Urban Guru Cafe
Discovering what you truly are
47. It’s YOURS right here, right NOW – Kimo, Dan and Morgan # 2
Posted on 07.24.09 1:59PM under Podcast
Continuing on from part 1. Dan, Morgan and Kimo share their insights on this subject of ‘Non Duality’. A demonstration that clear ‘pointing’ is happening – it is not a matter of ‘someone’ standing on a platform, wearing the ‘guru’ garments. Clear and present ‘Pointing’ is not inhibited by conditions of ‘membership’ or hefty fees and devotional attitudes. In fact a single blade of grass swaying in the breeze can ‘point’ you to your own true essence.
Music includes: Stevie Wonder, Gigi, Bob Dylan, Dan (our Dan), Ry Cooder, Mercan Dede, Jethro Tull, Alan Parsons Project, Creedence Clearwater Revival, Crosby Stills and Nash, The Beatles and Sam the Sham. – Voice cuts from TV and Movies: The Matrix, Deliverance, The Riches, The Street and the opening text was written by Bill Bryson, taken from ‘the introduction’ in his excellent ‘light read’ book “A Short History of Everything”. We might track Bill down for an interview.
This is a free Podcast available to all who find it. Small donations can be made by those who wish to, by using the donation tab on the front page of the website, beneath the coffee cup Logo. The donations are not tax deductible donations.
Posted by gilbert on 07.24.09 2:01 pm
Just in time for the weekend, for those who live in ‘time’.
We tend to get a bit serious sometimes, so some humor spills out here and there.
Apologies to those who are too sensitive to laugh. Enjoy – Warm regards from ‘the team’ Gilbert…and Areti.
Posted by davidb on 07.24.09 2:46 pm
Thanks Gilbert and Areti!
The doing got done by no-one, Wu Wei, someone was getting restless here, was hoping for another dreamless night and my prayers were answered.
;>)d
Posted by Ron Marson on 07.25.09 10:26 am
Can suffering sometimes arise independent of thought?
A toothache, for example, seems to arise prior to thinking, “This is a toothache.” Granted, naming this sensation ‘pain’ can add psychological dimensions to suffering. But prior to labeling a feeling as ‘pain’ is there not still…, yeeeow!
Posted by gilbert on 07.25.09 10:58 am
Pain in the body is NOT suffering. The pain is bearable usually. It is the ‘story of me, in pain’ that IS resistance to ‘what is’ and it will build up and up until it bursts out as anger or resentment (or whatever) and these depend on the integrity of the story – but it has NO integrity at all – and we know it. Mush ado about nothing, as Shakespeare expressed it.
This angst and turmoil in the mind ‘creates’ more and more dis-ease and that is what we call ‘suffering’. Drop the story and SEE what is left.
Example: A few years ago my Dentist asked me if I want an injection before he did some work on a tooth. I said no. I was not full of stories and fear. I was actually interested to see what would happen. There were a few moments of sharp pain and some dull aches in the jaw but apart from that, there was nothing of concern at all. Relaxation just kicked in each time some pain happened. Pain is usually bearable so long as you stay in the immediacy of it. It appears and disappears. It is the story that builds up pressure – the pressure of resistance that is unbearable – words, ephemeral appearance.
Nature does not resist itself. Nature is the pure expression of LIFE.
This is our own nature – but ‘we’ IGNORE it and ‘we’ go running around like a headless chicken resisting the freedom of this immediacy of LIFE flowing just as it is.
All these things are pointed out over and over.
The thing is, ‘people’ want to hang onto the ‘me’ and make adjustments to it, so it will fit in with the Non Dual. It will never fit in because it is resistance – it is dualistic and it is restless – the activity of the mind is to divide. You are not in the mind. The so-called ‘mind’ is thought, an appearance in what you ARE.
Too simple.
Posted by Michael S on 07.25.09 12:20 pm
I would like to clear something up for all so called seekers; I want to give you a more accurate pointer than you are NO-THING, what is more accurate to say is you are NO-THING IN PARTICULAR. That is all.
Posted by gilbert on 07.25.09 12:38 pm
Forget about ‘seekers’ – clear it up for yourself, then SEE if there are any others to help.
No one argues with a sign post, except the local drunk, as he leans against it.
There is nothing particular about No Thing. So your addition is unnecessary.
No one ever went beyond No Thing.
Don’t get caught upon the words and attributed meanings.
‘No Thing’ has no words or meaning.
This is why everyone misses it – even so everyone is THAT No Thing.
Paradoxical for the mind – yet so very obvious – so obvious it is passed over again and again, even by the most learned ‘individuals’.
Words are not reality.
Posted by gilbert on 07.25.09 2:32 pm
Unassailable Fact:
The ONE is FREE to express itself as anything, a fool, a king, a beggar and as the town drunk. Its integrity is not in question. ‘We’ as believed in separate things do not have a say in HOW the ONE displays itself. Even the imaginary notion of control is being displayed in all manner of ways and conditions.
You do NOT know what your next thought will be – so how come you believe that you are in control of anything?
Many believe that you have to be ‘clever’ or very intelligent to grasp this Non Duality ‘stuff’. Actually the ‘clever ones’ and the thick skinned and thick skulled, are the ones who get instantly offended – these ones are the most difficult to get to.
A very simple ‘person’ can realize this without much trouble. Those who are entrenched in belief in being the ‘me’ find it all too painful and spend all their time trying to reshape it all to preserve the ‘me’. There are good examples of such ‘ones’ out there playing the role of guru or teacher. The ego display is very obvious in them and that is what makes them popular, because the ‘me’ in the ‘seeker’ has something to imitate and these teachers are well adapted to guide the ‘seekers’ along their own imaginary ‘path’ to a future time of ‘deliverance’.
The whole problem is that there is no future time of deliverance. All there ever is is now.
These teachers include such information in their talks and it can still deliver the message, ironically.
As soon as some of this stuff is pointed out, the one who takes everything ‘personally’ gets offended – WHY? Because it is touching ‘a sore point’ for THEM – the believed in ego. Welcome to Life – there is NO other life.
What is being written here is not written to upset anyone at all, no matter HOW it looks. It is all impersonal. What is the point of hiding behind beliefs and images of selves that don’t exist? When one gets closer to the ‘truth’ there is a sense of feeling ‘naked’. This sense of vulnerability must be gone through. Running back for cover will only perpetuate the illusion of separation. Separation is only a belief and no one can dismantle it but what you ARE.
I realize that some things appear to increase suffering in others – but that is always happening, with or without ‘my input’. The point is to get to the core of the problem.
It is called ‘me’. There is no me and the word is merely used as a convenient description. SEE for yourself. The relief of discovering that this ‘me’ is a fiction, is beautiful. But hearing that it is beautiful, without tasting it, is only annoying and misleading, because it is a mere concept, without the TASTE.
The ‘I am’ is NOT the words ‘I am’ – it is the ONLY fact you cna be absolutely CERTAIN of. ‘The FACT of your own BEING’. There is NO becoming.
Posted by Morgan on 07.25.09 3:31 pm
Great job on the production, y’all (sorry, it’s a southern U.S. thing). Lots of fun. I find “myself” completely resonating with what Dan and Kimo are saying. Completely in accord.
Posted by Michael S on 07.25.09 4:30 pm
Fair enough Gilbert, but we are nothing and everything, so saying we are nothing confuses many people, why not just stick the basics of I AM, the pointing of no-thing is a concept that will be known after staying with what is, right? Or I suppose that whatever works best for people, albeit non-existent people with non-existent preferences…
Posted by dan on 07.25.09 7:03 pm
Even suffering, (yes, EVEN suffering) is THAT appearing and patterning in the form of ‘individual suffering.’ There is no ‘outside’ of Being. Individual suffering does not linger and hover around outside some kind of heavenly, unpenetrable realm of ‘oneness’, and then this great oneness descends upon the individual once suffering has been dealt with.
!
It is ALL Being. It is ALL THAT.
Quoting Gilbert – “It is all-inclusive”
There isn’t anything that isn’t Being. There isn’t anything that isn’t THAT.
Even when apparent suffering appears, there is still nobody there experiencing it. All there is is suffering without anyone in the way of it. That which would experience anything is simply non-existent. Total myth.
Nobody has ever experienced anything. Ever.
Nobody has ever done anything.
There is no Jesus, no Buddha, no Ramana.
There is no-thing.
Nothing just apparently appears, swirls around, and disappears again….
Posted by gilbert on 07.25.09 8:24 pm
So, if you are nothing and everything, where are these other people you speak about?
You see, these other people are nothing but what you are. Once you clear up this paradox, then concern for these others resolves itself. This is why I say that there is NO POINT in pretending to know this. Such pretense is a mind game, which appears in the knowing.
By believing in the mind game, the pure knowing is not recognized as what I truly am.
There is no problem here, it is easy to point in a thousand ways. It ‘appears’ to be rare that anyone hears it. In a way, all this pointing goes on for YOU. Once the recognition ‘happens’ the pointing is not necessary. For every one that ‘gets’ it, there are ten thousand others who don’t. Yet it is all in the appearance.
Watching an old man rest in the afternoon sunshine is peaceful. Watching two dogs fighting is disturbing. All is equal under the Sun.
What I am getting at is basically that it isn’t a matter of the automatic responses or any ‘thinking it through’ hoping to come to some conclusion.
All conclusions are merely patterns appearing in the mind and they shift and change consistently. There is nothing to hang onto for the ‘entity’.
It is about dropping the mind, breaking the habit of belief and letting the ‘afternoon sun’ bring some warmth to the tired flesh and bones. Bask in your own natural presence – without being disturbed by the tyrannical ‘me’. You will not regret it.
Posted by wenotwo on 07.26.09 12:32 am
Another very entertaining show by the non-dual G&A duo and their red hot pokers (Dan, Morgan and Kimo); This trio really is speaking from the recognition of THAT. I like the music and the cerebral humor too!
Posted by ana on 07.26.09 3:23 am
Great program, jolly good, amusing, refreshing talks of Dan, Morgan and Kimo,
Had the insight that whatever comes through the person is fake,
is second hand, approximations, and never can touch oneness.
All the words, written or said are false as soon as they leave the mouth or keyboard.
How can one describe this, its impossible.
So better shut up..
And Morgan yes you may, whenever possible shoot down this sitting duck, using all amunition, as anyway its a phantom and whatever comes through these tapping fingers is not IT anyway. There is only oneness…
Thanks for doing it.
Posted by suki on 07.26.09 4:21 am
“How can one describe this, its impossible.” True. One can only point.
There is nothing more intimate or closer than this ‘Seeing/Knowing’. It is has infinite creative potential in expressing these ever clearer pointers in the appearance of different ‘body/minds’ across apparent time and space.
Each expression is unique and insightful as demonstrated by the guest speakers on this and the previous podcast.
I liked Dan’s observation of the fact how people just gloss over the advaitic phrase ‘ADVAITA’ – (meaning not two or one without a second)! that phrase set off alarm bells for me when I first came across it. To the point that I contemplated it day and night much like a ‘koan’, I couldn’t let it rest, until it dawned on me that the answer is not in the mind/language construct or in other words its where you are ‘SEEING’ from.
It is a great pointer.
Cheers to all ~suki
Posted by Michael S on 07.26.09 6:03 am
You can’t separate everything from nothing, there is no pretending. You can see what is, anyone can, there actually is neither nothing or everything, just one energy which can be looked at both ways.
