8. A conversation with Stephen Wingate ***
Posted May 31, 2008
By areti
This program features Stephen Wingate who suggests that instead of listening to other’s ‘experiences’ and definitions about what reality is, we need to look and see for ourself, from our own direct experience, what it is. In it, he guides us through such an investigation.
Music by Ekova and Carlos Nunez.
Stephen’s website is: Living in Peace: The Natural State
Good.
Rate it!
0
Hey,
Again a very interesting podcast, with intriguing musical intermezzo’s.
Just one thought though:
I remember something from Byron Katie talking about her method in “a thousand names for Joy” where she says that her method is not about a simple consciousness. Because with consciousness you keep on being painfully aware of the things that frighten you, for instance.
I wonder why being the awareness of frightful things would change it in any way?
If it does anything , then it’s highlighting it . Because without awareness no frightful thoughts. It’s like saying, well you know those car bombings in Iraq, it doesn’t matter, it all appears on the empty television screen.
Bye,
tom
Rate it!
0
There is NO method. The cockroach did not have a method when it walked up to Byron Katie and shone its brilliance into her bloodshot eyes. Forget about methods.
Rate it!
0
No I’ve tried that, didn’t work
Rate it!
0
Yes, NO method is the answer.Because any other answer would just be a frozen question. No method gives space to the inherent openness in which 10.000 methods can arise. From chopping wood to carrying water.
Rate it!
0
For the advaita-police, yes ‘in which’ is dualistic
Rate it!
0
Nice podcast, and of course as FOYAN put it :
“People nowadays take the immediate mirroring awareness to be the ultimate principle. This is why Xuansha said to people, ‘Tell me, does it still exist in remote uninhabited places deep in the mountains?”
keep on truckin’
Foyan
Rate it!
0
I know this isn’t supposed to be a forum, but could somebody please take a crack at decoding that Xuansha quote for me? Not that it really matters because it doesn’t change who we are, but I don’t understand the point of that quote. “Mirroring awareness” is only two words and “uninhabitated places deep in the mountains” is just a concept. All of which appear in and as awareness (not two). If Xuansha asked me that question, I would probably ask him what difference does it make that we’re talking about uninhabitated places deep in the mountains? It’s still just right here right now with a concept arising. What am I missing about this question? What is it about an uninhabitated place that would or could make a difference?
Rate it!
0
Everything ‘appears’ in the singular existence – THAT is what you are.
There is no question about, or in, THAT actuality. The mind is dualistic and as long as you take yourself to be those thoughts and that ‘me’, then the essential emptiness of mind escapes ‘you’. ‘Deep in the forest’ is just a concept and an appearance ‘appearing’ in the space-like awareness that you ARE. What more need you know?
Rate it!
0
If it’s uninhabitated then is there still the space-like awareness to mirror? If it’s there where you are and not there where you are not, then can it still be the invariant truth?
Rate it!
0
IF…this and IF that…….What you ARE is KNOWING. There is NO ‘IF’ about THAT.
Postulating this and that is just mind games. Be the KNOWING and SEE ‘what IS’.
The definition of Reality is: Reality is that which never changes.
All that ‘you’ know, ‘knowledge’ is changing.
What mirror? There is NO mirror – just awareness.
There is no awareness of awareness – there is ONLY awareness.
Awareness of presence or the presence of awareness ‘appear’ AS ‘the experienc-ing’.
That experienc-ing never changes – the content (experiences) is ever changing.
‘If it is there where you are’ – Well see IF you can find a ‘point’, a ‘locality’ of ‘where you are’. Investigate that thoroughly and what is discovered is that there is NO locality and NO time, no volume and no duration in that direct and immediate experienc-ing.
As Bob Adamson says: “The false cannot stand up to the investigation”.
So, stop postulating about IF’s and take a good look into IT.
Rate it!
+1
G- thanks for the pointers
Roy- thank you for answering my question.
I was just curious because I didn’t understand the point of the Xuansha quote. Now, I understand the explanation (but I’m not sure that was Xuansha’s intention unless he was a crackpot teacher). Sometimes it’s fun to engage the acquired mind in these “if a tree falls in the uninhabited woods does it make a sound?” type scenarios. And if I ever get seemingly lost in thought identification, I know G-money will be there to pull me out.
Rate it!
0
And the point is that when you ask yourself that question, in fact either of the questions postulated, it silences the mind, for there is no answer, for nobody is there, no consciousness as ‘defined by the mind’ is there, for it is all awareness/knowing/consciousness (words and more words)- one without a second. So as Gilbert says, If this….if that….’Postulating this and that is just mind games. Be the knowing and see ‘what IS’ (don’t just keep on thinking because you can name it, you see it). The definition of Reality is that which never changes. All that ‘you’ know, ‘knowledge’, is changing. There is no awareness of awareness – there is only awareness.’
Rate it!
0
So if we take one of the recent pointers of John Wheeler:
“Consciousness has a locus; awareness does not. Look at the dream example. The consciousness in the dream has an apparent location, a reference point. But where do you, that is, your actual being, exist in the dream? Nowhere! Everywhere!”
