Urban Guru Cafe

Stephen Metcalf says:

I very rarely post anywhere. Here I am.

This Urban Guru Cafe in incredible. The most Direct Pointing.

I have deep Gratitude for Bob, Gilbert, Randall, Areti and Stephen Wingate. Just amazing pointers.

Gilbert, you have been VERY helpful. No compromising.

I spent a lot of time with Adyashanti. Five or six week long silent retreats. Listened to many tapes and Cd’s.

No longer though.

I stay here….with Direct Pointing.

However, this I do not understand.

The Direct Pointing occuring here is IT. IT stands on its own.

Why the need to focus/bash other teachers? Yes, the other teachers do not provide Direct Pointing. Who cares ?

I experience this ” other teacher focus/bashing ” as a distraction from the amazing Direct Pointing that is occuring here.

Stephen Metcalf

Rate it!   -1

Ralph says:

‘Direct pointing’ is the way !

Unfortunately, many will not get it with ‘direct pointing’ alone. This is where ‘teachers’ come in. Your job is not to go with this teacher or that one but instead take what ‘resonates’ from them and move on. To be fixated with ‘one teacher’ or ‘one teaching’ usually keeps the seeker in stuck mode.

So beware and good luck !

Rate it!   0

dorothy hoffman says:

Gilbert, speaking of methods and practices…even Nisargadatta openly endorsed staying with the “I amness” as much as possible.

However, the confusion for “me”arises in trying to stay with this I amness so to speak is that it needs a ME to stay there. Now where is this ME? It becomes a method and carries with it a certain kind of heaviness. It is not effortless because there is a ME to begin the process.

Upon Self Inquiry or Investigation, there is no separate individual found; only a sense of existence, aliveness, presence remains…actually, “remains” is not quite the term as the Inquiry happens in that presence.

It is obvious that there is no independent person running the show as it can never be found; yet partiality and self interest towards this personality remains; fear still arises for the sake of continuation of this personality; the freedom that John so effortlessly speaks about in this podcast is not felt here. What is getting in the way of what?

Rate it!   0

gilbert says:

Your assumption that there is a ‘me’ to start a process is the error. It is ALL intelligence – that intelligence appears as everything – even as the ‘me’. The potency of what you are is not in the ‘me’ – it is the intelligence. Innately you KNOW this. The story about a ‘me’ is just a story. I will let John answer your question about what gets in the way of what?
The so called personality is the persona, the mask, an interface ‘between’ the (believing in) entity and the world. Nisargadatta spoke to many seekers and he did speak of simple practice, if you want to call them that. Staying with the ‘I am-ness’ is just being what you are. There is no effort being made by ‘someone’ to be what you are. It cannot be a practice because what you are is ever fresh.
A practice is stale bread. An imposition from mind and memory upon what is already free.
The problem as I see it is that we take what the mind is translating this experiencing into, to be knowledge. And we slip away into that conceptual realm – and in doing so, we are ignoring the immediate clear nature of experiencing – which is ceaseless.
Anyone’s words can be pulled apart or criticized. It is better to pull apart your own words (beliefs) and really see where the clarity of being is. it is not in any concept.
It has been called ‘Non-conceptual awareness’ (The great perfection) and the mind has all sorts of problems with such a description, because its habit is to add more concepts or translate it into something ‘already known’ (past) – in other words, into just another concept. All these points have been covered a hundred times in previous notes and programs etc. The booklet of the transcription of Bob’s 2 part interview is well worth getting and of course listening to it. Details about how to get that booklet are on the program title pages of Bob’s interview. If one truly hears what is being pointed out there, all questions will vanish.
But I see that so many approach this with pre-conceived notions. They hear something and they imagine that ‘they understand’ it and go on searching elsewhere.
If they were studying for a degree or whatever, they would need to know the subject thoroughly – but when it comes to this, they pass over essential points far too quickly. The dissolution of beliefs is the key point. If we want to hang onto our beliefs, then the clear understanding will remain elusive.
Confusion is nothing but a tension between two or more reference points in mind. One must see this tension clearly and know that they are just reference points being held onto in some way. Investigate them and they will resolve themselves. They leave in any case. Where is last years confusion?
As Nisargadatta also says: “Don’t pretend to be what you are not – and don’t refuse to be what you are.”
The natural state is here – the minds activity simply plays upon it. This activity is so clearly obvious – but the habit is to ‘go with’ what the thought is suggesting ‘to be real’. The closest one comes to what is real, apart from being what is real, is to ‘stay with’ the un-interrupted experiencing. That can also be called the ‘I am-ness’.
There is no problem with the ‘I thought’ or the ‘me thought’ – they are just expressions – it is the belief that they have some substance and independence that appears to cause so much grief and turmoil. So, take a look. Seeing is happening. In the ‘place’ where the pure seeing is happening, there is nothing at all, except pure seeing. That is what you are. The ‘me’ idea and all the efforts can’t transport the ‘me’ to that ‘place’ – the ‘me’ is an appearance of endless becoming can only appear and disappear in THAT which IS.

Rate it!   0

Ishanth Mehra says:

Can someone give me details about the song “we were talking about the space between us….. in the time 12.35 to 13.50. Who sang the song and the title of the song?, please. Thank you in advance. (editor’s inclusion – It is the Beatles, George singing I believe. The song is “Within you, without you”)

Rate it!   0

gilbert says:

To Pendragon – if this is known to be so – as you describe it – where is the problem?
Knowing the false as false and the real as real is natural. Understanding is not in the mind.
It appears that some do not see the difference and they mix up things that are essentially quite different – thus confusion arises. If you see a blind man walking towards a cliff face, would you not step in and advise him of his erroneous direction? Some sign posts point accurately while others point in an erroneous direction even though the sign says the ‘right thing’. It usually has a big picture of the guru attached. Those who make a big deal out of themselves are not the ones to trust. Umpteen promotional photos with an obvious staged appearance is a dead give away. So many have learned the talk and pretend to walk the walk. Self-indulgence is hard to hide – it seeps out – it is not much more than show business.
The Non Dual jargon of passing everything off with some formula is shallow and does not satisfy anyone except the believer.
As I said earlier, we are not singling out Adya. People keep mentioning his name. In my opinion, his name has no place in this podcast site.
I am well acquainted with things to do with this ‘subject’ and I can tell pretty quickly if a teacher is ‘telling it straight’. As John says in the program, they are rare and that is why we are providing this podcast – to bring a few of them into one ‘place’ so that many can access at least one of them, one that will resonate with their understanding.
I realize that some will get their noses out of joint over this program – but that is no reason why we should hold back. There is some gold in ‘this bag’ – so let’s get to it.

Rate it!   0

Pendragon says:

I see no problem here at all, Gilbert, nor >>>>>> “There”.

Just life, doing that ole Life Thing, again.

Concepts divide, Mind does its dance of duality…. some would say… So What?

Yes, there IS a lot of Gold here to be mined but ‘I’ can’t Own any of it.

A bouquet has many colors and fragrances…. All Beautiful,,, In Essence~!

You point to the cliff and say… “Watch Out”, and that “feels” very natural.

