Urban Guru Cafe

Morgan says:

In response to the post of Shhh!:

“It’s not the presence or absence of words/ideas/thoughts that’s the thing.

It’s where they issue forth from.

The root or the branches.”

“Roots and branches” is a dualistic concept. Everything issues from and has no other substance than “the root” – being. Thoughts don’t generate other thoughts – thoughts don’t do anything.

PS – keep up the good work Gil and Areti. Love.

Rate it!   0

Shhh! says:

Morgan:

ALL words are tools of dualistic creation/maintenance. Including the words that you addressed: “‘roots and branches’” is a dualistic concept”.

Including “I Am”, “I Am Not That”, “I Am That”. All tools from the toolbox of differentiation.

Every word that you and I utter… are dualistic concepts.

So why target one group of words to be a dualistic concept, when every word is?

Rate it!   0

suki says:

There is no way in or out of the Mystery of Being!

Rate it!   0

Jacob says:

THE CAFE IS ROCKIN AMEGOS, THE CLASSICNESS IS FLOWING, fANTASTIC APPRECIATION FLYING OVER FROM THE ISLE OF WIGHT, LOVE JACOB

Rate it!   0

gilbert says:

You are the first to ask for more of the Nisargadatta tapes. There are hundreds and hundreds listening to these programs. One other comment many weeks ago was a dismissal of their importance. I was surprised that so few responded via the comment pages about those programs. Many hours were spent on cleaning up the audio to make them as accessible as possible. As a ‘teacher’ who has ‘influenced’ a majority of ‘seekers’ in the ‘Advaita scene’ (in the appearance) it certainly was a surprise that so few ‘appear’ to have not listened to them and commented in some way. The Advaita scene is, it would seem isolated ‘pockets’ based around ‘teachers’ who will not mention other sources of the message. The UGC is selective also but it is a lot more embracing of other sources (in the appearance). There are ‘pointings’ on these comment pages from ‘ordinary’ folk that are so much cleaner than many gurus ‘out there’.
I am not interested in kissing or touching a gurus feet. It is my opinion that those who indulge in such activities are swooning in delusion. They need a good shake. But ‘devotion’ was not my ‘path’. I wanted to KNOW for myself……and it came to pass that it ‘works’ just like that. Mooji is fine in what he says and he is a loving being, in the appearance. It is the seekers that surround him that steal away the value, only in the appearance, of course. Not everyone wants to kiss feet.
Mooji is not one I would be inclined to call ‘clean’. It’s a cultural thing, mostly, I think. There is a LOT of idolization going on there and it is a sign of indulgence. Whatever he may say is undermined by the hypnosis of the seekers and the state they ‘generate’ amongst themselves. We are NOT interested in pointing anyone in that direction, If you cannot perceive the obvious difference between someone like Peter Brown and Mooji then there isn’t much here at the UGC for you. Mind you, those seekers get very angry and protective of their ‘guru’ if anyone ‘has a go’ at him. Self deluded seekers who have been convinced by a smooth talking ‘operator’ are almost impossible to ‘get through to’.
As Jesus said “Let the dead bury the dead”. Papaji may have been somewhat more genuine but there was a lot of spiritual crap hanging around him also. I don’t know of any from that ‘lineage’ who are simply giving a clean message. It seems to be all about a ‘spiritual life style IMAGE’ with them all.
The point is that the message needs to be clean and the collecting of ‘seekers’ is a waste of time and usually an ego indulgence that the guru can’t seem to ignore. That is a sure sign that all is not well, in my estimations.
Having said all that “Everyone is THAT”. The expression that is happening is NOT due to anyone. The Devotional Path appears to be a long road full of ‘seekers’ comforting each other with some sort of induced ‘love’ notions. Behind the scenes there is always bitchy politics and sometimes very inappropriate things going on, ‘behind the curtain’.
It all leaks out eventually and the squeaky clean ‘image’ gets soiled rather badly. With the direct message many are ‘released’ from that ‘scene’ but it isn’t turned into a marketing product to ‘sell’ anything.
Well, enough of these ‘concepts’. The ONLY ‘thing’ worthy of your attention is the ‘clean message’. Once it is truly ‘heard’, there need be no concern over such ‘messy stuff’.
You will never have to kiss a gurus feet again, metaphorically or physically.
Nothing ever truly happened. Enjoy the programs.

