Reiki and situations
MikeH
How can this be, please?
MikeH
Garry
How can it not? :-)
Love and Light,
Garry
suzee
Maybe he wants to know how to do it...
sue
MikeH
"suzee" <suz...@imbris.com> wrote in message
news:heac9h$e67$2...@news.eternal-september.org...
Yes, I do. I shall have to go elsewhere for an answer. it seems. :-(
MikeH
suzee
Well, stick around, may you'll get an answer now that it's been
clarified what you're looking for. I suspect it's as simple as focusing
on the situation and sending healing to it. But I've never tried it.
sue
www.GymRatZ.co.uk
> Yes, I do. I shall have to go elsewhere for an answer. it seems. :-(
>
> MikeH
>
Remember the rules are as you create them and the restrictions are only
as imposed by your own vision of limitation.
;-)
Person, Object, Situation.
Past, Present or Future
Local or Distant
Using symbols or not.
The beauty is in the simplicity.
Garry Williams
Oh, ye of little faith! Since when has a question about reiki not been
answered in AHR? Granted, one doesn't always receive the answer one wants
or expects, but *some* kind of answer is always forthcoming! :-)
As Suzie noted, I simply didn't understand what you were asking. I truly
thought from the way you phrased your original post that you were
questioning whether such a thing was possible, rather than asking how to
go about it.
And as Pete said, think it possible! People send reiki to situations all
the time. One way is to do it exactly the same way you do distant healing
for a person, except instead of focusing on an individual, you focus on
the situation you are concerned about.
Hope that helps! Please don't ever hesitate to ask for clarification any
time the answer you get doesn't satisfy. We are here to help! (even those
of us that are slow to understand the question being put <g>)
Love and Light,
Garry
www.GymRatZ.co.uk
> I ahve read and heard that Reiki can be used to correct "situations"
>
You can't change was has been done but you can (in my mind) help that
situation to best effect.
Example: I have one very particular situation in my life which I really
felt I was best off not going beyond. Since that day (since discovering
Reiki) I regularly reflect on that time and "send" Reiki back to that
moment in time to help me through it. I'm still here !
You could "send" Reiki to a forthcoming job interview or presentation or
operation or anything. It my not change the eventual outcome but it will
assist with the way you (or someone else) copes.
If someone is terminally ill or has passed away in a horrific accident
etc etc you will not change history or prevent the passing of that
person but sending Reiki will help them cope and pass over with a
peaceful state of mind.
The possibilities are limitless.
So you can't fix something or correct something no, but you can help it
or them.
If that makes sense.
Well, that's my take on it. Others may have their own thoughts, but
that's mine and works for me in my own ruleset.
:�)
Pete
--
http://www.gymratz.co.uk/fitness-equipment/
Home Fitness Equipment & Commercial Fitness Equipment
Garry Williams
> Home Fitness Equipment & Commercial Fitness Equipment
Well said, Pete!
Love and Light,
Garry
MikeH
"Garry Williams" <ji2...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:687aa23d-c6b0-481c...@e20g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...
Well said, Pete!
Love and Light,
Garry
Thanks for the replies. It was the implication that one could affect
situations that flummoxed me, when I read about it. However, to enable
someone to deal with the situation better, is understandable. So... Ever
Onwards.
Thank you, all.
MikeH
suzee
> Thanks for the replies. It was the implication that one could affect
> situations that flummoxed me, when I read about it. However, to enable
> someone to deal with the situation better, is understandable. So... Ever
> Onwards.
Ahh, it's the same thing as 'sending reiki to the past'. No we can't
change what happened, but we can send it to those involoved to change
the repercussions of what happened, how they can deal with it.
sue
Wombat
I haven't written here since yonks. So forgive me for popping in ...
Having read the other replies by our fellow reiki folks here ...
... there's a wee thingie I'd like to add to this ...
... as in sending to a situation .... it is or can be useful i.m.h.o. ....
to send to
certain past events, certainly if they were of a traumatic nature.
With in mind, ..... if you happen to be of like mind, .... that in a
*following life*,
the sting of the events can be altered. In such, that you might have the
memory
and the lesson learned .... but without having to lumber the pain or grief
into a
following life perhaps ??? :)
One should always use the symbols in this regard, with care and
consideration,
because they are out there for always - as in eternity - and carry beyond
understanding
sometimes.
With kindest regards,
Wombat:)
"MikeH" <trur...@btconnect.com> schreef in bericht
news:IpmdncGYPIqlyJvW...@bt.com...
coerdelion
As others have said, the word "correct" doesn't seem to be appropriate
in this context. When sending to a situation, whether in the past,
the present or the future one is sending Reiki, not necessarily to the
people involved, but making it available in the situation - after all,
if one was sending to the people, it would be much more
straightforward to send directly to them, rather than to the
situation.