The Blind man thanks you~

At some point it just felt a little excessive and obsessive, like it was your Job
to set up a help station at the edge of the cliff… and that’s OK as well~

Rate it!   0

will says:

Well, that’s the trouble with the reported sayings of alleged old sages who may or may not have said anything of the kind at all. Crassness mistaken for wisdom.

Rate it!   0

The Feral Dream says:

It seems to me that this whole “seeing’ business is inherently designed to confuse – by its very nature, by the way it has been modelled……

There was a very clear Seeing here at one time, that apparently lasted a few hours. It was clearly Seen that there was no identity, no person except a shell of a body and thoughts passing through – the ‘owner’ of the thoughts was absent. There was intense fear that came up, i suppose one could label it the fear of death of the ego or whatever….doesn’t matter. Suffice it to say, people may contest this but – my evidence is my evidence and really there can be no (intelligently) arguing that.

So given that it was temporal, was that a mere experience and not real Seeing?
What is the ‘proof’ for oneself? (this question is actually silly I realise – because when I was in the Seeing, there was no proof needed – it was completely obvious and self-evident – proof by nature being subject/object will not validate self-evidence… so what am i asking? I guess, question is was it Real Seeing and if so, why was it temporal)

It is often said that nothing is needed but isn’t it in fact needed that the Ego has to die? Because as long as the identification with the false self is there, that is ‘real’ for the one. Its all very well to say ‘the ego doesn’t exist, never did’ – and I did see that clearly during those moments – but not NOW.

“there is no such thing as a permanent awakening’ – i believe Bob or Niz said that. however I see people with seemingly temporary awakenings (myself, a friend of mine) and those with seemingly permanent ones (John, gilb, bob, etc).

Lastly, on the false teachers – during the last few years, i was quite curious about the power gurus, shaktipath guys, Da Free John etc. I can see how one would become a ‘false guru’. In the case of someone like bob or john, the sense of identity seems to be completely decimated – but for many, a half awakening might lead to delusions of grandeur. On the flip, It seems very clear that This (or THAT is Binary – One is either awake or one is not. There is no ‘half-awakening’. Is this correct? So in effect, a false teacher with siddhis and a learjet is merely a different level of mis-identification than me who slaves at a 9-5 job – its all basically mis-identification one way or another. Once one is disabused of the notion in the Identity, then the game is over.

just some thoughts…. thx
S

Rate it!   0

JoeDon says:

Off track, Gilbert? I’m afraid it seems UGC got off track by putting this podcast up. What happened to the direct pointing……… Im surprised John would rant like this. Having read his site, it’s just …well..surprising that he would give into the appearances in mind so much.

This all leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Whatever ground is being gained through direct pointing, the insistence that I hear in this podcast just destroys it. Sorry just my opinion. It’s just that I heard John bash all concepts “out there” only to give 10 minutes of a podcast full of his concepts. Yikes, does anyone see the irony?

UGC has a real decision to make. Continue on with this kind of bashing, or get to the real juice of this direct pointing.

It’s not all this intelligence. Some of it smells like garbage (‘ego’ whining…).

Rate it!   -1

will says:

This one is on an extended grump apparently. Don’t rise to it.
It was more that business of “an old sage once said….”
It’s a pet gripe, like “Jesus said” or “Buddha said”.
No one knows what Jesus or Buddha said, let alone if they were at all.
I do see your point, but “why cover the earth with leather” struck here as a poor analogy, that’s all. Ignore me. Irritable, pedantic, and words words words words…..

Back on topic – another doozie from John Wheeler, thanks staff. Trippy musical interruptions a bit of a shame again if I may be permitted such a personal opinion without sparking an arse-kicking frenzy.

I loved the music by the way. Back when I was tripping to it.

Gratitude for the Cafe, as ever.

Rate it!   0

gilbert says:

OK…anyone out there that wants to take over putting the programs together?……and have wall to wall voice with no interruptions. Allow any old teacher to go on the programs and then put a payable download charge on them? – because the new production nerd wont do it without getting paid (just like his favorite guru).
As I see it, these programs place some excellent pointing into a setting that we are all familiar with……like listening to a radio program (without the commercials). By the way, even though the programs were offered as a suggestion to anyone reading the comments pages, to approach local community Stations, yet no Radio Station has been banging on our door to get the high res’ files from us. Anyway, leave the ‘sour grapes’ in the sun until the ripen. Some of these comments remind me of that English TV show “One foot in the grave” – Mr. Grumps.

Are you not awake? Right now?
The clarity of SEEING remains – it is the clouding of the mind through belief that suggests that the SEEING has gone away – and it is believed – it is all a story about ‘Me’.

Rate it!   0

Sergio says:

I just listened now to the next interview fragment. Good as always.

So… nobody need´s that “knowledge”, yes? …. because, there is nobody separate from this “Presence, I Am”

It puts down all the need for teachers, gurus, practices, seekers, and the whole game.

This can be frustrating when you believe you are a seeker, but if you really want to know truth, it´s really so striking.

Because it is very simple, nothing to do and nothing to attain, it is very subtle to recognize. This is not a good ‘plate’ to serve to the convinced seeker, but it is the real key (to freedom) for the desperate one.

Really there is nothing more to add. It´s so simple, the real one who has the real need, “will listen”, now.

Love,
Sergio

Rate it!   0

Scott Kiloby says:

That’s really clear Gilbert. It’s the story, the image of “me,” that falls away and makes it appear that someone comes to ‘this’ in time or that there is someone who could claim “awakening.” “I” don’t come to ‘this.’ There is no “I” that is separate from ‘this.’ There never was. Just concepts…coming and going creating the appearance of two. And that appearing includes all the concepts—not just the “me” that seems to be the most stubborn one, but even the most so-called ‘spiritual’ concepts like Oneness, consciousness, timelessness, Nonduality, presence, awareness. No one ever reaches or discovers these ‘things.’ They are all images. The quicker this is seen, the quicker the illusion of ‘me’ falls away totally. It takes no time if seen directly

Rate it!   0

gilbert says:

Thanks Will. I will have the Cup engraved yet again with my name. Surely that will make me happy (for at least 5 minutes).
Then I can relax and forget about all these silly seekers. Damn it, I might even ‘get a life’ – which is what many tell me to do quite often. I love it, the way a few words can make a whole garden of weeds and flowers appear out of thin air. Even though there never was a ‘person’ anywhere, as soon as something is stated from or to a ‘person’ it sure rouses the aroma of horse shit. Every ‘group’ has its brigade of vigilante’s and the Non Duality group is no different. Sure it is all appearance – but ‘who’ really wants to see and know that?
Anyway save the last dance for ME. Rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic and let the band keep playing “Waltzing Matilda” – I may be home late for dinner but don’t forget to put the trash out….and the cat.
P.S. Good to see you back Scott.

