1st June 2003

      Hi A,

Several times I reread this post since you sent it...
I read it like a tea bag steeps in water. I just let it steep.

Yes.

That is the correct way.

Don't agree/disagree, don't accept/reject, ........just allow a pondering........ as living is going on.

And maybe a ........... "voila", ............. a "YES"............... happens............. which is not a "thought-out yes".

The other half of the equation is that, .......such is also the case even with the "other", .....who is relating to this body-mind complex labeled "A", .........either temporarily, like the teller on the shopping mall, or that asshole driver on the inter-state, ............or somewhat more permanently, like a spouse/partner/child/parent.

The instrumentality , as in "A"'s case, is the case, even for "them".

Thus in a relating, whether it is as love or as hatred, the two instruments, through which the relating happens, are part of that one moment,.............and ........for that moment to be such, two such appropriately conditioned instruments had to be manifested, such that, ...........that precise relating occurs, in the moment.


So it seems...what takes precedence is the manifestation of "such ness" of the moment.
The conditioned instrument (me) is only a temporary prop or actor destined to play its
part.

From the Covenant...

..the "seer" and the "seen" appear only when there is seeing.

They are attributes of seeing.

When you say "I am seeing this," "I am" and "this" come with seeing, not before.

You cannot have an unseen "this" nor an unseeing "I am"

The "me" does not even have the existential reality to be an actor.

The manifest conditioned body-mind complex, the psycho-somatic programmed organism, is the instrument of functioning or divinity.

Functioning is going on THROUGH this instrument, moment to moment to moment.

And quite irrespective of whether the prevailing sense of the "me", gets pissed of with the functioning in the moment, or is greatly elated with it.

This points to the quality of experience I've noticed for some time.
It is a quality of.......dispassion.
In this American culture passion is worshipped.

Yes.

And not just the American culture, for what invariably, what is essentially a chimera.

Passion for acquiring things,
for jockeying for position, for affiliation with power, some fantasy image or
some stance, etc, etc....

But doesn't this really just boil down to passion for ......experience?

Yes.

And through the experience, the sense of self-identity.

A,..... what you are seeking, (whether articulated or not, even whether you are aware of it or not) is essentially to address the innate sense of insecurity and thus the associated fear.

The sense of the "me" is just that, ..........the sense of insecurity.

And thus it seeks succor , solace in experience, assuming that the experience whether for the material or for the spiritual, will lend it, it's self-identity.

I could see this as the momentum of human habit or unconscious desperation for
experience in order to perpetuate (the illusion of ) existence.

To arrive at a meaning of existence.

Notice, when you lie totally satiated in your lover's arms, ..........you couldn't care whether it was an illusion or not.

Or whether the satiation meant anything or not.

Neurosis is phoning your shrink and saying " I am in total bliss, deliriously happy.

WHY?"

Thus, all the talk in spiritual circles of losing interest in experience or "letting go" of desires.

Those are the usual bromides.:-)

The bromide,.....forget the "seen", .........look for the "seer".

But after reading this second part of equation ... I don't see it this way.

So here arises a question...........If "A" (and everyone else) is only an instrument for
thinking/actioning to happen through in order for a moment to be such......
Who/What desires a moment to be.........such ?

Ahaaa.

Take any term, that you like, ................Bozo the Clown, Source, Noumenon, Consciousness, Mickey Mouse, Awareness-not-aware-of itself, Jerry Springer, God, Void, Plenum-of-potentialities, Subjectivity, Impersonal functioning.

Whatever, you feel like, any terminology will do, for all terms are conceptual conjectures anyway..

The key to apperceive A is that the question "Who?" can only arise to a "me-entity" from a sense of separation, isn't it?

I being all there is, ......................can the question "Who am I" ever arise to I?

Who is not-I, to whom I will pose this question to?

Who/What has a taste for experiencing..........anything ?

Experiencing, itself.

As-if.

What an ineffable mystery this all is....and how strange to be conscious
of this mysteriousness and also know that it can never be "known".

Yes.

It can never be known as a cognizable "object" to be known, experienced, or realized.

And it being nothing but the ,.............noting,-- "how strange this mysteriousness", ....

......you A can never become or know that, ........which you already are.

Mostly what I experience these days is wonder....not bliss or peace or whatever....
it is wonder at how beliefs, ideas, desires are falling away and not being replaced
by anything.

Doobeee Dooobeeee Doooooo.

It is simply wonder at how I am able to experience sitting here looking
out the window....or write these words to Sandeep......or feel my cat's fur........or
smell the air blowing in the window......or hear the traffic outside........on and on.....
every second.

Yes.

The ten thousand things, all going on, in the same moment and you witness the "going ons".

Witness, with absolutely no stake in the going on.

Which does not mean that there is no participation in terms of addressing an incoming input from the environ, as per the operating conditioning-in-the-moment.

And witnessing even this responding arising through "A".

The horses, had to be such, that day, the air, the trees, the barn, the entire milieu, the psycho-somatic-neurological ambience as "A", ............had to be precisely such, ..............such that "A" turned, looked and stayed.

And seeing occurred through "A", ...........as one movement of the entirety, of the Whole, in that moment.

What was seeing through "Amy" seemed to be.........what I am.
This is what is so amazing.

YES

Knowing this .............

In what will "A" take pride in?

Who, or What can "A" fear?

Who can "A" envy?

About what can "A" get angry?

About what can "A" be guilty about?

What can be a "disturbance" for "A"?

About what, shall "A" agonize ?

The non-fulfillment of what need,........ can trouble "A"?

What does "A" HAVE to achieve?

What does "A" HAVE to do?

What vicissitudes of Life can vicissitude "A"?

What suffering will "A" attach to an arising pain in the moment?

Who can "A" hate for enabling the arising pain in "A"?

What does "A" have, at whose potential loss, "A" trembles?

The answers to all the above are....nothing, nobody........yet, at times,
I still can experience these things....even though they seem like faint echoes.

Sure.

It's the flip-flops.

Suddenly you notice, the identification of suffering or guilt, or "must have that" or "must definitely not have that", etc etc.

and then you catch yourself and laugh "Aaah there goes A again".

In that laughing acceptance of even the flip-flop, you will notice the reduction of both the intensity/duration of the identification when it happens in the moment,........ and the frequency of occurrences.