Local Hero – More than Just Compassion

May 11, 2011 in Featured, Inspiration, May 2011, New York, Volunteering by Tails Magazine

Volunteers spend their time with dogs in their final moments, creating lasting memories

Every night one of nine people show up at the Animal Care and Control center in New York to spend the night, and create a lasting memory for a dog who will be euthanized the following morning. Whether it is a long walk, a special treat, or just time spent cuddling, members of the Compassion Program make it their priority to ensure the dog is happy and loved on his final night.

The Compassion Program, which started four years ago, focuses its efforts on animals that need extra support and love–animals that will be euthanized. It is primarily run out of New York’s ACC Manhattan shelter, with the hope of expanding throughout the state.

Members accept donations, host drives, and hold events to raise money to purchase special treats and toys to give to the dogs on their final night. “It’s about providing last minute tender love and care,” said volunteer Yolanda Crous.

The program was started when a combination of staff and volunteers came together in an effort to make sure dogs are given the same care as humans in their final days. It isn’t a job for the weak of heart, as each night the volunteers are given a list of dogs that will be euthanized the following morning. A kinship is born immediately, but at the same time the volunteer knows the next day the animal won’t be there.

“It’s one of those things where I don’t think I would have ever expected myself to do,” Crous admits. “But once you see the need, you can’t walk away.

The overpopulation of pets is a problem throughout the United States, and in New York there just isn’t enough room for all of the dogs in need. Crous said dozens of dogs enter the shelter everyday and its the goal of the Compassion Program to make sure the dogs are loved as much at the beginning of their lives as they are at the end.

“I feel like I am making a difference every moment I spend with the dogs,” she said. “And one of the best parts is the dogs give back just as much compassion as we give them. It is just amazing.”

Autobiography of a Jnani now available in Hindi:

http://itisnotreal.com/AOJHindiMay.pdf

Reactions to the Friday, May 13 Satsang posted below:

Dear Edji,

Thank you so much for Satsang on Friday evening.  It was very powerful.  I sat for quite some time following the end of the broadcast and dropped d 
                                                     e
                                                        e
                                                           p
                                                               within.  And my meditation sessions yesterday and this morning have been . . . well,
I’m not exactly sure how to describe them.  I feel like I’m dissolving.

Also, I’ve been reading Sadhu Om’s chapters on Self-Inquiry.  As you are well aware, that is a profound meditation in itself.  I am so greatly looking forward to the moment Sadhu Om describes in Chapter 8 when the final sinews of the knot of ego finally snap and I don’t ever return.  

Though it has only been a short time since we have begun working together, I have already experienced such a strong influence on my practice through your grace.  Thank you for the empowerment you have offered through your repeated suggestions that I trust my own experience and not look to others for validation.  I can’t tell you how freeing that has been.

In this regard, it is rather ironic I suppose that I feel such a strong connection to you.  You know, one of the things that always struck me during my years of practicing Siddha Yoga was the profound love Baba Muktananda spoke of having for Bhagawan Nityananda.  I remember reading that he had traveled the length and breadth of India twice in search of an experience of God and had visited over sixty Siddhas in the process.  But when he met Nityananda all his searching stopped.

This is how I feel about you.  I feel my heart bursting with a love for you, the depth of which I have never felt for any other.  It is not a co-dependent type of love.  It is just love.  And gratitude.  A feeling of finally having come home or at least encountered the one who will usher me through the final stages of my journey.  

Be clear, however, about two things.  First, I am aware that, as Nisargadatta said, you and me and our relationship is all part of the dream (and what a great part it is!), but that it is the part that is meant to awaken me at last from it.  Second, I know  full well that you can’t walk the path for me.  I understand that my own practice is what it’s all about.  Practice, practice, practice!  Until there remains no one left to do so.  But thank you so much for such clear directions on how to proceed!

It’s kind of weird because I don’t really have any burning questions for you at this point.  You have told me to trust where I am at and to not give in to the mind’s silly games, to stick to my sense of self and not budge.  Really, what else can you say?  Actually, it’s been kind of funny.  Every time a question does pop into my mind concerning my spiritual practice, it seems that the next thing I read in one of your transcripts or one of the books you have suggested or hear in one of your talks addresses the issue.  And, to be honest, the best is when I just sit with it, and the answer reveals itself through my own experience.  So perhaps my biggest thank you is for the guidance you have offered in trusting my own experience.