Rate it!   0

John says:

It’s been a while since I did the interview and I haven’t listened to the podcast. So I can’t recall specifically what topics were covered. However, there is a basic message or point being put across about this stuff. One may or may not agree with it. And I strongly suggest that you DO NOT agree with it out of hand without some considered reflection. The issues, in my view are:

1. What is our true nature?

2. What is the nature of the world?

3. What is the nature of ultimate reality, if there is such a thing?

4. What is the root of seeking, suffering, and doubt?

5. What, if any, is the resolution of the latter.

6. How can I live a life in accord with these deeper perspectives?

These can all be condensed down to: What is my true nature? Because until that is clear, all other matters will be colored by the lack of clarity on that. So my advice is to emphasize that above all other considerations. Various traditions and historical figures over a wide span of time and cultures have looked into these points and come up pretty consistent answers. Again, that is no assurance of any truth of any of it. But it does at least provide some incentive to look for ourselves.

Once these issues are looked into and we come up with some solid understanding based on direct experience, it may become apparent whether or not certain teachings, spiritual perspectives or paths are consistent with that understanding. My own experience over years of looking into this stuff is that many approaches have settled for partial or incomplete answers to the above issues. Or they have gotten side-tracked along the way into other matters and are not even considering the basic points any longer. Some are emphasizing goals, states and experiences that have little if anything to do with these core issues. That is an opinion, but a considered one. There is no use taking it on faith from me or anyone else.

Every tradition that I am aware of essentially points out the presence of a deeper reality or truth of things. Various pointers are given to provide some sense of that. The words are clearly pointers only. The key communication always comes down to: your own nature and this reality, whatever it might be, are one and the same. This true nature is, by nature, unconditioned, free of limitation, free of suffering, etc. The encouragement is to have a clear view and sense of who you are, without that being mixed up with unexamined notions and assumptions. The root of all seeking, suffering and doubt is based on a wrong view or belief in who/what we are. Those beliefs ultimately trace back to a view that I am a limited, defective, separate person in the appearance of things. The resolution of that unexamined belief leaves your real, abiding being free of any attachment to concepts and notions that cause us to believe we are something we are not. Nothing is brought in; nothing is attained; nothing is achieved. Because the point is that you already are whatever you are. So the only viable task at hand is to have a straight look at what you presently are.

In my view, some approaches/presentations are more effective with this or stay on point more consistently.

It is less productive, I have found, to speak of particular persons and their doctrines, which is largely beside the point. So I am not interested in teacher X, Y, or Z. The point to look at it your own being, your own nature, to make sure that is clear. If that is clear, then what needs to be seen is seen. The proof is going to be in the pudding, by the direct discovery of freedom from suffering, doubt, and seeking at a practical level. All else is smoke and mirrors.

One hint: This has absolutely nothing to do with awakened teachers, enlightenment, progressive attainments, or freedom in the future. Why? Because all of those things divert away from the essential point of this. It is better to see that earlier rather than later. One of the reasons I am even speaking of this at all is to save a few people years of looking in the wrong direction. There is no need for anyone to go down a blind alley at this point.

I am more interested in looking at specific issues or questions that are arising out of your own direct looking at your own nature. After all, whatever you are is fully present and available to be recognized right now. The issue is not IF we are, IF we exist, IF we have a true nature. This is intuitively obvious and cannot be doubted. But if there is some doubt on WHAT that is, or WHO we are, that can be cleared up directly through a bit of clear looking. And that is what this is about in my view.

Rate it!   0

Kimo (Jim) says:

Hey guys, if it helps…this stuff is MUCH easier than you think. There is no need to ponder the reality of time and space, to debate whether little “c” consciousness or big “C” consciousness comes and goes with the body, to concentrate on the now, now, now, now, etc. You already are what you are seeking. You don’t need to be a spiritual scholar. Forget trying to see how the non-duality concepts make sense and just SEE. There’s no departure EVER from your natural state. I’ve heard things like “once this is seen, you’ll have to look again and again to overcome the habit pattern” or “once the me is no longer fed the root eventually is severed and the belief in the me whithers away”. The “me” who is separate from awareness doesn’t whither away–it is non-existent–there never was an entity to begin with who needed to awaken. Wakefulness is!

Rate it!   0

Ralph says:

Okay, we read alot of ‘great pointers’ here at the UGC but very little is spoken about ‘love and compassion’, why is that ?
I ask this because sometimes ‘the pointers’ are clear but they feel empty.

In my case, I find that when one speaks from their ‘own direct experience’ rather than ‘in general terms’, it comes across not only more clear but there is a resonance in it that cannot be explained in words , a feeling of oneness is felt.

Rate it!   0

Scott Kiloby says:

John said:

“Those who work on the overcoming of the “me” are falling into the false perspective that there is “me” present at all.”

Yes, one can spend “years” like a hamster on a wheel, trying to overcome or have the “me” fall away. Actually, there is no one spending anything called “years” on anything like a “wheel.” Just more appearances… The “me on the wheel” is and never was there.

Rate it!   0

Ralph says:

So… if there is no ‘me’, then there is no ‘other’ also ……… where is the love in that ?
It has an empty feeling.

But on the other hand, there is a fullness felt when it is seen that who I am is all of it, that the ‘ me’ and ‘other’ is who I truly am. This is my true nature. The trouble comes in when I see the’ other’ as separate from ‘me’.

As it is said……… Love thy neighbor as thyself…. I now see that my neighbor is myself….. there is no ‘other’…. and there is no ‘me’……..I am all of it and in the seeing of that , love is revealed.

Rate it!   0

Guy Fawkes says:

How should we understand:
“there is no such thing as a permanent awakening’ – i believe Bob or Niz said that (tFD)
In the light of:
“All along, you have been only THIS and nothing else. ” (J.W.)
.?

Rate it!   0

Dan says:

Being the Nothingness that is all encompassing is the freedom from being limited. I am anything, everything, nothing. This play of Nothingness feels like love to me. The love is soft, non-intrusive, always waiting, always eager. Love is always silent, always moving, always full.

This is one of the best ways I’ve heard my experience described, by Eddie Traversa:

When we love the pain of existence as much as we love the joy of existence that is love.

When we love the simple step of a foot on the ground as much as we love ecstatic experiences that is love.

When
our loved ones are not physically with us and never will be again, but
are in the trees, in the softness of a gentle wind caressing our
cheeks, in the beauty of night dreams and we know this deeply that is
love.

When we allow things to come freely and to move away freely that is love.

When there is no reason to love, no need to love, and there is still love, that is love.

Rate it!   0

Dan says:

tomvds,

If I say that there are “others” who are “met” by “me,” then there is a conceptual framework created. We could analyze it with the idea that everything is nondual except that and probably get some interesting interpretations involving appreciation, recognition, maybe lack of interest, or whatever else seems to fit the person talking about it.

But setting up that dichotomy is separating, is limiting. If there are others then there is, by definition, something you are lacking at every moment, something that’s not 100% contained by you. The Wholeness is then incomplete, less than whole. So there really cannot be any others in any separate sense for the wholeness to be experienced as whole. Otherwise the concept appears to limit it, and so the experience becomes limited, becomes one of lack. Does that make sense?