Rate it!   +1

gilbert says:

No one is forcing you to read these pages. Exercise your choice but don’t complain after the choice is made. Those who find my comments upsetting can simply skip by them.
Few will stay quiet and the talking goes on and on, any which way AND loose. There is no point in resisting the natural expression. Even by simply listening to your own voice as you speak can bring some insights. It is ALL awareness.
How many programs will be enough? Seekers have an non-quenchable thirst.
Misunderstanding is rife ‘out there’. Feeding the intellect will never bring about the recognition necessary. No one can delineated HOW the message is ‘heard’. It is always unexpected. We at the UGC have merely attempted tp bring some very clear pointing into ‘one place’. It will never be popular simply because it consistently ‘destroys’ the usual ‘images’ that ‘seekers’ grasp onto. Go amongst any of the mass popular guru’s devotee gatherings and you will find deluded states of mind almost instantly. Listen to them talk and it will turn your stomach pretty quickly. The blatant bullshit machine is working very well there. Check out the clothes they wear, the silk neck attire, beads and bangles.
Love is a favorite word amongst them all. Unconditional love, as if they could really know what that is. Then take note of the competition going on, the pocket groups and divisions.
A few certified ‘awakened ones’ walk around like they are pretty special. Imitations of the guru no doubt. “Chief Enlightenment Officer” was one title I heard, which is such an outrageous title to bestow on anyone. Well, of course I am stirring up a hornets nest once more. Peter Brown is really worth listening to. Stick to the programs and forget about the guru scene – it will just keep you seeking forever.

Rate it!   0

gilbert says:

As a believed in ‘entity’ you believe you have a choice. So exercise it but don’t complain to anyone else about your choices. Oddly enough the clearer the ‘message’ is the less it seems to register with ‘seekers’. Clarity IS – Clarity is not in the patterns appearing.
And calling me friend is a bit of a lie, isn’t it, since your previous deleted comment was not friendly at all. Just listen to the program dude. Comment on those, forget about what I say. I am just fulfilling the entertainment contract I have with the UGC. In addition, some take my words to be angry words but most of the time I am very light in being when I make the comments. The words just flow out. Some appear to be designed to stir things up. If you can be stirred up, then stirring up happens. It reveals all kinds of beliefs and mind sets. There is some ‘value’ in that but few want to accept that possibility.
Nothing ever happened. ‘Who’ wants to know that?

Rate it!   0

dorothy hoffman says:

Mooji is not one I would be inclined to call ‘clean’. It’s a cultural thing, mostly, I think. There is a LOT of idolization going on there and it is a sign of indulgence. Whatever he may say is undermined by the hypnosis of the seekers and the state they ‘generate’ amongst themselves.
______________________________________

To add to the above comment – the idolization that goes on at those satsangs is unreal…i speak this from first hand experience. The seekers line up to touch his feet; hold his hand and drown in his gaze, so to speak. They are mesmerized by his words (80% of the crowd consists of women from affluent backgrounds). On the retreats, his pictures are on sale, vegetarianism is promoted and People change their names and opt for “holy” sounding ones.

Mooji seems very genuine and does speak with clarity; yet at the same time, does nothing to break the spell of the hypnotic seekers that surround him…

Rate it!   0

Shhh! says:

“I want to be just like him”, or “I want to have what he has”…

is the stuff that emulation is made of.

Which is why I’ve always cajoled folks to question anyone who communicates his or her message authoritatively.

If someone is absolutely certain about what he or she is asserting, let that be a cautionary signal.

The Absolute is the Absolute… whether you are certain that it is or not.

Rate it!   0

Michael says:

Should one stop activities til one meshes in with this?

Rate it!   0

Shhh! says:

Michael asks: “should one stop activities til one meshes in with this?”

Of course not.

Since I swim mostly in zen waters, I’ll share a zen perspective in response to your Q.

Do everything that you regularly do. Nothing different has to be done. Just do everything that you regularly do… without a do-er.

You’ll discover… if you haven’t already… that the absence of a do-er almost always correlates with the absence of any thought or conceptualization.

Do what you regularly do… from the smallest task to the largest… without a do-er.

And when you do, the appearance of time also subsides, since time and space are products of the mind.

Nothing extra-ordinary has to be done, Michael. Just do the ordinary extra-ordinarily.

Without a do-er.

I’ll be happy to elaborate on this, by using an actual example like washing dishes by hand (which I still do), if you’d like.

Or not.

