Zelfkennisforum  

Ga terug   Zelfkennisforum > Advaita Vedanta > Je kunt hier een (advaita georienteerd) onderwerp starten

Je kunt hier een (advaita georienteerd) onderwerp starten Je onderhoud dit draadje vervolgens zelf.

Reageren
 
Discussietools Zoek in deze discussie Weergave
Oud 4 november 2012, 11:57   #1
Renoir
Forumbaas
 
Renoir's schermafbeelding
 
Geregistreerd: 28 maart 2010
Berichten: 1.659
Standaard Losing the Moon




VOOR HIER HET BOEK 'LOSING THE MOON' VAN BYRON KATIE GESCANNED

EN ALLEEN VOOR LEDEN IN DE BESLOTEN KRING TE LEZEN.

BIJ BELANGSTELLING PLAATS IK HEM HIER OM ALS PDF TE DOWNLOADEN

COPYRIGHT 1998 by the EuroCenter for the Work
P.B. 465, 5900 AL Venlo, the Netherlands

ER IS GEEN TOESTEMMING VAN DE UITGEVER GEVRAAGD HET IS TOCH OVERAL TE LEZEN
__________________
Ordnung muss sein
Renoir is offline   Met citaat reageren
Oud 4 november 2012, 12:07   #2
Renoir
Forumbaas
 
Renoir's schermafbeelding
 
Geregistreerd: 28 maart 2010
Berichten: 1.659
Standaard

DIALOGEN OP BASIS VAN NON DUALITEIT EN VOLGENS DE UITGEVER NIET VOOR IEDEREEN GESCHIKT MET NAME HET LEZEN VAN HOOFDSTUK 3 WORDT STERK ONTRADEN TE LEZEN OMDAT HET NOGAL CONFRONTEREND IS


FOREWORD


When I met Byron Katie I was immersed in the advaita, non-dual teachings. I knew the depth of Silence accessible in the Heart, as the Heart. I had sat extensively with many beautiful teachers including Gangaji, Papaji, Robert Adams, Francis Lucille, and Isaac Shapiro. I had walked around India's sacred mountain, Arunachala. My heart had sung deeply with Ramana. I had fallen more than once in full prostration with the total awe of That. I had spent months in gratitude.

And my mind was a mess. I wandered around chanting the child's rhyme of "There once was a girl who had a little curl right in the middle of her forehead. When she was good, she was very, very good, and when she was bad, she was horrid." The extremes of that seemed accurate. I would know all the bliss and gratitude of empty mind, of non-identification, and then like a wall, like a landslide, the mind would begin its cycle of not letting up. Self-abuse would reign. I felt shame at being in such misery, when I had experienced such freedom. I felt something must be very wrong with me. How could I know the truth of no self, of emptiness, and still be caught by the illusions that left me full of fear and self-loathing?

Many friends had suggested meeting Byron Katie and experiencing The Work. I went. Having been a psychologist, the last thing I felt I needed was another method. The first day I didn't listen to The Work at all. My focus was glued on Katie. I don't know what exactly I was studying, but I was studying her. My attitude was "Make one false move and I'm out of here," although the actual feeling was more like "Make one false move and I'll kill you." The old rage which I hadn't felt in years had returned. I was like a caged animal?caught between Truth and total pain. How could this be?

The second day I continued the focus on Katie. I planted myself in the back of the room, but directly in line with her. I couldn't see the one in the chair doing the Work and I didn't want to. I simply studied Katie. That night I went home and wrote my first piece of The Work?on God and how angry I was. I didn't really connect with it much. Katie returned to Marin the next month. This time I was willing to watch The Work. I borrowed tapes. I bought the book. I began doing The Work. The first turn-arounds I experienced rocked me.

Here was a procedure, done as a meditation, that worked only with my own mind and my own integrity, or lack of it. I was intrigued. I was full of resentments, and had no problem writing The Work daily.
In my connection with Katie, all my longing got aroused once again. I wrote The Work on Katie and again rocked with the turn-arounds ! "Katie should connect me with Heart!" became "I should connect me with Heart." What do you mean I should? If I could, I would! "Is that true?" I began to settle down inside of myself with the questions. I began to feel the lies as they were gently contacted. I listened when Katie said the Heart is the only place we can meet that The Work is internal.

Katie suggests asking the questions of the Work with the mind, and letting the heart answer. Mine was not an easy case. My mind fought and scrambled for its life. My mother issues were totally in my face. I hated seeing them? again! After a decade of therapy I thought they were gone! What felt like attachments held since childhood were standing firm. I wanted the peace of non-duality, not the pain of my feelings about my mother.

But the Work. works! It is four simple questions and one can ask and answer them alone. I filled out the worksheet, set up Katie's picture, got out the little book, and proceeded step by step through the four questions.