Rate it!   0

gilbert says:

Affirming and denying do not touch the limitless boundary of One Presence. The apparent battle between the polar opposites is contained within the One.
In the All inclusive Presence, the All is equanimity down to the very ‘last’ subatomic particle. A thought arises. A thought disappears. In taking sides with ‘one’ thought in opposition to the ‘other’ – that is the ‘entry point’ into duality – conflict – yet it is only a conflict for the believed in bias – the so-called ‘entity’.
When science split the atom – the evidence of that hidden potency revealed itself most dramatically. In splitting the conceptual ‘me’ in two, in lifting the conceptual limitations away from this natural unadorned presence, the hidden potency of the natural state shines forth. Moments of insight are glimpses of this.
Even so, it is all just an appearance. THAT clear and present essence that you are shines anyway and nothing can truly hide it or smother it.
On the darkest cloudy overcast day the light still seeps through.
The words fail to express it – yet in the sharing through words, something appears to transpire.

Rate it!   0

gilbert says:

Yes indeed. The misery of trying to be what you are not is a dead end street. John has a way of expressing this ‘stuff’ and it seems to register ‘out there’. Being free of the limitations of believing in a conceptual being, which we call ‘me’, lets things flow a lot more freely. There is no need to be stuck in the Non Dual Jargon Bowl, which is just another limitation. Stiff necked ‘try too hard’ conflict bound ‘leaders’ can take a holiday. Each day is a new day – even though it is the same day. I sat up to watch the clock tick over midnight, just so I could witness the day flip over. Nothing happened. We may stir up all the crap about gurus yet right there where the seeing is happening, there is nothing really happening. Nothing touches that. By the way, have you noticed the patterns that appear in these paragraphs, ‘created’ by the white spaces between the sentences? So, do they exist? How can an absence create a pattern? Just a little nothing to contemplate….since you seem to like entertainment.

Rate it!   0

dorothy hoffman says:

John and Gilbert – your pointing is a lethal combination. Please keep it coming. Gilbert, Areti, just a suggestion on some more clear pointing if anyone is interested, I have come across a chap by the name of Mooji on the web and he is very clear. Have a look and see how you feel; even though these meetings are called satsang (satsang / meetings / what’s the difference…both are just words); the authority of pointing is unmistakable. Very similar to Bob’s pointing….

Rate it!   0

gilbert says:

Yes, it does appear that the stirring up of things does assist for some to take a fresh look at their beliefs and what they call ‘self-knowledge’. In life there appears to be two different types – givers and takers. I always had a tendency towards being a ‘giver’. I think many popular gurus and teachers are similar. It is all in this appearance of duality. They get surrounded by takers and it gets exhausting for the giver. The true source of life is never exhausted.
When it comes down to the nitty gritty it seems that one has to be extremely selfish, exclude everyone else and really look into one’s own consciousness to see what is truly going on. Some have called it ‘The Black night of the Soul’. For years I felt like I was in a bubble and the skin of this bubble seemed to get so thin and so transparent, it felt like it would burst at any moment. This skin of the bubble was nothing but the concept of separation. There was no big bang. The ‘event’ of seeing through the illusion of being a separate individual happens by itself. Describing it may not help much. In fact it often ‘sets up’ the seeker to go looking for what is described. The prime example of that is the personal awakening stories that teachers use in their spiel.
These discussions here have already delivered the message in one form or another.
There are those who are critical of what appears here and they usually have a bias for some other teaching or teacher. There are many more who appreciate what is on offer. The basic points are hammered away at over and over. It sinks in – because intelligence responds from beyond the realms of reason and prejudice.
The light of knowing is there (here) and once ‘the bail of cotton’ gets a spark of true recognition, it just keeps burning until all the doubts are turned to ash. This I know first hand – without a single doubt. The other side of it is that there will always be those who resist with such a strong denial. As G.I Gurdjieff once said: “Don’t go sticking your head in a hornets nest”. He also said:”If you want to lose your faith, make friends with a priest”.

Rate it!   0

gilbert says:

The basic plan is to keep it to those who are clearly expressing the ‘directness’ of right here right now. No tolerance will be given to anyone that goes on about some story about the ‘seeker’ gaining some state of awakening. It is just divisive expressions and misleading to say the least. We already have let things slide a little into that arena on a couple of occasions. We are not about ripping anyone’s teaching to shreds. The directness of the clear message does that by default. The way I put it is that if one KNOWS the immediacy of THIS presence-awareness, why would you point anyone that is seeking truth, or whatever you want to call it, away from it, why would you give them the impression that they need to DO anything apart from seeing, right here and right now, the truth of what they are? The ‘problem’ is that so often, even in the first opening statements by these gurus, the ‘hooks’ and ‘enticements’ are so obviously there. They are selling something. I for one am not buying it. And I want no part in assisting them in selling their bullshit. This podcast is clean and if I have anything to do with it, it will stay that way. I am not afraid to make such statements.
Anyone who has been to see Bob Adamson will attest to the fact that he never plays that guru game. John Wheeler discovered that. I was there when John first came to see Bob. His response to Bob’s pointing was unmistakable. It is through the benefit of Bob’s directness that I recognized my true nature. I saw the essence of it all, something that I had known all along but had been ignoring. I had been missing it because I had been on some search for ‘things’ I had been encouraged to believe in.
Most of these popular teachers harp on about enlightenment – that is why they are popular. Cohen even published a magazine about it. That hierarchy stuff is just not going to get an even chance around here. It is a ‘One Horse Race’ and if you back the wrong horse (the ‘me’) you lose.
The direct message is not open to any compromises – by its very nature it cannot support anything divergent.
If we let it get too loose around here, it will just deteriorate into the same old, same old. Bob may not be everyone’s ‘cup of tea’ but I am yet to meet anyone that can truly fault what he is pointing out. His voice may not make it all that easy to hear what he is saying for some (that is why a booklet is being made available) but it is English being spoken. Before I met Bob, I even considered learning Marahti, so I could search out any tapes of Nisargadatta and hear directly what he had said.
I think Bob is more profoundly direct – he has eliminated all the Indian terminology and speaks in ordinary language about the simplicity of it all. Those who have the most difficulty are those who have pre-conceived notions about it all. It is those notions that get in the way. I have witnessed a few who have come to Bob, a few who have not been on any spiritual path and had no spiritual language or notions about it all – and they quite quickly ‘heard’ the simplicity. I have also witnessed the spiritually arrogant sit and sweat through many meetings trying to rearrange their concepts, just so they could convince themselves that ‘they got it’. Take another listen to Bob’s 2 interview programs. It is all in there. And John follows up on it with his way of expressing it.
If it is not ‘hitting the mark’ – then listen again. It sinks in – that I know first hand to be true. Warm regards – Gilbert.

Rate it!   0

audrey says:

..responding to ‘letting it sink in’..the mind has its natural inclination to claim understanding, what I notice is the effect of this inclination is the opposite of radiance/warmth mentioned by Gilbert. With a thought ABOUT something, which accounts for 99% of thought, there is an after the event coolness, translated speedily and usually subconsciously into aloofness, distance,, separation. The aliveness of immediate (unmediated) experience is ignored, missed.
In the cafe lots of words are happening, opinions expressed, experiences described, so much to nod with in agreement..then there’s one short phrase that cuts through, that resonates beyond the mind.
A while back, one of those phrases (Bob’s, John maybe?) was “separtion is a conceptual overlay”…hardly poetry, but there were involuntary tears, it hit home.
If it was all that was ever said about this stuff it would be enough. If the words aren’t gobbled up I can taste the truth of that.