There is still that part of me that would love to build and sustain a personal relationship with you.  I would love to Skype back and forth at times and would love to meet you in person someday if you would be willing.  At this point, I am not sure exactly what that would look like — maybe something like the vision Robert shared in his talk, “The Good For Nothing Man,” of he and Ramana walking on the banks of the Ganges discussing the weather (ha, ha).  Anyway, I know it probably feels like every student wants a piece of you, and I realize that such experiences are secondary to the real work we are doing, but such a relationship would sure would be a nice compliment. 

One last note, speaking of Robert, I think I ran across a comment of yours concerning you having more transcripts and audio recordings of Robert.  And now I ask this of you as my Guru:  If you think it would be appropriate and helpful to my sadhana to read and/or hear (especially “hear” as I just go out while listening to him talk) any more of Robert’s talks, can you tell my how I could have access to them. 

Thank you again from the bottom of my heart, Guruji.  I love you!

Namaste,

S.

My Dear Beloved Edji,

This just keeps getting better!

After my last email about being energized, yet deeply calm and peaceful after Thursday night's test Satsang, there's been another shift after Friday's Satsang which also left me energized but even more calm and peaceful.

As you know, I  did a major 'crash and burnout' a few months ago and since then have been slowly detaching from the world... your beautiful phrase 'dispassionate compassion' is my reality now... but this morning I woke up with a deep realization that words are empty... truly little empty vessels that "the egoic we" fill with all sorts of meaning and a lot of egoic garbage.

I realized this morning that words appear to have lost the energy behind them for me, that is, the egoic meaning often attached that causes an emotion or feeling to arise followed by defensive thoughts (and sometimes actions).

You can call me anything you want now... and each word appears to carry the same 'energy' behind it for me now... none.

Call me ugly or beautiful... brilliant or stupid... good job on that, crappy job on that... just empty little words and phrases, little 'ego shopping carts' that the person using them against you fills with their own meaning and then justifies their actions on that meaning... and,  if you also take up that meaning and join with them in that game, then it can cause inhumanity to man, cruelty to animals, wars, etc.  That's not to say that beautiful actions cannot also arise from words, but they too can be filled with ego and eventually turn into ugly actions unless the ego is set aside.

I actually look forward to some word, some phrase, that might cause an inner reaction/feeling so that I can bring it up into the Light and empty it out as well.

There is a beautiful spiritual saying that goes something like  'the vessel must be empty to be filled'... I am finally getting a deep understanding of what that means!

There is actually only one word right now that does carry greater meaning and energy for me and that is LOVE, and there is not a single person or sentient creature on this planet that I do not love to the depth of my being.  I may not want to have someone over for dinner, and certainly won't condone someone's wrong actions, but I do love ALL unconditionally, no matter what, as I would only be hating and hurting the true essence of my Self.

Since I was a child I've never understood how people could hate someone else, or judge someone so harshly for their looks, for the job they did, for being poor, etc. just because they differed from 'society's standards' but now I see so clearly that all those that are judging have little 'ego shopping carts' that are so filled to overflowing with projected meaning that they have no room to see the Truth of 'what is'.

My shopping cart is almost empty Edji, but please reach deep within and grab out anything that is left and hiding in the corners!

In complete devotion and surrender,

J.

Dearest, dearest Edji

Thank you so much for the beautiful, loving and powerful satsang. I just wached it and feel deeply grateful and silent within. But I got intoxicated from the chanting...Oh My Guru come to me, come to me, come to me...Everything around dissolved to a transparent mist and only you remained on the screen - your consciousness, my consciousness, just one. All one.

I love you so much

E.

Thank you for Satsang, Edji! 

It was nice to see you and everyone again.  I honestly could not tell the difference between having Satsang in person, and this evenings' online Satsang. Excellent!

I will see you next week.