Rate it!   0

gilbert says:

In the space where SEEING is happening there is nothing actually happening.
The emptiness of phenomena is cognized nowhere else. The mind activity labels ‘things’ in a ‘world’ etc.
In recognizing that the body (your body) is an appearance in the pure seeing, then one realizes that one is beyond the body and beyond all appearance. There is no question about intellectual understanding – intellectual understanding is NOT understanding at all.
It is merely labels and concepts that are believed in….repeating patterns. The brain is a pattern recognizing apparatus. It functions well enough, even with biased beliefs. It functions a lot smoother without biased beliefs.
Things are instantly recognized because of the patterns that have registered already (past – samskara etc). If you were to come into existence in this instant, there would be nothing to recognize. Everything would be exactly the same but the mind could not translate anything into words etc. Memory would not be available.
Beliefs are patterns that the fresh and new impressions of LIFE are automatically translated into – thus obscuring ‘what is’ – to some extent. In other words the mind activity is believed to be reality. If the mind stops that activity, then things are seen fresh. Insight may happen and a shift in perception also.
But at the heart of SEEING nothing is actually happening – it is Non Dual – No Thing.
Now, the mind will play with what has been said and probably come up with some counter rhetoric. Who cares?

Rate it!   0

Kimo (Jim) says:

I enjoyed the Peter video (while delaying getting some actual work done this weekend). I liked the answer to whether things are happening or not–and the answer was a question “what is ‘happening’”? May be maddening to some but very humorous as the word ‘happening’ is just another noise in appearance/communication facilitation.

In seeing whether you are the mystery, as Peter likes to call it, or seeing whether you are a person–maybe try something different than seeing if you can find the person or forcing a non-entity recognition…

Notice that the focus as being the mystery never changes. You may claim to be a seeker or a somebody who is angry or sad or a somebody who is happy. But notice one thing–it’s obvious that all of these appearances we call emotions are arising but there’s another thing always missed–not only are the emotions and value judgments arising in what we are, but also the reference point in the form of thoughts and images is also arising without fail. You can never be the oneness or the mystery with suffering thoughts appearing in you and nothing else–there’s always the suffering and the accompanying assumed separate entity. So this is a little different from assuming nobody is there or forcing a non-presence of separateness. See that everything is always appearing in the Seeing/Knowing. Your focus is perfect right now. See that the suffering and the one you attribute the thoughts to are appearing in what you are. In seeing that, where’s your stance?

Rate it!   0

Kimo (Jim) says:

And the seeds of understanding sprinkled around UGC continue to fall on solid concrete as the simplicity of this is ignored over & over in favor of focusing on a body of knowledge and studying history lessons about Advaita. You’ve read plenty. Enough already. Look and see what you are.

Rate it!   0

pishta says:

Look and see.

Well, it happens all the time when my eyes are not closed. So the secret is in trying not to blink? Never read about it, though…

Rate it!   0

gilbert says:

There is no answer in the mind. In the appearance all manner of patterns appear.
The patterns appear in cognition – the pattern knows nothing whatsoever – it can’t know anything – because of association, the pattern believes it is the knowing, separate and independent.
So, Richard, in the appearance, for many years ‘I’ pointed everyone I met one way or another, to Bob’s message. At first there was some disappointment because it was like water off a ducks back. ‘Eventually’ it dawned on me that there is no problem. As Bob points out “Everyone is THAT, whether they know it or not” and “There is no duality in Non Duality”. I realized that there is NO transmission – there is an appearance of transmission. In the appearance of transmission you can be transported into the bosom of God and be given your original name and be ‘told’ the ultimate secret. You can ‘return’ to this eternal moment and ‘appear’ to transmit a message to ‘others’.
It is all in the appearance of things. And in recent decades there has been an explosion of extremely clear ‘information’ and some of it is ancient, translations into English (for one) and it has had a profound influence, in the appearance.
It is a bit like the story of the man who found God’s House and would not knock on the door, because he knew it would be the end of ‘him’.
There are points of information that can be expressed, which have the instant potency to remove all doubt – yet the recognition is ALWAYS unexpected. And a public forum is not the place to share the information – yet somehow it gets shared in so many ways. The source is ONE.
This is why I say “It sinks in” and it pops out when it is ‘ready’. There appears to be a period of ‘gestation’. ‘Germination’ appears to be essential, prior to gestation.
The SEED is LIFE and LIFE expresses itself all ALL things, without exception.
When Nisargadatta said “I am THAT” it was not “I will become THAT” or “I was THAT”.
It was not a statement by an individual – it is a Universal statement – what the ancients call “The Great Maha-Vakya” The great word.
It ‘contains’ the pulse of LIFE. It is your origin name.
No one can say it for you or give anything to you.
But it appears that ‘you are asleep’ due to belief in erroneous things.
Now, I see that there are more speaking clearly. I recognize the clear expression in a few ‘out there’ and I see that to assist in creating a vehicle for the expression of clear pointers, in one place, without a bias for only one messenger, is valid.
There is an intelligence at play. I am THAT.
I can appear as a scoundrel or as a clear speaker. The oscillating changes in ‘my appearance’ disturbs only those who are still caught in their own oscillating patterns.
I am not caught or stuck to any image. There is a no doubt here of what I am.
Bob is the clearest, in my estimation, in the appearance. However the clearest view is right HERE where SEEING is happening. Nothing can take that away.
My e-book “Who do you think you are” is a potent message. It is not like a normal book
and the ‘effect’ of reading it cannot be explained. It works – yet it appears that few are able to be quietly absorbed in what it is ‘pointing at’. The fact of your own BEING.
The mind wanders all over the place. The e-book holds it gently, like a baby and whispers ‘information’.
Now, I realize that my words may be jumped on by vigilant ‘non duality’ freaks.
What do I care what they do and what they think and believe? Fact is I don’t give a fig.
Enough already.