Rate it!   0

stephen metcalf says:

I wrote the second post at the top of this comments page. I still feel the same.

Regardless though, what is arrising now is this deep heartfelt gratitude for Gilbert. Steadfast comittment to staying with total focus on direct pointing. Pulling the carpet out from underneath anything that does not point to this Immedicacy.

And the gratitude continues as it is through this UGC that I was exposed to Bobs teachings. I fumble to try and find words. Such direct simplicity. Stunning ” this mind” into Silence.

I just got his newest book One Essence Appearing as Everything. Words fail me, the Silence continues. This book is amazing.

I chuckle to myself wondering what is going to come out of Glibert next. What a character. A character I am grateful to.

Rate it!   0

Kirk says:

If we use unrelenting honesty it can be seen that, for the VAST majority of us, we don’t want to end the self-illusion (out of fear of leaving the human familiar). Redirect the energy you presently use to get your back up – take a peek at the container rather than the content. Thanks again for the consistent pointing, guys!

Keep it Real!
Kirk

Gilbert … smooth sounds on the airwaves – you could spin the wax on any radio station, man! Thanks for keepin’ it fun!

Rate it!   0

John says:

One subtle little “trap” often shows up that may be worth pointing out. This involves discussions as to “who is clear and who is not”. This is often accompanied by suitable clips to YouTube showing the latest “guru du jour”. It is fine as far as it goes. But it can subtly reinforce the dubious notion that this is about “people who are clear”. There are no people who are clear, at least in terms of what we are talking about here. This is not about gurus with exotic names around whom one may experience enchanting and wonderful states of clarity by their “presence” or transmission.

One rather naïve person recently fell into a quandary as to whether or not they should go on “tour” and follow such a guru around in order to “get more transmission”. This is the same phenomenon that compels people to go on expensive retreats year after year and even submit to the folly of competing to get into them. OK, that may be fine for passing the time and to help the guru pay his bills, but it has nothing to do with who you are. There are so many false assumptions driving those actions it is hard to enumerate them all. Just to mention a few – the belief that this is about something you get, that special beings “have it”, that this involves time, deepening and levels of progress, that some environments are more conducive, that there are “knowing guides” that compassionately help you achieve enlightenment, that perhaps there is some subtle, non-verbal transmission involved, etc.

There is a tendency to buy into the view that this is about a special state that people “get”. Once they “get it”, they are qualified to be “teachers”, etc. Often there are grandiose tales of awakenings, incredibly dramatic events, etc. The teacher is usually as plugged into his story as the students are fond of repeating it at every chance, experience shows. Once this whole paradigm starts rolling, people find themselves tramping here and there to sit “in the presence” of this or that “clear” being. In practice, this turns out to be more of the hamster wheel, because the root of things may still be (and usually is) entirely overlooked.

Just as we may switch spiritual jargon or buzz words to get a fresh “lift”, we end up moving from one so-called “clear” teacher to another. This is about as useful as not finding water in one mirage and hoping to find it in another. (I can’t recall the number of times people have tried to convince me of how “incredibly clear” teacher X is, only to see them rushing off to the next one. I suppose the teacher wasn’t so clear after all!) Looking for clarity in others and overlooking it in ourselves goes back to the subtle assumption that the “answer” lies out there, as a state or experience. This fundamental assumption needs to be looked into – deeply and thoroughly. The sooner, the better.

There are no “clear beings” in terms of what we are talking about here on UGC. Clarity is a description of your innate being. That is the only awake presence in the house and all that needs to be looked into. In fact, until that point is clear, all the traipsing around from one satsang to another, one event to another, one video clip to another is simply wandering down blind alleys looking for something that is in your pocket the whole time. It is like a lump of gold traveling here and there to experience more “goldness” in the presence of specially awakened gold nuggets. Why would it ever do such a thing, if its own essence were seen for what it is? It would not.

There are some relatively clearer pointers here and there amongst all the dubious hogwash happening under the banner of satsang. But the basics of this are pretty simple. If you are interested, a good, straight conversation or two is enough to get you rolling, put you on your own two feet and beyond the need of help. The point is to have a look for yourself. See yourself for yourself. Once this is clear, all anyone else can do is tell you what you already know, what is already clear. Your own seeing will be on par with any other presentation, and the gurus, meetings, and video clips will lose a bit of their charm.

Rate it!   0

gilbert says:

The concept about all you need to do is ‘Just wake up’ is the erroneous belief.
Are you not awake right now? In the appearance of all these ‘self-indulged’ sacred images, images in the mind of the so-called spiritual journey – there appear half baked teachers and gurus who collect half baked devotees – they all support each other in a fantasy worthy of a Walt Disney cartoon movie. If one is believing in it all, it is not recognized as such. As soon as you see the game that is going on, the whole charade starts to fall apart – BUT no one who is still believing in it is going to agree with you – and they will argue until the cows come home about it.
All this nonsense about some special ‘awakening’ is truly nothing but ideas and stories about ‘someone else’ being more awake than you. That naked wakefulness is the natural presence of what you are. That presence is not divided into levels or possible attainments in some future time. That is very obviously nothing but concepts appearing presently ON that naked wakefulness. The subtle movement into the concepts and believing in those postulated states of awakening is clouding the clear and present wakefulness.
For the mind, what is being pointed out is like a razor’s edge perception and yet in the natural seeing, that seeing is not limited to anything and is vast like the open sky.
It is pointed to over and over and because it has ALWAYS been your true nature, it is not noticed – for the mind. What you are knows nothing other than THAT. It is ALL THAT.
Undifferentiated. The mind is like a prism, it breaks the white light into a rainbow of colors.
The mind breaks this light of knowing into a thousand concepts – yet the concepts (colors) are nothing but that ‘white light’ (awareness).
When we say “This was my experience (no train)” we are back in the mind with ‘someone claiming’ something. All ‘experiences’ are a story of the past…….it is the naming of experiencing, and the language used is a learned thing of the past. In labeling the immediacy and believing in that story or label, the immediate experiencing is diverted into belief. If this is seen for what it is, the story loses its meaning and it is arrested by knowing what it is. This does not mean one stays silent and never says anything again. Whatever apparent process one has come into this understanding by is known to be only of the appearance. There is a natural wisdom in that knowing NOT to use ‘my story of my process’ to inflict upon others – because each case is unique. The core of it all is this ‘Knowing’ has NEVER had to go through any time or process – it is nothing but THIS immediacy. All the eons of ‘time’ cannot ‘appear’ anywhere but in this immediacy. There is only ONE understanding. There is nothing in the story about ‘intellectual understanding’ – it is just story that the intellect plays with, a label – an erroneous label – a beliefs and belief is not understanding.
As Bob so efficiently points out: “You KNOW that you ARE – that is not a belief”. (Belief is not knowing and that is the crux of it all)

Rate it!   0

Dan says:

Gilbert,

Saying that “you are already awake” strikes me as the same concept. It’s just another finger pointing at the moon. One can just as easily run with that concept and use that as an excuse to abandon examining their concepts of duality, labeling that “Enlightenment.”