Love,

Ryan

Dear Edji,

I found tonight's satsang to be very intense, particularly in the second half.  I found myself engulfed in an immense, swirling void, for lack of a better word, that just kept expanding and pushing to the very limits.  It was all but it was nothing.  There was something beyond that limit and I wanted it.  It was so near, so very near, but yet so far.  I knew very deeply, with all my being, that it was worth striving for and attaining.  It is like a chick hatching from an egg.  Up to that time, it's whole universe, its whole being is within the confines of that egg but it somehow knows that there is so much more beyond.  It doesn't know what, it just knows, and the chick wants it.  It's to make that first crack in the egg and I'm ready to crack the egg.

Thank you so very much.

Much love and gratitude.

A.

MY RESPONSE:

It is great to hear about the experiences many of you have had.  But it is really hard for me to take any credit for it. I was just telling you the truth and you heard it.

Friday's Satsang--

The I Am as the Gate to the Absolute,
 and Love as the Gate to the I Am

(Be warned. Some say my chanting is awful!)

Dear Edji,

I found tonight's satsang to be very intense, particularly in the second half.  I found myself engulfed in an immense, swirling void, for lack of a better word, that just kept expanding and pushing to the very limits.  It was all but it was nothing.  There was something beyond that limit and I wanted it.  It was so near, so very near, but yet so far.  I knew very deeply, with all my being, that it was worth striving for and attaining.  It is like a chick hatching from an egg.  Up to that time, it's whole universe, its whole being is within the confines of that egg but it somehow knows that there is so much more beyond.  It doesn't know what, it just knows, and the chick wants it.  It's to make that first crack in the egg and I'm ready to crack the egg.

Thank you so very much.

Much love and gratitude.

One response to last night's online satsang

Dear Edji,

Last night was amazing!

I found after the Satsang that instead of being completely 'wired', I had a lot of energy and was very awake, but I also felt a very deep inner calm and peacefulness and I was able to sleep for about 5 or 6 hours which I normally can't do after a Satsang.

And I feel wonderful this morning.

ZZZ has also noticed a change.

Thank you, thank you, thank you!

Love beyond words,

Is everything directed by Consciousness and we are merely along for the ride? 

Whether this is a play designed by Consciousness, or one designed by you and I consciously or unconsciously, is an open question. I am not sure there are any differences. If you are open enough, I think they are identical. That is, you become Consciousness, the witness and the actor, owning the whole process.


It is a matter of awareness of the totality of the processes, the feelings, and the projections. If you are open enough, not just focused on what you want, and truly watch and are aware of the entire spectrum of emotions and perceptions every second, then you will feel like it is you. Everything is you and in you. Otherwise, you just feel like a helpless spectator, a mere witness to all that is happening, which is a typical Advaita position. Or, you can deliberately take this witness position, just refusing to act on all the stuff that arises in your awareness.

ONLINE SATSANG IS BACK!

The Online Satsangs are back and we are planning the first major test of our new video conference program THIS Friday at 6:00 p.m Pacific Time by holding an informal Satsang.  

If you would like to attend this Satsang and are NOT on our email list, please contact Chris at satsangreg@gmail.com to be added to our list and to get an invitation with the direct link to the Satsang.  At the present time we have enough seats with the new program (100 seats) to accommodate everyone on our email list so registration will not be required... but you do need to be on our email list.


These will be informal Satsangs, meaning the bullshit will not be planned, but will be spontaneous!


Think of a question.

