Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).
Dharma,
What a beautiful summation! Normally I would be ready to fire off a smart reply, but you have left me speechless. I feel like I?ve been pitched into the deep end of the pool, and I cannot swim. Nothing for me to do but thank you for ending my part of this conversation by showing me the truth.
Lindsay
What a beautiful summation! Normally I would be ready to fire off a smart reply, but you have left me speechless. I feel like I?ve been pitched into the deep end of the pool, and I cannot swim. Nothing for me to do but thank you for ending my part of this conversation by showing me the truth.
Lindsay
L
littlebuddha
Guest
(bowing)
The Other Side
One day a young Buddhist on his journey home came to the banks of a wide river.
Staring hopelessly at the great obstacle in front of him, he pondered for hours on just how to cross such a wide barrier.
Just as he was about to give up his pursuit to continue his journey he saw a great teacher on the other side of the river.
The young Buddhist yells over to the teacher "Oh wise one, can you tell me how to get to the other side of this river"?
The teacher ponders for a moment looks up and down the river and yells back "My son, you are on the other side"!
Miss Alisa:
Zen is like a joke. No one can explain a joke to you, you either get it or you don't.
The koan is a gift to you. When another person unwraps it for you you do not reap the reward because enlightenment results from applying yourself to the task until the prize is attained.
If you wish the gift, meditate. Then remember the context of how and when the koan was given.
(bowing)
The Other Side
One day a young Buddhist on his journey home came to the banks of a wide river.
Staring hopelessly at the great obstacle in front of him, he pondered for hours on just how to cross such a wide barrier.
Just as he was about to give up his pursuit to continue his journey he saw a great teacher on the other side of the river.
The young Buddhist yells over to the teacher "Oh wise one, can you tell me how to get to the other side of this river"?
The teacher ponders for a moment looks up and down the river and yells back "My son, you are on the other side"!
Miss Alisa:
Zen is like a joke. No one can explain a joke to you, you either get it or you don't.
The koan is a gift to you. When another person unwraps it for you you do not reap the reward because enlightenment results from applying yourself to the task until the prize is attained.
If you wish the gift, meditate. Then remember the context of how and when the koan was given.
(bowing)
Dear Dharma,
OK, I?ve been awestruck and speechless for a couple of hours, but I?ve also read your last posting about twenty times, and I really, really need to ask you some questions.
When I read your Clarity messages ? I?ve read a quite a few of them over the past month or so ? I get the weirdest feeling you are writing from some incredibly vast and vivid personal vision of the world that is completely outside my experience. I speak your language and understand your idiom, but often I find in the middle of a sentence that I have no idea what you are talking about. But there is also a strong intuitive feeling that you are talking about something familiar enough in your world, rich with meaning and full of significance. All those capital upper-case letters can get really SPOOKY, because I have no idea what the difference between ?desire? and ?DESIRE? is ? but I?ll bet there IS one. Sometimes I have a nagging feeling that I?m just not evolved enough to get it. [If that?s true, will you tell me please?]
So there is this communication thing. Is it just me? It could be. I always use myself as the yardstick of normality. It doesn?t always work out that way.
Now you have my attention. I think I understand everything in the first half of your last posting. Wherever your ideas and mine are different, I admit yours are better. But then we get to the following:
And what *is* "passion" but the unyielding DESIRE to HAVE something. (If we're honest with ourselves, we believe we are helpless in order to justify getting what we want --perhaps even what we NEED.)
This ?DESIRE to HAVE? ? is this the desire to possess, to own, to control? Makes sense to me. But the next part is puzzling. Do you mean that helplessness is just an excuse or self-deception? For example: ?The Devil made me do it!? We aren?t really at the mercy of our emotions or impulses, but if we persuade ourselves that we are, then that can excuse doing sleazy things to get what we want? This means that the noble thing would be to always be in control of oneself, no? Isn?t this very difficult, maybe impossible? Rooting out the seeds of desire and quashing our instinctual and libidinous behaviors ? I feel this is something we read about quite a lot, but I have never known or heard of anyone who could actually do it. And isn?t it odd that to become good, we must kill our natural behaviors?
I always say that in order to get to the Higher Ground we have to travel through, and in & out of our self-created pits and ruts, after all, we cannot become holy without first understanding what it is to NOT be holy. These are the rules, I didn't make them up.