Posted by dan on 07.26.09 6:05 am
It appears to be the very first thing that is discarded, all the time the very discarding of it being THAT simply arising as ‘discarding it.’ There are SO many other things to be preoccupied with……
Posted by Morgan on 07.26.09 6:15 am
As Dan and Suki point out, the phrase “non-duality” is really a strong pointer, in terms of what is possible with language. It says it all, really. All dualistic constructs have no reality. That makes things very simple. No “enlightened” and “unenlightened”, “good” and “bad”, “sacred” and “mundane”, “me” and “universe”, etc. Only ever-present, non-dual being.
Posted by wenotwo on 07.26.09 6:33 am
Say what, Dan?? (Sorry, I’m rather thick skulled)
Posted by dan on 07.26.09 7:57 am
wenotwo, first of all – you CANNOT ‘get’ this. So, if confusion arises, then… so what? Its not as if this will ever be one of things you can put aside and say “great, now I got that non-duality issue resolved.”
Here is a by-no-means-exhaustive list of things you can ‘get’ :
1. Riding a bike
2. A degree in Physics
3. A house, car, partner and job
4. Loads of money
———
Regarding your particular enquiry:
It would seem that the main point, the main thrust of what is being pointed to – Nonduality, Advaita, One without a second, is so ironically the very first thing that is ‘forgotten’ about. Yet, it is the central message, the central sharing. The very essential FACT. This is the irony. It is almost immediately tossed aside…… and it seems that a preoccupation with the concepts is more attractive. Getting in amongst the concepts, getting our hands dirty and tucking-in to the ideas and intellectualization is far more agreeable for the individual.
The very FACT of Being is far less appealing and far less inviting to the individual.
But for me, this rummaging around alongside the concepts, this rolling around on the grass with the ideas is just more ‘keeping busy’, keeping active…. keeping the game going on and on and on and on…..
That is what was meant by the last post. Again, it has no meaning or relevance. Its just an observation…. it is odd that this immediacy is the first toy thrown out of the pram.
Posted by Michael S on 07.26.09 8:20 am
I think 80% of us all understand but it is a hard thing, regardless of what modern gurus say. Nisargadatta said that this is no easy task, and it took him 3 years in clock-time. But I guess it is needed to say that it is now, it is simple, because in reality yes it is but we are far from reality clearly, although it is front of our eyes.
Posted by suki on 07.26.09 9:18 am
The reality of your presence is here and now and undeniable – no distance. This is what is being pointed to.This wordless presencing is prior to any thought/concept (which give rise to illusion of time/separation). Seeking will go on until this is seen clearly 100% full on.
This is not some magical mystical state but your everyday ordinary awareness.
Posted by wenotwo on 07.26.09 9:30 am
“Seeking will go on until this is seen clearly 100% full on.”
Yes and the proof of the pudding is in the eating.
Who of ‘us’ can truly say?:
“learning the Tao in the morning, one can die in the eveningâ€
How will ‘being the awareness’ stand-up to that event?
Still so non-dual?
Posted by Dennis on 07.26.09 9:42 am
introducing….
Kimo Therapy
s’wonderful
Posted by gilbert on 07.26.09 9:44 am
All events are only in appearance. ‘Seeking’ never really happened. There is no ‘becoming’. What IS – IS. What ‘is not’ will never BE.
Being and awareness are ONE – the SAME.
‘We’ try to merge TWO into ONE.
It can’t be done BECAUSE ONE never ever divided into Two-ness.
Where are you seeing from?
Look into the ‘distance’ at the horizon, be open and thought-less – then bring the ‘seeing’ back behind the eyes and let this clear space of seeing-knowing be expansive.
If this space of seeing is not obviously empty, then it is only a thought or ‘state’ that ‘appears’ to obscure this openness. But see that all states and all thoughts appear nowhere other than in this clear space.
This ‘pointer’ is clearly exceptional. How anyone could not SEE and recognize their own true nature via this pointer is just beyond belief.
Belief is NOT the ACTUAL.
Warmest regards – G. P.S. My new e-book will be available next week for download. Instead of going through publishers, distributors and bookshops, I have decided to offer the e-book on the net.
Posted by gilbert on 07.26.09 10:01 am
There is an infinite compassion which does not allow the ‘indulgence’ of attachment to ‘the seeker’ operating ‘in’ the true messenger. It is not a choice made by the messenger. The message is directed at our true essence (and is the origin of the message).
It is simply that there is NO attachment in the messenger to any ‘thing’ and no ‘me’ for anything to get caught on. The ‘appearance’ of relationship happens yet it never ‘creates’ duality because the reference point ‘me’ has been eliminated via SEEING that it has no substance and no independence. SEEING this in oneself, automatically ‘brings’ the view that there is no ‘me’ in anyone else, ‘as well’. Equanimity. The drama of relationship appears and the dance plays itself out – yet at no point does the dance receive any energy to perpetuate itself from the clear ‘messenger’.
‘We’ believe in things that don’t exist. It is ONE pure energy ‘appearing’ as ‘things’.
In contrast to the direct pointing, the ‘popular guru’ gives plenty of ‘food’ to support the ‘me’ and that is why he is popular. It is more about ‘life style’ than about clear pointing.
Charisma in the ‘guru’ is so often riddled with so much bullshit, it makes the place stink to high heavens. Everyone walks around in a dream of the guru – the guru’s dream. The dream of ‘unity’ that is prevalent is only a dream of unity. The ‘me’ has not been seen through. The ‘sad’ thing is that the gurus bondage to belief in the guru’s own dream is undermining the message – yet the ‘message’ is never subjected to adulteration, it remains clean, no matter what form it takes – even though it ‘appears’ to be cluttered and indistinct.
Using the message to feather ones own bed is just a tad devious. As the old Chinese saying goes “water finds its own level” – Bullshit attracts more bullshit etc.
Even so, for the so called ‘seeker’, when the love of being (self) is equal to the love of the guru happens, the paradox merges into empty space.
Devotion to the guru can take a ‘long time’. Direct pointing, with no emphasis on the messenger is ‘timeless’. There is no you or me – there is no guru – disciple.
There is no this and that – There is only THAT.
Posted by Michael S on 07.26.09 10:44 am
Gilbert, does pure consciousness point towards only consciousness of consciousness or is it saying you are pure ONLY consciousness – thoughts-feelings-things-colors- OR being awake only awakeness which is awake to object consciousness? or is it pure awake conscious of things, but you cant separate the things etc… ?
Posted by suki on 07.26.09 10:56 am
Wenotwo,
What choice is there in birth?
What choice is there in death?
Can you choose to be unaware?
Can you choose not to breathe?
The event is natural, choiceless and unavoidable!
It is of no import.
Posted by suki on 07.26.09 11:28 am
Joke:
What do so called ‘Spiritual Seekers’ have in common? – NO thing
(to editor,please feel free to delete if in appropriate)
Editor: It is okay, I can hear no one laughing. So, does that mean the joke is ‘on YOU?’
Posted by gilbert on 07.26.09 11:55 am
‘Standing here’ pointing does no get tiresome.
Slight irritation arises sometimes because the signpost is clearly ‘pointing’ in ONE ‘direction’ and yet it is not ‘hitting home’ for a ‘someone’. It is also known that it can never hit home for that ‘someone’. ‘Things’ appear and disappear.
The irritation dissolves naturally by itself. It is just an itch, a tiny fragment of disturbance in the mind.
The ‘pointer’ of the sign is dynamic and manifests in a thousand ways with as many words. The ‘message’ is not IN the words. The ‘pointer’ of the sign is an appearance – pointing AT the pure cognition happening right there where seeing is happening. It is the ‘flip over’ that is called recognition. It is NOT new. It has already been cognized. The flip over is the dissolving of the ‘seer’, the ‘knower’, the conceptual ‘form’ dissolves into its own origin.
Ever so basically, it can be put like this:
The concept of ‘knowing’ is NOT the knowing.
The concept of ‘seeing’ is NOT the seeing.
The concept of ‘awareness’ is NOT the awareness.
The concept of what you are, is NOT what you are.
The concept of One-ness, is NOT Oneness.
The origin of all concepts is non-conceptual awareness.
Clear and empty – pure cognition.
Posted by gilbert on 07.26.09 12:25 pm
Of course it isn’t about the ‘teacher’ or the ‘pupil’.
Having said that, I have witnessed umpteen ‘seekers’ arrive at Bob’s meetings, and because the core of the message is extremely subtle, it takes a few visits usually, I have witnessed first hand a ‘transformation’ take place. The ‘seeking’ attitude gradually seeps away. What appears is a lightness in being, translucent and joyous – not excessive or flamboyant. Subtle knowing shines from the eyes.
Those who have been to see Bob know that there is no ‘club’ or membership stuff. You never know who will turn up, or not turn up, at a meeting and new ones flow in regularly.
The meetings are simply called ‘meetings’. He is a beacon of light, shining with the light of equanimity. Even with seekers that are exceedingly bombastic, like Charlie Hayes (when he came to see Bob a few years ago), Bob is never put off track. He addresses the ‘essence’ of the being – and ‘it works’ – it may take a little ‘time’ – but it works.
If you get the chance, go see Bob. I will shout you a cup of coffee here at the UGC. If you can’t get here, then listen to the interviews with Bob on this site and maybe get his books.
Posted by suki on 07.26.09 12:36 pm
“The origin of all concepts is non-conceptual awareness” – Gilbert
Nicely put. The flip side is ‘non-conceptual awareness’ is origin-less.
ps – yes the joke is on me, ah what the heck i thought i try lighten it up, some get too serious. (No one in particular).
Posted by suki on 07.26.09 1:22 pm
Bob certainly grabbed my attention a few years ago. I’ve not met him in person or even talked to him other than listened to his interviews, which I found to be very profound and direct. I was impressed and did have a strong desire to meet him in person to clarify my experience and understanding at the time. This is no longer the case, but should circumstances be favorable I would still like to meet him one day.
There is just no strong desire to meet any teacher now. I mean, Eckhart Tolle lives in my neck of the woods and I have read his book ‘The Power of Now’, which I found insightful with a lot of very clear pointers, but something did not tally right and for me there was no connection or resonance. Have never been to any of his meetings or should I say public venues.
But anyway back to Bob, he definitely put me on the right track. And there was something else in him that reminded me of Sri Nisargadatta (humility, honesty and a sense of equanimity). Though there personalities could not have been any more different! – Hey, variety is the spice of life after all.
Definitely recommend listening to him or checking out his books.
Warm regards, Suki
Posted by Michael S on 07.26.09 5:25 pm
Get Annette Nibley on the show, women are less wordy and more to the point, simple, direct, and gentle.
Posted by Jeremy on 07.26.09 7:05 pm
Forgive the fairy tale, but “Once upon a time” there was an idiot named Jeremy. He was a ‘nice guy’ who had been through some ‘rough times’. Forever damaged by a childhood encounter with a murderous sociopath, his path was to make the world a nicer place than it would have been without him. There could be no other point to a life in such a ‘cold world’.
Jeremy had a dog. A ‘problem’ dog. She was a nervous wreck. This dog bore the sores of self-mutilation. She chewed and scratched herself to the point of blood. One day, Jeremy watched an American TV program where a curious little Mexican man suggested his dog was already whole and complete, and it was only his story about the dog and the justifications for her behavior that were limited. Jeremy’s brain couldn’t contradict this logic. As an experiment, he tried treating the dog as if she was already whole and complete, not broken and damaged. To his surprise and delight, it was absolutely true. Here was a whole and complete creature with some bad habits. The habits were easily broken, but persistence was required to form good habits. The end result, there was nothing actually wrong with this ‘problem’ dog.