I began investigating my anger with a close friend: ...She should have come to see my apartment by now! Is it true? What's the reality of it? She hasn't. What do I get when I hold the belief she should have come by now, when she hasn't? The old familiar self-righteousness and superiority, for starters. And how does that feel inside of me? Separate. Hopeless. Angry. Alone. And who or what would I be if I didn't hold that lie, the lie that says she should have visited when she hasn't? Present. Not thinking I know something. Which is more comfortable?separate, hopeless, angry, alone? or present not knowing something? I had to admit the latter.

You mean thoughts cause those feelings? You mean SHE doesn't cause them? You mean I'm not a victim of her behavior?

Years before as I sat in bliss for months on end in India, I knew that I would eventually have to face the content of the mind. I somehow knew that for me the emptiness I knew in India was a reprieve, a sweet gift.
I was certain that sooner or later I would have to welcome the mind once again?that the welcoming of seeing it as not real would not be sufficient when the mind got past a certain threshold.

What The Work offered was miraculous: Purity grounded in the truth of non-duality, and in a way that addressed the particulars of this mind in the moment of its identification. I can know all is well, and I can experience the sweetness of silence, but in the next instant I can be reeling with the judgments "you should love me," and "you should clean your room," and "you should leave so he can be happy." The tension between these feeling realities of the moment, and the truth of no Mind, was experienced like a rubber band pulling me into more and more self- hatred and fear. While lovingly reading about non- attachment, I was attached to very particular judgments, moment by moment.

When thoughts are not impinging, there is no problem. When there is that luscious spaciousness, that Silence, there is no problem. Thoughts come and go?like laughing gas?keeping everything at a distance in which anything is okay! This is the wondrous state of peace, of just sitting, of quiet, of non-attachment. However, in this mind, another experience sometimes takes over. The thoughts come in closer, and it's as if the sweet veil which keeps them as out there somehow disappears. Every movement of mind suddenly feels real. The "I" is identified. Silence seems unavailable. Grace has stepped aside as unknowingly as she appeared. Shame takes over with "What have I done?" Suddenly the "I" is everything again. Asking "Who am I?" seems to only result in more mind activity.

This is where the gift of Byron Katie's investigation comes in. It addresses the mind where it is, exactly in the middle of its content. It can go directly into shame as well as into beliefs such as "My mother should love me." The shame says, "These thoughts shouldn't be arising!" The Work asks, "Is it true? Sweetheart, these thoughts shouldn't be arising, is that true?" What is the reality of it? They are. And what do you get when you hold the belief that they shouldn't be arising, when they are? What happens when you argue with reality? What happens is more shame! Guilt. Worry. Anxiety. Belief in the "I." What do I get when I argue with reality? Pain. Katie says of herself if she has any freedom, it's that she's a lover of reality. Of what is.

The Work is based on the simple cause-and-effect relationship between attachment to a belief and it's being let go. When I believe certain thoughts shouldn't arise and they do, I can chronicle what happens: My body tightens; feelings of shame, guilt, and self-blame escalate; thoughts build on each other appearing more and more solid; the mind gets very active. All of this can be observed and monitored. And then, as the fourth question is asked, "Who or what would I be without this belief that certain thoughts shouldn't arise?" I can also chronicle what happens. Without this belief, I become a simple observer without judgment. A friend. My breath eases. My stomach softens. Slowly the lovely advaitic "All is well" begins feeling closer inside.

It's not "All is well" as some theory, but this moment, inside of me, when I examine this belief that my friend should come visit, when I investigate it. I began to contact for myself this truth of the advaitic masters?All is well. I am not dependent on your actions, feelings, decisions. My shutting down my love is what hurts.

I am love, I am That. And when I hold the belief that you shouldn't be how you are, I am in the lie that there is something other than love, something other than That. Suddenly the truths of advaita were seeping into my own body. I am love, not in spite of you, or when you give me what I want, just I am love. I realized the truth that Katie's daughter announced to her mother one day: "There is nothing you can do to keep me from loving you." "Who am I?" like "Is it true?" becomes again an amazing question that stops the mind.

Writing The Work stops the mind on paper. The swirling mass of thoughts becomes stopped. Each thought is then available in its purity for investigation. We may find the next time the thought arises, it does not produce the same discomfort, and that it is held much lighter. We may just find it mildly interesting! The Great Undoing has begun. We even look forward to it arising again, so we can investigate it freshly.

As each belief is undone through the four questions, the original silence of the mind is once more available. And with the turn-around, the attention is put back where it belongs?on me. It is the returning to "Who am I?" after straying off to "Who are You?" "Who are you?" returning to "Who am I?" becomes the ultimate turn-around.
__________________
Ordnung muss sein
Renoir is offline   Met citaat reageren
Oud 4 november 2012, 12:11   #3
Renoir
Forumbaas
 
Renoir's schermafbeelding
 
Geregistreerd: 28 maart 2010
Berichten: 1.659
Standaard

I invite you into these pages where the Truth of Non- duality and the truth of what is, meet. "Ramana" means that which resides in the Heart of all Being. Ramana comes to the West in 1998 in the form of Byron Katie. Tat tvam asi. (You are That!)