Rate it!   0

Kimo (Jim) says:

Again, just like the question is something “happening”? What is “gained”? Just a sound appearing. In the appearance, things can get quite complex. There is an understanding of what “gaining” means. And Richard could very well say that there was something that turned it all around and he gained the love of the girl he knew since undergrad, he ended up publishing a national bestseller, became more well-known than Eckhart Tolle. Or he could say he almost got it but never did, and he got demoted at work because he kept minimizing the UGC screen when his boss walked by and his addiction to seeking created a lack of motivation to do his job. So, a sound is heard, a pattern is seen, a meaning is applied to the pattern “I gained something; I lost something”, a whole story of causality arises. And these are appearances in reality; they just have no being–totally transient. But for anything to register, whether it’s simply the sound of the words “I gained”, “I lost” or the big production and protracted 70 year story about how a Me gained or lost in life can only appear if Being is already present. The intelligence is just amazing! And it’s never depressed or confused or lacking in any way. If you think it is, you’re sure to find your little buddy appearing in Being along with those feelings of lack. That little buddy is the Me. He is always appearing when suffering thoughts arise–no exceptions. And if you can sense the suffering thoughts and your little buddy, what is sensing those appearances?

Rate it!   0

Shhh! says:

If Richard is stuck indeed (only he can attest to that, though), then he should be applauded for pretending to be stuck while actually free.

Which is what many of my fellow planetary inhabitants, myself included, do on occasion as well.

We are all free… pretending that we’re not, from time to time.

It’s only a game of pretend.

‘Cause we’re all free just the same.

No harm in pretending, eh?

Rate it!   0

Shhh! says:

Thank you for explaining that.

It prompts me to ask you this question too.

Aren’t miserable traps no things too?

And if someone falls into a no thing (i.e. a miserable trap)…

does this then become some thing to be concerned about?

Sometimes, our interest in helping prevent someone from falling into a trap… or even in extricating him from one… only adds to the perception that the trap is real.

Rate it!   0

Shhh! says:

Exactly.

We do it all the time and live to tell about it.

I’m sure Richard will too.

Thanks again.

P.S. Maybe one day we’ll discuss no thing and some thing being One, eh?

Rate it!   0

Shhh! says:

One fleeting moment of resonance does not make it a date.

Rate it!   0

Richard says:

Seems like the consensus is, the variety of approaches assures that seekers will each find someone’s words they resonate with. This makes sense on the relative level.

For me, meeting with Bob several times removed my questions concerning Reality.

So I was wondering why Gilbert doesn’t only direct people to Bob as I do. Now I see it’s different strokes for different folks.

Also I am not as elequent as Gilbert, John Wheeler, Charlie Hayes, and so many of the others who have visited Bob and gone on to write books. Therefore I just point people to a clear pointer, Bob.

However, if I did write a book as have all the others, the title would be: “I visited Bob Adamson and Didn’t Write a Book”. (When I told that one to Bob, he laughed.)