Soon after Jeremy wondered if he was also whole and complete, just for shits and giggles. Suddenly, and wholly unexpectedly, it was true. At this point in the description words become icky and useless. Sailor Bob’s analogy about a water mirage on the road could not be, as far as this meatbag is concerned, closer to the truth. Nothing fell away. Is anything lost when the mirage is seen to be distortion of light perception due to the properties of heat?
It turns out, Jeremy is not broken. Far from it. Being was telling the story of broken Jeremy for the hell of it. Why? Why not?
If I am not broken then NO ONE is. Resolve this one question. Are you whole, or not? I apologize for the third person bits. It makes me giggle.
Posted by big john on 07.26.09 7:41 pm
No “me” is not a feeling, its a knowing, not of knowledge. Everyone ( in the appearance ) wants to be something even nothing is something translated in thought. Nothing beyond the concept, No-thing,… prior to the word… THAT I Am.
Gilbert, the relentless pointing has slayed the idea of the “me”. Thank you.
Areti much gratitude arises here, many thanks all from not me to not you, from no one to no one.
Posted by gilbert on 07.26.09 8:51 pm
There is no ‘idea’ of ‘me’ without this ‘knowing’. There is no feeling of ‘me’ without the ‘knowing’. There is nothing without this ‘knowing’.
It is all No Thing. The first instant, the only instant of No Thing is this ‘knowing’.
This ‘activity’ of knowing is prior to all appearances.
No one can get the gist of this, without this ‘knowing’.
Just like sugar cannot be without the sweetness that is potentially contained in its very nature. Sugar is not salt. Salt is not sugar.
We know the difference by the taste.
The Taste of this knowing has never not been here. This is why it is not recognized.
If I put salt in your coffee, instead of sugar, you will soon let me know about it.
The ‘shock’ of the salt registers instantly – the expectation of sweetness (mirage) is shattered by the actual.
Everything registers in the immediacy of cognition.
‘We’ think we know the world – yet it is the unknown that ‘we’ face.
If you know not what is seeing, what is knowing – how can you know the world or anything?
This activity of knowing, this movement of knowing, is the birth place of space and time.
What you truly are is before the taste of space and time.
You cannot be in front of that and you cannot get behind that – you are THAT.
Posted by Fenn on 07.26.09 11:46 pm
Following Dan’s excellent observations:
In SEEING, it is seen that no dream object (mind/body/seeker) could possibly be a SEE-ER.
Paradoxically, until this SEEING is recognised to be always the case, recognition is apparently sought by the dream character (which is nothing other than a process amongst processes in the appearance).
This (seeking recognition) seems to be a mechanism in the dream that SEEMINGLY preceeds recognition of SEEING.
Of course, IN THE SEEING, it will again be argued that seeking can have no possible value (since a seeker is a dream object in the dream.)
This is a paradox that is at the heart of the differences between the shades of teaching by Tony Parsons at one end and say, Eckhart Tolle at the other.
Yet, the funny thing is that ALL teachings are by default, DREAM TEACHINGS (it’s just a matter of degrees.)
Fenn
Posted by gilbert on 07.26.09 11:56 pm
Zero Degrees of separation.
You are THAT – seeing-knowing.
Posted by dan on 07.27.09 12:29 am
“Seeking will go on until this is seen clearly 100% full on”
Who is going to see this 100% full on?
The individual?
Yeah, sure, the individual can get some kind of strong understanding or strong clarity and be very clear on all the points, the rules and regulations of nonduality.
But that is still just a dream.
NoBODY sees this clearly. That is simply a big ‘ol wet dream.
Seeking goes on until it is obvious* that seeking is simply THAT ineffable, indivisible essence appearing as a pattern called —> seeking. In this seeing* it is clear, hence, that this seeking pattern has no power to bring anything about. It cannot bring about anything grand, bigger. THAT is already whole and complete, done and dusted.
As was mentioned on the podcast, the fact that anything does occur or apparently happen is simply a celebration. Or, if you’re a pessimistic ‘type’, the appearance is simply moot. Unnecessary in a certain sense. Who cares? Really?
——
* ‘obvious’; ‘seeing’. Note: It does not become obvious to anyone. And nobody sees this. It is simply obvious. It is simply seen. Not by anyone. The very fact that this is the case is the wonderful mystery of THAT. And, obviously, because this is only ever about ONE and NOT EVER EVER ABOUT TWO!, that obviousness and that seeing is simply THAT itself. Nothing sees THAT. Seeing actually IS THAT.
——
Akin to a lighthouse, THAT can never shine upon itself and conceptualize about itself. This would be THAT splitting into two, which is impossible. The lighthouse always shines out of itself and can never shed direct light upon itself. Why bother? It already IS that light. Everything is illuminated in the clear light that the lighthouse shines out. But the light is always and ever done and complete. It is “self-shining.” (now, who said that?…. nisar??… can’t remember).
Posted by Charlie Hayes on 07.27.09 12:35 am
Gilbert’s Message (which is identical to ‘Sailor’ Bob’s Message, in substance if not in style) CANNOT fail to liberate the seeker from himself or herself. When I was in Melbourne Bob said very straightforwardly (my interpretation, not word for word; was nearly 4 years ago): This Message cannot fail. The entire “lineage” from the Primordial Guru, and the whole of Totality, stands behind it.
And recently when I interviewed Bob for his Podcast on “Being Is Knowing”, he said, with his usual great good humor, “well, it didn’t fail, did it, charlie?” I replied “NO, in spite of my best (‘Bombastic!’) efforts to make it fail, it did not fail! Nothing trumps Being.
Even though this old racer was exceedingly resistant, Bob’s Message planted a seed. That seed WILL come to fruition. That is my experience. I know now that this Message is of the essence of wholeness, integrity itself. You can trust it. I hope you will. I Love You.
Posted by gilbert on 07.27.09 12:37 am
As I remember it, ‘self-shining’ is from the Dzogchen tradition.
The Sun knows no darkness and no light.
No other light is necessary – the light by which you SEE and KNOW is invisible and yet it illuminates everything without exception. This light is self-shining.
For anyone interested, my new e-book is now available on http://www.seeing-knowing.com
Go to the BOOKS page to read the details of how to get it. It is titled “Who do you think you are? – Without a reference point”.
Posted by dan on 07.27.09 12:44 am
Love this: “nothing trumps Being.”
Posted by suki on 07.27.09 1:27 am
Hey Dan,
I’m not implying any individual that sees this.It is ‘Seeing’ recognizing itself.The empty space-like, clear edgeless awareness that appears to be behind the eyes as I’m typing these words.( Either this is noticed or not – 100% or 0% )
Yes?
Can it be that simple?
Posted by dan on 07.27.09 2:23 am
Yes it is! Thanks Suki. Edgeless Awareness is a great pointer!
Posted by Jacob on 07.27.09 5:57 am
hi there are times of tasteing this presence breifly and there are times of doubt saying your going to be one of the thousand who dont see this message, times of great anger shouting at my eldest, the me is after reasuurance of this seed of being growing to reveil itself in full bloom, love to you all, Jacob
Posted by Corey on 07.27.09 5:57 am
Gilbereti, clearly many here continue to listen and read because they/we don’t fully understand what it is that’s being discussed. It really seems there’s no need to harp on “WHO wants to understand?” That’s just completely flipping annoying, and to hear it over and over and over once more again only fuels the irritation. Again, clearly it annoys the intellect — the functioning mind-form that’s somehow given life in a way that seemingly cannot be understood.
So anyway, after that indulgent preamble — as al or mrsnacks says: Onto the questions!
Since this no-thing apparently cannot be found/grabbed/possessed, is it more a deduction of reasoning — somehow the SEEING-KNOWING as Gilbert likes to call it, is known by its effects? That is, it’s the no-thing space behind/allowing the senses? I can know (small K), see, hear, etc. register impressions, but the capacity to KNOW(ing), i.e., register these things/appearances is the God-given (uh-oh, big trouble now) capacity to BE/LIFE function. In this ‘personal’ lexicon God-given equals self-shining (capitalize or decapitalize any words/letters you wish).
Are all we to do is REST? I mean, if the intellect can’t get it, and so obviously we are this LIFE as much as the Andromeda Galaxy is, what is there to do?
Posted by Ralph on 07.27.09 8:35 am
Corey asks ” “are all we to do is REST?”
I understand exactly where you are coming from. You can’t blindly just Rest as Awareness. It has to be realized. You are not your thoughts but try telling that to the one using thoughts to try to understand that thoughts is what stands in the way of true seeing. Paradox indeed ! So it must be seen that the ‘I’ you take yourself to be, can never REST. Find out for yourself who is it that rests as Awareness? If not ‘me’ than who or what or none of the above? Maybe you can rest in ‘not knowing’.
… and yes, this is flipping annoying to the intellect.
Posted by dan on 07.27.09 8:59 am
“what is there to do?”
Its not a question of what to do or what not to do. It is a question of whether you have the capacity to do anything at all. The basic fact is that you cannot do anything. Nobody has even done a thing – EVER.
“The only capital you have is this consciousness*.” – Nisargadatta
*Consciousness meaning THAT, Being, One without a second.
This has absolutely nothing to do with the individual. Not a thing. THAT which is pointed to here could not care less about the individual. In fact, reading these words has about as much relevance as not reading these words – if you start from the very fact that you are. But you are reading these words…. what can you do about that? Nothing. You have no choice in the matter!
Its already happened-ing.
“Are all we to do is REST?”
The Hsin Hsin Ming has something to say about this:
When you try to stop activity to achieve passivity your very effort fills you with activity.
As long as you remain in one extreme or the other you will never know Oneness.
Even after reading this, the individual may still ask – “then what am I to do?”
Following the Hsin Hsin Ming, the key is to NOT be active and also NOT be passive. Where would that leave you? The only way is to recognize yourself to be THAT which has no capacity for either of those extremes. What is it that has no ability to achieve either activity or passivity? It is THAT which must be you. It cannot be any ‘thing’. Do not identify yourself with that which can be active or passive…. the player, the gamer, the individual. The conviction that “i am this person that does things and doesn’t do things” may begin to wane, and it may become obvious that there is no such thing as you (as far as a doer is concerned).
No one is pointing out that you can do or not do anything. No directives are ever given to the individual here. What is being pointed out is that there is essentially no ‘you’ there that has power to do anything. It is a completely different message to that of “just rest and do nothing.”
It is saying – there is no separate ‘you’. All there is is THAT appearing as THIS.
Posted by Michael S on 07.27.09 9:14 am
Everything that ever happens is a pointer, since all things happen to YOU, not to thought but the very alert consciousness itself. In this way thought is a pointer, the sound of a dog licking its private parts is a pointer, you remain as you are, just attention moves around.
Posted by Morgan on 07.27.09 9:20 am
You can’t escape oneness. You can’t not be. The appearance that one calls “my life” is already the perfect expression of the clear awareness that one is. The activities that appear aren’t generated by a “me”. As pointed out before, the “me” is an afterthought. “Functioning” happens perfectly without it. This is always the case, regardless of thoughts that arise that say “I’m doing this” or “This isn’t right”. A “me” cannot do anything – it’s not real.
Posted by areti on 07.27.09 9:35 am
Corey, the question ‘Who wants to understand’ cuts to the core of the issue. If you continue to ask questions about this, you are engaging in some kind of conceptual story about what this is, and what it is about cannot be known or understood by the ‘me’. The question is an invitation to look to see if you can find some locality in this ‘me’ that belief appears to give substance to. Yes, it is annoying as you say, ‘it annoys the intellect’, which is all that this ‘me’ is.