Suggesting that something can be done to Awaken seems to me to be a finger pointing at the moon from the other side of the moon. They appear to be pointing in opposite directions, but they are really just two pointers to the ineffable.

Rate it!   0

Ralph says:

Dan, I can relate to what you are saying. Well said, and if I may add : Stop fooling yourself( Gilbert likes it when I say that) to think that all one needs to do to ‘wake up’ is to do nothing and just ‘see’. Really, I ask you, how many can do that ? Stop kidding yourself and get real.
In my experience, it is becoming more clear that it take ‘time’ and ‘effort’ to see that
‘time’ and ‘effort’ is what stands in the way of ‘true seeing’.
So, you will most lkely remain on the hampster wheel until you get ‘totally frustrated’
and ‘totally exhausted’ and perhaps then you wll get off the hampster wheel and your true nature revealed.

Rate it!   0

gilbert says:

The ‘hamster wheel’ is not necessary – it only ‘appears’ to be necessary………the instant the recognition ‘arises’ (out of nowhere) all such ideas about ‘what is necessary’ are vanquished – and the KNOWING is obviously NOT within the boundaries of what we call ‘the mind’ – the ‘dis-functional home’ of troubles and worries.
All the mind has is a translation of ‘what is’ and ‘imagination’ (image-ing) – and memories of something called ‘the past’. This knowing is as if ten miles above those ‘appearances’ – and yet they appear no where other than in this knowing – just like everything else.
Everything is contained in that essential nature of seeing-knowing. Seeing-knowing is a phrase ‘I coined some years ago’. The seeing is the knowing and the knowing is the seeing. Ultimately every word is THAT – every conversation anywhere, at ‘any time’ is about THAT. It is ALL awareness appearing as ‘this and that’.
As the old song by Sammy Davis Jnr goes: “I gotta be ME, I gotta be ME, what else can I be but what I AM” – or Popeye the sailor-man: “I yam what I yam” – “Pass the spinach Olive”. ‘People’ imagine that they will lose all their ‘personality’ if they see through the ‘me’. “It ‘ain’t necessarily so – the things that your libel to read in the Bible – It ain’t necessarily so”. We make a fuss about ‘the false’ and do a song and dance about the importance of ‘truth’. The ‘thing’ that needs to be recognized is that it is ALL an appearance – yet it is nothing but THAT. In knowing THAT, in being THAT, everything flows like an ice skater – whatever happens, you keep on ‘sliding’ and nothing sticks.
Where are last years dramas now? Where are yesterday’s arguments – if you don’t give it a thought? Even if you think about it – does anything really ‘stick’ anywhere?
The true nature of the mind is clear and empty.

Rate it!   0

Ralph says:

Before you go further you must accept, at least as a working theory, that you are not what you appear to be, that you are under the influence of a drug. Then only will you have the urge and the patience to examine the symptoms and search for their common cause. All that a guru can tell you is: “My dear sir, you are quite mistaken about yourself. You are not the person you think yourself to be.” Trust nobody, not even yourself. Search, find out, remove and reject every assumption till you reach the living waters and the rock of truth. Until you are free of the drug, all your religions and sciences, prayers and yogas are of no use to you, for, based on a mistake, they strengthen it.

- Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj

Rate it!   0

John says:

It is a bit tricky quoting “sages” for confirmation of anything, because the words are just pointers and concepts arising in particular situations. In other words, in the moment the words were delivered they were spontaneous pointers of encouragement for someone at some moment to drop a particular concept or perspective in order to notice what is here prior to concepts. Later, when we read the words, it is actually a case of moving back into concepts and away from what is clear and present, even before reading the words. Seeing this may free up a lot of space. That is why reading about this stuff is a bit misleading and often complicates the simplicity of it.

For every Nisargadatta (Ramana, Shankara, Buddha, etc., etc.) passage one quotes, you can find dozens more asserting the opposite view. It is hepful to see why this must be so. There is not a fixed “teaching” at all. There is a stream of spontaneous points arising to expose whatever dualistic notions the “seeker” may have been holding as true in that moment. It is more a matter of love in expression rather than some non-dual verbiage to parse through years or centuries afterwards. People think you get to the heart of this by studying books or by learning Sanskrit and parsing the recorded words of Shankara, Buddha, or whomever. This is entirely erroneous and missing the mark. It only fattens the stock of concepts and keeps the attention locked in the mind and overlooking your ever-present natural state.

So pause the thought, whatever it may be, and notice what is the nature of what is present, what you actually are. That is already evident and available in all its immediacy. No teacher, guru, scripture, satsang, or awakening are involved. I cannot stress this strongly enough. That we thought they were was only an ignorant mistake. So take it back to the basics have a look for yourself.

Instead of talking about concepts, chuck them all overboard and talk from what is actually present in your experience. Non-duality books, quotes, spiritual jargon and hypothetical “what ifs” are entirely incapable of revealing the direct recognition of immediate freedom and happiness. That is present as the pure light of simple knowing and being shining in the core of your mind or the center of your heart. In that light, the universe and all bodies and minds arise and pass like specks of dust in the warmth of a vast, cloudless sky, the sky of your being. That non-conceptual awareness or presence of life beyond the mind pours out through your senses and bathes each thought, feeling and experience in a timeless and inescapable clear cognizance. Call it what you will — being, awareness, love, presence, what is, knowing, light, life, intelligence, spirit, etc. Whatever it is, it is undeniable and inescapable. It is being that cannot be doubted or contradicted; an unborn, undying awareness without ceasing; life with no boundary; a peace and causeless joy that embraces all appearances, all possibilities, all opposites. Nothing can be outside of that; nothing stands apart from that; there is nothing other than that. And you are that.

Love,
John

Rate it!   0

tomvds says:

Finally I had time to listen to this podcast; I enjoyed It very much.
I don’t take It as gospel, but It is ‘gospel’, meaning ‘the good news’. Freedom is here already without any conditions or limitations; This is what everyone truly wants to hear, but somehow the mind wants the recognition of that, something tangible, something to hold on. The importance and value of this direct non-dual, non-compromising communication, I see now, cannot be overrated; It’s the only way out of the hamsterwheel looking for something that’s already there, even closer than your breath. It’s the end of spirituality, the satsangs that seemed to focus more on emotions, relationships, embodiment and the petty little problems people wanted to have taken care of by their spiritual daddy or mammy; funny to think I too fell for this spiritual tragicomedy…. just thoughts appearing now. Who in their wildest imagination would of thought that the crux of ‘spirituality’ lies in our identity? Who’s chasing what? Overlooking that fuels the hamsterwheel; still the hamster will always be where It’s at. Thank ‘God’ some people are moved to share this in a non-egoic, non-teacher mode !