Reiki generally throws some light into dark places, thus making things
visible that weren't necessarily so without the Reiki; it can help
smooth the way for help to arrive, reveal the best help to provide,
direct solutions that may not have been clear before, adjust the
picture so that perceptions might be clearer ... and a whole lot of
other things that I haven't even thought of!
It's always worth putting some Reiki into situations - can't hurt,
always helps :)
Blessings
Fiona
http://budurl.com/fionaahrwebsite
http://budurl.com/fionaahrhelplist
Garry Williams
Thanks, Fiona! Let me just add (just on the outside chance we haven't
flogged this horse to death already) that labeling a situation as needing
"correction" implies that it is imperfect to start with. But *every*
moment of this life is perfect, just as it is. How can this be? When we
start saying a given moment is perfect or imperfect, we are judging it
according to the desires and wishes of our own ego ("If EYE were in
charge of the world, X would never happen!") What we need to learn to do
is to put our ego aside for a moment and realize that the present moment
is what it is (just as we are what we are), and the question is, what are
we supposed to learn from it? And yes, Mike, Reiki helps us do that, too!
Accept this moment. Receive it. Learn from it. Relish it!
Hope that helps someone, somewhere!
Love and Light,
Garry
coerdelion
was, we wouldn't have anything to aim for and then what would be the
point of being human?
I think I'd be more inclined to recognise that every moment is an
effect of previous (or even post) causes. If we want to go deeper we
might be inclined to send Reiki to heal causes ... and
consequences ...
Garry Williams
> Well, I don't think I'd agree that every moment is perfect - if it was,
> we wouldn't have anything to aim for and then what would be the point of
> being human?
LOL! Just a matter of perspective, or maybe terminology, Fiona! Seems
paradoxical, but the moment is perfect at the same time that we are busy
viewing it as imperfect, so we still get to be human in spite of it all,
and that's just perfect. :-)
> I think I'd be more inclined to recognise that every moment is an effect
> of previous (or even post) causes. If we want to go deeper we might be
> inclined to send Reiki to heal causes ... and consequences ...
That's a beginning, but certainly not the end. The end is now. And now.
And now. ;-)
Love and Light,
Garry
coerdelion
one's subconscious objects - and keeps presenting one with proof that
it isn't so! Lol !
Blessings
Fiona
http://budurl.com/fionaahrhelplist
http://budurl.com/fionaahrwebsite
Garry Williams
> The problem with that approach, Garry, is that, like affirmations, one's
> subconscious objects - and keeps presenting one with proof that it isn't
> so! Lol !
And who is it that has a subconscious to object? ;-)
Love and Light,
Garry
> Blessings
> Fiona
> http://budurl.com/fionaahrhelplist
> http://budurl.com/fionaahrwebsite
>
> On 26 Nov, 03:43, Garry Williams <gdw...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 07:51:22 -0800, coerdelion wrote:
>> > Well, I don't think I'd agree that every moment is perfect - if it
>> > was, we wouldn't have anything to aim for and then what would be the
>> > point of being human?
>>
>> LOL! Just a matter of perspective, or maybe terminology, Fiona! Seems
>> paradoxical, but the moment is perfect at the same time that we are
>> busy viewing it as imperfect, so we still get to be human in spite of
>> it all, and that's just perfect. :-)
>>
>> > I think I'd be more inclined to recognise that every moment is an
>> > effect of previous (or even post) causes. If we want to go deeper we
>> > might be inclined to send Reiki to heal causes ... and consequences
>> > ...
>>
>> That's a beginning, but certainly not the end. The end is now. And now.
>> And now. ;-)
>>
>> Love and Light,
>>
>> Garry
--
Garry
coerdelion
art
> On Thu, 26 Nov 2009 15:31:18 -0800, coerdelion wrote:
> > The problem with that approach, Garry, is that, like affirmations, one's
> > subconscious objects - and keeps presenting one with proof that it isn't
> > so! Lol !
<friendly snip>
i think it is more like the conscious mind objects. the problem is
letting it go on cycling and recycling misconceptions and left
unchecked, brings a person more of the unwanted same. the "proof"
lies in what
ea. moment brings. if you don't like it change it!:)
love is . . .
kevin
coerdelion
On one level, you're right of course ... but here's a way of thinking
about it:
The way we humans learn is to construct rules of thumb - for example,
once we come across one door as a child, we pretty much recognise all
doors and can make an attempt at least at opening them. Those rules
of thumb - called heuristics - are very useful ways of learning.