Then applied to the statement of the obscure Xuansha:
So ‘the immediate mirroring awareness’ that FOYAN talks about has a locus and cannot exist in remote uninhabitated places deep in the mountains.
While the awareness is Nowhere, Everywhere so also in remote uninhabitated places deep in the mountains. Wich has to mean those places are purely conceptual.
So Xuansha is targetting ‘people’ who are stuck in the ‘I AM’ realisation, who think that’s the be-all and end-all. Not realising that this an appearance too.
?
Rate it!
0
All this discrimination between this and that, is dualistic. The polar opposites ‘appear’ within ONE presence. That presence can have many names: Awareness – Consciousness – Knowing – Being – Understanding – Essence. The Understanding that is sought is NOT in the mind. The Knowing that is overlooked is NOT in the mind. The Presence that you ARE is not in the mind. Mind is Time. Presence-Awareness is not bound by something called ‘time’. Bob says “Start from the FACT that you are already THAT”. That ‘pointer’ is so direct and potent. All these questions about consciousness versus awareness and ‘If this and if that’ drop away instantly. The simple nature of awareness is non dual. Be THAT – it is too simple for most and everyone passes over it. Searching in the mind terrain for all manner of experiences and knowledge. All in vain. Understanding is SILENT, Wordless. The fabricated understanding of mind is NOT understanding at all.
Understanding is complete, right NOW – it does not need ‘you’ to ‘do’ anything before it ‘becomes’ present. It is ‘presence’ and it reveals its ‘clear presence’ when the ‘mind’ is NOT. Mind is thought. No one can do it for you. All we can do is ‘point’.
As the ancient text says “Stop talking, stop thinking – and there is nothing you will not be able to know.” Like all profound ‘pointers’ we read them or hear them and say “wow, that is good” (or not) and then we go on and on searching back in the mind trying to ‘get some new understanding via some new formula’. In really hearing a ‘pointer’ it stops you dead in your tracks. A ‘space opens up’. I call that ‘the space of knowing’. We may need to hear ‘the message’ many, many times until it dawns on us.
One could say that the core point is that ‘the essence of what I am’ (what you are) is THIS immediate ‘knowing’ – it is always prior to the mind’s activities – mind has only reflections and concepts about (that) ‘knowing’. The mind translates THIS knowing (via ‘objects’ and experiencing) into words etc. And then takes that to be reality. That realm is ALWAYS belonging to ‘the second’. ‘One without a second’ is that essence of pure knowing – I am THAT.
Rate it!
0
Hi Everybody, I love the site. I just discovered it after Stephen Wingate included a link in his newsletter email. When is part 2 of his interview going to be?
Rate it!
0
Hi Mike, welcome to the urban guru cafe. There are plans to use the other parts of the conversation with Stephen Wingate in a compilation piece (i.e. a piece featuring a number of ‘teachers’ talking on a particular aspect/using a particualr pointer) in the not too distant future. Stay tunned!
Rate it!
0
Thanks G for your reply!
It’s like Bob says; the only thing that can complicate this, is that which divides.
It’s like the mind allways tries to put legs on a snake.
kind regards,
tomvds
Rate it!
0
Yes. As Bob says: “There is no answer in the mind.”
There is nothing simpler than Non-Duality. – Yet, as a subject, it is approached in ‘the mind’ in many complex ways. – It is not something attainable after years of study or practice. – There are no professors of Non-Duality because there is nothing to teach. – Everything that is taught on the subject is dualistic and it is bound to be so.
Non-Duality is the nature of One-ness. – Every apparent ‘thing’ is contained in the One.
That is far too obvious and the clear apprehension of that fact ‘stills the mind’s restless activity. (The ego is not interested in that)
In that empty ‘space-like awareness’, clear cognition (knowing) reveals itself and then conceptualization ‘eventually’ steps back in.
This is natural – the mind functions as an interpreter, naming the experience – yet nothing of that functioning actually separates the One-ness.
Nothing in the mind realm actually separates any ‘thing’ from any other thing and any apparent ‘form’ or substance to the notion of ‘separation’ is an appearance contained within the (knowing) One. – Everything is the One – appearing to be ‘something’ or ‘other’.
All appearances appear nowhere other than within the One.
You can see this ‘within’ the ‘presence’ that you are. – (and) Where else could you see it?
Rate it!
0
Areti & Gilbert,
Thank you for your website and work.
The format of the podcasts into segments is refreshing and keeps the attention focussed. I loved listening to the latest Sailor Bob pod cast and the one that I’m commenting on.
As I live in Alice Springs, I’m unlikely to be able to go to meetings very often, so the many podcasts on non-duality are a wonderful way to receive teachings for people like me. I haven’t even met anyone else here who’s interested in non-duality, so I talk about it to my husband a lot. Maybe I should just start a local discussion group and see who turns up.
My only suggestion is to change the date style on the posts and comments. They’re done in the backwards or American (month/day/year) style rather than the standard way Australian/English style (day/month/year). I’m not sure if you can fix this … just a suggestion.
Rate it!
0