When I referred to seeking Higher Ground in my post, I meant encouraging people to behave as well as they are able by holding out ideals and standards. I did not anticipate that anyone would become ?holy?. What on earth does that mean? Is holiness the goal we should all be striving for? Why? Who did make up the ?rules?? What rules are we talking about? Right here, Dharma, I would say we have a total disconnect. I might be able to understand, in an intellectual way, what you mean ? but I am pretty sure we are worlds apart at this point. And what does that mean? What is the relation of my conceptual world to your conceptual world?
Could there very well be a spiritual reason that Carl and Sally NEEDED to experience what they did? Could I Ching, in it's infinite wisdom, have directed them to go in this direction for the intense spiritual refinement that it would bring all persons involved? I don't think that any one of us can say for sure and without a shadow of a doubt.
What spiritual purpose could this dilemma serve? Some say suffering engenders wisdom. Others say traumatic experiences are agents of transformation (worm-to-butterfly model). In this case I would say suffering only produced more suffering. But the part I really find astonishing is the deification of the I Ching. ?Infinite wisdom?? Where did this come from? Are you subscribing to a literal interpretation of the Great Treatise (Dazhuan)? And your remark implies agency ? ?directed them to go? ? this is the stuff of gods. (Your last sentence is a rhetorical trick ? I don?t suppose anyone can say for sure that Stonehenge was not built by aliens.)
This is absolutely my last posting about all this stuff. I?ve been thinking so much about Carl and Sally and morals and the I Ching that I can no longer distinguish what I know from what I imagine. I?m starting to admire Alisa?s viewpoint more and more. Maybe someone will actually come forward for a reading. Come on, out there ? help us out here!
Dharma, I hope you keep writing. I don?t understand all (much?) of it, but I think it?s good for me.
Thanks,
Lindsay
OK, I?ve been awestruck and speechless for a couple of hours, but I?ve also read your last posting about twenty times, and I really, really need to ask you some questions.
When I read your Clarity messages ? I?ve read a quite a few of them over the past month or so ? I get the weirdest feeling you are writing from some incredibly vast and vivid personal vision of the world that is completely outside my experience. I speak your language and understand your idiom, but often I find in the middle of a sentence that I have no idea what you are talking about. But there is also a strong intuitive feeling that you are talking about something familiar enough in your world, rich with meaning and full of significance. All those capital upper-case letters can get really SPOOKY, because I have no idea what the difference between ?desire? and ?DESIRE? is ? but I?ll bet there IS one. Sometimes I have a nagging feeling that I?m just not evolved enough to get it. [If that?s true, will you tell me please?]
So there is this communication thing. Is it just me? It could be. I always use myself as the yardstick of normality. It doesn?t always work out that way.
Now you have my attention. I think I understand everything in the first half of your last posting. Wherever your ideas and mine are different, I admit yours are better. But then we get to the following:
And what *is* "passion" but the unyielding DESIRE to HAVE something. (If we're honest with ourselves, we believe we are helpless in order to justify getting what we want --perhaps even what we NEED.)
This ?DESIRE to HAVE? ? is this the desire to possess, to own, to control? Makes sense to me. But the next part is puzzling. Do you mean that helplessness is just an excuse or self-deception? For example: ?The Devil made me do it!? We aren?t really at the mercy of our emotions or impulses, but if we persuade ourselves that we are, then that can excuse doing sleazy things to get what we want? This means that the noble thing would be to always be in control of oneself, no? Isn?t this very difficult, maybe impossible? Rooting out the seeds of desire and quashing our instinctual and libidinous behaviors ? I feel this is something we read about quite a lot, but I have never known or heard of anyone who could actually do it. And isn?t it odd that to become good, we must kill our natural behaviors?
I always say that in order to get to the Higher Ground we have to travel through, and in & out of our self-created pits and ruts, after all, we cannot become holy without first understanding what it is to NOT be holy. These are the rules, I didn't make them up.
When I referred to seeking Higher Ground in my post, I meant encouraging people to behave as well as they are able by holding out ideals and standards. I did not anticipate that anyone would become ?holy?. What on earth does that mean? Is holiness the goal we should all be striving for? Why? Who did make up the ?rules?? What rules are we talking about? Right here, Dharma, I would say we have a total disconnect. I might be able to understand, in an intellectual way, what you mean ? but I am pretty sure we are worlds apart at this point. And what does that mean? What is the relation of my conceptual world to your conceptual world?
Could there very well be a spiritual reason that Carl and Sally NEEDED to experience what they did? Could I Ching, in it's infinite wisdom, have directed them to go in this direction for the intense spiritual refinement that it would bring all persons involved? I don't think that any one of us can say for sure and without a shadow of a doubt.