Ellen J. Mack, Editor


1.


THERE'S NOT ANYTHING LEGITIMATE EVER
GOING ON INSIDE OF ME

Friend: Are we right in understanding, Katie, that no desires arise in you?

Katie: There's not anything legitimate ever going on inside of me. You're all that's left of it. And I know that you don't believe your own desires either.

Friend: I don't believe my own desires? Let's say that a corn chip is in front of me. I can taste the salt and I feel like I'd be happier if I put that corn chip in my mouth than if I just left it there. I can feel the saliva...

Katie: That's the power of the story of a past. It's the story of a corn chip that doesn't even exist.

Friend: It's in front of me...

Katie: But it's a corn chip, sweetheart, is it true? Can you really know that?

Friend: No, I can't know it's a corn chip.

Katie: So you're telling the story that it's real, and your tongue does all that stuff, and all the desire starts, and none of it's real. I mean you could reach down and find that it's plastic? That's a closer metaphor. But even when you eat it and you investigate, it can't be real. Because everything is a story. It can't ever be legitimate.

Friend: So, why do I eat?

Katie: Because you do.

Friend: So, what's the difference between ...

1

Katie: Motive. A "you." I am eating? Ach, I don't think sol Investigate. "I" doesn't eat. It's "is-ing." There's no eating. There's no sleeping.

Friend: So, the corn chip just goes in the mouth, but as soon as it's "I want that corn chip," it's time to investigate?

Katie: Yes. But not with the motive of not eating the corn chip. You investigate for the love of truth because that's what you want. A corn chip is a metaphor for that that you really want.

Friend: Let's say it's true now that all I want is the truth. Now, how could I know that to be totally true?

Katie: Well, it's true until you see the corn chip. And then you switch, you've moved. So, at that moment you want a corn chip more than you want truth. When it's true you don't want the corn chip, and you're tired of the effects, it's as though apparent form starts to shift because it really is your body. And it could be obesity, or swelling from the salt, or indigestion, whatever the effects are?those are God also. When you stop preferring the corn chip, and corn chip is all the guilt, the shame, the happiness, the joy, the indigestion, all of it?that's the package. That's what is.

When you don't prefer any of that, then there's no corn chip. I mean they could be all over the place, and you would never see one. It'd be like you don't want to sit in that chair forever, and so you don't. That's where the apparent world field starts to shift. It leaves when you leave. It's the end of everything. And then you notice, it wasn't just. the corn chip. Or it wasn't just the sex partner. You do this work on sexuality, and you notice the desire

3

for everything?it's across-the-board. Because it's all just a metaphor for the same thing. What happens is it just starts to do its own flow without attachment. It's like a "what is," with no ups or downs.

Friend: There's no "you" doing it. It's that impersonal thing that's almost impossible to get until you get it.

Katie: Well, it's not impossible to get because it's always there. The illusion is impossible to get, and not there.

Friend: When you are doing The Work I often think of vasanas, this concept I was taught in India, which means habits of mind, or tendencies of mind. Annamalai Swami, a disciple of Ramana Maharshi, said, "Vasanas arise, catch your attention, and pull you outwards towards the world rather than inwards towards the Self."

Katie: Vasanas are the world. The world is a reflection of the vasanas. The world cannot exist without them. It's a reflection of them. And he's accurate in my experience also, because he could be realizing that people think there's a past, so the world already exists for them in their reality.

Friend: He suggests just ignoring all the vasanas that arise in the mind and to fix the attention on the Self.

Katie: The guy's, you know, in my experience, absolutely, totally accurate. And for me, to be still 43 years ago and ignore the vasanas that arose in my mind, and to try to fix it on the Self?I had not heard of such a suggestion. It just wasn't available to me.

So for me to be still and ignore the vasanas?it would be like "yeah, sure" and give me some cocaine instead. Give me something that makes sense to me. To tell someone to be still, from where I came from, would be disrespectful. It would be to ask the impossible. So, I enter the vasana with total respect.

5

Rather than saying go beyond the vasana, let's join the vasana. Let's understand the vasana. It makes sense to me because only love heals in my experience. I can't just leave it out there and go to the Self. That is me I'm leaving out there.

So I came in as a reversal. I call this the re-entry. I'm in love with it. It would not think of not coming back to give itself a kiss? including it, merging with it, sexing with it, holding it, being it?all of it. Why would I want to ignore it or meditate it away? Just meet it head-on. Let me meet it with understanding. Because after all these centuries, it's pretty obvious it's not going away. And I just rarely speak of prior to that, because it leaves you out and you are me.

Friend: Could you explain more about coming in as a reversal?