I like what Bob says about all this, and I paraphrase and summarize: the hearing, seeing, thinking, experiencing requires no effort, it is always and ever there—are you ever not knowing? Even when you have a good night’s sleep, there is a knowing of this. You do not have to make any effort for that knowing to be there, for that being to be present. You do not have to try to understand what you are reading, understanding is happening.
Everything appears in that knowing— is the knowing of the sensations of the body, the arising of thoughts, the view appearing, the objects in the view, any different ever? That knowing, that is what you are.
As to ‘What is there to do?’ I can irritate you and say, ‘Who is there to do anything?’ but I won’t. Instead I will offer this: what you truly are is ever and always there and it is the intellect that appears to mask this, though it can’t really because are you ever not knowing?
So, why pay ‘mind’ to the ‘mind’, do you even need to? It is like Nisargardatta said (I got this quote from Gilbert’s latest e-book, thanks Gilbert): ‘Wherever it leads you, it will be a dream. The very idea of going beyond the dream is illusory. Why go anywhere? Just realize that you are dreaming a dream you call the world, and stop looking for ways out. The dream is not your problem. Your problem is that you like one part of the dream and not another. When you have seen the dream as a dream, you have done all that needs be done.’
Posted by Michael S on 07.27.09 10:04 am
Yes Morgan that is what I meant, things appear to YOU I should have said instead of things happen to YOU I suppose, either way the YOU is pure awareness.
Posted by gilbert on 07.27.09 10:05 am
Where are you seeing from? Can a thought divide that clear space?
No in front, no behind, no anterior, no posterior, no inside, no outside.
Nothing is happening to a you – or a me.
THE KNOWING IS NOT IN THE PATTERN APPEARING. The pattern (all of them) appears in the KNOWING.
The idea that ‘I have experiences’ is just a thought. The ‘I’ is a thought. The description of an experience appears in the immediate experiencing. This experiencing is uninterrupted. It does not stop and start according to some thought about ‘I’.
The natural state is wordless. That ‘pointer’ register before it is contemplated. The contemplation can go on for eternity and it will never be the immediacy of recognition.
There is no problem. Who do you think you are?
What is wrong with right now? – Unless (you) think about it.
Even if you do appear to think about it. What is wrong?
The ‘me’, a thought, appears to dismiss any questioning about itself. A drama of duality, me and not me. What is going to rob the ‘me’ of anything in its own support mechanism.
The false cannot stand up to the investigation.
There is no success – there is no failure.
“Notice the intricacies of the spider’s web”.
“As the same fire assumes different shapes When it consumes objects differing in shape, So does the one Self take the shape Of every creature …”
“How much more grievous are the consequences of anger than the causes of it.”
“Anything in any way beautiful derives its beauty from itself and asks nothing beyond itself. Praise is no part of it, for nothing is made worse or better by praise.”
- Quotes from Marcus Aurelius – He was Roman Emperor from 161 to his death in 180. He was a ruthless warrior, yet extremely sensitive to the subtle nature of LIFE.
Posted by Bob Seal on 07.27.09 11:49 am
thanx for the podcasts.
Editor: Thanks for the Cartoons.
Posted by Fenn on 07.27.09 6:53 pm
“Are all we to do is REST?”
Of course that would be another doing.
But, doing resting or doing seeking, doing nothing or getting stressed are beside the point.
It’s always BEING DONE, no matter what appears.
And whatever appears can never be anything other than the perfect expression of REALITY.
You are that REALITY.
So, carry on (apparently) doing, resting, getting annoyed or whatever…
None of that can violate the pristine, untroubled WAKEFULNESS in which it appears.
Posted by dan on 07.27.09 9:08 pm
Thanks for that Nisar quote Areti – how potent the line: “stop looking for ways out.”
Michael – yes, there is sense that all that appears is pointing back at itself. All things are literally screaming out loud – “THAT you are.”
Tat Tvam Asi.
That, thou art.
What the thou is, is the very SAME as what THAT is.
All things are screaming out, but they are really screaming to no one. Like Aurelius is pointing out, beauty is self-beautifying. It comes from nothing and is going nowhere. Its beauty is derived from its own beauty. So, where did that beauty start? Where did it come from? It didn’t. It just IS.
So, things just are (Being simply is Being). They ask nothing of anyone.
The difference that is talked about on this board, is that maybe, somehow, miraculously, this Being is ‘noticed’. But it isn’t noticed by anyone. Boom.
*clunk*
Welcome to the brick wall. The individual has just hit the brick wall. The individual can travel no further from here on.
Yet, THAT, which is all there is, remains unchanged and eternally THAT.
Posted by gilbert on 07.27.09 10:30 pm
Language does not make it possible to recognize our true nature. That is the ‘main problem’ with talking and writing about this. I would hazard a guess and be bold and say that sometimes the talking and reading somehow brings a moment of dissolution of thoughts, words and ideas. In that ‘space of knowing’ the recognition happens – that I am not any of those ‘things’. The activity of knowing is naked, spacious and unlimited – understanding shines without any dimensions at all. It is seemingly expansive and yet without a center to measure such expansiveness from.
One is left wordless – yet the knowing is crystal clear.
Words fail. Yet they appear to assist, sometimes.
What Charlie shared, quoting Bob, in one of the comments above is exceptionally potent.
This Message cannot fail. The entire “lineage†from the Primordial Guru, and the whole of Totality, stands behind it.
Posted by gilbert on 07.28.09 10:38 am
For anyone interested: Scott Kiloby is interviewed by Charlie Hayes on the http://beingisknowing.blogspot.com/ Check it out. They talk about love and other stuff. A cozy interview. Some music from Leo-nard Cohen too. Scott has been composing some music lately and maybe we will get him to share some of his music with us at some point. Charlie has a few programs happening there and he is getting better at it, so it seems. The interview with Bob Adamson is very good. The audio isn’t the best on that particular one but the content is tops.
Posted by Kimo (Jim) on 07.28.09 3:19 pm
How nice it is when the chick has his whole head outside the eggshell.
None left to guide him.
And nobody else to set free.
Posted by gilbert on 07.28.09 3:48 pm
What is the bottom line?
In the finest print on the back of the contract it says:
Everyone is THAT.
Some ‘appear’ as the knowing of THAT. Some ‘appear’ as the not knowing of THAT.
The BASIS of all knowing and all not knowing is KNOWING.
Everything IS the knowing.
Everything is contained IN the seeing-knowing.
No concept can ever divide the seeing from the knowing because they are One.
Everything is the One, appearing to BE ‘other’ than the One.
Who is tricked by the appearance of separation?
No one. NO ONE.
There is not even One.
Minus Zero.
The warmth of your own being melts the wall of ice, which we call ‘separation’.
Posted by pishta on 07.28.09 5:40 pm
I recently discovered this site and it’s been a great help. I do some self-enquiry and I figured you could give me some opinions, maybe?
So mostly I start with a question ‘Who am I?’, obviously. Well, this question is too much for me, so I do a little trick and ask ‘Who asks the question?’. That’s a little better, because I feel the ‘need’ for answer, so all that is left to do then is to find out where did the question come from. Well, I got nothing. There is just a question, or better yet a feeling of a ‘need’ to answer the question. Can’t find no source, seems it just appeared out of nowhere. But that’s nothing for me. Again I ask another question: ‘Who sees this?’ Because it is obvious that I am aware of the feeling. Again, I got nothing. There are just objects floating everywhere.
After some time I do this with everything: confusion, thought, itching, pain, whatever. I see it and I ask myself who is the ‘watcher’. But there is just watching. The good thing is that confusion and all the other go away the moment I realize it is seen as just a feeling in the body…
I can do this with everything and all there will be left is the awareness of them. Anything comes up – confusion, thought… and I realize they are just ‘objects in the awareness’. After a while it seems like some kind of kung-fu, shifting focus from what comes up to realizing that it is seen. In the end all there is left are just objects seen in the awareness. But I feel that it’s just like ‘employing the thief’ to be the policeman here. The mind cannot kill itself. How can it turn to it’s source (as Ramana says)? There is just a seeing of the ‘want to turn’, after all.
So the process doesn’t really lead to ‘THAT’, which is pointed to. It is maybe too much ‘in the head’. I can get ‘glimpses’ quite easily (it seems that I just need to listen to pointers or read long enough) and it can’t compare… Pointers are just intuitive (listening is passive) and enquiry on the other hand leads also to some passive recognition, but it seems ‘stuck’ in the head (don’t know how to bootstrap). Should I just drop that type of ‘enquiry’ and focus more on pointers?
btw, sorry for my kitchen english
Posted by Su on 07.28.09 6:23 pm
Podcast #29 appeared on my screen this morning.
Fingers pushed the play button.
Diving deep into the experiencing.
Ah resonance.
Beautifully clear.
And with appreciation for the glimpse of the stability.
Posted by Mark on 07.28.09 7:32 pm
As much as I am fascinated by many of the posts here, after a few minutes of reading so many ways to identify the unidentifiable, it is clear why silent presence was the favoured ‘pointer’ by Ramana.
There is this great weak soup of paradoxical concepts all floating about and banging into each other, and ‘eventually’, as the soup simmers and the intellect starts to give up trying to hold on to these lumpy concepts, they evaporate leaving only the spaces between. The distillation.
Just an idea..
Posted by gilbert on 07.28.09 11:05 pm
Everything appears from the same source. EMPTINESS.
There is no one here.
Activities happens, things get done.
Just recognize that it is all spontaneously happening.
You don’t even need one thought to see this actuality.
It is prior to thoughts and concepts – ever present.
You are THAT.
Posted by tomvds on 07.29.09 12:29 am
“Yes, but don’t ask the question mechanically, like a machine. When you eat, you should ask yourself ‘What is eating?’ with an intense desire to solve the riddle. When you listen, you should ask yourself ‘Who listens?’ When you look ‘What is looking’ When you walk ‘What is walking’” – Yasutani Roshi (Three Pillars of Zen)
How are you aware of the question ‘What is looking?’. How and where does that register ? Can you locate it? Are you not that? Where is there any border in THAT?
“What the blazes are we looking out of?” – Quote Douglas Harding. It ‘should’ astound you !
Posted by pishta on 07.29.09 2:07 am
How are you aware of the question ‘What is looking?’
I am aware of the ‘need’ to get the answer, which appears maybe after the question. It is a feeling or a movement in mind. A ‘need’ an ‘urge’ to get the answer. It’s an object. So when focused on this need, the original question falls right away and what’s left is a feeling that was registered. Still I want to know who ‘needs’ the answer. But that is again a wanting, which is seen as a kind of feeling or movement in mind. The cycle never ends. So after all it is just those movements registering in awareness. But when I go and try to locate… That’s another feeling (urge, need) of trying to locate. Seen again. I can do this all day, but what’s the point?
So again, what I do is focusing on the feeling of ‘need’ to answer the question, rather than trying to answer it. The question then falls away. That feeling is just like any other object and when trying to do anything, the ‘trying’ is a feeling (movement) too, which is registered and it falls away when seen…
Posted by gilbert on 07.29.09 2:28 am
It is far more simple than how we describe it.
The mind plays with the concept of ‘I see’…..’I hear’. The ‘I’ cannot see or hear.
SEE the appearing concepts as they appear – and SEE them as they disappear……….The space-like awareness is clear and obvious.
Posted by Morgan on 07.29.09 3:03 am
Pishta. Nice post. There aren’t “glimpses” of seeing – EVERYTHING IS SEEING. What arises sometimes, though, is the idea of “someone” who is apart from that, doing the seeing. Nothing can arise outside of aware presence. You are already what you think you might lack. Look.