They're stored in the subconscious, we don't even think about them and
that leaves the conscious mind free to explore and lay down the
foundations of more heuristics. In fact, heuristics are so useful
that the IT industry has adopted them for software development -
they're a pretty complex algorithm.
We all have these heuristics stored away in our subconscious - my
favourite is that research has found that judges tend to use whatever
number caught their attention that day as a starting point for
sentencing - even when they know about it, they still do it - too
funny, really.
It's like heuristics are cast in stone in the subconscious. They are
one of the ways we filter and interpret our world.
Thus, when we make an affirmation that "everything is perfect" for
example, yes, you're right, the conscious mind will throw up
objections to it, but it is the subconscious heuristics that bring us
to situations that "prove" that it isn't perfect - the traffic jam,
the shopping queue, the boss "looking at me funny", whatever ...
Mainstream psychology indicates that there isn't really any way one
can change one's heuristics other than through long term therapy and
even then there's no real guarantee, simply because it's all
subconscious. However, with Reiki, one can loosen off those heuristic
connections and begin to at least have the "wriggle room" to react
differently. Think about it - "the boss looked at me funny - he's not
happy with my work" is a whole lot different to "the boss looked a bit
funny - hope everything's ok at home" are the same situation with two
completely different interpretations - realities, if you like -
motivating two different kinds of behaviours ...
So, to my mind, affirming that everything is perfect is not helpful,
really. Our whole system recognises that as inaccurate and continues
to object on, lets say, *all* levels.
It is the recognition and acknowledgement of imperfection that is the
driver of change.
pr
"MikeH" <trur...@btconnect.com> wrote in message
news:OumdnU3smaYM15fW...@bt.com...
>
> On Nov 22, 4:25 pm, "www.GymRatZ.co.uk" <discount-fitness-
> equipm...@gym.shop.com> wrote:
>> The possibilities are limitless.
>> So you can't fix something or correct something no, but you can help it
>> or them.
> Thanks for the replies. It was the implication that one could affect
> situations that flummoxed me, when I read about it. However, to enable
> someone to deal with the situation better, is understandable.
So ... the possibilities are NOT limitless, and what it boils
down to is that Reiki applied to situations is just a mind game?
Why would I need Reiki to change my mind or thoughts
when I can do that without Reiki already?
Is the presence of a disease not a "situation"? Is it not
claimed that Reiki can heal diseases and thus *materially*
change at least such a "situation"?
If it can change such "situations" why can't it change situations
of another kind? Depending on what one wants to change
more than the usual effort may be needed but if Reiki is what
it is claimed to be then even bringing back the dead should
not totally be beyond a practitioners capability.
Peter
Wombat
I'm really pleased that MikeH asked the question to start with - I'm
enjoying
reading this thread !! Good minds and good thoughts galore - like old times
;-)))
I wasn't at home to write my good wishes for Thanksgiving to you all - but I
was in
the moment there for a change, and managed to think about it. Many thanks
for this
post Fin - and to _ all _ for the imput so far. It's really nice to follow
all your thoughts on
this not so easy subject - we live and we learn, and I'm right up there
amongst the first
of you to learn alongside of you.
Kindest regards,
Wombat:)
"coerdelion" <coerd...@yahoo.com> schreef in bericht
news:d5f51bd5-c4da-4f19...@s20g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
Garry Williams
On a practical, everyday level, I'd say that all you have written about
heuristics and human behavior is true. That said, I would just like to
note that when some of us say that everything is perfect just as it is,
and others of us say, "Are ye daft, man?" it's because of those two
different ways of looking at the same situation that you mentioned.
Except those of us who are saying everything is perfect just as it is
apply that attitude (not the right word, but it will have to do for now)
to all situations, even ones which, ordinarily, are viewed as ghastly and
horrible, like death, suffering, pain, anger, hatred, man's inhumanity to
man, etc. How can those things be perfect, just as they are? Well, that's
the trick! Figure that out, and you're well on your way. The only problem
is, nobody can do it for you. "We" each have to find "our" own way. The
way to where? Why, the way to Love!
Love and Light,
Garry
--
Garry
Garry Williams
> <friendly snip>
Hi Kevin! Long time no see! Where you been hiding? How's tricks?
Garry
Garry Williams
> "MikeH" <trur...@btconnect.com> wrote in message
> news:OumdnU3smaYM15fW...@bt.com...
>>
>>
>> On Nov 22, 4:25 pm, "www.GymRatZ.co.uk" <discount-fitness-
>> equipm...@gym.shop.com> wrote:
>
>>> The possibilities are limitless.
>>> So you can't fix something or correct something no, but you can help
>>> it or them.
>
>> Thanks for the replies. It was the implication that one could affect
>> situations that flummoxed me, when I read about it. However, to enable
>> someone to deal with the situation better, is understandable.