Katie: It would be like if we put a mirror up here, and we're all reflected up in it. And the mirror image, you over there, is going to dictate to the mirror image of another to be different than it is. You are dictating from the mirror. Hopeless. So it's going to do everything it can watching the others in the mirror move around and think it should be like that, like it's really real. And we're just sitting here still. And it's got all of our tendencies?it's insane. It's not real! It's not Source. Okay? So for me to ask, like if I am the image, for me to try to change the other, if I'm you, is nuts! And I spend an entire lifetime trying to pull off something. I am not Source. I am the reflection of Source. That's why it's kind to just kick back and move when it moves. I am that. And then not even that. I mean all you have to do is turn the mirror and it's gone.

Friend: So you're the reversal?

Katie: As God, I'm watching my image. It's called you. It's called the books over there, It's called the wall. Fireplace.

7
__________________
Ordnung muss sein
Renoir is offline   Met citaat reageren
Oud 4 november 2012, 12:18   #4
Renoir
Forumbaas
 
Renoir's schermafbeelding
 
Geregistreerd: 28 maart 2010
Berichten: 1.659
Standaard

Everything. Okay? So I'm watching it, and I thought I was that. I thought I was God. Here's how I came in as a reversal: I wasn't this woman for 43 years and then awakened?I was BORN. I was born at what you would call age 43. I came from nowhere and nothing. It was wiped out. I looked at my hand for the first time. I came in through a back door. I didn't die and was born.

I had never seen this earth. I came in clean. At 43. Clean. So when someone calls it a hand, it's like my self defining my self. It's like a man and woman in bed when they're the most intimate. You would say hand, and it was rapture. The very first time. And everything is a first time. So I fell in love with earth. Everything. All of it. I got to come into that. Not leave earth and go back to the other. So that is my love of the mirror image. I woke up as the image. Not God. And God. The fun part where it's lived. The fun part is the living one. It is itself realized.

Friend: So these last 12 years were the fun part.

Katie: Oh ! Ah !

Friend: How were the first 43 years? Were they fun?

Katie: No. They were not fun. They were not fun. They were not fun. It was confusion. Just confusion.

Friend: Now, the people reading about re-entry are going to be mostly confused people. They're going to be confused people looking for concepts that will help them out of the confusion. My concern about this book is that we are going to create a new concept.

Katie: Don't bother being concerned?what you say is absolutely accurate. No need to be concerned?that's exactly what's going to happen. That's what happens in the dream.

Friend: And do we have any way to warn people about this,
or to tell them?

9

Katie: Yes, up front. You can say everything we say here is a lie. But only everything. And if you think there's something real here that could be carried on as a new religion?new concepts in any way, shape or form, ask yourself four questions....

Friend: Like, "Is it true?"

Katie: Yes. I just like that it?oh, you know what I speak can't be told! So, it never bothers. But if people would just look at their hand without a story, they would fall in love also. Total. Absolute, Absolute. Absolute. Just like they would fall in love with the most apparent vicious concept that could arise. It would be the same.

Friend #2: Katie, didn't you say there are no new concepts? So when you say there's going to be a new concept with this...

Katie: People would think they have a new concept. It's just the same old thing. Let's understand the vasana. And when I hear these non-duality teachings, I get very excited, because they hold the space that I don't. It's me again. And when someone says, "I'm going to this teacher," I say, let's celebrate that together because to go to them, is to go to me. I get that a lot in Europe: "Will you forgive me, I've been to see another teacher?" So, like Ramana holds that space of prior to, and I am a lover of the vasana. Because it's the mirror image of myself. And myself is the "prior to." It just completed itself. It lives as the full circle. I mean the no thing is no more or less than the apparent thing. And it's a total love affair. I refer to it as the re-entry that can't be done. There is no re-entry. Ramana apparently held that space. I'm a scam while he held that space. How can you speak of nothing when people think there's something?

11

Friend: Just say the truth that you're a scam.

Katie: I'm pretending not to be non-duality. Ramana holds the place where people can understand that truth. And I pretend I don't. And there's no "I" doing it. It's just an appearance.

Friend: And you're pretending not to hold that truth because...?

Katie: Why would I separate from you? Why wouldn't I join you? My way is to join wherever you are. When you go into the pits of hell, I'm there. I am there.

Friend: I see you actually as a Trojan horse. I see you're appearing in a guise that you're not, and this book is going to reveal the Trojan horse as it really is and I think that's what has to be, in the sense that you're a more palatable package to the Western mind in your disguised state. They think you're a person that's wise.

Katie: And it amazes me that it is standing still for such?it's obviously time. This vasana?habit or tendency?you're talking about comes from a natural place. It images Source.

Friend: I keep hearing the word "re-entry" as you talk.

Katie: Yes. Good. All you can do is come to see that what is, is. And then there's another step. I always say it "I'm a lover of reality." What is, is. Until I love what is, there's a good reason to cut my throat, because I lose. I don't have control, and that was my game. My life was "I want control and I'm going to have it." So, "What is, is" can seem pretty depressing. But I'm a lover of what is. And that takes it to a whole other level and that's the re-entry for me.

Friend #2: I'm getting more and more what you mean by reentry, but maybe you could just...