Rate it!   0

gilbert says:

What is this? Word Soup? Stir the bowl of soup and see new words form – then add some meaning and call it ‘my philosophy’ or ‘my take on it’?
It only appears and disappears. It only appears that ‘someone’ garbs ‘silence’ and turns it into ‘something’.
The combined sound of all the Universe is comparable to a sparrow fart.
The ‘problem’ is that the restless mind cannot abide with silence – it drives it mad – why?
Because the nature of the mind is nothing more than transitory appearances, there can NEVER be any sense of security to it. Reality is that which NEVER changes. Now, that is a sentence made up of words, transitory appearance but what it is pointing to NEVER EVER changes – THAT is what you ARE.
How could you not KNOW THAT? The ‘You’ who is believed to be ‘present’ isn’t present at all. There is ONLY knowing -which IS Presence itself.

Rate it!   0

davidb says:

Pooof….!

Rate it!   0

Shhh! says:

I’m a little surprised to hear the phrase “that should be no cause” in a virtual playground like this one.

But then again, I like surprises.

Rate it!   0

Shhh! says:

No advaita police uniforms required here.

A police action was already performed.

When you say “when you hear You Are Already That–That should be no cause for jubilation or laziness for the person who refuses to look”…

you are saying that not all forms of response to You Are Already That are acceptable to you.

You’re even kind enough to cite one response, in particular.

Isn’t that what police officers do?

Distinguish which actions/responses are acceptable and which are not?

Now, I don’t mind police actions, mind you.

Some of my friends perform them.

I’ll just count you as another police action performing friend.

Amongst many other good friends.

Rate it!   0

gilbert says:

‘You’ can think about it as much as you wish – even though you cannot choose even one thought. The thought appears TO knowing. It can never be the other way around, except in imagination – and that is where the problem lies. Images are not REALITY or even separate and distinct things of themselves, they remain as images. Graven images impair clear sight, if they are believed in.
Whatever is unknown has the potentiality of being known. What we ‘term’ as being unconscious (how do we even know of it?) may arise in consciousness and thus be conscious.
Whether it is realized or not ‘we’ all face the unknown every ‘moment’. All our problems are because of non recognition of our true nature. The bondage of self can be released and there are many who will attest to this. Whether ‘you’ believe them or not is one thing – but when the direct and immediate experiencing is totally obvious that you are not a body or a mind – then it is totally obvious what you are – yet you cannot delineate what it is. You can only ever BE what you ARE. Pretending to be what you are not is tiresome and wearisome.
This is why an amazing sense of relief arrives from nowhere when the recognition ‘happens’. Those caught in limbo land often get really pissed off because they feel so close and yet so far away. It is the sense of separation that can appear to be a thin membrane or a wall made of lead lined concrete. It is a fiction and YOU are the ONLY one who can ‘demolish it’. It is a fiction, so the demolition is also a fiction BUT it appears necessary to KNOW without a doubt that it is a fiction.
The mind will ask “How?” Investigate it, that is how.
Why waste time on misunderstandings and theories? Get to the crux of it all.
There are hundreds of pointers in these programs. Time to get down to the nuts and bolts.

Rate it!   0

areti says:

Here’s a comment related to the program guys & gals.

I really love the comment that Peter makes about how the analytical aspect/side takes up a very small amount of the real estate, and yet we make it our preoccupation, our focus.

So I thought (as we are all apt to do – think that is), hey, I have a question that would be a good one to suggest to all those who think they are clear and that Gilbert perhaps isn’t. A question framed around what Peter had said (after all, aren’t our comments supposed to be discussing the content of the program and the insights it may trigger). Cool.

We need to be the judge of our own clarity, only we can judge. Only we can assure ourselves of the truth we and others see.

So, the question we need to all ask ourselves is, ‘How much of the real estate is what you are when you put up a post?’ Is the mind focused on that awareness that you are, inclusive of all those intimate senses (sight, hearing, feeling, touch etc), or is it focused on the analytical?

What do you reckon? Is it a good pointer to that?

