What can I say Jim. Other than you should ponder deeply the Steve Mahvakya I quoted in an adjacent post. Ponder it until you REALLY get it this time.
But what can I say. You and Rory are the anti-Woks. Well, I sing to you "Wok on By". Cause we Wokers are getting ready to Wok on the Wild Side. Wok Round the Clock.Lets Wok, everybody, lets Wok. Everybody in the whole cell block Was dancin to the jailhouse Wok. but tomorrow we will get up, fresh alert, ever creative, and Wok the Line. Don't Wok on My Blue Suede Shoes. or spill some of Wokers favorite wood on them: Wokamole. Well as they say "Wok, Don't Run". See you in the akash, in the Wok. May the Wok be with you. Wok Wok Wok --- In [email protected], "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], new.morning <no_reply@> wrote: > What is can "could" > > always be more divine, more and expression of heaven. if you or it > > don't like that, then sure, leave it as it is. But if vision of what > > could be has not been snuffed out within you, then seeing what could > > and helpingto enable that change is a good thing, IMO. Wallowing in > > yesterdays news (now is what was conceived yesterday) is not a huge > > virtue, IMCO, unless you want to gloriify something then worship it. > > Pesestalphelia. > > My sense when I read your words is that you are mistaking the > elemental tamas associated with your thoughts with what Now is. Now > lasts for less time than it takes to write the word, and encompasses > all of the change, stability, upliftment, etc. that you want it to > have. Now is a singularity in the midst of any direction of time and > space you wish it to go. What is being said here is that to stand in > Now and projecting it to a more perfect Then, does Now a disservice. > > This stickiness or tamas associated with thinking about Now is a > natural function of ownership of thoughts, and conclusions, and > suppositions. You see moving from that [tamas] as a great > accomplishment, vs. staying with it something dead and sluggish. This > view is due to the ownership of thoughts, and the desire for > sattva/rajas to move away from that ownership, vs. an accurate picture > of the perfection of Now. > > But seen from the perspective of a free mind this movement from Now to > Then is not seen as desirable; Now is the true realm of all > possibilities, whereas the desire to be Then is nothing more than an > illusion.:-) >