Posted by pishta on 07.29.09 4:31 am
Thanks, Morgan. Nice pointer. So let’s rename the glimpse to ‘the absence of the idea of someone’.
The question is… Should or could the idea do something in order to be dropped?
What did yours do before it dropped?
‘You are already what you think you might lack. Look.’ – Can I really? Because for ‘me’ IT is seen when the looking stops (which the first sentence hints to anyway).
And am I wrong or is this all just a total fatalism? (not that it is ‘bad’ or smthing)
Posted by tomvds on 07.29.09 5:36 am
Did you ever notice when looking direcly at a star in the night, the star gets a little blurry; but the stars more in the perifery are seen sharp. By looking indirect you can watch the star. Same with looking directly for the Self; It can’t be done because It is the SEEING; ‘the eye cannot see itself’. Can you STOP the SEEING? Try it, with all the toughts you can muster… the Light is on, omnipresent, there is no switch.
“For whoever seeks God in some special way will gain the way and lose God who is hidden in the way.” -Meister Eckhart
Posted by Morgan on 07.29.09 6:03 am
Pishta, of course an idea can’t do anything. All thoughts of a “me”, confusion, clarity, whatever arise in presence. This presence can’t be seen because it is the seeing – it’s not an appearance but there can be awareness that seeing is happening (being conscious of consciousness). All appearances are bound to fade leaving what is. This is what we are.
Awakening/enlightenment is a dream event. In reality there never was someone for such a thing to happen to so no such thing ever happened “here”. Nothing has ever appeared outside of being/awareness – it is the only reality. Without it, no thoughts of “someone who doesn’t have it” could arise.
Posted by Ralph on 07.29.09 6:36 am
Pishta, if I can give you my opininion, it is to stop trying to figure it out. Your type of questioning just gives more food for the mind to play with. It keeps you in the mind. Trying to figure it out will never get you there which is always HERE. Awareness IS.
Posted by Josef on 07.29.09 6:39 am
Hello Gilbert
on 07.25.09, 10:58 am, you wrote:
“…….but ‘we’ IGNORE it and ‘we’ go running around like a headless chicken….”
I don´t think that Catherine Harding agrees with you with regard to this analogy. I hope, she won´t read it!
Posted by pishta on 07.29.09 6:46 am
This presence can’t be seen because it is the seeing – it’s not an appearance…
The sentence shut me up. No more comment from pishta
In fact, deep down it is always known, no matter how strong the identification with the thought is. Who fools who?
Posted by charlie on 07.29.09 6:58 am
Morgan writes, “Awakening/enlightenment is a dream event. In reality there never was someone for such a thing to happen to so no such thing ever happened “hereâ€. Nothing has ever appeared outside of being/awareness – it is the only reality. Without it, no thoughts of “someone who doesn’t have it†could arise.”
That is really well said, my friend. Who would be there to claim either “I have it” or “I don’t have it”? In the seeing-Being it’s just MOOT… It’s great to hear the Message coming out in so many styles and through so many different non/people. Great thanks!
“It is far more simple than how we describe it. The mind plays with the concept of ‘I see’…..’I hear’. The ‘I’ cannot see or hear. SEE the appearing concepts as they appear – and SEE them as they disappear……….The space-like awareness is clear and obvious.’ ~ Gilbert
YES.
Posted by billtys on 07.29.09 9:47 am
Snake said to the Great Spirit,
“Any downside to your job?”
The Great Spirit answered,
“Yes… there are no opportunities for advancement.”
There is only seeing/knowing.
Posted by gilbert on 07.29.09 9:48 am
at the risk of offending a non existent ‘me’: I don’t give a rats ass whether Catherine agrees with it or not. You might – and that is your problem. Do you want everyone to agree with you? Is it all about agreement? A Gentleman’s agreement? The bondage of self is an agreement you made a long ‘time’ ago and it is now time to dismantle that agreement and flow with LIFE. Expressions happen spontaneously. Be with the expression in ‘this moment’. It is the dualistic mind that plays with right and wrong.
Someone wrote and asked a clear question:
GILBERT,
How can I recognize the difference between pure KNOWING and intellectual KNOWING ?
GRAZIE -R. (Italia)
Reply:
Intellectual Knowing is not knowing, it is thought.
Pure Knowing is pure knowing……….it is what the thought appears IN or ON.
There is a knowing of thought. Thought knows nothing by itself – it may appear as the expression of that knowing and/or the not knowing.
It is not the believed in ‘you’ that recognizes this……..the seeing-knowing is self-knowing……you are already THAT.
There is nothing outside of this knowing.
See for yourself.
Posted by Mike in SF on 07.29.09 10:53 am
I’d like to ask this week’s speakers, as well as former guests of the show, what they think about the idea of “Spiritual Bypass”. Here are a few snippets about SB I found on the internet:
“If we try to ignore our pain and achieve the higher levels of our consciousness, something, usually our false self/negative ego or shadow self, will hold us back until we work through our particular unfinished business. Trying to bypass the work that needs to be done on our negative ego/shadow backfires. This is called spiritual bypass, premature transcendence or high-level denial. Spiritual bypass can be seen in any number of situations, from being born again in the fundamentalist sense, to focusing only on the Light, to becoming attached to a guru or technique. The consequences often are denial of the richness and healthy spontaneity of our inner life: trying to control oneself or others; all-or-none thinking and behaving; feelings of fear, shame and confusion; high tolerance for inappropriate behavior; frustration, addictions and compulsions; and unnecessary pain and suffering.”
-Barbara H. Whitfield
And then this:
“Do yourself a favor. Heal yourself in the emotional and mental realms first. Do not try to climb the ladder to the divine, until the lower rungs of your ladder have been repaired.
First make sure the basics in your life are handled. You have a secure home and way of maintaining your day to day living. Then heal your psyche.
Seek a therapist or group to work through any wounds, patterns, or beliefs that are destructive.Counseling can help you discern what is truely healthy for you. Now when you begin your spiritual journey, you are prepared to respond to the wonderful fulfillment as well as the disappointments, and frustrations along the way.”
-Debra Joy Goldman
Posted by Morgan on 07.29.09 11:27 am
Who is bypassing what? What is “your” self? How is a therapist going to help you BE? If a therapist told the truth (“You are complete and whole right now – you don’t need me”), they’d be instantly out of business. All of these statements hinge on the idea of a separate self that needs to be fixed. What if such a thing doesn’t exist and isn’t believed in? What’s left?
Advaita doesn’t mean that you behave like an idiot or go into a comatose stupor. It is often said that only in the absence of the self idea can intelligent action occur. Most of the apparent atrocities committed against “eachother” and nature wouldn’t happen if this idea (isolation) wasn’t believed in.
Posted by Kimo (Jim) on 07.29.09 11:32 am
Mike–You can’t escape what you already are. Why hide from it?
That quote from Barbara & Debra would pertain to an “engineered understanding” otherwise known as the enlightened ego. As in, I’ll pump myself up with how there’s no person and hence no problems and there’s only this aware presence–and maybe I’ll start believing it and it will come true for me (or my problems and lack of requisite spiritual work will pop back into the picture).
This has nothing to do with belief. See what is right now. We keep mentioning how there’s no becoming. You are what you seek already.
In watching a re-run of the movie “Interview with the Vampire”, it struck me as a sutra when Brad Pitt (a vampire watching a play about vampires) remarked how funny it is that his buddies who are vampires are on the Paris stage pretending to be humans pretending to portray vampires. This is how I feel everytime I see a spaghetti code “I’m a person with work to do”-type post. It strikes me just as odd as it would if I knew a vampire who had all kinds of angst about being a human and wished he could be a vampire and wanted to talk to me about it over and over. Compassion reigns but at some point you just have to look for yourself and cut the nonsense and realize what you are right now.
Stop glossing over the “You already are what you Seek” quote. It’s true; stop doubting it and have a look.
Posted by billtys on 07.29.09 11:43 am
The ‘I’ needs to be investigated.
Bob does it in a most powerful way…and it really is as simple as 1 2 3…
Is seeing happening?
(This is not a trick question).
Yes…seeing is happening.
The seeing is prior to the thought ‘I see’…
The thought ‘I see’ has NO power whatsoever and the seeing continues unabated…with or without the thought ‘I see’ …the seeing is always there…it is what the ‘I’ appears in….
The imagined entity does not push a button or pull a lever to get the seeing to happen…it is just there…happening…
The imagined entity does nothing…absolutely nothing…NO exceptions…
The seeing and the hearing and the thinking and the digestion and the talking and the hand waving all just happen…then we add an ‘I’ to the mix, and say ‘I see’, ‘I hear’, ‘I think’, ‘I talk’…etc
The awareness/knowing/seeing is That in which everything appears…including the thoughts about ‘I see’ and ‘I hear’ and ‘I am aware’…
But the imagined entity does not see, does not hear, is not aware…the seeing, the hearing, the awareness are simply present without the imagined entity doing anything…it just all happens. Did I say that already?
You are the awareness in which all appears.
A question is an appearance…appearing in the awareness…just like everything…no exceptions…
There are some excellent questions appearing… but the bottom line is that the question is like everything else that appears in the awareness…
You are prior to anything arising in the mind.
The questioner and question appear in what you are…and that is what is being pointed to.
Posted by gilbert on 07.29.09 11:51 am
The concept of awareness is a concept.
Awareness is not a concept – it ‘appears’ AS all concepts.
The concept IS awareness appearing as a concept.
The KNOWING is NOT in the concept.
Simple, yet passed over way too quickly by the intellect.
Posted by Kimo (Jim) on 07.29.09 11:56 am
It all comes back to “what is the truth about what I am?”
Why waste time denying that you are a butterfly or denying that you are a person or denying that you are a thought or denying you are a body? Or doing spiritual work? Or posing endless questions? The answer is right where you are. Right now.
Go right into it. What are you right now? That’s what this is about. Forget about the non-dual answer key and forget about anything you’ve been told. When unfiltered looking happens (or “congested/confused looking” for that matter) notice that there’s only ever that knowing presence, wild and free–inseparable from what you are and inseparable from every appearance. The source of all–it is You.
Simple.
Posted by Kimo (Jim) on 07.29.09 12:14 pm
Try to find a time when the awareness that you are solidifies into (becomes) an object or gels into a reference point or identity. It never does. Free-form awareness is your home and your anchor. It can’t suffer, it can’t “better itself”, it can’t become anything other than what it already is.
Posted by Ralph on 07.29.09 12:29 pm
‘Spiritual bypassing’ is what one does to avoid facing themselves. Most will do anything but face themselves. Why? because they are scared shitless what they might find there. In truth, they are just ‘believed thoughts’ but until one faces them and sees them for what they truly are, they will remain solid as concrete. Have you ever asked yourself, why is it that these uncomfortable thoughts keep re-appearing from time to time ? There is no way out but through them. ‘BE’ in the presence of these uncomfortable thoughts and ‘SEE’ what happens..
Dare to go ? C’mon I dare you.
Know thyself.
Posted by Ralph on 07.29.09 12:30 pm
You already are what you seek. Okay, then why is the suffering still there ?
Suffering is an appearance… appearing in Awareness… and yet I still suffer, why ?
….. perhaps there is more to it than just seeing/knowing.
Posted by gilbert on 07.29.09 12:30 pm
Ralph, the concept that there is MORE to it, is a concept. Drop the concept of MORE and SEE.