What spiritual purpose could this dilemma serve? Some say suffering engenders wisdom. Others say traumatic experiences are agents of transformation (worm-to-butterfly model). In this case I would say suffering only produced more suffering. But the part I really find astonishing is the deification of the I Ching. ?Infinite wisdom?? Where did this come from? Are you subscribing to a literal interpretation of the Great Treatise (Dazhuan)? And your remark implies agency ? ?directed them to go? ? this is the stuff of gods. (Your last sentence is a rhetorical trick ? I don?t suppose anyone can say for sure that Stonehenge was not built by aliens.)
This is absolutely my last posting about all this stuff. I?ve been thinking so much about Carl and Sally and morals and the I Ching that I can no longer distinguish what I know from what I imagine. I?m starting to admire Alisa?s viewpoint more and more. Maybe someone will actually come forward for a reading. Come on, out there ? help us out here!
Dharma, I hope you keep writing. I don?t understand all (much?) of it, but I think it?s good for me.
Thanks,
Lindsay
hilary
Administrator
- Joined
- Apr 8, 1970
- Messages
- 19,247
- Reaction score
- 3,495
(***Official forum announcement: this is no longer a lull.***)
There are so many ideas here, I don't know where to start. But LittleBuddha's second story I like very much. It sounds Taoist to me... perhaps a little like the events in the town where a big horse was obstructing a narrow street and refusing to move. They tried everything, everyone contributed ideas, no-one could get the beast to move. Traffic ground to a halt. Then the cry went up:
'The master is coming! He'll know what to do!'
So there was a respectful silence as the master came up, saw the obstruction...
...turned round, went back, and took an alternative route.
(This is not intended as a koan for anyone in particular. It's just a story I like.)
There are so many ideas here, I don't know where to start. But LittleBuddha's second story I like very much. It sounds Taoist to me... perhaps a little like the events in the town where a big horse was obstructing a narrow street and refusing to move. They tried everything, everyone contributed ideas, no-one could get the beast to move. Traffic ground to a halt. Then the cry went up:
'The master is coming! He'll know what to do!'
So there was a respectful silence as the master came up, saw the obstruction...
...turned round, went back, and took an alternative route.
(This is not intended as a koan for anyone in particular. It's just a story I like.)
Lindsay, what a wonderfully respectful yet direct approach to disagreement/clarification/ongoing discussion. I have some ideas how I would answer some of those questions myself, but, another time.
I found something in Ritsema-Karcher to post about "What is the I Ching?" but I think I'll start up a new topic for that. Although, it's kinda fun to only have one campfire going. Can't we call it a lull a little longer...
I found something in Ritsema-Karcher to post about "What is the I Ching?" but I think I'll start up a new topic for that. Although, it's kinda fun to only have one campfire going. Can't we call it a lull a little longer...
D
dharma
Guest
Lindsay, I can see that this situation has had quite an impact on you and though I would like to address your questions at this time, I cannot. I am busy for the next few days and will return with the responses to your questions when I get a chance to sit and really give them my undivided attention.
Willow, I loved the article you posted from the I Ching on the Ritsema-Karcher page. I feel that it really goes a long way towards answering at least one of Lindsay's questions and concerns.
By all means, please feel free to answer any of the other questions that were presented in your own way. I believe that whatever you say will have substance and relevance and I am, myself, eager to read your ideas.
Dharma
Willow, I loved the article you posted from the I Ching on the Ritsema-Karcher page. I feel that it really goes a long way towards answering at least one of Lindsay's questions and concerns.
By all means, please feel free to answer any of the other questions that were presented in your own way. I believe that whatever you say will have substance and relevance and I am, myself, eager to read your ideas.
Dharma
D
dharma
Guest
Hello Lindsay,
As far as I can tell, I have not attached any secret meaning to my use of upper-case letters when I write. It is merely my way of emphasizing a word, or part of a word, in much the same way as one would emphasize their written ideas elsewhere through the use of italics. Since italics is not reflected in the actual e-mail we receive after the message is posted on the board, I thought that perhaps I would help clarify my meanings by using bold lettering and [ironically] avoid misunderstandings.
It is not my intention that my views be interpreted as weird, spooky or even tricky. I'm sorry that the content of my messages have affected you in this way and glad that you took the time to express your uncertainty. I do have a "vast and vivid personal vision of the world" and it IS "rich with meaning and full of significance" as you describe it, but it is really not so different from the world view of most spiritual traditions. Luckily, having to put my pants on one leg at a time continues to keep me well grounded.
