Dear Ed,
I think the quote perfectly sums up the spiritual life. The quote is
from an Indian named Nisargadatta Maharaj. He is best known through a
book titled, "I am That." He didn't write it - his comments were written
down by his followers. His most well known translator into English is
Ramesh Balsakar, who has also written extensively.
Thomas Bryson
Facilitation, training and counseling by Skype
Ed Levy wrote:
Dear Thomas,
Thanks very much for your recent posts, on bowing and presence. Who is the
author of the wonderful quote,
"When I look inward, I find that I am emptiness. That is wisdom. When I look
outward, I find that I am everything. That is compassion"?
Ed Levy
_____
From: ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ConstellationTalk%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ConstellationTalk%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of Thomas Bryson
Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2010 5:02 AM
To: ConstellationTalk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:ConstellationTalk%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [ConstellationTalk] Orders of Love revisited
Dear Sadhana,
I am not advocating a dry, lifeless, sexless presence. I am advocating
the wonderful, intimacy of seeing the other as one's own self.
The bow I discussed does not preclude recognition of the other. In my
view it is preliminary to truly seeing the other. The bow starts with
finding one's own space, by recognizing presence. It ends with
recognizing that this presence is precisely the same presence that is
there as the other. This is the embodiment of the expression, 'namaste'.
We do not come into wholeness until we can stay present enough to feel
what wants to be felt without being overwhelmed.
The dry, lifeless place you speak of can come when one seeks the
transcendent as a way to get away from the messiness of one's
incarnation. The child is right when they move away from the parents to
seek the presence that is unavailable in the parents. For one with
Interrupted Reaching Out Movement (IROM), the place of transcendence can
be a tremendous relief compared to what is coming from or through the
parents. But it is only a coping strategy if the person stays a child
and does not return to life. While moving away may be right for the
child, for the adult the completion of the move is to allow presence to
come into the body and heart, to be present and accept one's family, to
stand with the parents and to be present. Just as the completion of the
bow offers the inner presence to the other, the adult returns to the
family with new information that is needed by the system.
Emptiness and fullness are a matter of perspective depending on which
direction we are facing. "When I look inward, I find that I am
emptiness. That is wisdom. When I look outwards, I find that I am
everything. That is compassion."
When we give the gift of ourselves to the other and receive most deeply
the gift that is offered in turn, dryness is left behind in the desert.
All love,
Thomas Bryson
Facilitation, training and counseling by Skype
Kay Needham wrote:
>
>
> Hello Thomas and all,
>
> The meanings are different, although the words are similar. I do
> understand the value of aloneness, being able to disidentify or
> disentangle. The original detatchment from the other is also valid and
> necessary. These are all great points of understanding.
> However....................
> The meaning I attempt to convey includes recognition, acceptance and
> acknowledgement of the other. This way it is not "all about me," nor
> is it all about the other. When acceptance, acknowledgement and
> recognition of the other are absent, so is relationship, so is love.
> Yes one may have presence however presence is not always filled with
> love. Presence alone is not love. The emptiness of the meditative monk
> in the caves is often juiceless, lifeless, sexless........ a dry
> emptiness. Yes maybe even enlightenent can happen like this. However
> does this give anything, is it worth anything? Does this make the
> world a more beautiful place? Is it celebrative? Does it have a rich
> and alive quality of friendliness among people?
> Perhaps..................... it took all and gave nothing.
>
> What is the value or worth of a bow that fails to recognise, accept
> and acknowledge the other? Does it cost anything? If it does not, then
> it is worth nothing.
> This is how I see it.
>
> Kind regards Sadhana