The Poppy Foundation

THE WORDS WE USE AND WHY THEY MATTER   Tina Clark Studies have indicated that surveys show completely different outcomes depending on the way the questions in the survey are worded. One person will answer the very same question in two completely different ways depending on the wording of the question. Therefore, one survey could have two or more completely contradictory outcomes based simply on the way the questions were worded. Choosing one word over another, even if those words ostensibly mean the same thing, can make a huge difference in the way we look at things, and can even completely change one’s world view. In our relationship with non-human animals, the words we use can have a major impact on the way we view animals and therefore on the animals themselves. Words we use without even thinking about them can color the way we perceive non-humans. An example is the word "owner" versus the word "guardian." We must stop thinking of ourselves as owners of our animals, and begin thinking of ourselves as their guardians. We must start thinking of them as companions, not as property. A study done by FIREPAW shows that people who refer to themselves as their animals’ guardians rather than as their owners were more likely to treat their animals well. In Defense of Animals has a program called the Guardian Campaign, the goal of which is to have the word "owner" replaced with "guardian" in official language, and it has succeeded in doing so in areas ranging from law codes to shelter and vet forms to signs in public areas–even the entire State of Rhode Island now uses the word "guardian" officially. Of course, it wasn't too long ago that humans "owned" other humans. We have done away with that, and I eagerly await the day we will regard the owning of any creature as abhorrent. We can start by choosing to use the term "guardian." Something I hear quite often, even among many animal advocates–people one would think would know better–is the habit of referring to non-human animals as "it," with its concomitant "that" or "which" instead of "who" or "whom." This seems to come so naturally to some people, but whenever I hear it, it is so obviously discordant, it affects me the same way as hearing someone use terribly bad grammar. Many people give the excuse that they don't know the gender of the animal, and therefore can't say "he" or "she." But it is better to be wrong about an animal's gender than it is to treat that animals like an inanimate object. If you didn’t know the gender of a human, would you call that human it? I doubt it. Referring to non-human animals as "it" helps people to think of them as objects, not the living beings they are, and therefore gives permission to exploit them, to treat them any way we please without regard for their feelings. There is another type of word usage, or mis-usage that has a slightly different background. The use of the word "shelter" to denote a place where animals are taken in and killed, and the use of the word "euthanasia" to describe that killing must also be done away with, but the impulse here is slightly different. These words have come about as euphemisms, a way to make the pounds seem like places that are protecting animals, and the killing that occurs in them seem like a favor to the animals. The use of such words intentionally hides what these places actually are and what actually happens in them. And this, too, has a disastrous effect on the animals. When the public thinks of pounds as "shelters," they are lulled into thinking that animals are cared for and protected there.  They are more likely to abandon their animals at these places, and are more likely to buy puppies or kittens from breeders or pet shops rather than adopt to save a life. They are also less likely to be outraged at the killing that goes on and to want to do what it takes to stop it. Often those who are working to help animals will continue to use these terms, especially when dealing with members of the pound system, even though they know how inaccurate and misleading the words are, simply because they don’t want to be seen as too radical, or to alienate the people affiliated with the system. I admit I have on occasion fallen into this trap in the past. But I will no longer do so. Therefore, I hereby vow I will no longer use inaccurate terms when talking about animals. I will no longer use the word "shelter" when talking about a place that executes animals, and I will no longer refer to that execution as "euthanasia," even when talking to "animal services" people. I will call a pound a pound, and I will call killing killing. I encourage others to do the same. This is important. We must stop using euphemisms that hide the truth and begin using accurate words for things, so that the truth will be brought to light, and the killing stopped. A word that is perhaps even worse than euthanasia is destroy, as in "the animal was destroyed." No. The animal was killed. You kill living beings. You destroy inanimate objects. While "euthanasia" simply gives the impression that the killer is performing an act of mercy, saying that one "destroys" an animal actually makes the animal sound as if he were some inanimate object. The way we talk about animals in the wild also affects the way we think of them and consequently the way we treat them. When they are no longer seen as feeling individuals, but rather "natural resources," well, aren't resources just things we use for our own benefit? When we kill them and refer to it as "harvesting," we turn them into something like wheat or oranges. Then, when some animals who haven’t been targeted for killing are accidentally killed in the massacre, they become "trash animals" (the non-human equivalent of "collateral damage"). Then there's meat--oh, the euphemisms we use to distance ourselves from the fact we are eating someone's dead body. It has been sanitized so entirely that we don't have to think about it–to even connect the meal with the individual we are consuming. We don't eat pigs and cows and calves; we eat pork and beef and veal. If you eat pork, well, pork is not an animal, it’s food, and you don't have to even think about a pig. If we called it what it really was, I think more people would hesitate before they dug into that piece of meat, and many would finally make the connection and perhaps give up meat altogether. This is why those of us who are advocates for animals must start calling dead flesh what it is. And it's funny, but when you call meat what it is in front of someone who's about to eat it, they can become quite irate. Believe me, I know from whence I speak. Unfortunately, our everyday language is filled not only with thoughtless references to non-human animals, but also with downright derogatory ones. To merely call someone an animal is considered an insult, as are, more specifically, the terms "pig," "rat," and so many others. We talk about "killing two birds with one stone" as if that were a good thing to do. These references are deeply ingrained in our culture, and we who care about animals must be vigilant, not only removing them from our own language, but also bringing it politely to the attention of others who use these terms and phrases. The words we choose to talk about anything or anyone color the way we view that thing or being. In the case of non-human animals, this can give us an unspoken permission to treat them in harmful ways. After all, wouldn't it be easier for you to "harvest" a "resource" than to murder a fellow being? And doesn’t it seem perfectly permissible–even the right thing to do–to "euthanize" someone rather than kill him? We must not merely make the change in our language, we must make the change in our hearts as well. Until it becomes second nature for us to say he or she rather than it, who or whom rather than that or which, etc., we are not truly respecting animals. As long as we have to catch ourselves, we are not there yet. Our old outmoded, speciesist view of animals dictates the words we have long used with regard to them, and these words perpetuate that mindset. But it also works in reverse: we begin realizing that animals deserve our respect and real protection, and we begin using words that reflect that, and those words help change the way all of us view non-human animals.