Regarding the meaning of "helplessness": As I see it, our use of helplessness could at times be an excuse --sometimes we do things when we really know better. It could be self-deception --we often do this to *excuse* doing the things that we really *should* know better than to do. It could be ignorance, too --we often aren't aware enough and lack the necessary knowledge when choosing and deciding, and so we are driven to act on our impulses UNconsciously. That is why I pointed out that it isn't just about what we *want* that drives us to be helpless but what we *need* to experience in order to grow and evolve. In other words, when we aren't fully engaged to our life experience because we are habitually repressing certain areas of it, we will be driven to act on our impulses. The fates then, will lead us where we refuse to willingly go. Otherwise we would never grow because we humans are notorious for resisting change.
Do I believe that it is possible to ALWAYS be in control of self? No. At least not for many people at the present stage of their evolution. Do I believe that we CAN eventually be in control of self? Certainly. When we are fully and consciously aware we won't be resorting to excuses, self-deception nor at the mercy of our ignorance. But, if we believe that becoming *fully aware and conscious* means that we must RID ourselves of our natural, vital impulses -- the wild, spontaneous and natural self-- then it makes perfect sense to *resist* the idea of becoming "noble", as you put it. I'd be high-tailing it myself, if that were the case. This explains why anyone would resist the mere concept of normal, everyday people aspiring to the holy life.
You see, my understanding of the word holy has to do with becoming WHOLLY oneself. For the average wo/man this is the stuff of Gods, certainly, but to become holy simply means becoming WHOLE --Physically, Mentally, Emotionally, Spiritually-- for your life to become a sacred vessel for the expression of Life through you. Believe it or not, this means that our instinctual and libidious natures, which are part of the whole, are meant to come along, not be eradicated. The only difference between living *unholy* lives and living *holy* lives is the degree of awareness and consciousness.
In this sense of the meaning, I *absolutely* believe that holiness is a goal that we will each strive for willingly, at some point along our journey. And since I believe that our respective journeys extends beyond this one lifetime, I don't expect that all of us will be aspiring to this goal in this particular lifetime.
I do hope that I've clarified some of the ideas I previously presented that you found so disconcerting.
.....
"Spiritual development is a long and arduous journey, an adventure through strange lands full of surprises, difficulties and even dangers. It involves drastic transmutation of the 'normal' elements of the personality, an awakening of potentialities hitherto dormant, a rising of consciousness to new realms and a functioning along a new inner dimension." ~~Assagioli
Dharma
As far as I can tell, I have not attached any secret meaning to my use of upper-case letters when I write. It is merely my way of emphasizing a word, or part of a word, in much the same way as one would emphasize their written ideas elsewhere through the use of italics. Since italics is not reflected in the actual e-mail we receive after the message is posted on the board, I thought that perhaps I would help clarify my meanings by using bold lettering and [ironically] avoid misunderstandings.
It is not my intention that my views be interpreted as weird, spooky or even tricky. I'm sorry that the content of my messages have affected you in this way and glad that you took the time to express your uncertainty. I do have a "vast and vivid personal vision of the world" and it IS "rich with meaning and full of significance" as you describe it, but it is really not so different from the world view of most spiritual traditions. Luckily, having to put my pants on one leg at a time continues to keep me well grounded.
Regarding the meaning of "helplessness": As I see it, our use of helplessness could at times be an excuse --sometimes we do things when we really know better. It could be self-deception --we often do this to *excuse* doing the things that we really *should* know better than to do. It could be ignorance, too --we often aren't aware enough and lack the necessary knowledge when choosing and deciding, and so we are driven to act on our impulses UNconsciously. That is why I pointed out that it isn't just about what we *want* that drives us to be helpless but what we *need* to experience in order to grow and evolve. In other words, when we aren't fully engaged to our life experience because we are habitually repressing certain areas of it, we will be driven to act on our impulses. The fates then, will lead us where we refuse to willingly go. Otherwise we would never grow because we humans are notorious for resisting change.
Do I believe that it is possible to ALWAYS be in control of self? No. At least not for many people at the present stage of their evolution. Do I believe that we CAN eventually be in control of self? Certainly. When we are fully and consciously aware we won't be resorting to excuses, self-deception nor at the mercy of our ignorance. But, if we believe that becoming *fully aware and conscious* means that we must RID ourselves of our natural, vital impulses -- the wild, spontaneous and natural self-- then it makes perfect sense to *resist* the idea of becoming "noble", as you put it. I'd be high-tailing it myself, if that were the case. This explains why anyone would resist the mere concept of normal, everyday people aspiring to the holy life.