>
> So ... the possibilities are NOT limitless, and what it boils down to is
> that Reiki applied to situations is just a mind game?
Peter, I would say that mind applied to any situation is just a mind
game. :-)
> Why would I need Reiki to change my mind or thoughts when I can do that
> without Reiki already?
Are you getting effective results? :-)
> Is the presence of a disease not a "situation"? Is it not claimed that
> Reiki can heal diseases and thus *materially* change at least such a
> "situation"?
I think you're just playing with words now. Instead of adding on extra
layers of delusion, let's try and be as clear as we can here, okay? If
someone is ill, Reiki can be used to help them get better. If someone is
having trouble selling their house or getting a job or whatever, Reiki
can be applied to that situation.
What Reiki is not is a magic wishing wand to give you whatever your heart
desires instantly. It is a process for helping you to heal disease and
invite happiness into your life.
> If it can change such "situations" why can't it change situations of
> another kind? Depending on what one wants to change more than the usual
> effort may be needed but if Reiki is what it is claimed to be then even
> bringing back the dead should not totally be beyond a practitioners
> capability.
Now you're just being silly! Do you believe in mainstream medical
science? If it is what it is claimed to be, then even bringing back the
dead should not totally be beyond a practitioner's capability. Do you
believe in accounting? If it is what it is claimed to be, then even
bringing back the dead should totally be beyond a practitioner's
capability. After all, it just requires a little more effort than
usual. :-)
Love and Light,
Garry
coerdelion
I do get what you say ... however, that kind of positive thinking is
self defeating. The thin layer of "love and light" is counteracted by
the deeper level of, lets say "experience". Thus, in order to find
the loving place within, one must first accept that life is not always
loving. It is only in this way that we can understand that there is
another way. It is, if you like, by recognising and acknowledging the
slap that one is able to "turn the other cheek".
Life is contrast - yin and yang. To insist that it is only one thing
to the exclusion of the other is a mistake. We are here to experience
all of the human experience, not just the bit we like.
Many Blessings
Garry Williams
On Wed, 09 Dec 2009 14:46:07 -0800, coerdelion wrote:
> Hi Garry
>
> I do get what you say ... however, that kind of positive thinking is
Hmmm, when you say "positive thinking", it makes me think that you don't
really get what I'm talking about, because I'm not talking about positive
thinking. In fact, what I'm talking about is beyond words. I can only
allude to it, but can't put you right on it with a bang because it's not
something that can be parceled up with language. It's not like telling
you how to get to the corner store.
> self defeating. The thin layer of "love and light" is counteracted by
> the deeper level of, lets say "experience". Thus, in order to find the
> loving place within, one must first accept that life is not always
> loving. It is only in this way that we can understand that there is
> another way. It is, if you like, by recognising and acknowledging the
> slap that one is able to "turn the other cheek".
What I am speaking of obtains whether you recognize the slap or not,
whether you turn the other cheek or not.
> Life is contrast - yin and yang. To insist that it is only one thing to
> the exclusion of the other is a mistake. We are here to experience all
> of the human experience, not just the bit we like.
Yes, you are correct that we can't pick and choose and exclude. But life
is not *just* yin and yang. It is both and neither, at the same time. The
funny part is that "you" think of "yourself" as something separate from
*What Is*, but, that's just a delusion. OTOH, that same delusion is a
part of *What Is*, arising in this moment. Separate, but not separate, at
the same time. Sorry, I can't describe it any more clearly than that. All
these words that you and I are speaking are just a story, an illusion,
unreal. Yet that illusion is part of *What Is*.
Love and Light,
Garry
coerdelion
spiritual. BTW - it's not "delusion" but "illusion". This reminds me
of a story ...
Woman up in Scotland, I forget her name, actually managed to persuade
her followers that she was an Ascended Master ... she actually went
round giving workshops and lectures about her being one ... all very
delusional. For those unfamiliar with the term, an Ascended Master is
generally ascended - ie not here any more.
Even the Dalai Lama - the reincarnation of the Buddha of Compassion -
recognises that there is discomfort - he, after all, carries the
sorrows of an entire nation. Although he is happy, joyful, even ...
and to be in his presence is a great blessing ... the fact is that the
reason he is here is that we are not enlightened. If we were, he
wouldn't need to be here to show us the way.
The recognition of imperfection becomes the motivation to grow both
spiritually and emotionally. To assert that everything is perfect is
a denial of spritual growth.
art
hello garry! i hide good huh?! i lurk around from time to time to see
what the latest topic is. .
this one cought my eye. thank you all for being here and asking the
tough questions:) and letting a non-reikist play too!
kevin
Garry Williams
> Oh, Garry, I do get that you think what you are saying is all very
> spiritual. BTW - it's not "delusion" but "illusion". This reminds me
> of a story ...