Dearest Master,

This one is drawn to write to you today to explain a new phenomenon which occurred.  It is seen to be merely a phenomenon, but the pull to write you about it is strong....so here goes.

Following a bad dream last night, waking up was taking place (that space in between waking and sleeping).  During this stage it was observed that the dream was re-starting.  A few small thoughts which were arising started to take on a visual form (color and shape) and were beginning to lead into a dream story.  When awareness was clearly seeing this, it all dissolved.    This repeated about 3 times.  It was seen that the dream formation was taking place within me (existing as pure awareness).  It was also seen that the normal waking state was the same as this.....ie all taking place within pure awareness....me. 

Could you please comment on this dear Master.  

much love and humble gratitude

E.

RESPONSE:


E.,

So, did you identify with pure awareness and disidentify with the dream and waking worlds?

If the identification between you, as awareness, and the fantasy worlds of waking and dream worlds break, that is a major freedom. If not, you are still observing the whole process, but who are you?

You need to break the identification, not by deliberately trying to break, but by having a convincing,  mindblowing change in identification, or a long term more gentle change in conviction.

 Ed

You see, each of us has our own path, whether we are conscious of it or not.


Each of us has our own strengths and weaknesses that differ from everybody else. Some of us are natural athletes, and no matter how hard we try we will never run a four-minute mile, or put the shot 74 feet, or beat Tiger Woods in a round of golf.


No matter how hard I try my could never be another Picasso, or another Beethoven, or another Einstein, and I did struggle many years in physics and mathematics, only to find so many others far more talented than I. Why waste my time trying to perfect myself here?


And there are great saints and sages whose experiences I could never have. I could never be as devoted to God as was Ramakrishna, nor was I as devoted to Robert Adams as Peter was to Christ. I can never have Ramana Maharishi's experience, his awakening, because that was his alone. I did not have Robert Adams expanding mind in light experience, I saw my own emptiness in a shower, then saw even that emptiness was unreal. I no longer have any of the ecstasy states I used to have, nor which many saints lived in all the time. I don't care about these anymore. Samadhis come, Samadhis go. What of it?


Now all I care about is being me, the best me I can be, and by that I ask, will I be able to look back on my life to be able to say without a doubt, "I cared enough."?

You know, I have had so many "spiritual" experiences and "enlightenments" over the last 40 years is I cannot count them. So many samadhis, so many openings, so many ecstasies, so many discoveries, so much truth and knowledge, I cannot count. 


But none of them mean so much to me now as the happiness I get from watching my cat Lakshmi eating from her bowl, then running over to me and climbing onto my chest. She loves me, and I her. She has cancer ansd I give her chemotherapy every other day in the form of a pill, many different kinds of shots for another medical condition, and syringes filled with yucky tasting medications. Yet every day she climbs up onto my chest and looks into my eyes. She loves me so. And I her. And this means much more to me than any of those samadhis and awakenings. They are only memories, or awarenesses that come and go easily as I pay a differing attention. But at this moment I am an ordinary man, a man who loves his cat, and whose cat loves him. 