Rate it!   0

gilbert says:

One without a second. It means exactly that.
The movement appears in stillness. The movement appears to create (two) multiplicity.
The movement is the ONLY action that there is – it is One movement, uninterrupted.
‘Who’ is there in the stillness?
‘Who’ is there in the movement?
Understanding is silent.
The mind translates that silent knowing into ten thousand things.
That which IS has always been.
The mind is time.
What you are has never ‘not been’.
But the mind cannot grasp this – only in its restful nature of emptiness does it (the mind) come close and in that ‘state’ of emptiness, it has already lost its ‘fingers’, with which it could grasp anything. The seeker is never a finder. What you SEEK you already ARE.
Words…….words.

Rate it!   0

gilbert says:

Some say that each organ has it’s own consciousness. For instance, P.D. Ouspensky suggested in one of his books that when ‘someone’ says something like ‘I am going to kill myself’ the organs in the body ‘hear’ that and they go into shock or panic, producing extra ‘chemicals’ which have an effect on the body, thus emphasizing the ‘state’ of depression.
It kind of makes sense. However interesting such notions are – What we are talking about here is Non Duality – which means One without a second. So the thing to recognize is that there is ONLY one Cognizing happening – AND that fact is obvious right there as WHAT you ARE – it is ONE BEING. The body, its ‘members’, all the organs, are all appearing within the expansive, all inclusive nature of that singular cognition – right now. Not just your body but the body of the universe. It is only ‘thought’ that suggests the fragmentary notions of separation – and because that is our habit, the undivided nature of this cognition is not recognized, except as glimpses that appear and disappear.
‘We’, by habit, take the limited view in being someone stuck in a body, and ‘we’ believe that we were born and that we shall die. When ‘the religions’ speak of Eternal Life it is not speaking about a reward in the future for some individual based on some good behavior. Only the limited ‘teachers’ of religion speak like that. Eternal Life is NOW. The only ‘thing’ that excludes ‘you’ (or Adam and Eve) is the belief in words as having some separate ‘power’ from the Singular Presence (what people call God). As is suggested here over and over – SEE if you can find that place where the cognition is taking place. It is often said like this: Investigate the ‘me’ – see if you can find anything with any substance or independent nature. No one can do it for you. I can sit here and harp on and on about it until the cows come home, complaining about the day.
There is a knowing here that this point of investigation is the key – no doubt about it here. Some teachers take some sort of opposition to this idea that there is an investigation, saying that it is just more seeking. It appears that they are stuck in some impotency role – they say that there is nothing that you can do. Of course, there is no ‘me’ that ever did anything – but for ‘most of your life’ there was a belief that there was a ‘me’ there who did this and did that. Now when it comes to a simple instruction to investigate, what I repeatedly hear is “Who is the ‘me’ that is going to investigate?”
Frankly, I find such talk to be just immature ‘Non Dual Jargon’. ‘You’ investigate all sort of things everyday – just in going to the letterbox – you are seeing if there is any mail. It isn’t much different to that. No one says “Who’ is going to the letter box?”
It all takes place in the realm of appearances – the key point is that the cognizing is from beyond it all – space like awareness – SINGULAR. What you truly are is THAT. Looking at it from the limited view, we can say “We are all One”. In the naked seeing there is no limitation and everything is Clear and Obvious. There is no ‘me’ and there is no ONE. Not even One. Non-conceptual awareness has no need of any concepts – all concepts depend on non-conceptual awareness as something to appear on (or in).
– Warm regards – Gilbert.

Rate it!   0

Dan says:

Man, this site really highlights the inadequacy of words to talk about it. That’s a wonderful quality in a site.

Rate it!   0

Dan says:

Gilbert,

My appreciation is genuine. When enough people are clear enough on the experience and seek to talk about it different ways, it really shows that it cannot be talked about. This speaks best to what it is in my opinion. (not avoiding talking about, but talking about it so clearly and from so many different perspectives that it becomes clear that it really CANNOT be talked about, because partial words can only point to holistic experience).

Also, something underlying my point is that people, standing from different places point at the moon from different directions. The typical problem is that the seeker will go in that direction the finger is pointing, instead of looking up at the moon that the finger is trying to point at. Thus, when a sincere seeker is confronted with conflicting fingers that all point to the truth, something amazing happens, that I cannot describe very well. It’s like the truth settles into their being. This has happened to me many times, and I’ve seen it happen to others. It’s amazing to behold, and this site helps allow that kind of thing to happen.

Rate it!   0

Dan says:

Well said.

Rate it!   0

Dan says:

Hi Johnny,

Well, I’ve noticed it a lot in certain physical meetings that are not solely based around one teacher.

Also, I’ve noticed it here. There are a lot of souls pointing to their own beautiful Isness. I’ve seen a lot of debate back and forth, where both people are saying the same thing. In the end, everyone won, and there are many readers not usually posting who post once or twice to say how much they appreciate it. I certainly appreciate it a lot.

Rate it!   0

chaosnurmind says:

What amusing hypocrisy to see some of you guys slamming concepts and beliefs while wholeheartedly being invested in and professing your own.

Can anyone give an example of anything that has been said in all of these comments, or in any of these podcasts that isn’t a concept? Any concept, regardless of how lofty sounding it is, such as “direct pointing,” is still only a concept. Please reveal anything that can be pointed to or anyone who is doing the pointing. Oh so many wonderful concepts. That’s the hook that keeps you on the line and sells more books.

“Most teachings lead the mind into a fantasy realm with a central figure as the featured entity – an entity that is going to become something rather special.” Or in this case, has become.

Ironic how one of the most up and coming California gurus is putting down California gurus. A legend in his own mind no doubt. “it is actually a case of moving back into concepts and away from what is clear and present” as if one could ever be moved away from what is clear and present. You’re hooked baby.

“So the magician hypnotized the whole flock. The hypnotic suggestion was given that their life was very good and they were going to achieve great things and would be happy forever etc.” What a lovely start to these comments.

Chaosnurmind

Rate it!   0

George Holbrook says:

To Chaos in your mind.

Well I hope henceforth you will have peace and no mind.

What is it that you don’t agree with the above comments. Why don’t you give your take on who you really are or about non duality? Why don’t you make your point clear with some clear cut explanation instead of just being vague and irate?
You are simple twisting facts around to suit your own ego. What is your agenda? Did John or anyone here say something that has exposed your own Guru as a fake?

Rate it!   0

gilbert says:

And nothing of what you have said is true either. No one owns any concepts. These are not my concepts and to suggest that they are is a misunderstanding.
There are no separate examples of what is true – there is no separation. To call it true or false is actually equal.
All that is happening is not really happening. So what?
All that is seemingly happening here is that some beliefs are shaken up and a view may open up that was not open before.
Yes, there is no time – but people believe that there is.
Everything is revealed to be concepts. Reality is not a concept.
Just because words suggest that there is someone here that takes one thing to be real and another to be false does not mean that there actually is someone here.
Welcome to the World. That is how it appears to work here or did you not notice that yet?
Why don’t you show your ‘given’ name? If you have gone beyond all this conceptual stuff, then why hide behind a made up name? Where is the brave ‘non dualist’? (silly words ‘non dualist’, I know).
(Actually I have a good idea of ‘who’ it is, by the style of the expressions.)
Anyway, its all entertainment isn’t it – even though it is all concepts.
Arguing about Non Duality must be one of the silliest games ever invented.

