theos-talk.com

[MASTER INDEX] [DATE INDEX] [THREAD INDEX] [SUBJECT INDEX] [AUTHOR INDEX]

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

re "just being" re Leon and ...

Mar 28, 2004 09:04 AM
by Mauri


Leon, since this post didn't seem to be accepted on that other list, Mar 24, I'm posting it here:

Leon wrote: <<Be nice to know what such "clarity" means to you, and how one "maintains" it? I heard it said by a Master teacher of occultism that the three great dangers for the student are "fear," "old age," and "clarity of mind." >>

When Gerald (on Theosophy Study List) brought up the word "clarity" in reference to "just being," that rang a bell for me, seems I'd been maintaining a kind of "clarity" while "just being," apparently. Not that my "just being" has amounted to much, apparently, but/"but"... Besides, if my "just being" ever "amounts to much" (ie, in dualistic/exotericy terms), seems to me that I might decide that then it couldn't be "just being," "so much," anyway, at least "not enoughedly," (in a sense, maybe ...), so ...

And I'm wondering if your words "clarity of mind" might be misleading to some people in as much as if one interprets "clarity" re "just being" as being "mind" related in some kind of "ordinary (essentially dualistic) sense," in that, as I tend to see it, "ordinary mind" is something that one might want to transcend when "just being." When one transcends "mind," "old age," "fear," and various dualistic or "essentially dualistic" ("exoteric") notions, then how could one be "prone to dangers"... ^:-/ ... I thought "dangers" were, are, how can I put it, basically dualistic, exotericy things--- not that I have transcended duality, myself, apparently, (believe it or not) but/"but"... ^:-)...

<<Another said that to learn the mysteries and understand the realities leading to the attainment of self realization or enlightenment, one must use self devised and self determined effort -- and, there are many dangers and traps along the way that one has overcome with great discrimination. Another said that there is a
"culture of concentration" that has to be practiced continuously to protect oneself from such dangers.>>

Seems to me that some things can't be explained in so many words, but can only be experienced or "known about more-directly." "Just being" seems to be one of those things. Leon, (mind if I call you "Leon," instead of "Lenny"... unless, of course, you're not Leon ... not that you might not be "Lenny," but ... ^:-) ... anyway, Leon (I hope I got the "right kind of Leon," here), you keep referring to "Master teacher of occultism" and such in a few posts. That's nice, but how we define/interpret such teachers is where it's at, isn't it ... The sense in which comments are basically meant (by teachers or whoever), seems to me, might often tend to be missing some keyish element/s in as much as if the commentator, eg, failed to be "applicable enough" in whatever "related sense" (as in my case re "just being," eg, apparently) and/or if some interpretations of comments go off on tangents that are seen (by whoever) as "less relevant" for whatever reason---such exchanges of ideas possibly tending to lead to another, if somewhat "apparently related," discussion, maybe, as per this post, eg, seems to me, so what can I say ... ^:-/ ...

For anybody out there to have some kind of "more realistic" idea about what I mean by "just being," or what somebody else means by "just being," that anybody would have to BE that "just being" person in question, seems to me. Short of that, we could have some kind of conversation, I suppose, and we could "try to be applicable," say ... Not that I'm saying our conversations so far have all gone over like lead balloons (although ...). Well, things might be worse, don't you think, Leon ... Or do you think things are worse enough already ... Or worse than that ... ^:- ... Not that ... Anyway, I think I'm trying to say that in as much as I am not you, Leon, or not you, general reader, my speculative comments on these lists might generally tend to be missing info and whatever, and maybe even missing some keyish info, occasionally, so ... what can I say ...

<<In those lights, "just being" (as you apparently imply that it covers none of that) seems to be a pointless waste of time. In any event, how can aimless speculations and rambling thoughts be considered "clarity"?>>

One person's "clarity" seems to be another person's ... whatever ...

<<Or, does clarity, as you define it, just mean transparent empty headedness and being completely detached and out of control of one's life and one's thoughts? Could that be what the Master meant by "clarity" (of mind) being a "great danger" to the aspiring student? And, isn't that what we all are on this and any other theosophical forum>>

Leon, if you don't have a clue how "clarity" might relate to "just being" ... what can I say, other than you might want to see how "far" you can "just be," and then see how "far" you can "do that" while maintaing some "clarity" (the quotes refer to "in a sense" which, apparently, I can't explain "applicably enough") ... Of course that kind of wording can be misleading, so ... But I think you said something like "self-devised/determined efforts," if I remember correctly, so ... Not that the "self" part is all that related to "just being," among other things, but ... And not that ... ^:-/ ... You can tell me I'm wrong, but I have a feeling that some things, like "just being" and "clarity," among other things, can't be explained too well by anybody. An explanation that I seem to like for "just being" (which might not suit your "scientific" approach, I suspect) is: "just being." Maybe if Mr. Spock could hook us up, or something ... but, in the meanwhile ... ^:-/ ...

Speculatively,
Mauri

PS Sorry didn't get around to editing this post much. Not that ... ^:-/ ...









[Back to Top]


Theosophy World: Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application