What do I care of oneness, of unity consciousness, of the absolute? She does not care about such things, nor can I, when I look into her eyes. Just she and I.


I think if she did have all of those awakenings herself, she would throw them away, just so she could continue to look in my eyes like she always has, as cat to man, equals, sharing a moment.

We Are Sentience

                    

Mission Statement: 

No Pet Left Behind is a religious organization and public charity with the mission of teaching about the nature of consciousness and also to manifest the universal compassion for all living things as espoused within the Buddhist Mahayana and Advaita Vedanta teachings, and by St. Francis of Assisi, as interpreted by Edward Muzika, an ordained teacher of Chogye and also Vietnamese Buddhism.  

These traditions all acknowledge that Consciousness (God) is everything, both the form and formless, the phenomenal and noumenal.

We acknowledge that the suffering in the world is endless and vow to do whatever is possible in a well-defined and operational way, to mitigate that suffering as a movement of conscience within Consciousness. We acknowledge that this movement of conscience will take different forms and actions depending on time and place.

Specifically, for the immediate purpose of this organization, the public charity aspect of this organization is to act to end the killing and suffering of companion animals, with the goal of bringing America to No-Kill by emptying the public animal shelters, housing these animals, getting feral cats and dogs off the street through effective sterilization, TNR, funding non-profit shelters, and opening cat and dog sanctuaries for pets that cannot be placed.

We aim to end the killing of companion animals and animals that could become companions, one city at a time, by:

1. Developing a model for ending animal shelter killing of cats, dogs, rabbits and other animals, which is commonly referred to as bringing a shelter system or community to No-Kill[i]. As of 2010, in the various public shelters within the County of Los Angeles, over 80,000 cats and dogs, and perhaps up to 30,000 other animals and impounded wildlife were killed. Our mission is to bring Los Angeles to No-Kill through developing a successful model incorporating the public shelters, non-profit rescue groups, and private enterprise as partners, which then can be copied nationwide, ultimately leaving no pet left behind.

2. To develop a private shelter similar to the San Francisco SPCA (SFSPCA)[ii], which in partnership with San Francisco’s City shelters, Animal Care and Control has brought that city close to the No-Kill goal. In there agreement, the SFSPCA agrees to adopt pets that the shelter has not, do necessary rehabilitation, and then adopt to the community. Nathan Winograd, probably the country’s leading No-Kill writer, WILL be involved in this process.

3. To develop an effective coordinating apparatus to fund and administer an optimal distribution of public, non-profit, and private resources to implement a City wide Trap/Neuter/Return program for the city and county of Los Angeles, to stabilize and gradually end the lost, homeless and feral cat and dog situation in Los Angeles.

This will require extensive study of the current homeless animal population dynamics in Los Angeles, and funding animal demographics/dynamics studies of both housed and homeless animals to gain a greater understanding of the environmental impact of homeless animals, and the impact of various strategies to end homelessness. Essential questions to be answered are: how many housed pets are there in Los Angeles, how many street animals are there, and what are the mechanisms through which housed animals become homeless, and homeless animals become housed?

This will also require an understanding of the potential market value of owning a housed animal, and the public costs of the current homeless population, and the public savings or costs of removing animals from the street. This is essential in order to gain the cooperation of both City shelters and government, as well as corporations that derive revenues from animal related sales and veterinary care.  That is, we need to determine the market value of emptying publically sheltered animals into homes, and the removal of feral cats from the street to homes, non-profit shelters, or designated sanctuaries.

Just saving the 80,000 cats and dogs animals now killed in shelters every year in LA county would potentially create over $50,000,000 additional ($600/per animal) in gross pet related sales and vet care per year just within LA County. The 30,000 other animals, including rabbits, ferrets, snakes, turtles, etc. have an unmeasured market potential. The reclaiming and housing of street animals is an untapped and unmeasured potential market, but presents its own costs to implement.

4. Currently we are supporting colony managers throughout the San Fernando Valley by supplying food, medication, vaccinations, vet care, and TNR assistance to maintain a healthy homeless cat population until they can be removed from the streets.