Being addicted to ‘process’ is useless. Yet that is only known clearly once the ‘process’ is SEEN THROUGH. There is no one in the SEEING.
All of our words fail. Yet something ‘happens’ and the recognition happens, unexpectedly.
It is all valid, no matter how it appears. And ‘conflicting expressions’ can be useful in undermining the beliefs. Whatever works, it works and as soon as it works, it is no longer needed.
For many the recognition has happened, then a wish to share happens. Each case is unique.
Here is a simple question:
How did you get here? Can you show another how to get here? The ‘way’ that you came here may not suit the apparent ‘other’.
The truth of it all is that you were always here and there is no journey, so all methods and maps are only rudimentary approximations.
It is not about wasting time – there is NO time to waste. It isn’t about denying or affirming anything either. The space of knowing ‘reveals itself’ as a recognition, wordless and silent.
You were never anything other than THAT.
This Presence is neither positive or negative – it is ALL inclusive.
Posted by Kimo (Jim) on 07.29.09 1:42 pm
Tell me what I am! Tell me what I am!
Haven’t you had enough of that?
You’ve been told what you are for all of your intellectualizing-capable period of life.
And you’ve told others what they are to make them feel special, to hurt them, to reward them, to punish them.
I say your true identity is there for the looking now without my calling you yet another name.
See.
Posted by gilbert on 07.29.09 6:26 pm
For anyone who may be interested: Charlie Hayes called me and the resulting interview is on his site now.
http://beingisknowing.blogspot.com/
Posted by Fenn on 07.29.09 11:20 pm
It’s argued that the person cannot be found. This is true – but only in the same way that your computer cannot be found or your chair cannot be found. There is no inherently existing separate computer – yet this doesn’t stop you switching it on (and coming to the UGC.)
The phenomena of ‘person-ing’ goes on at some level – and continues to have apparent impact in the apparent world.
This need not be denied or ignored.
But… this direct pointing is about the TRUTH beyond/before the limited identity.
Feeling better about ‘your’ life is a whole other thing. It’s in the realm of rearranging appearances – and there are plenty of places that cater for that. There is nothing wrong with that particular endeavor just as there is nothing wrong with working on diet, education etc… No different to getting the car serviced or fixing the roof. It may make the appearance work more effectively.
But this is about the direct ‘gnosis’ of YOU ‘prior’ to the appearance. How the apparent life functions in the light of that ‘understanding’ is something else.
Posted by gilbert on 07.30.09 12:21 am
The intrinsic nature of all things is emptiness. There is no one arguing and no one to find a person or not find a person. All there is is seeing-knowing.
The so called ‘person’ appears as thoughts in the seeing-knowing.
The so-called ‘person’ cannot see or know anything. It is belief that gives it these seeming qualities.
The seeing-knowing is clearly empty of forms. Where the seeing is happening, this is clearly obvious.
You are not the software or the hardware, using the computer analogy.
The crux is that that which animates the thoughts, IS the thoughts, is also the activity of knowing. There is no ‘time-lapse’ between a thought appearing and the knowing – it is Self-Knowing.
This knowing is never divided into multiplicity – it only appears to be divided.
One awareness, One Being, One Seeing, One Knowing.
You are that One.
You cannot find yourself as a separate object, without identifying as the object.
What is it the identifies?
What give identity?
In other words – What are you?
Watch the mind and see how it behaves. It is mechanical, isn’t it? Are you a mechanical device? Impossible.
What is the most intimate knowing that there is?
Surely this is not a mystery to you.
But can you say what it is?
It is wordless.
Posted by Morgan on 07.30.09 1:06 am
Fenn, when it is said that a separate self can’t be found, it seems it’s mostly the belief in an individual as an independent source of activity and existence that’s being questioned, not the appearance of everything (computers, body, thoughts, chairs, etc) in what one is. As pointed out by Douglas Harding – in direct experience, one is not a “thing” but (headless) space in which everything (including sensations and impressions that get labeled “body” and “mind”) arise. In that space, you will never see a thing called “me”, just thoughts and perceptions that come and go.
Posted by Fenn on 07.30.09 1:44 am
Yes Morgan, I agree. I was using the word ‘person’ to point to something akin to an extremely complex process which need not be ignored (but sometimes is.)
The apparent mind/body organism exists in the same way as other ‘things’ exist. OR… it doesn’t exist in the same way as other ‘things’ don’t exist – YET we don’t go around saying that my shoes don’t exist or my sandwich doesn’t exist or my car, house, computer don’t exist.
Or if we do… we don’t act that way – we don’t say ‘my car is an illusion’ and proceed to walk everywhere. Same with the organism/person, it might be seen as apparent/illusory but ‘we’ still use the bathroom.
The organism/person is a (apparent) complex conditioned process in the appearance. BUT… it’s not where the ‘power’ is. It’s not an actor, doer, knower or instigator of anything….
It’s not what I AM, it appears in what I am.
Posted by Kimo (Jim) on 07.30.09 3:42 am
Fenn,
The person is not the same as the computer or the shoes (except that they are all concepts). The computer and shoes are much more discreet from an observation standpoint.
If ‘you’ were around, I’d be able to see a body that certain folks can identify as “Fenn” and also objects such as the computer or shoes. No separation there in reality as they are appearances in what I am and certainly from a practical standpoint we can see scientifically that with magnification the atoms which make up these apparent objects spread out to where empty space is evident. But that’s still not what this is about. The assumption that the person is observable and that it’s what you are, but you don’t really exist because it’s just an appearance in awareness is a false logic proof.
How are you bundling the body/mind and calling it you or calling it a person? Have you ever found a mind? Including finding your own? What we could point to in a buddhist tradition is that the mind is clear and empty–the mind is not an object as such or locate-able or definable (except as evident aware presence–an attempt at description but never the real). Just a naked awareness in which all appears.
That leaves the body as another candidate of what you are. Is it observable even though it’s only a bunch of atoms patterning with no solidity the more we magnify it? Sure, we can observe the body. No sense pretending we can’t conceptualize a body.
But that’s not what you are. The body is just a tool that comes and goes and allows for awareness to register qualitative sensations.
I cannot see a person. I never have (but I’ve seen plenty of shoes and computers). I’ve only seen bodies and made further conceptual assumptions about what is in those bodies and the personality each has. All a dream! There’s only ever aware presence in which all appears. Challenge your definition of what you think a person is—and then let us know if you’ve ever seen one in observable instantaneous perception.
Maybe you’ll come back and tell us “ok, I’m not an object, but I’m still a person”. Well, if you really want to call yourself a person that’s okay, as long as that concept, in your lexicon, is pointing directly at naked awareness (but I assume it isn’t or won’t).
All this takes is direct looking. Find the person. Don’t assume it’s not there or that it is there. Look!
Posted by suki on 07.30.09 4:05 am
Good day to all,
The new e-book “Who do you think you are? – Without a reference point”, by Gilbert is undoubtedly in my opinion one of the clearest books on non-dual pointing out there.
The delivery is exceptionally sharp and to the point (no pun intended).If you have any lingering doubts and questions that arise naturally during intense self enquiry,then this is the book that will clear them up revealing your ‘True Self Shining’Nature! At the very least I’m confident it will trigger profound insights into the nature of your ‘Being’…………..well worth the price of a couple cups of coffee and a doughnut!:)
ps – I was not asked by Gilbert nor was I monetarily compensated for the above comments.
Posted by pishta on 07.30.09 4:26 am
Does anyone here practice self enquiry?
What do you think about Mooji? His approach is in understanding that anything that is seen can’t be me, because I must be prior to it in order to see it. And even the seeing is being registered somehow… So in the end it results in realisation that ‘I am not’.
Posted by Fenn on 07.30.09 4:48 am
Hi Kimo. I disagree, the person is exactly like a computer or car – but much much more complex.
Is it findable? Of course not – but as I said before, neither is the computer – there is no such essence as a computer.
The real issue is; is the person the seat of Consciousness.
I think we all agree that it is not. It, like the computer, is an appearance. (I think it is clear that that disqualifies it from being what I AM.)
Posted by Josef on 07.30.09 8:09 am
Dear Gilbert,
Oh my god.
I was a bit surprised about “your” answer. I only wanted to make a joke and perk you up. Thats why I set the smilies 
Thats realy the problem with words. Very dualistic.
Josef
Posted by dan on 07.30.09 8:43 am
Nothing is apart for THAT. You can call it Being (hell, call it lemon curd if you like).
Nothing is apart from Being.
If its there, it is Being
If you can see it, it is Being.
If you can smell it, it is Being.
If you can hear it, it is Being.
If you can feel it, it is Being.
Now, here’s the good one:
If you can THINK it, it is Being.
It is ALL Being.
All senses, all thoughts, all sensations, all feelings, all perceptions.
It is already, already!
Nothing has to happen to bring this about. The very fact that anything arises is THAT, simply arising as whatever arises. And that can come in many, many forms. Suffering, pain, sadness, the idea “i don’t get it.” Great. The idea “i have no bloody clue what these guys are talking about” already simply IS THAT. How can it be apart from THAT?
It cannot be found. The seeker can never find THAT which it seeks because it is too preoccupied with finding it to stop and see that the very seeking of “it” is THAT.
Here is another list (non-exhaustive) of things which can be found:
1. Your car keys
2. Buried treasure
3. That 50p piece you dropped behind the sofa last week
The only things which can be found are those which have been lost (or yet to be discovered).
You cannot find THAT ineffable Beingness because you never lost it. If it was never lost, then how are you going to find it? It is like looking for the pair of pants that you are already wearing.
Equally, you can never lose THAT because you never found it. It always already is. ‘You’ never found it because there is no separate ‘you’. The real YOU is THAT. What movement can YOU make to come any closer towards THAT which YOU are? Is any movement in any direction necessary?
That is what is meant by Tat Tvam Asi – That, Thou art.
YOU ARE THAT!
You cannot know it as a separate thing. There is no dividing line. Not two. (how can you kiss yourself on the lips?)
These are straight up, obvious, clear, basic and plain FACTS.
Absolutely speaking, the words YOU and THAT are synonymous. So much so that it renders the need for any differentiation between those words pointless. You can rub them out of your dictionary.
Because the real pointing is clear, open, silent stillness. Nothing has to happen to make this more so. It is no-thing. The dance of the UGC is just one of the myriad dances.
Posted by gilbert on 07.30.09 9:47 am
Oh my God, you misunderstood ME. Ha.
Each ripple on the ‘Surface’ of REALITY is distinctly different to every other ripple. Reality, is that which does not change.
There is no surface as such, no interior or exterior to reality.
Emptiness cannot be disturbed by any activity whatsoever. The ‘First Instant’ the ONLY instant of THAT is this activity of knowing. Everything appears in THAT.
There is nothing outside of THAT. It is all THAT. In this activity of knowing appears a concept that ‘I don’t know’.
It is true. The ‘I’ does not know anything. There is only knowing. Recognition of our true nature is nothing but this knowing.
A Zen Garden is a well designed ‘symbol’ of ‘reality’. In the quiet space of knowing, simple being, it is easy to see the disturbances of mind. Insight happens.
The mind is restless only because it is composed of ripples. The knowing is undisturbed.
The stillness of undisturbed presence with ‘what is’, is your true nature. But this stillness is all inclusive – all the disturbances are resolved in this stillness.
The cognition of this resolution, which is happening ‘all the time’. Every thought that appears, disappears.
There is no one who understands this.
Understanding is the being-reality of all existence and non-existence.
(I was not asked by anyone, nor was I monetarily compensated for the above comments.)
