Theos-Talk Archives (December 2002 Message tt00587)

Hi.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mauri" <mhart@idirect.ca>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 6:30 AM
Subject: re more re Re: Theos-World re
Leon,Swami,Maya,perspectives,esoteric/exoteric,karma, and l...
>
Mauri> I suspect that there's an aspect of Mahayana (whether seen in a
> Buddhist or Theosophic sense) that's confusing to a lot of
> people about "emptiness," (among other things?), out of which
> kind of confusion other confusions might seem to build up ...
> even to the extent that, (apparently?), some people tend to
> branch off in their own directions from some aspects of the
> esoteric tradition ... Many people seem to equate the
> "emptiness" in Mahayanics with nihilism or negativism,
> apparently. Not that there's anything "particularly wrong" with
> various interpretive branchings off (in that seems as if we all
> need to follow our own noses, after all?), but I tend to suspect
> that there might be an overview, or sense, of ("about") the
> esoteric tradition that incorporates such branchings in a way
> that "makes sense," if in an exoteric way, for some (many?) ...
>
An overview is not a thought, but a complete seeing. When the time is
appropriate, it will be accompained by spontaneous compassion for whatever
it is outside of and impartially seeing, specifically ones own little body
as it moves around connected to everything else, and also everything else it
is connected to. There will be a rapture that is both external to and
interconnected to the functionary of the ordinary which will then become
extraordinary. It is a simple operation, the ultimate performance of which
is preceeded by much practice of a simple and specific nature.

Thinking and talking about stuff is not the same as pondering and/or
enquiring, both of which are more active. If you put what you are trying to
understand into a format that is simple, there is a better chance of not
getting lost in a maze of details. IAnyone can say he is a Mahayana
Buddhist, but it is next to impossible (though not impossible) to actually
be one.

> For example, I tend to see the "apparent differences" (?)
> between the Tibetan "middle way" and "mind only" schools not
> so much as fundamental differences, (although ...), but as the
> results of karma-skandhic influences resulting in interpretive
> variations that tend to emphasize somewhat different stages or
> aspects on the p/Path, so ..

Wry: Everything and anything is a result of interconnecting causal factors.
In the doing of a simple non-interpretative practice ithat involves an
attentitiveness to myself as I am in my daily activities, everfything will
come more into focus, and wrong view will be corrected. When one function,
such as thinking, tries to do the work for another function, such sensation
or feeling, an imbalance is created which is very difficult to correct, as
the pattern becomes deeply ingrained. There is no way out except that
something sees all of this from the outside and there is an impartial study.
This can take years, after which it may be possible to do something
differently. But a person can participate in trying to establish an
atmosphere with others where this kind of observation can occur. I get the
idea to try this. Then something from the outside sees me as I get up from
the computer and walk from the room. I am going to do this now.and see how
long I can sustain the effort for. Maybe I will report back. Wry
>
> Speculatively, and best wishes,
> Mauri
>
> PS Sorry about ... whatever ...
>
> PPS My wife just yelled at me: Come on Mauri get off from
> that Goddamn computer. So gotta go!
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>