5. The holy grail for feral colony managers has always been to have a large cat sanctuary(ies) (and dog kennels), using public land and volunteer, nonprofit support and administration, working in partnership, such that every cat and dog can have a home if not adopted or placeable by the various public shelter systems or through the SFSPCA  equivalent in Los Angeles. There was a movement in the 1990s to establish such, but City Council never authorized the land. Leo Grillo has established such a private sanctuary for dogs in the LA area (D.E.L.T.A.)[iii].

Implementing all these steps would leave no pet left behind in Los Angeles.

6. Lastly, to help the elderly and poor to provide medical care for their pets, rather than relinquishing them to shelters for care that never comes, we would establish a non-profit, sliding scale, low fee or free veterinary care clinic for the use by the public. This itself will be the first charitable veterinary clinic in Southern California, and also a model, which if successful, can become useful nationwide, again, leaving no animal left behind. 

Our vision is to take whatever of these steps necessary to make sure every cat, dog, rabbit, ferret and other non-wildlife creature, now on the streets of the City and County of Los Angeles, find a home, or at least allowed to live in a shelter, or a managed sanctuary, emptying the shelters and streets of unwanted pets, and using the successful public/non-profit/and private cooperative model invented, to eventually make our nation No-Kill and all animals to be housed.

---

[i] No kill is currently “operationally” defined as a 90% or better live save rate, which recognizes that very ill, dying and unplaceable animals are brought to shelters, which may not be savable without extraordinary resources. However, this save rate can be improved with increased resources, better medical and behavioral care, and better adoption outreach. For example, San Francisco was almost no kill in 2007 with the municipal shelter having an 82% save rate, and the associated SFSPCA having a 96% live save rate. However, the SFSPCA’s new emphasis on supporting its new vet hospital means their progress towards no kill has been interrupted. The resources go to the hospital rather than impound and adoptions.

As of Friday, We Are Sentience was incorporated as a non profit in the state of California.


Much more about the purpose of this organization later, but essentially it will aim to end the killing of companion animals in Los Angeles, and if the model succeeds, throughout the country.

Rogelio garcia lois 

 Hello, Ed.

The show is over.

 What a weird game spirituality is. In the first moments, no spirituality, no liberation. In due time , if spirituality remains, no liberation is possible. At the end of the game, it is discovered that one has never been bound...A sad and necessary game to play...

I woke up one of this days and started a progressive contemplation:

I started with "things", apparently separate from me. I looked at a chair and thought, "Is it possible for the chair to exist independently from the consciousness that perceives it? No. Is the chair telling me "I am you"? No. Is the chair asking me for its eternal existence? No. It is just a perception. It depends on me".

 Then I climbed the ladder and looked at the first possible identification, the body. I just watched it, pure comtemplation. And, to my surprise, I realized that the same questions that I applied to an apparent "external thing", are also pertinent for the body: Is it possible for the body to exist independently from the consciousness that perceives it? Impossible. It is just a group of perceptions. No consciousness, no perception, no body. Is the body telling me "I am you"? No. The body cannot say anything, since it is just a perception. It does not perceive, it is perceived. Is the body asking me for eternal existence? No. The body is more than happy with its being just a perception.

 Finally, the last step: the pure, wordless, thoughtless feeling of being of the waking state. The "I am"-consciousness . The window that allows the universe to appear every morning. And that´s where the whole castle of cards , "spirituality" , collapsed.
To my amazement (and amusement!), I found out that the "I am", without which there is no universe and no spirituality at all , is subject to the same questions that the body or even a chair are!


  When I watch it without allowing thought to stand in the way, does it tell me "I am you"? No!! What does it tell me about me? Nothing. Is it possible for the waking state consciousness to exist independently of "something" that perceives it? NO!! The "I am-consciousness" is not independent from me. It is just a mirage, a perception. Amazing.

The door to the universe is just a perception! . Is it asking me for eternal existence? No. It can tell me NOTHING about me, because it does not see me. It is the other way round. I am the one who sees it! It needs something prior to it that allows its existence. What is birth? The PERCEPTION of the appearence of space and time. What is death? The PERCEPTION of the dissapearence of space and time. How could birth, which is a perception, create the one who perceives it? How could death, which is a perception, kill the one who perceives it?