‘People’ are happy to play with all this ‘spiritual nonsense’ so long as they don’t have to face reality. ‘Spirituality’ is a mind game.
Isn’t it odd that ‘people’ value ‘things’ and ‘gurus’ so much more when they have already vanished or the traces of their ‘existence’ are mere photos and words in a book.
And yet the rarest ‘thing’ of all, the most refined, the ‘self’, is the most common.
And ‘people’ go searching for it – searching in the mind, the very place where it is not. Words….words…..words.
Posted by pishta on 07.30.09 6:46 pm
Each ripple on the ‘Surface’ of REALITY is distinctly different to every other ripple.
Don’t believe him, ripples! There’s no such thing as ‘Surface’ of REALITY.
Posted by gilbert on 07.31.09 12:03 am
Playful banter. Of course there is no surface to reality. It is a figure of speech.
You ARE reality. How come you don’t KNOW that? If you know that, then ‘who’ are you advising not to BELIEVE what was written? Where the world appears in the seeing, it is LIKE a membrane, reverberating with the impressions, as they register.
Everything we utter in words is a concept. Some useful and others useless. For whom are the useful or not useful? Who is misled by concepts? Where are they transported to by misleading concepts?
If we must have disclaimers every sentence, then there is nothing to say, except “Not Two”.
Posted by davidb on 07.31.09 4:44 am
Just finished Gilberts E-book:
If there is anyone who needs their mirror polished and the cleaner they are using isn’t working, for the price of a movie ticket and some popcorn you can have the clearest cleaner available to wipe away those smudges, and if you decide! it could
be a maintenance program with some longevity… whatever that is!
Thank You Gilbert!
no compensation for this endorsement! …..0….nada….just warm regards for the message.
:>)d
Posted by mark on 07.31.09 6:11 am
“Any Prickles?” – Quote ‘Sailor’ Bob Adamson.
I was not asked by anyone, nor was I monetarily compensated for the above comment.
Posted by Miscji on 07.31.09 7:06 am
@davidb, the ‘I AM’ is the best polishing cloth!
Posted by gilbert on 07.31.09 8:09 am
Send the maintenance team home and throw away the ‘cleaner’. Go to the movies instead. The ‘mirror’ is uncontaminated – not a smudge or scratch obscures it.
Smudges and apparent scratches, fogs, clouds, dramas and lamas are only reflections in the immaculate true nature of what you TRULY are.
P.S. Don’t get popcorn – but go see “The Limits of Control” movie (again maybe) and observe the squirming ‘me’ – if there still is one floating around in your ‘Personal Cinema’.
Eat this message after reading.
Posted by Josef on 07.31.09 8:51 am
Hello gilbert,
I made joke. There was no question. But never the less thanks for answering the nonexistent question
Warm regards
Josef
Posted by Josef on 07.31.09 9:19 am
And yes, spirituallity is only a mind game. Spirituality is only thoughts. No thoughts about such terrible things as “awakening” or “nonduality” or “enlightment” or “advaita”- no problem with it. I had no problems with advaita – until I heard about it 5 years ago and started to think about it.
Thinking about something like that is not better than thinking about what to eat at the next meal. Indeed choosing the next meal is more important and effective than thinking about this bullshit.
Its realy very strange to search something and think about something, which was never lost. But even this sentences are absolutly meaningless like everything else. Thinking about the damage of the care happens, and thinking about the damage of the car stops. Thinking about the ugc happens – and thinking about that stops. “I” didn´t choose to look at the ugc now. It just happenend. And writing this bullshit now also happens. There is no one there, who could choose. Everything happens. Everything is it. But everything implicates, that there are many different things. But there is only one thing. And that is it. “Bad” feelings, “good” feelings, a sense of wellbeing, frustration, feeling fit, being tired – everyting changes in this constant presence.
Posted by Josef on 07.31.09 9:36 am
Like Sailor Bob said: “What is wrong with right now until you think about it?”
Posted by davidb on 07.31.09 10:26 am
Gilbert,
I hope that you did not take the”anyone” as you. (Ed: No I did not) I should have worded it as those who are struggling with “seeing”"being”, etc. This is the clearest pointing ( cleaner)
you can get for the money. The “smudges” being those moments of “doubt” about what is being pointed at. The maintenance program is that you are being offered something here that will go beyond this life.
Again, Thank you for the beauty contained therein.
Should have napped before putting up the post and again as we know words are words and can carry as much bullshit as any cow.
Warm regards,
David
Posted by gilbert on 07.31.09 3:34 pm
Cleaning crappy stuff off this site is easy, flick a switch, press a button. Ephemeral stuff vanishes in an instant. Isn’t it also true that thoughts appear and disappear with an equally fleeting ‘presence’? Who is offended and who is offensive? Once the feeling is engaged and fed by belief, the ‘fire’ in the head flares up and and ‘beast’ hiding ‘within’ leaps forward – a ‘me’ dances on hot coals and performs like a puppet show character. It all fades away by itself. No one ever ‘goes’ anywhere or ‘does’ anything.
The vast open highway and a dead end track are equal. They only seemingly lead you away for what you are. Immaculate presence is untouched – Cosmic in nature, unlimited by any appearance.
Everything is contained in ‘the mirror’.
You cannot have a mirror that has no reflections. No one says “I want a new mirror, this one is full of reflections”. “I want a new awareness, this one is full of concepts”.
Turn the lights off, the mirror still has reflections.
In deep sleep awareness has not disappeared.
This mirror-like awareness does not need something outside of itself to reflect. It is ALL INCLUSIVE.
Nothing to defend and nothing to fight for.
See if ‘you’ can find the ‘mirror’. If you cannot find the mirror, then how can one clean any smudges? Where are you seeing from?
Is that ‘where’ the mirror is?
Everything is THAT. Where you are seeing from is clear and empty. Nothing actually divides that ‘space of seeing-knowing’.
Everything is contained in the singular all inclusive THAT-NESS.
We cannot define or describe THAT, because everything is THAT. Every conversation is THAT.
Every description whether ‘right or wrong’ is THAT.
Having said that, the e-book “Who do you think you are?” is unusual in the fact that it does not lead the mind into the usual ‘time realms’ of most teachings. It gives very little for the mind to play with. The true beauty that one may find in the text is actually one’s own true nature. Pure cognition. There is nothing in it for the ‘me’ – (that is why so few are interested) – the me is non-recognition, resistance.
It is amusing that sometimes I receive the odd abusive email from someone who has read one of my e-books or website. Instantly it is obvious that the ‘me’ has been offended by something. The defense mechanism is all about intellectual boundaries being undermined or not supported.
Attacking me over the expressions is simply ‘a waste of non-existent time’.
However, emails and messages of gratitude outweigh the abusive ones by far.
All that is happening (all that I am doing) is sharing what is obvious.
The ‘reaction’ in the reader has nothing to do with a ‘me’ here.
Nisargadatta’s book is called “I AM THAT” it is not called “I am going to become THAT” or “I was THAT”. …….I AM THAT.
Say it. Where is the doubt?
Warm regards – Gilbert.
Posted by Any Prickles on 08.01.09 7:35 am
“However, emails and messages of gratitude outweigh the abusive ones by far.”
“The Great Way is not difficult
for those who have no preferences.
When love and hate are both absent
everything becomes clear and undisguised.
Make the smallest distinction, however
and heaven and earth are set infinitely apart.” – Hsin Hsin Ming
Someone has to be the buttonpusher,
Sorry, I love to be at your controlpanel
PS: genuine, working e-mail address was provided
best regards,
Any
Editor: Good shot. Bullseye. One can always find something to jump on – but don’t miss the ‘good stuff’ while your busy jumping on words
Posted by gilbert on 08.01.09 1:42 pm
Note about my new e-book “Who do you think you are?”: Anyone who got the e-book in the first few days of its release may wish to download the present version. The first version would not print and also the text layout has been cleaned up somewhat since then. The details of how to get the e-book are on http://www.seeing-knowing.com
Posted by Richard on 08.02.09 6:19 am
Gilbert says, “One can always find something to jump on…”
True. And the following is something that has been said many times by many teachers over the years, which seems so incorrect, that I get much exercise jumping and jumping whenever it re-arises.
Among the good stuff Areti said, she also said, “Even when you have a good night’s sleep, there is a knowing of this.”
It has been oft said that the proof Consciousness is present during the deep sleep state is shown upon waking in the morning when we say, “I slept well” or “I slept poorly”.
I contend this is not seen while asleep but only known by how the body/mind feels once it is in the awake state the morning after.
Regards to all,
Richard
Posted by Kimo (Jim) on 08.02.09 6:35 am
Time and space are appearances in awareness.
You are prior to any conceptualization about how “an I” recognized good sleeping during the night and/or afterward in the morning.
The “proof of Consciousness in time” during a process such as bodily sleep (especially in regard to “big C” consciousness) is faulty in logic from the get-go as time appears within consciousness.
This line of discussion falls under the umbrella of non-literal musings about what goes on “during sleep” as if awareness could undergo any effects of duration. It’s also an attempt to graft so-called personal experiences with discussions about the absolute. While the conceptual and the absolute are inseparable, the mixing of them in a case like this just leads to confusion. With a direct understanding, know the order of things..time, space, Awareness, ideas about a person…and you’ll be okay and the questions about sleep will be meaningless.
Posted by Kimo (Jim) on 08.02.09 6:46 am
Another angle and more simple–
Is Being/Awareness on hold until the mind conceptualizes an answer to what happens in a state called sleep?
Or are you already what you are–perfectly present and aware?
Posted by Mike in SF on 08.02.09 7:32 am
“Gilbereti” (Haha, good one Corey)
Thanks to everyone who answered my question about Spiritual Bypass. Much appreciated.
Posted by dan on 08.02.09 8:27 am
Kimo – zackly!!!
Being doesn’t wait for ‘you’ to come into it. The light switch is on. There is NO off button. It is always ON.
If you’re reading these words then that is proof that Being is being.
A friend of mine the other day said “i’m not there yet” as if this person is ‘outside’ of Being somehow and one day this person will meet Being, or be immersed into Being! It is ALL Being.
The very sentiment “i’m not there yet” is the very direct expression of Being. It only appears as someone saying those words. In the end it is just noise. There is no meaning to any words. Saying “i’m not there yet” carries the exact same weight as “shmurlyurhgurhgngtiqevvdbsgreojodk.” It is just ‘noise’. Sound emanating from lips. No meaning. No relevance. It is just Being.
Posted by billtys on 08.02.09 9:08 am
Everything appears in awareness…time, space, objects, notions, concepts…no exceptions…
‘Nothing’ is an ‘appearance’ …and also appears in awareness.
Deep sleep is an expression of awareness or an appearance in awareness.
It is simply the reference point not dancing.
Posted by gilbert on 08.02.09 10:26 am
“I contend”. Who is this ‘I’ that contends?
‘Who’ is this arrogating ‘I’ that says “I know” and ‘who’ is this ‘I’ that ‘falls in love’ with not knowing?
Cease from pretending and BE.
The question about deep sleep has no validity in deep sleep.
At any ‘time’ half the world is asleep and half is awake – does awareness sleep, or is it merely the instruments of cognition that periodically sleep?
Without sleep the organism will perish – it is natural to sleep but the ‘me’ knows nothing of sleep – it knows nothing at all, in fact. It is a bunch of ideas and no idea can ever KNOW anything at all.
The nature of the mirror is to shine or reflect. Just because the lights are turned off (at night) does not mean that the mirror stops its pure functioning. The mirror never ceases to reflect. There is no such thing as a pure and empty mirror.