Actually, what I'm saying isn't spiritual at all. :-)
> Woman up in Scotland, I forget her name, actually managed to persuade
> her followers that she was an Ascended Master ... she actually went
> round giving workshops and lectures about her being one ... all very
> delusional. For those unfamiliar with the term, an Ascended Master is
> generally ascended - ie not here any more.
LOL How about a descended ascended master?
> Even the Dalai Lama - the reincarnation of the Buddha of Compassion -
> recognises that there is discomfort - he, after all, carries the sorrows
> of an entire nation. Although he is happy, joyful, even ... and to be
> in his presence is a great blessing ... the fact is that the reason he
> is here is that we are not enlightened. If we were, he wouldn't need to
> be here to show us the way.
>
> The recognition of imperfection becomes the motivation to grow both
> spiritually and emotionally. To assert that everything is perfect is a
> denial of spritual growth.
As long as you say you're on the path to enlightenment, it means you've
already guaranteed from the get-go that you're not enlightened. So as
long as you're on the path, you will never arrive.
OTOH, nobody can ever be enlightened. And nobody can ever be
unenlightened. That's because there is nobody to be enlightened or
unenlightened. The Garry-thing and the Fiona-thing appear to be typing
words at each other and the Fiona-thing at least appears to think there
are two people having a discussion, but this is not the case and really
it all means nothing. :-)
Love and Light,
Garry
coerdelion
> On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 18:30:11 -0800, coerdelion wrote:
> > Oh, Garry, I do get that you think what you are saying is all very
> > spiritual. BTW - it's not "delusion" but "illusion". This reminds me
> > of a story ...
>
> Actually, what I'm saying isn't spiritual at all. :-)
>
Rofl! You know, Garry, I'm intrigued - you argue for newtonian
physics elsewhere and quantum physics here ... reminds me of
discussions around my father's table while growing up. We would argue
up one side, he would then suddenly switch sides and then 4argue
down the other ...
> > Woman up in Scotland, I forget her name, actually managed to persuade
> > her followers that she was an Ascended Master ... she actually went
> > round giving workshops and lectures about her being one ... all very
> > delusional. For those unfamiliar with the term, an Ascended Master is
> > generally ascended - ie not here any more.
>
> LOL How about a descended ascended master?
<grin> yeah, I don't think she appreciated how funny she was ... ;)
>
> > Even the Dalai Lama - the reincarnation of the Buddha of Compassion -
> > recognises that there is discomfort - he, after all, carries the sorrows
> > of an entire nation. Although he is happy, joyful, even ... and to be
> > in his presence is a great blessing ... the fact is that the reason he
> > is here is that we are not enlightened. If we were, he wouldn't need to
> > be here to show us the way.
>
> > The recognition of imperfection becomes the motivation to grow both
> > spiritually and emotionally. To assert that everything is perfect is a
> > denial of spritual growth.
>
> As long as you say you're on the path to enlightenment, it means you've
> already guaranteed from the get-go that you're not enlightened. So as
> long as you're on the path, you will never arrive.
Rofl! Isn't that the point of Reiki - to reach enlightenment? And
haven't you always argued for that, funny boy?
And by the way, the Dao is the Dao, neither a way nor a path, but all
things - perfection *and* imperfection included
>
> OTOH, nobody can ever be enlightened. And nobody can ever be
> unenlightened. That's because there is nobody to be enlightened or
> unenlightened. The Garry-thing and the Fiona-thing appear to be typing
> words at each other and the Fiona-thing at least appears to think there
> are two people having a discussion, but this is not the case and really
> it all means nothing. :-)
Too funny, Garry. As you well know there are the Buddhas and the
Boddisatvahs - the former being enlightened beings and the latter
having refused enlightenment until all sentient beings have become
enlightened. And then there's the rest of us.
Enlightenment, literally, is to be filled with light, the next step
being the return to oneness. Which is my point. That perfection
cannot exist without imperfection, otherwise how would we know it?
We are all one - light, dark, perfection, imperfection, yin, yang,
happiness, sadness, great, small, in, out ... and so on. While we
carry our human form, we can only know what we know, strive for
watever it is we strive for ... and _be_ in the universe of duality.
Which we made up in order to learn what oneness *is* and what it
means.
The serial killer and the paedophile are not perfect - particularly if
one happens to be on the receiving end. That is self evident.
However they *are* part of the whole, the divine oneness ...