13
__________________
Ordnung muss sein
Renoir is offline   Met citaat reageren
Oud 4 november 2012, 12:27   #5
Renoir
Forumbaas
 
Renoir's schermafbeelding
 
Geregistreerd: 28 maart 2010
Berichten: 1.659
Standaard

Katie: To go to the "No thing?I'm God?I'm a song, but I won't come out and sing," is like halfway. The No One and the No Thing?ach ! Re-enter ! You may as well. It's what you're doing, pretending not to. You know these spiritual people, the ones that say "There's no One and Nothing"? it's a great concept. I really understand the teachers who are silent, who stay silent. It's noble. And this one speaks. It had to go all the way. It had to take all the risks. It would not let any concept of "I should teach it all" stop it. The inquiry won't have it. It says you and me, and that's where the scam began.

It came out as a liar?for love. It will do anything for love?say anything, do anything. It's what it is. It would die for it. And that's over and over and over. It would sell its peace. It has no caring for itself. It will join. It will join because it is it already. It dies for itself. Lives for itself.

Friend: What I hear you talking about is pretense. You don't have any pretense to be anything other than what you are.

Katie: Yes, because it's so fine, so good.

Friend #2: Katie, in a workshop recently you said, "What fun is it being God if I can't hold up the mirror? Not mourning the coming back, not judging ourselves for not being in non-duality. Duality is a terrible thing?is it true?"

Katie: That pretty well covers it. You know how you say Ramana sat, and didn't speak for so long, all of that?I experienced that for like a second. And because he did it, I burned through it. It didn't take me months or years out there. It was just a moment.
What happened was this: there were a bunch of people waiting for me, and I had committed to be there. I was on this rock.

15

And they were calling me. And I KNEW that nothing could ever move me?ever, EVER move me. And then it moved ! It was like because it has been done, it burned just like that. So, again, this has just gone to the next phase. It's a total reversal. My experience is until I loved them there was no peace. Because I didn't have a people world. There was only thought. There was only mind. I mean "prior to I" and "I." So it was all me. To love each one arising, that was all of existence, because you just don't exist. Show me something that's not kind. Show me something that's not benign. In other words, show me something that's real. So, it's the joy of apparent living. It's the joy of life.

Friend: Katie, could you comment about referring to yourself as "it?"

Katie: I'll say, "She needs to go to sleep now." If they hadn't said "You're a woman," I would just always say "It? it needs to sleep now." I refer to myself as "us" or "you." I'll take on any pronoun and sometimes it's hard for people to catch that. I don't have a reference point for any separation.

Friend #2: It seems to me a big difference is, of all the meditative traditions, yours is the only one that says look at the content. Everyone else is saying avoid it.

Katie: Yes, you look at it, you come to love it. I mean, isn't that what we do? Isn't that love at first sight? And if we don't love our neighbor, isn't it painful? To me there is no neighbor. There's only this?what people would call an internal world. There was nothing left to love.

17

2.

NON-DUALITY COMING BACK FOR ITSELF


Friend: Katie, I woke up this morning in a space where there just seemed to be awareness, and then identification set in and as soon as that happened, intense fear arose. So as we've been sitting here, I've been doing The Work with the fear. And the first thing I asked was "What am I afraid of?" And I couldn't get an answer. There's just this fear. And then I asked "What do I get for holding the belief in the fear?" What I get is a "me." Okay, so the fear gives me a "me." Then I asked, "Can I know that it's true?" And that's where the dropping into the heart won't happen. It just sits here. Intellectually, I can see it; I have a host of teachings, yours included, running through me, but it's just stuck.

Katie: I'm hearing the question. You're labeling it fear, saying that it's fear. Can you really know that it's true?

Friend: No, as soon as you said it, it was clear?

Katie: So there it is. It's done. That was the first one and you skipped it. You went to a descendant. A little reincarnation there! You're skipping a generation. It's fear, ach ! Labeling it fear without investigation is how it has all these lives. And that's where psychology is born, in trying to find out what this fear is. Well, it's nothing. Let's just investigate it in the beginning. Go back to the beginning. And then there's no need for psychology.

19

Friend: So when you said about fear, "Can you know that it's true?" It went really fast?can we go through it again?

Katie: Okay. It's fear. Is it true? Can you really know that it is fear?

Friend: What came up was, "It's a sensation."

Katie: Yes. And you label it an enemy. You label it "not natural." It's a sensation. So, now you can ask: "It's a sensation?is it true?" Can you really know that?

Friend: The strongest thing that comes is "I don't know."

Katie: That's my position. In that place, you're back in that twilight you were describing?before the label of sensation and then labeling it fear, and on and on and on. This is a game! This is fun! This is not serious. You're doing one of two things all of the time: you're attaching to apparent creation, what arises; or you're un-attaching. And the investigation is the un-attaching. You can't attach to what's not true. And that's been the apparent life's goal? to make something real. It's a full-time job. We don't go to sleep at night?we pass out. It's like living in an arena, trying to win all the time inside of yourself to make it real. And being unconscious of it. Just knowing that it's very hopeless and stressful.