The ‘instant’ the lights are turned on again, the reflecting nature of the mirror is obvious.
So many take the translations in mind to be reality. The story of me has no awareness of its own.
There is only one seeing happening. It is not the ‘me’ that sees.
Be totally honest and sincere with ‘yourself’ and find out what it is that is seeing, if you can. It is not a matter of seeking – it is simply SEEING in this immediacy that there is no one there doing any seeing or knowing.
The seeing-knowing is NOT in the pattern or the instrument. ALL patterns and all instruments of cognition APPEAR in the SEEING.
Clever mind games lose their interest, without incident. 99.999% of so-called ‘spiritual teaching’ is merely clever mind games.
It is rare to come across some-one who is direct and uncompromising.
Posted by Richard on 08.02.09 3:42 pm
Hi Gilbert,
As long as you assume an air of superiority, as long as you assume someone else doesn’t ‘get it’ (and you do) and needs to be taught by you, the expert, that is how long your sense of egoistic separation will last.
In Oneness there are not the dualistic notions of teacher and student, enlightened and unenlightened. All is ONE and perfect AS IS. Why not relax and cease trying to re-create yourself through conflict? (Though it could be a fun game when realized it is only a game.)
Socrates: Know thyself.
Richard: No thyself.
Sorry for the tough love approach.
Love (in a manly kind of way),
Richard
Posted by gilbert on 08.02.09 6:02 pm
Get out of the house Richard. Get some fresh air. Who says I am not relaxed?
You took the bait, not me. There is no point in pretending to have gone beyond the ‘me’.
You say it could be a fun game when realized that it is a game – what are you waiting for?
Realize it and be done with being offended by words.
Don’t be sorry – you are not tough anyway. You are a pussycat. Though there may be a tiger in there somewhere. Or is it just that your head is in the tigers mouth?
Love? Don’t talk to me about love. Love is a very tired old word that only induces hypnosis these days.
Warm regards – Gilbert (the button pusher’s cousin)
Posted by Richard on 08.02.09 6:40 pm
I just won a bet with myself. Knew you (Gilbert) would try to throw the focus back onto me rather than trying to kill your own ego. Many folks here do that same thing.
Tough? I hope you never have to go through the medical stuff and treatments I’ve been through the past 9 years. Or the knowing any day the body can die suddenly and painfully.
I’m from the streets of Brooklyn. You talkin’ tough to me?
Walk a mile in others’ shoes before judging their toughness. Don’t let the introversion fool you.
Agreed, ‘love’ like all words are often misinterpreted.
Meow…I mean Roaarrr!
If you ever get to the eastern U.S. we can settle our disagreements by going to the White House and having beers with Obama and Biden.
If ‘love’ is meaningless can I tell you I like you, or would that heap coals upon your head tough guy?
With like,
Richard
Posted by gilbert on 08.02.09 7:06 pm
A dualist through and through. Making bets with yourself eh? I guess you are used to always winning. As for settling our differences, no chance of that. I am just fulfilling our requirements to entertain the readers of this site. If you ever get the focus off your ‘self’ you might just start to see the joke. There is no purpose – yet in the scheme of ‘things’ purposes play themselves out.
The great freedom that is being pointed to here many times, is the freedom from the bondage of self. There is only LIFE. Thousand of bodies died this day and millions of cells die each day in that body right there. What concern is there for any of these events?
You can read the Death Notices in the daily paper and it is just words, until a name pops out at you. You will never read your own name in that column, that is for sure.
As Nisargadatta points out (paraphrasing a lot): When that body is dead, your friends and family will not want to be associated with it. They will dispose of it quickly. Why do you have such a strong attachment to it?
Isn’t because of the idea of ‘self’ – something incarnated and limited – Is that what you are?
Ramana says: “You are the Infinite Being – then you take yourself to be a limited creature….etc”
With like-ness – Gilbert.
Posted by Richard on 08.02.09 8:25 pm
Hi Gilbert,
No attachments here to body or anything. I speak in the relative but realize the Absolute and original non-separation and live there. No pretenses at anything although you seem to want to think otherwise.
Maybe you’re jealous that ‘others’ might have what you have, or are what you are? Who knows? But as Kerouak said, “I don’t know, I don’t care, and it doesn’t matter”.
There is no fear of death (because I’m tough
).
I didn’t know you were trying to entertain. I missed it.
To me life is one big joke but the Aussies don’t get me or my dry type of humor (except maybe Peter).
I look forward to hearing your interview with Charlie as you usually have good things to say.
Please send my love to Bob and Barbara.
Peace,
Richard
Posted by gilbert on 08.02.09 8:47 pm
Well, the next program is finished and will appear soon enough. Just before your weekend ends, probably. This comment page is not for leaving ‘personal notes’ between Richard and Gilbert but it has been a little light entertainment.
ME jealous that ‘others’ might have what I have? I don’t have anything. I used to have something but the doctor cleared it up.
Anyone from the AA tradition will probably enjoy our next guest. He doesn’t talk about the 12 Step thing much but coming from the addiction side of things, it will be of interest to a great number I am sure.
Relax – be yourself, whatever that is, that is my advice. Warm regards – Gilbert.
Posted by Fenn on 08.02.09 11:11 pm
That which is the ‘substrate’ (for want of a word) of the appearance is the nondual Self or Being or SEEING (or whatever.)
The appearance appears as all kinds of dualistic relations; up/down, hot/cold, him/her, seeker/teacher… etc.
YET, never for one moment does the appearance ever really become dual – it is always the One indestructible primordial substrate; Beingness / Oneness.
But what appears, APPEARS AS duality. In the same way as saying that the cinema screen is always One, but the moving pictures appear as multiplicity and duality.
Now, what seems to be happening with some current (often labelled ‘neo’) nonduality is an attempt to insist that what APPEARS cannot contain duality. Since there is only Oneness, there cannot be teachers and teachings, no meditators or seekers, no people, dogs, trees…..
This is a kind of cardboard cut-out nonduality that misses the mark with its simplistic reductionism.
The appearance is rich, diverse, complex, deep… whilst never deviating for one instance from its nondual ‘ground’ – it is all THAT!!!
But although it is all THAT and nothing but THAT – it APPEARS as the ‘stuff of ordinary life’.
When it is ‘seen’ that nothing can deviate from THIS – from the inescapable, indestructible nondual REALITY of ‘things’…
Then once again… mountains can be mountains and rivers can be rivers….
Posted by gilbert on 08.02.09 11:51 pm
There is NO duality in Non Duality.
The appearance is appearance – phenomena.
Phenomena is that which ‘appears to be’.
That which is real, never appears.
This is why you cannot find your true self. You can only BE it and you ARE that – and the label ‘self’ is just a label. The ‘self’ is No Thing.
No matter what instrument you use to investigate the ‘self’, a super-dooper microscope and a super-dooper telescope, you will not find the ‘self’.
It is the pure cognition and nothing other than that.
‘People’ go in search of themselves – but how ridiculous is that assumption – since where you start the search from MUST be where you already ARE.
‘Things’ have no separate existence or substance apart from the pure cognition of those ‘things’. Everything is contained in the SEEING.
Everything is the seeing.
There is no separation.
Who cares what the Neo-Advaita folk say? They are all caught up in labels and dualistic notions. And the experts who play a game of elitism, pretending that they know these ‘two camps’ of Traditional Advaita and Neo-Advaita better than anyone else is truly something so far fetched it seems just too silly to even talk about.
The appearance is dualism – it cannot be any other way. Don’t lose any sleep over it.
When today turns into tonight, it will not all change into tomorrow, because tomorrow never comes. Watch the clock tick over midnight and see if you can detect even a glimpse of tomorrow. It is all concepts.
Posted by Fenn on 08.03.09 12:26 am
“There is NO duality in Non Duality.”
Absolutely spot on!
Any ‘dream’ of duality can ONLY be appearance.
But boy, what a self-shining display THAT is.
Empty and marvelous.
Posted by Kimo (Jim) on 08.03.09 12:35 am
Fenn,
The discussion of those things only seemingly aids in an understanding for the one who is trying to work things out. There’s no mantra about there being no things that holds advaita together. Advaita IS already; wordless.
Turn your quote around that you’re saying neo-advaitans say incorrectly “there cannot be teachers, meditators, seekers…”
Turn it to “Teachers cannot be, Meditators cannot be, seekers cannot be..”
And it’s seen that it’s not a bad pointer after all. None of those things can BE; they all arise in being. A mountain can be called a mountain and a river can be called a river right now–not after a process where the person and objects disappear and then re-appear as the absolute state gels in a stabilized condition. I AM is already the case.
All objects appear in time and space and require perspective to be identified as anything. Lie face-down on the earth with your eyes closed and you won’t know you’re on a mountain or a campground in the flats. Be plunged 20 ft below in water and you won’t know if it’s a river, a swamp or an ocean. Go to the moon and look at the blue & white ball called earth, and see if you can discern humans, seekers, dogs, cats.
What did not change during all those experiments? What always IS?
The fact of BEING doesn’t budge. The Experiencing is. Not the Experiencing will be.
The appearances in experiencing always change.
So, in the futile seeking game—
When you find the one (experience) you want…. When you find the one that you want verified by a guru to prove your understanding….When you think a certain experience will do the trick…
Know that EXPERIENCING contains it all. What an appearance is called doesn’t matter nor does an appearance indicate a level of understanding–it’s all appearing in understanding/cognition. Just know that an appearance has NO BEING. Also, know that all appearances are in the BEING or the EXPERIENCING. So, to take an appearance and claim it as indicative of an enlightened understanding OR not getting it–is all a story–and guess what that story is in– that you already are–BEING
Posted by Fenn on 08.03.09 2:19 am
Nicely put Kimo.
——————————————-
The following is hoplessly conceptual:
Some nonduality ‘pointers’ miss the point that already there is no duality in nonduality – IMPOSSIBLE!!
They make the mistake of insisting that the appearance i.e. the CONTENT, conforms to a nondual ideal.
This will never be the case. The content of Consciousness appears as diversity and multiplicity. For the CONTENT to be strictly nondual – it would not appear. That’s what the appearance is – the face of the nondual.
YET (and this is crucial), the ‘substance’ / Source / Beingness / IS-ness / THUS-ness of the appearance is ALWAYS 100% nondual.
It’s the nondual ‘substance’ (that word is useless)…. APPEARING as duality and diversity.
The ‘gnosis’ of the substrate / Source / IS-ness, is the powerful ‘seeing’ that right now amongst this apparent diversity, there is Oneness.
It’s not about making the actual detail of the content conform to this – since it is always already the case.
The content is ‘free’ to do / be whatever…. and Oneness is not compromised in the slightest.
Emaho…..
Posted by evan on 08.05.09 8:36 am
Seeing or knowing are only names for what you are. The names are obviously not what you are because they are usable… to point or describe “something”. What they are pointing to or describing you already know and its actually undescribable. Its just what you are. Nothing new or fancy, just what you are in this moment. Seeing, knowing being, all concepts pointing to the truth of just seeing knowing being. That which must be for anything else to appear. the inteligent capacity…. is just a point. The you im talking about isnt a thought or invention, but what those thoughts appear to. Its right here. or right there. beyond closeness. It needs no description and no description would subsitute. Description would come and go with every other thought but what is being described was before during and after and will remain untouched by a mere word or sentence. Its not even accurate to say untouched … or anything else for that matter. You just always are. period. THAT is also pure love and peace. everything you ever wanted is hiding right where you are.
love evan
Posted by evan on 08.05.09 9:55 am
what is anything?