 So, even the seed of space and time, of the entire universe, depends on me. And if the seed of space and time is itself in space and time, I cannot be within the universe, I cannot have space/time coordinates. That´s why the question "What am I two hundred years before the appearence of my body?" is a wrong question, since my true nature, whatever name one can give to it, is not something that "lasts" eternally. It is not a continuum in time. It is completely OUT of time. I am just deluded by the wrong messages that the mind sends. The mind is born with the birth of the body and will die with the body. It feeds on "form", so it conceives its absence as "nothing", as death, because it cannot create memories of that which has no physical form. That´s why it tells us "you were nothing before the body, and you will be nothing when the body dies". And all that game is just a mirage, a movie.
 
 Really amazing. Really marvellous.

  Thank you very much for your help. Very, very much.

 REPLY:

But you need to stay convinced!

A Symphony Too Large

The totality of Robert Adams talks including audios can be found by doing a google search on the web for "Robert Adams" and relevant to our Robert terms such as Satsang, talks, enlightenment, info or information. I cannot put up a link as Infinity won't let me.

His transcripts alone are a book of 3,700 pages, close to a million words. Yes, if you read Robert, you will find a contradiction every dozen pages or so.

Sometimes there are small inconsistencies, such as his story of first meeting Ramana Maharshi.  Sometimes he is inconsistent about method, saying that one should diligently practice self-inquiry alone, while at other times even suggesting mantra practice or watching the breath. At other times he’ll say forget practice altogether and just be with the guru, serve and love the guru.  Sometimes he’d just say forget that even that and just wake up. He would always tell people at Satsang to avoid the world and just stay close to him, while those close to him, he’d urge to stay involved in the world and did all kinds of things himself to keep himself “grounded” and involved in the world.

His closer students would act as “apologists” explaining away the inconsistencies with the idea he was speaking truth to different levels of students, some more advanced than others. In a sense this was true, but mostly in his Satsang he spoke to beginners, especially during the large Satsang on Sundays when a more general audience came.

He used to say that each teacher had their own message, and that is why you have the sometimes large differences in doctrine taught by Ramana, Nisargadatta, Osho, Muktananda, etc.

Students, unable to tolerate inconsistency, and not having found their own truth, were always trying to reconcile inconsistencies between teachers, such as Ramana, Robert and Nisargadatta. Tiny, minor, inconsistencies that hardly mattered to some, created huge crises of faith for some students. Some refused even to acknowledge in their minds that even blatant inconsistencies existed, or they explained them as one teacher was “really” realized, versus another who voiced a contradiction.

Consistency is a huge thing with a logical mind.

In the 1930s, a German mathematician named Kurt Gödel published a paper later called Gödel’s proof, which demonstrated that all the truths or theorems of simple arithmetic, or any comparable number theory, could not be proved within the framework of a certain type of logical system with was logically similar to the subject matter of the arithmetic being investigated. That is, the truths, or theorems, of even simple arithmetics could not be proved within the confines of such a system. There would always be some logical inconsistency within the truth expressions of any arithmetic or propositional logic.


It was a world shattering discovery that truth cannot be confined to exposition of logical consistency.

So too was Robert’s teachings. It was too large for consistent and sequential exposition.

You might think of Robert’s teachings as a symphony needing 80 instruments or voices to fully express all the nuances of his message, yet at any Satsang, he never had more than a single voice. It is like at some Satsangs he brought an oboe, while to others he brought a drum or a violin. In each Satsang he was a soloist, singing in one voice, one aspect of his truth, and in order to understand Robert, you had to listen to him for years to bring in your being, all the voices together into a beautiful symphony.

However, the highest symphony note was when the teachings stopped and he was silent. All the notes and instruments stopped for a moment, and the truth of no truth, of immediate apprehension of one’s own being was thrust upon those ready for it. Everything was in the silence if only you listened with a silent and alert mind.

Really, all the words to that point were merely lullabies to put your mind to sleep allowing you to see truth beyond truth if you were ready and not looking for truth in words and concepts.