I was in Istanbul in a Turkish bath and the woman who came at me must have weighed 300 pounds?that's an under exaggeration?and she was entirely physical. And I could not make a sensation. Another person could have called it a physical torture chamber. And that's all that happened to you this morning. Making something out of nothing. Without investigation it has to go on like the creator because it's a mirror image. That's its nature, but to investigate is to put yourself back into a clear position of "I am That."

21
__________________
Ordnung muss sein
Renoir is offline   Met citaat reageren
Oud 4 november 2012, 12:34   #6
Renoir
Forumbaas
 
Renoir's schermafbeelding
 
Geregistreerd: 28 maart 2010
Berichten: 1.659
Standaard

I AM the sensation. And it can't be told. But the investigation puts you into the experience of all those words. And that's not even true. I am prior to I. But what fun to come back to one's own self. In my experience, there's nothing I could or would do to stop that. That's re-entry. So we come to understand it as we're discussing here, through the investigation. That it's a privilege to open the eyes and see itself. You don't wake up forever. It's now, now, now.

Friend: When you said those last words I had this image that, in some sense, final awakening will happen, and now it's just like it's not. It's just going to be...

Katie: To wake up?whatever that is?forever, implies time. To wake up is just a past history apparently arising. It's old. It's to keep you from the experience now. Man sitting in chair. Without a story?heaven. The stories go on?but without attachment to the story. And that's what the inquiry leaves us with. The freedom of non-attachment. Internal. Detachment from the movie. But then, as you know, I talk about the re-entry.

And movies are good when they've been met with some understanding. You know how you love your story? Well, every story is the story of itself. It adores itself. People say how can you just listen to people's stories for 12 years? They're my story. It's the story of me, the story of God. The sounds of the birds out there?same. Delightful. It is itself. Now. And all sounds are internal. There is no "out there." Hear it from inside. Nothing less than that is possible.

Friend: Katie, my understanding of awakening has been that it's the absence of a personal me. There's an apparent me and then that's gone. There's just what is.

Katie: As you investigate, it's not. It's just one more story of the past. If it's five seconds ago, it might as well be a

23

million years ago. This moment cannot be spoken of. It's already gone. There's no such thing as a moment or now. Now is a concept.

Friend #2: That's pretty exciting.

Katie: Yes! And I get to hear this word, not awareness, but the other one?enlightenment--thrown around so much. But "awakening," I understand. Because that's my story. I was asleep on a floor. I awoke, I was asleep, or not. But the way I like to tell it is?it's a process all the way through. All the way through. It's ever-changing. Ever-growing. Ever-expanding. I couldn't even speak of it at first, it sounded like a deranged, insane woman trying to speak the unspeakable. But it's taken on a way of... communication. And it continues to mature. And that's fascinating from here.

Friend: One quotation from Ramana Maharshi that totally stays with me is: "The only obstacle to your enlightenment is the belief that you are not enlightened."

Katie: When you look at "What do you get for holding the belief, I want to be enlightened," you see you get to stay stuck in what you quote Ramana as saying is the problem. And the inquiry shows that beyond a doubt.

What do you get for holding the belief? You're not enlightened! And who would you be without it? That's when you go into that space. And you can continue to hold the same concept after the investigation, but without attachment, which is mostly what I experience you do anyway. You can't long for what you don't know. The concept is what you say it is. I was just one "graced"?to use that term?with not knowing there was such a thing as "awakening." I thought that suicide was the only way out?that it was my only option. It's a homesickness. A homesickness! The longing for home.

25

I used to lie in bed for so many of those seven years and just wail, "I want to go home" I thought that was suicide but inside of me that's all! knew. It was a purity?"I want to go home." But I didn't believe in a heaven or a hell. I wanted to go home, so in my innocence and ignorance, I had it right. That's how I know the longing for oneself is a perfectly natural thing.

Take away the word "enlightenment"?because I wouldn't know what that meant, and maybe no one else does?take away the word "enlightenment," and go home. Go home?meet it there. To the heart. Back to itself. It's always there; you know that from The Work. It's always there?always.

There's no time you can ask the heart that it won't give you that innocent purity?full-blown right in your face. Just what do you use to block it? That's the true guru. It always speaks?always. There's nothing you can do to obliterate it. Nothing. Going against it is the pain. It's a natural. This asking is what the investigation is for?there it is. There it is! It's an amazing thing. To say it's tireless is a ridiculous understatement. And if you ask it when you get hurt?it's home. It's always there.

It doesn't matter what condition?you listen. You are the listener, the one without a story. I use an expression, "Let the mind ask the question, let the heart give the answer." And the mind and the heart merge as one. You come to know that they were always undivided. There never WAS a mind. It was always the heart. Just ,a little dance here or there and you know the heart is everything. It is Everything.