Rate it!   0

George says:

To Chaosinumind,

Dear sir/madam,

You said: “Most teachings lead the mind into a fantasy realm with a central figure as the featured entity – an entity that is going to become something rather special.” Or in this case, has become.

I don’t know exactly what you are trying to say, but if you listened to John, he has said that there is no such entity present at all. So where is the question of such a phantom becoming special? Seriously sir/madam, did you listen to what John said? I don’t know John and he does not know me. Infact according to what is being said here there is neither an entity called John nor George or anyone else. So how can I defend a person who does not exist as such?

Rate it!   0

Kelly Mantel says:

Dan, ‘your’ clarity is very helpful.

Each concept pointing at the moon from a different angle. Totally clear.

If I use the word “orange,” that is only a concept referring to what appears as the actual thing ‘orange.’

If I say, “A citrus fruit that is sweet and sour and grows on Trees in California and is orange in color,” that is also merely a concept referring to what appears as the actual thing ‘orange.’

The value of direct pointing is in the pointing itself. It is never in the voice of the ego that comes in later to give a promotional ad for “direct pointing” (which is almost always accompanied by putting other ‘teachers’ down). I feel like I’m watching a tylenol commercial where the guy is saying 9 out of 10 doctors say that ours is better than Bayer aspirin. No thanks on the promotional ad, I will just take the tylenol and the Bayer and see for myself.

All this “my way of pointing” nonsense seems like just more ego. More “me” stuff. Pointers always speak for themselves.

Only a fool fails to see that attachment to the word “orange” is no different than attachment to the words “A citrus fruit that is sweet and sour and grows on Trees in California and is orange in color.” One may be clearer than the other, but only dualistically (relatively speaking). It’s funny how the mind likes to forget that and call the love of its favorite pointer “nondual.” Neither pointer is what is actually being pointed to, which is unnameable.

Believing or thinking that the word “awareness” is a better pointer than “awakening” is still belief or thought. It’s still being stuck on concepts. Life is not a concept.

Thanks for clearing the cobwebs out of this room Dan.

Rate it!   0

Brad Newich says:

There is something really revealing itself to “us” here.

Dan is the first to really say it in a way that resonates. Kelly and Chaos hit on it too. The only reason the “I” agrees with another’s pointer is that the “I” is seeing itself in the mirror. When the “I” (the “I” being the dualistic mind) disagrees, it just means it is not seeing itself in the mirror.

There is something just staring at us here. No one is right or wrong. There is no actual conflict. The mind just looks out onto these pages and when it sees its own ideas or ways of expressing, it agrees. The self (with small “s”–ego) is merely confirming who it is when it defends another. It is confirming its own concepts. It is confirming “me.”

Experience happens. Awareness is realized. It feels true. It is nonconceptual. But concepts arise to describe it. The mind gets really hooked into its own interpretation. Gets hooked into the appearances. Then it falsely believes that its interpretation is true. It confirms itself by looking on the page and seeing that Gilbert says it in a similar way. When someone else says it an opposite way, the individual identity is threatened–that mechanism that has hooked itself into concepts. There actually not two here, just a play in duality (opposites, if you will)

This is happening everytime I see an argument or conflict on here. The only one who would disagree with what I’ve said is the one who engaged in the conflict above. It isn’t very “spiritual” to go to battle over nonduality (or so the ego says).

All of this is totally harmless. But it makes sense why these chatrooms line up around one kind of pointing or another. Its happening all over the web in other chat rooms too. The mind is stuck in this crap.

No matter how many times we point directly, it is merely a pointer to the moon. From the moon’s perspective (the absolute, true nature) all of these words are duality.

The question seems to be: how STUCK in duality is awareness. That stuckness is revealed the moment conflict begins here. The ego rears its head whenever its appearances are threatened, the appearances that it holds onto so tightly, calling it truth, or nonduality, or pure seeing or whatever.

Wow…it is so immediately obvious to “me” that if someone were to disagree with what I’m saying right now, it would just mean that “I” am not mirroring back who they are. If they agree, that too is just a mirroring back.

It’s “true” that there can be a resonating beyond the words, but it seems to happen much less when these threads get caught up in conflict, taking sides, guru bashing, and all that stuff.

Just more concepts.

Rate it!   0

Ralph says:

Well said Brad and if I may add that with deep honesty, it will be seen that it really was never about the ‘me’ verses the ‘others’ but instead, realizing that the ‘others’ was always in ‘me’.
In truth, there is no ‘me’ or ‘others’ but instead just simply…being.

I like what you say in this paragraph:

It seems that nonduality was always about looking inward and seeing all the conditioning, all the past insights, that “I” have accumulated. Seeing that those concepts are just more concepts (including the concept that the California gurus don’t point directly enough—P.S. implicit in that statement is that “I” point correctly) and then realizing that what is left, after we have dropped all this identification between the “me” and the “other” is just simply….being. Not the word but the actuality of being. When that is realized deeply, it is difficult to then go around correcting others only on the level of the conceptual. To do so would buy in again to the idea that my insights are the right insights. This is just the reinforcing of the idea that my ideas are the right ideas and that others’ ideas are the wrong ones. Thoughts are thoughts, whether they arise from some direct experience of being or not. They are memory.

Rate it!   0

Ralph says:

hmm……… looks like the fuss is created by the ‘me’…. where else can it come from if there is no ‘other’.

That chatroom you speak of can be created only by the ‘me’ so it can enter and do an inward looking, no need for ‘others’ to enter it because in truth , there is no ‘other’ ….so it doesn’t matter.

Rate it!   0

GooneIrrigo says:

Hello there

This is my first post on this forum so i just want to say hello to everybody. My name Is Josef i am from LA in USA and i am 16y old .
i want to make some online friends…

cya

Rate it!   0

Ralph says:

Awareness is here in this chatroom and it is everywhere else. All is included and nothing is excluded. I think that we must know ‘ourself’ first in order to understand ‘other’. Thats why an inward looking is most impotant.

The problem is we believe we are separate and thus a chatroom of this kind is created for the assumed separate self to enter and hopefully with ‘true honesty’ investigate if this separation is true. What is most important is that you get it, no worries if others get it, perhaps they are there for you to get it and they are there to help you get it even though it may seem that they too are trying to get it. Remember, in truth there is ‘no other’. Get it ?

I repeat these beautiful words I read somewhere:
“Use your mind to know your mind to get behind the mind”.

Thanks again Brad , I enjoy reading your posts because there is sincere honesty in your speaking.

Rate it!   0

gilbert says:

So you are an expert on what Nisargadatta, Krishnaji and Ramana THINK?
Your three cents worth is invalid. There is NO half way there.
There is no there – ONLY HERE right NOW.
Everyone is THAT.
The patterns you are critical about are no different to the patterns you praise.
Non Duality is ALL INCLUSIVE.
Whether you know this or not, it makes not the slightest difference.
No refunds on the Three Cents worth, sorry.

Rate it!   0