>
> Love and Light,
>
<grin>
Garry Williams
> On 17 Dec, 01:10, Garry Williams <gdw...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 18:30:11 -0800, coerdelion wrote:
>> > Oh, Garry, I do get that you think what you are saying is all very
>> > spiritual. BTW - it's not "delusion" but "illusion". This reminds
>> > me of a story ...
>>
>> Actually, what I'm saying isn't spiritual at all. :-)
>>
> Rofl! You know, Garry, I'm intrigued - you argue for newtonian physics
> elsewhere and quantum physics here ... reminds me of discussions around
> my father's table while growing up. We would argue up one side, he
> would then suddenly switch sides and then 4argue down the other ...
Hey, you're talking to a Libra, ya know... ;-)
<gentle snip>
>> As long as you say you're on the path to enlightenment, it means you've
>> already guaranteed from the get-go that you're not enlightened. So as
>> long as you're on the path, you will never arrive.
>
> Rofl! Isn't that the point of Reiki - to reach enlightenment? And
> haven't you always argued for that, funny boy?
Well, of course I did! That was before it worked. This is after. Oh,
wait. I forget. There's no one to enlighten! :-D
Seriously though - what do you think "nirvana" means and why? It would
seem to be all very freeing once it starts falling into place. Except
that we were never bound in the first place, except by our own beliefs.
The worst of which is the whole subject/object thing.
> And by the way, the Dao is the Dao, neither a way nor a path, but all
> things - perfection *and* imperfection included
The Dao which can be spoken of in words is not the true Dao. :-)
>> OTOH, nobody can ever be enlightened. And nobody can ever be
>> unenlightened. That's because there is nobody to be enlightened or
>> unenlightened. The Garry-thing and the Fiona-thing appear to be typing
>> words at each other and the Fiona-thing at least appears to think there
>> are two people having a discussion, but this is not the case and really
>> it all means nothing. :-)
>
> Too funny, Garry. As you well know there are the Buddhas and the
> Boddisatvahs - the former being enlightened beings and the latter having
> refused enlightenment until all sentient beings have become enlightened.
> And then there's the rest of us.
>
> Enlightenment, literally, is to be filled with light, the next step
> being the return to oneness. Which is my point. That perfection cannot
> exist without imperfection, otherwise how would we know it?
>
> We are all one - light, dark, perfection, imperfection, yin, yang,
> happiness, sadness, great, small, in, out ... and so on. While we carry
> our human form, we can only know what we know, strive for watever it is
> we strive for ... and _be_ in the universe of duality. Which we made up
> in order to learn what oneness *is* and what it means.
Almost. "You" cannot help but be oneness at the same time "you" are
experiencing all this duality. Whether the Fiona-thing "knows" it or
not. ;-)
> The serial killer and the paedophile are not perfect - particularly if
> one happens to be on the receiving end. That is self evident. However
> they *are* part of the whole, the divine oneness ...
Yes, indeedy!
And now for a little intermission:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fx_B2a6fwdo&feature=rec-r2-2f-26
>> Love and Light and <grins>,
Garry
coerdelion
> On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 05:20:34 -0800, coerdelion wrote:
> > On 17 Dec, 01:10, Garry Williams <gdw...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >> On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 18:30:11 -0800, coerdelion wrote:
> >> > Oh, Garry, I do get that you think what you are saying is all very
> >> > spiritual. BTW - it's not "delusion" but "illusion". This reminds
> >> > me of a story ...
>
> >> Actually, what I'm saying isn't spiritual at all. :-)
>
> > Rofl! You know, Garry, I'm intrigued - you argue for newtonian physics
> > elsewhere and quantum physics here ... reminds me of discussions around
> > my father's table while growing up. We would argue up one side, he
> > would then suddenly switch sides and then 4argue down the other ...
>
> Hey, you're talking to a Libra, ya know... ;-)
Libra doesn't necessarily mean you can't make up your mind, you
know ...
>
> <gentle snip>
>
> >> As long as you say you're on the path to enlightenment, it means you've
> >> already guaranteed from the get-go that you're not enlightened. So as
> >> long as you're on the path, you will never arrive.
>
> > Rofl! Isn't that the point of Reiki - to reach enlightenment? And
> > haven't you always argued for that, funny boy?
>
> Well, of course I did! That was before it worked. This is after. Oh,
> wait. I forget. There's no one to enlighten! :-D
>
> Seriously though - what do you think "nirvana" means and why? It would
> seem to be all very freeing once it starts falling into place. Except
> that we were never bound in the first place, except by our own beliefs.
> The worst of which is the whole subject/object thing.
We bind ourselves, Garry, in order to learn ... and presumably on some
level we thought that was important, otherwise we wouldn't be doing
it, would we ...