Friend: You've said that the heart will do whatever it takes. It will rape a child, it'll murder 6 million Jews, it'll do whatever it takes. I really just got that, really literally.

Katie: It is love, and we can tell all the stories we want about how it's not, and it is. It's not even misguided.

27

It is what it is, always. Always cleansing, purifying itself. Always knowing?sparing nothing. It's pure instead. That is the kindness. And anyone who would meet that realization, and get it, would walk into the fire to hold that purity. Literally, be ignited. It would walk through anything because it's fearless, it's nature itself. It does anyway?it would just walk into it with a little awareness. There's not a choice. It's like when the axe falls, just before it hits your head the last thought is?Grace. Thank you! This too. And even in this condition, this apparent condition, it always welcomes death. Always. So even the suicidal things are natural.

Everything is natural. It's just our interpretation, the way we interpret it, that's unnatural. And the life and death of it is, we could say, the non-duality coming back for itself. And I don't mean to get itself, or to heal itself or any of that, but to come BACK for the pure joy and egocentricity that is its nature?self love. It is itself. It is too damn greedy not to lick itself. Eat itself. Devour itself. Every taste, every thing is God. Every word, every movement is a love affair. Literally.

Longing for death is a longing for the beginning. And the longing for the beginning is the longing for death. It's a breath, it's an in and out, in and out. It's nothing, something, the left and the right. In Europe, a couple of people asked about non-duality and what I experienced was that I have no interest in non-duality.

Give me myself. It's the greed to hold the mirror up.. It wouldn't delete itself. And that's where lust comes in. And selfishness?all those words we have seen as negatives. They're all natural. They're all words for God. It would have to be?it's its own song. Every name is its own name. Non-duality is no name?and I come back for my name.

29
__________________
Ordnung muss sein
Renoir is offline   Met citaat reageren
Oud 5 november 2012, 13:19   #7
Aart
Drommedaris
 
Geregistreerd: 6 augustus 2011
Berichten: 3.650
Standaard

Citaat:
Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Gargamel Bekijk bericht
Friend: So, the corn chip just goes in the mouth, but as soon as it's "I want that corn chip," it's time to investigate?

Katie: Yes. But not with the motive of not eating the corn chip. You investigate for the love of truth because that's what you want. A corn chip is a metaphor for that that you really want.

Friend: Let's say it's true now that all I want is the truth. Now, how could I know that to be totally true?

Katie: Well, it's true until you see the corn chip. And then you switch, you've moved. So, at that moment you want a corn chip more than you want truth. When it's true you don't want the corn chip, and you're tired of the effects, it's as though apparent form starts to shift because it really is your body. And it could be obesity, or swelling from the salt, or indigestion, whatever the effects are?those are God also. When you stop preferring the corn chip, and corn chip is all the guilt, the shame, the happiness, the joy, the indigestion, all of it?that's the package. That's what is.

When you don't prefer any of that, then there's no corn chip. I mean they could be all over the place, and you would never see one. It'd be like you don't want to sit in that chair forever, and so you don't. That's where the apparent world field starts to shift. It leaves when you leave. It's the end of everything. And then you notice, it wasn't just. the corn chip. Or it wasn't just the sex partner. You do this work on sexuality, and you notice the desire

3

for everything?it's across-the-board. Because it's all just a metaphor for the same thing. What happens is it just starts to do its own flow without attachment. It's like a "what is," with no ups or downs.

Friend: There's no "you" doing it. It's that impersonal thing that's almost impossible to get until you get it.

Katie: Well, it's not impossible to get because it's always there. The illusion is impossible to get, and not there.
Als er geen 'you/ik' is dan is de wereld neutraal, pas als er een ik ontstaat vanuit een gehechtheid dan ga ik betekenis geven aan die wereld vanuit die gehechtheid.

Zonder die ik/gehechtheid is er gewoon het leven waarin alles vanzelf plaatsvind, zonder gehechtheid, zonder ups en downs.

Shit dat wil ik ook wel.

Ho ho waarom wil ik dat, wat is er nu mis? Waar komt plots die 'ik/gehechtheid' vandaan.

Zou ik nou de woorden die ik van Katie en Friend gelezen heb wel zo vertaalt hebben zoals ze bedoelt waren?
Aart is offline   Met citaat reageren
Oud 6 november 2012, 09:00   #8
Rennie
Singularis
 
Geregistreerd: 18 april 2010
Berichten: 9.992
Standaard

Citaat:
Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Aart Bekijk bericht
Als er geen 'you/ik' is dan is de wereld neutraal, pas als er een ik ontstaat vanuit een gehechtheid dan ga ik betekenis geven aan die wereld vanuit die gehechtheid.

Zonder die ik/gehechtheid is er gewoon het leven waarin alles vanzelf plaatsvind, zonder gehechtheid, zonder ups en downs.

Shit dat wil ik ook wel.

Ho ho waarom wil ik dat, wat is er nu mis? Waar komt plots die 'ik/gehechtheid' vandaan.

