A few observations/suggestions

[Dennis Waite]

Apologies for my apparent lack of involvement since joining the group,
especially since asking about posting the start of a discussion with K.
Sadananda on the topic of the states of consciousness. (In respect of this,
I have since discovered that this topic was already opened. Also, although I
have managed to locate my comments, I haven't yet found the original html
article. If K. Sadananda could find and post this, I could follow up with
the comments. Incidentally, couldn't we use first name terms on the list? It
seems a bit incongruous for Advaitins to be so formal!)

The main comments I would like to make are, firstly that there is an awful
lot of paper, despite the fact that the group has only been going such a
short time. There is some excellent stuff but I still haven't managed to
catch up on the backlog (not wanting to miss anything!). One of the reasons
for this, though,  is the duplication of material from the previous related
posts. What happens on the Alan Watts list is that the default form in which
members receive the posts is the digest. Each digest is numbered
consecutively. Then, when anyone sends in responses, they can write "As x
said in Digest #nn,......." and the reader can immediately refer back to the
original article (or follow-up), without having the whole thing written out
again. It works very well. Another benefit seems to be that authors think
more about what they want to say and get words (spelling, grammar etc.)
right before posting. There is much less tendency to do this in the
newsgroup type environment where often an immediate, unconsidered response
will be made and the result will be a much less comprehensible communication.

The other suggestion I would like to make is that, whenever Sanskrit terms
are used, an approximate English term is appended in brackets. I know that
Sanskrit terms are essential to convey ideas which have no direct equivalent
in English. I use many automatically myself and I am trying to learn
Sanskrit as a background task (more of this later) but there are many terms
I haven't encountered and it makes reading the articles very difficult if I
have to keep looking words up in glossaries (especially when I don't always
find them!). It would also have the additional benefit of helping the
learning process. I'm sure there must be other people in the group who are
unfamiliar with all the terms and it would be a great shame if a genuine
interest was dampened (or worse) because of such a difficulty.

Please do not see these comments as criticism but as constructive
suggestions to improve a group which I am sure will provide much help in
understanding some of the apparent difficulties in the philosophy, and
thereby removing some of the ignorance preventing the realisation of the
Truth of the one Self. Incidentally, I am bound to say I disagree with
Graham Boyd in his post 'talking like a Jnani' on 19th June. (This is where
I am up to in the catching-up! It may well be that the point has already
been made later but, if not, it is appropriate to make it here.)

Graham suggested that 'it is the ego which wants to speak like a Jnani',
that this is wrong and poses a problem for this group. I note that egodust
(do you really like being addressed in this way?) rightly comments (21st
June) that the relationship of devotee to guru changes as the relationship
progresses (from service to friend to unity, as I understand it). The other
point though is that, in a School whose spiritual leader is realised, the
guru is present through the tutor, irrespective of the location of the body
of the guru (presumably even if buried). Providing the tutor is still,
present in the moment and with no thought of result or selfish motive, there
is direct acess to the knowledge (of the guru-Self) and the Truth will be
spoken in response to the need.

Now clearly this group is not a School in the usual sense of the word and
has no spirtual leader but are not most of us in such a position outside of
the group? I would be one of the first to acknowledge that 'thinking' is one
of the greatest obstacles in this work - I am particularly guilty of it!
But, many of the things I have read have been helpful in dissolving
(apparent) impediments. Given purity of motive, I feel sure that sharing
these experiences will be of help to us all. As long as we are on guard
against manas (the discursive mind) just playing with ideas for the
indulgence of ahamkara (the ego).

Om Paramaatmaane namaH

Dennis