I mentioned, perhaps in fuzzy ways, the location.
And talked a lot about it. I kept raising the point in various ways,
subtle and explicit about the region being near the heart and "isn't
it really the heart we are talking about". He was very explicit and
literally punched me in the correct spot. Which is not a chakra
location (unless they move, :)). I "got" it. I had not been totally
innocent about the original instruction and had superimposed "my
knowledge" of what MMY (via Satynand) MUST have meant in the oringinal
instruction. I realized the actual instruction had nothing (explicit)
to do with chakras -- I just let my preconceptions enter into it. 

This example is insightful, to me, because we live in a sea of
preconceptions -- ours and others -- internal models, KNOWING what
must be, knowing what MMY "really" meant, etc. And such "insights" are
quite compelling. Often stemming from a deep level -- and with it an
unshakeable "truth" "signiture" -- and an assurance that "this is
correct". All the pieces fall together. An energy is created. Its like
a light goes on (the perverbial "light bulb in the head" of cartoons).
And yet, per this example, its all wrong. Its just some preconception,
perhaps feed by the awesome energy of suble ego, that makes it so
compelling and a "self-explanatory" truth. Which is ultimately false.
A powerful illusion.

I see so many exchanges in posts where people simply are not reading
whats on the page. Particular words or concepts appear to trigger deep
impressions or models of "something else" and they start to respond to
that "something else" -- not what has been said to them. And I recall
so many conversations and exchanges in social life -- and corporate
life, where the same phenomenon occurs. 

What is interesting, noteworthy -- IMO, if not odd, is that this
apparent lack of innocence, this reacting to things in their minds,
not what has been said or written, is as prevelant, sometimes more,
among those who interpret their experiences as being enlightened,
sometimes being in "Brahman Consciousness" -- whether the type defined
by MMY or by themselves -- still something high and glorious.

In my, perhaps quite naive and limited view, what good are these
exaulted states if there is no (sweet, simple) innocence in their
lives, in their views, in at least their "first glances" or first
reads of things? That "thing" -- that sweet innocence, freshness of
view, freedom from past boundaries, apparent from the first
meditation, seems lacking from these "high" states. 

Though not for all. I do find that Supreme innocence in various
"saints". SSRS is a good example, in my experience (though I am not a
SSRS "follower"). When ever I have talked to him, or seen him interact
with others, and each new event, it is with the freshness of childhood
awe, wonder, innocence and freshness. 

Not to imply that intellect,memory and all are not there to support
the "innocent view". He, and other saints, have not regressed to the
"silliness" and "dumbness" of childhood. (Though silliness is abundant
at appropriate times.) Its a smart and informed innocence. 

I have experienced the same with Sri Karunyamayi. And what I feel when
I put my attention on other saints, Amma or Mother Meera for example.
Or past "entities" -- Sankara, Christ, Buddha. (For Barry's sake, I
don't profess to be contacting saints who have dropped their bodies --
but there appears to be somethng awesomely pure "there" -- perhaps the
result of their past presence. Like meditating in Shankara's cave.)  
 Or even puja.

Associated with supreme innocence and ever freshness of view, its the
willingness and joy in acknowledging the mystery of things. As a
roughly parallel example, my grandneice recently went to the beach for
the first time, age 2.  She just stared at the waves and repeated, 
"WOW!" with each wave. She had no explanation for what was happening,
but totally appreciated it right here and now. 

I was shocked when I first heard SSRS say, "I don't know". More, it
was "I DON"T KNOW!" With a sweetness, innocence, laughter and
freshness of a child. My first reaction: "WHAT! What do you mean you
don't know!!?? You are are friggin saint, you BETTER Know!!!" 

Over time, I began to appreciate the innocence of "I don't know". At a
minimum, to start each moment with that innocent stance, "I don't
know" -- no preconceptions about how things should be. Just innocent
looking at how things are. Innocently in awe of the wonder of it all.
And willng and eager to then "figure it out" any specific thing, when
apporiate. Using past knoweldge and learning etc. But always from that
new and fresh perspective.

And I am not referring to a "trained" perspective, not an"atitude" one
cultivates. Its the freshness and innocence that ALREADY is abundantly
there aftereach meditation. And in time, always there. Its simply a
matter of letting THAT be.

The "I Don't Know" innocence of saints I have known contrasts sharply
with some posts that are quite ABSOLUTLEY cock-sure of themselves --
"this is absolutely what IS, what I pereceive is absolutely the way I
interpret it, what I say is absolutely true." Again, for me, what is
missing in such posts, and posters, is a that lack of supreme
innocence I see in "saints" -- a breathtaking freshness, infinite
flexibility, no ties to anything, nothing sticks, total teflon, line
through air, type of simplicity (and joy). 

But then, I don't know. I am happy with that. With innocence.

 



















To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 



Reply via email to