Zou ik nou de woorden die ik van Katie en Friend gelezen heb wel zo vertaalt hebben zoals ze bedoelt waren?
De wereld is zonder gehechtheid aan 'ik' ook neutraal. Verder is daar waar geen 'ik' is, ook geen ander er is zelfs geen wereld.
Maar de schijnbare werkelijkheid van de wereld is daarmee niet opgelost.

Wat me, ook hier in het verhaal van Byron Katie, blijft verbazen is de discrepantie van enerzijds toch het hebben van lijfsbehoud (de situatie van de bedreiging met het mes), de desinteresse in het welzijn van de (als zodanig schijnbare aanwezige en lijdende) ander in relatie tot de interesse tot het bedrijven van The Work ter lediging van de kennelijk erkende smart van de niet aanwezige 'ik'.

De droom wordt half als werkelijkheid, half al niet bestaand beleefd. Dus je kunt alleen maar uitkomen op het functioneren van een niet bestaand ik in een vermeende wereld. Je leeft de droom, daarmee is ook weer alles terug, de identificatie met je 'ik' de emoties, de mogelijkheid van verlies, de hele mikmak ligt weer op je bord met als enig verschil dat je nu 'weet wat je bent'.
Rennie is offline   Met citaat reageren
Oud 6 november 2012, 09:57   #9
Aart
Drommedaris
 
Geregistreerd: 6 augustus 2011
Berichten: 3.650
Standaard

Citaat:
Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Renoir Bekijk bericht
De wereld is zonder gehechtheid aan 'ik' ook neutraal. Verder is daar waar geen 'ik' is, ook geen ander er is zelfs geen wereld.
Maar de schijnbare werkelijkheid van de wereld is daarmee niet opgelost.

Wat me, ook hier in het verhaal van Byron Katie, blijft verbazen is de discrepantie van enerzijds toch het hebben van lijfsbehoud (de situatie van de bedreiging met het mes), de desinteresse in het welzijn van de (als zodanig schijnbare aanwezige en lijdende) ander in relatie tot de interesse tot het bedrijven van The Work ter lediging van de kennelijk erkende smart van de niet aanwezige 'ik'.

De droom wordt half als werkelijkheid, half al niet bestaand beleefd. Dus je kunt alleen maar uitkomen op het functioneren van een niet bestaand ik in een vermeende wereld. Je leeft de droom, daarmee is ook weer alles terug, de identificatie met je 'ik' de emoties, de mogelijkheid van verlies, de hele mikmak ligt weer op je bord met als enig verschil dat je nu 'weet wat je bent'.
Renoir, ik beleef dat toch anders mits ik je woorden juist vertaal.

Ik ervaar hier geen ik meer (bedoel ik mee, ik ken de tijd dat er wel dat ik-gevoel was) maar voor mij is er gewoon wat er is en dat is de wereld die er is, met alles er op en er aan.

Alleen er is niet meer dat wat ik 'het filter van de ik' noem die door dat filter de wereld beziet/ervaart.

Er is hier gewoon het lichaam met zijn eigen functies dat niet meer gestuurd wordt door dat 'ik-filter' maar dat heus wel reageert op direct gevaar.

Er is hier gewoon een bepaalde bewustzijnstrilling wat aan de hand van die trilling' 'zijn ding doet'.

Voor mij is dat een/de werkelijkheid.

Ik zie niet een droom of een vermeende werkelijkheid.

Als er geen ik-gevoel is dan zijn er ook niet meer die sensaties die horen bij/een logisch gevolg zijn van dat ik-gevoel.

Zonder ik kan er geen identificatie met iets zijn.

Althans zo is het hoe het bij mij is.

Zo lees/herken/vertaal ik ook de schrijvens van Byron Katie.
Aart is offline   Met citaat reageren
Oud 5 november 2012, 09:10   #10
glans
Voormalig lid
 
glans's schermafbeelding
 
Geregistreerd: 28 april 2010
Berichten: 2.156
Standaard

Citaat:
Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door Gargamel Bekijk bericht
DIALOGEN OP BASIS VAN NON DUALITEIT EN VOLGENS DE UITGEVER NIET VOOR IEDEREEN GESCHIKT MET NAME HET LEZEN VAN HOOFDSTUK 3 WORDT STERK ONTRADEN TE LEZEN OMDAT HET NOGAL CONFRONTEREND IS



ondanks de waarschuwing heb (direct) alleen dit hoofdstuk 3 gelezen.
glans is offline   Met citaat reageren
Reageren

Discussietools Zoek in deze discussie
Zoek in deze discussie:

Geavanceerd zoeken
Weergave

Colofon
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB-code is Aan
Smileys zijn Aan
[IMG]-code is Aan
HTML-code is Uit

Forumnavigatie


Alle tijden zijn in GMT (+ 1:00 uur), het is in deze tijdzone nu 07:08.


Forumsoftware: vBulletin®, versie 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Cultural Forum | Study at Malaysian University