You see, my understanding of the word holy has to do with becoming WHOLLY oneself. For the average wo/man this is the stuff of Gods, certainly, but to become holy simply means becoming WHOLE --Physically, Mentally, Emotionally, Spiritually-- for your life to become a sacred vessel for the expression of Life through you. Believe it or not, this means that our instinctual and libidious natures, which are part of the whole, are meant to come along, not be eradicated. The only difference between living *unholy* lives and living *holy* lives is the degree of awareness and consciousness.
In this sense of the meaning, I *absolutely* believe that holiness is a goal that we will each strive for willingly, at some point along our journey. And since I believe that our respective journeys extends beyond this one lifetime, I don't expect that all of us will be aspiring to this goal in this particular lifetime.
I do hope that I've clarified some of the ideas I previously presented that you found so disconcerting.
.....
"Spiritual development is a long and arduous journey, an adventure through strange lands full of surprises, difficulties and even dangers. It involves drastic transmutation of the 'normal' elements of the personality, an awakening of potentialities hitherto dormant, a rising of consciousness to new realms and a functioning along a new inner dimension." ~~Assagioli
Dharma
Dear Dharma,
Thank you very much for answering me so earnestly and in such detail. What you are saying seems to get more and more interesting as you explain it more fully. Not at all what I expected to hear.
IÕm sorry for using loaded words like weird and spooky and trick and so on. I guess I was trying to step on the tail of the tigress a little bit to see if she was awake. SheÕs awake alright! Thanks for not biting me Ð at least, not too hard.
You mentioned ignorance a couple of times as an obstacle to moving forward spiritually, and that hit home for me in regard to Clarity as a whole. When I first came to Clarity, I honestly did not imagine the Yi to be a medium for spiritual development. I thought the Yi was a useful decision-making tool, a somewhat blunt instrument for psychological probing, an enigmatic source of imagery, a neat intellectual puzzle, a fascinating Chinese cultural artifact. But I did not anticipate that anyone would take the YiÕs spiritual dimension (what spiritual dimension?) as an oracle seriously.
Until I encountered you. But you, Dharma, are only the most vocal proponent of spiritual development on this site. Nearly everyone else here seems to have pretty much the same concerns, despite having very different approaches. Look at recent postings by Candid, Willow, Alisa, Supanatural, Chinhuajin and others Ð not to mention Hilary herself, who sets the tone for the whole site and never fails (with a lot of wu wei) to keep things on a spiritual course. Some Clarity Friends are perhaps masters, some are apprentices Ð but all are seekers.
No doubt this is obvious to you, but it took a while for me to understand. I am not a spiritual person. Not yet.
Thanks again for taking me seriously.
Lindsay
Thank you very much for answering me so earnestly and in such detail. What you are saying seems to get more and more interesting as you explain it more fully. Not at all what I expected to hear.
IÕm sorry for using loaded words like weird and spooky and trick and so on. I guess I was trying to step on the tail of the tigress a little bit to see if she was awake. SheÕs awake alright! Thanks for not biting me Ð at least, not too hard.
You mentioned ignorance a couple of times as an obstacle to moving forward spiritually, and that hit home for me in regard to Clarity as a whole. When I first came to Clarity, I honestly did not imagine the Yi to be a medium for spiritual development. I thought the Yi was a useful decision-making tool, a somewhat blunt instrument for psychological probing, an enigmatic source of imagery, a neat intellectual puzzle, a fascinating Chinese cultural artifact. But I did not anticipate that anyone would take the YiÕs spiritual dimension (what spiritual dimension?) as an oracle seriously.
Until I encountered you. But you, Dharma, are only the most vocal proponent of spiritual development on this site. Nearly everyone else here seems to have pretty much the same concerns, despite having very different approaches. Look at recent postings by Candid, Willow, Alisa, Supanatural, Chinhuajin and others Ð not to mention Hilary herself, who sets the tone for the whole site and never fails (with a lot of wu wei) to keep things on a spiritual course. Some Clarity Friends are perhaps masters, some are apprentices Ð but all are seekers.
No doubt this is obvious to you, but it took a while for me to understand. I am not a spiritual person. Not yet.
Thanks again for taking me seriously.
Lindsay