>
> > And by the way, the Dao is the Dao, neither a way nor a path, but all
> > things - perfection *and* imperfection included
>
> The Dao which can be spoken of in words is not the true Dao. :-)
>
Rofl! That's straight out of the Tao Te Ching, which is a book ...
with words. So it can only be written about?
And the first sentence, too ... so have you read the rest of it?
>
>
> >> OTOH, nobody can ever be enlightened. And nobody can ever be
> >> unenlightened. That's because there is nobody to be enlightened or
> >> unenlightened. The Garry-thing and the Fiona-thing appear to be typing
> >> words at each other and the Fiona-thing at least appears to think there
> >> are two people having a discussion, but this is not the case and really
> >> it all means nothing. :-)
>
> > Too funny, Garry. As you well know there are the Buddhas and the
> > Boddisatvahs - the former being enlightened beings and the latter having
> > refused enlightenment until all sentient beings have become enlightened.
> > And then there's the rest of us.
>
> > Enlightenment, literally, is to be filled with light, the next step
> > being the return to oneness. Which is my point. That perfection cannot
> > exist without imperfection, otherwise how would we know it?
>
> > We are all one - light, dark, perfection, imperfection, yin, yang,
> > happiness, sadness, great, small, in, out ... and so on. While we carry
> > our human form, we can only know what we know, strive for watever it is
> > we strive for ... and _be_ in the universe of duality. Which we made up
> > in order to learn what oneness *is* and what it means.
>
> Almost. "You" cannot help but be oneness at the same time "you" are
> experiencing all this duality. Whether the Fiona-thing "knows" it or
> not. ;-)
Rofl! "Almost"? Almost what ...perfect? In whose opinion?
>
> > The serial killer and the paedophile are not perfect - particularly if
> > one happens to be on the receiving end. That is self evident. However
> > they *are* part of the whole, the divine oneness ...
>
> Yes, indeedy!
Glad you agree that there is no perfection, only oneness ... :)
>
> And now for a little intermission:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fx_B2a6fwdo&feature=rec-r2-2f-26
Yeah, well ... this is heavily Christian, very dualistic, sexist and
various other imperfect things. Pretty, though.
>
> >> Love and Light and <grins>,
>
Yeah, right ..
Garry Williams
> On 20 Dec, 05:10, Garry Williams <gdw...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 05:20:34 -0800, coerdelion wrote:
>> > On 17 Dec, 01:10, Garry Williams <gdw...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> >> On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 18:30:11 -0800, coerdelion wrote:
>> >> > Oh, Garry, I do get that you think what you are saying is all very
>> >> > spiritual. BTW - it's not "delusion" but "illusion". This
>> >> > reminds me of a story ...
>>
>> >> Actually, what I'm saying isn't spiritual at all. :-)
>>
>> > Rofl! You know, Garry, I'm intrigued - you argue for newtonian
>> > physics elsewhere and quantum physics here ... reminds me of
>> > discussions around my father's table while growing up. We would
>> > argue up one side, he would then suddenly switch sides and then
>> > 4argue down the other ...
>>
>> Hey, you're talking to a Libra, ya know... ;-)
>
> Libra doesn't necessarily mean you can't make up your mind, you know ...
No, but it means that I can argue both sides equally well. Not that there
are two "sides" to this "discussion". <g>
>
>> <gentle snip>
>>
>> >> As long as you say you're on the path to enlightenment, it means
>> >> you've already guaranteed from the get-go that you're not
>> >> enlightened. So as long as you're on the path, you will never
>> >> arrive.
>>
>> > Rofl! Isn't that the point of Reiki - to reach enlightenment? And
>> > haven't you always argued for that, funny boy?
>>
>> Well, of course I did! That was before it worked. This is after. Oh,
>> wait. I forget. There's no one to enlighten! :-D
>>
>> Seriously though - what do you think "nirvana" means and why? It would
>> seem to be all very freeing once it starts falling into place. Except
>> that we were never bound in the first place, except by our own beliefs.
>> The worst of which is the whole subject/object thing.
>
> We bind ourselves, Garry, in order to learn ... and presumably on some
> level we thought that was important, otherwise we wouldn't be doing it,
> would we ...
<g> "I" appear to be fine with whatever "you" appear to be saying. This
is simply the appearance of this moment. There is no past, no future,
only now. This idea of a separate self that made a separate decision in
some indefinite past to perform something in some indefinite future is
just a concept that appears to be arising in this moment. It is illusory.
>> > And by the way, the Dao is the Dao, neither a way nor a path, but all
>> > things - perfection *and* imperfection included
>>
>> The Dao which can be spoken of in words is not the true Dao. :-)
>>
>>
> Rofl! That's straight out of the Tao Te Ching, which is a book ... with
> words. So it can only be written about?
What is the difference between the written word and the spoken word? They
amount to the same thing. In the case of the Dao De Jing, they are
fingers pointing at the moon, and you are staring at the fingers instead
of where they are pointing.
> And the first sentence, too ... so have you read the rest of it?
As a student of taijiquan, I have an interest in things Daoist. So, yes.
How about you? BTW, the Yijing (I Ching in Wade-Giles transliteration) is
considered to be the textbook for internal martial arts like taijiquan
and baguazhang.
>
>>
>> >> OTOH, nobody can ever be enlightened. And nobody can ever be
>> >> unenlightened. That's because there is nobody to be enlightened or
>> >> unenlightened. The Garry-thing and the Fiona-thing appear to be
>> >> typing words at each other and the Fiona-thing at least appears to
>> >> think there are two people having a discussion, but this is not the
>> >> case and really it all means nothing. :-)
>>
>> > Too funny, Garry. As you well know there are the Buddhas and the
>> > Boddisatvahs - the former being enlightened beings and the latter
>> > having refused enlightenment until all sentient beings have become
>> > enlightened.
>> > And then there's the rest of us.
>>
>> > Enlightenment, literally, is to be filled with light, the next step
>> > being the return to oneness. Which is my point. That perfection
>> > cannot exist without imperfection, otherwise how would we know it?
>>
>> > We are all one - light, dark, perfection, imperfection, yin, yang,
>> > happiness, sadness, great, small, in, out ... and so on. While we
>> > carry our human form, we can only know what we know, strive for
>> > watever it is we strive for ... and _be_ in the universe of duality.
>> > Which we made up in order to learn what oneness *is* and what it
>> > means.
>>
>> Almost. "You" cannot help but be oneness at the same time "you" are
>> experiencing all this duality. Whether the Fiona-thing "knows" it or
>> not. ;-)
>
> Rofl! "Almost"? Almost what ...perfect? In whose opinion?
Your statement was "almost" "correct". There is no correct or incorrect.
But as long as "you" want to think in these terms, there are patterns and
combinations that are ordered, and patterns and combinations that are
disordered, the ordered ones being the "correct" ones and the disordered
ones being the "incorrect" ones. Or "logical" and "illogical", if you
will. "Your" thought was slightly disordered in that "you" believe that
"you" cannot be One while "you" are being two. This is an illusion. There
is only the One, and the appearance of twoness, of separation, that
arises at this moment is just that, only an appearance. It is the shape
of the One.
"I" totally understand why "you" would think differently - brains are
designed by evolution to see patterns, whether there is a pattern there
or not. It's sort of like optical illusions, but the idea of twoness, of
separation, is more like a higher level illusion. Nevertheless, it can be
seen through. And sometimes it appears that it is, and sometimes it
appears that it isn't. Or, at least, that's how it looks at this present
moment. Not there ever were or ever will be "other" moments, mind you. <g>
>> > The serial killer and the paedophile are not perfect - particularly
>> > if one happens to be on the receiving end. That is self evident.
>> > However they *are* part of the whole, the divine oneness ...
>>
>> Yes, indeedy!
>
> Glad you agree that there is no perfection, only oneness ... :)
And that's just perfect, just the way it is, isn't it? ;-)
>
>> And now for a little intermission:
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fx_B2a6fwdo&feature=rec-r2-2f-26
>
> Yeah, well ... this is heavily Christian, very dualistic, sexist and
> various other imperfect things. Pretty, though.
Tsk, tsk! So judgmental! Let's throw the baby out with the bathwater! ;-)
Love and Light,
Garry
coerdelion
student of Chinese metaphysics they are both de rigeur. Equally, as a
student of comparative religion they are both of interest ...
As to the rest, you are now arguing in circles and moving gaolposts
(existent or non-existent) so fast you are simply a blur ... existing
and not existing, both at the same time ... which is the object of the
exercise, no?
Garry Williams
the body with which you are however mistakenly identifying is composed of
particles that are winking into and out of existence at every instant of
its supposed being. Yet you believe this body to be solid and continuous.
That it is impossible to exist and not exist at the same time. This is
all part of the illusion of form, as well as the illusion of the passing
of time. At best this body can be said to be a nexus of forces, like the
swirling of water as it goes down the drain or the spinning of the air
that creates a dust devil. You are the indentation in the earth that we
call a valley. You have no substance, you are the shape of substance.
What makes a drinking vessel a drinking vessel? It's not the elements of
which it is composed, it is the shape of the empty space, is it not? You
are the same. You are the shape, not the substance, and you are the one
that created both the shape and the substance of all that is and all that
could be, but is not.
And no, I'm not arguing in circles, nor am I moving either jailposts or
goalposts. :-)
Love and Light,
Garry