Rate it!   0

gilbert says:

Clarity is not in question here. Clarity is as it is. As Peter points out very clearly in this program – whatever your experience, it is registering clearly without obstruction.
I would say it is seeing-knowing which is not ‘post’ mind translation. It does not really matter what anyone says BUT if the belief is that it does matter, then it does ‘matter’ – but for WHOM? You see, it is ALL bullshit, every last little bit of it. Spiritual people and profane people are Equal. They neither exist as anything that is actually real. It is such a joke and so few are laughing. So many experts on nothing. ex-pert: An ex is a has been and a s-pert is a drip under pressure.
Good to see you making an appearance here Areti. Actually I have had my fill of Non Duality Types. Too many wankers, me thinks. It is just a spontaneous thought.
Too many show offs and exhibitionists. Yes, I know, everyone will point the finger at me about that statement. Anyway, we did make some good programs from some of the comment makers. I would love to throw some of these other ‘expert’ candidates into a room and record the result of their bickering and one-up-man-ship stuff. It would be such a laugh – but we do have to keep it clean as much as possible. It never ceases to amaze me how so many take some of my comments as if they were an indication of who I am. So much of it is just a ‘stirring up of the pot’, to stop it all turning into a ‘spiritual shin dig’.
Anyway, see how you get along with my input. If it all turns to shit, we can always close the thing down altogether – have a good earned rest.
Peter is good stuff and part two is great too. Paul Hedderman part three is good and I know a few are hanging out for that. it will appear at the end of this coming week.
You may have noticed that we have NOT lumbered you all with advertising on this site.
The numbers that visit do show it would pay very well to advertise but we have a policy to keep it clean. Some actually send a few dollars in appreciation from time to time and that covers the costs of maintaining the site. Thank you to those who have donated.
We do appreciate it. Warm regards – Gilbert (Mr. Nice Guy)

Rate it!   0

gilbert says:

Actually, I get a sense of the ridiculous making my comments addressed to so-called ‘individuals’ who hide behind fictional names like ‘Shhh’. In almost every case, these smarty pants comment makers have had silly names. Why can’t they use the ‘real name’ and come out in the open? What are they afraid of?
No one owns clarity. The pretense that ‘I have clarity’ is absurd. What is expressed may be clear for some and not for others. So, that should tell us something. This site has proven to be of some value when questions have been asked and some clear response has been replied. There are some folks who are exceptionally clear and precise, none of them will come onto a site like this and play cat and mouse with anyone. That is partly why i do what I do – if that makes sense. It is making less and less sense for me, so it may stop soon. I don’t have a reputation to preen or look after. I have always had a playful side.
Just because the ‘me’ has been seen though ‘here’ does not mean that I have to be squeaky clean and holy, like some of these dead boring gurus. I can’t think of anything worse actually. Now Shhh.

Rate it!   0

Shhh! says:

gilbert says, “actually, I get a sense of the ridiculous making my comments addressed to so-called ‘individuals’ who hide behind fictional names like ‘Shhh’. In almost every case, these smarty pants comment makers have had silly names. Why can’t they use the ‘real name’ and come out in the open? What are they afraid of?”

There you go again, gilbert… ass-u-ming something instead of asking a clarifying question.

Had you asked for a clarification from me as to why I chose that name, I would’ve given you one.

But your preference to ass-u-me is noted. A preference is simply a preference, after all. And like rectal cavities, we all have our preferences.

My legal name is not my name. It is a name that other people chose for me. Other people being my parents, of course.

My daughter once asked me if I could call her by a different name than the one I chose for her. Being a spiritual libertarian of sorts, I obliged.

In turn, she asked me to give her a name that I would chose for me, instead of the one my parents did.

I did, and that name is Shhh! So I now call my daughter by the name that she chose for herself, Luna. And she calls me Shhh! A name that I chose for myself, at her request.

Those are “our” names, gilbert… since we chose them. The names that other people chose for us are not.

A silver lining for me, too, since it’s a constant reminder for me to downshift my mental chatter whenever I can.

You really ought to consider asking clarifying questions instead of ass-u-ming stuff, gilbert.

It will reduce the opportunities for you to wade in mental muck.

Rate it!   0

areti says:

To make the focus of your response on my question ‘Don’t we all want clarity?’ really does not answer the real question I posed now, does it Shhh? I could just as easily focus on your comment that you call yourself ‘Shhh’ so that you remember to quite the mind. Who is this one quietening the mind? Silly really. Advaita police shit, if you ask me.

The clarity is always there, whether there is thought of ‘I see it or I don’t’, but you know that many do get caught up believing the thought ‘I want clarity’ to be who they are. Does that provide some clarification?

Now back to the question I posed of noting how much of the existing real estate we are missing because of the preoccupation with analytics, if you care to go there.

It kind of reminds me of what Bob quotes about being with the sense wide open (they all ready are), but the mind becomes preoccupied with itself and thinks it is the self.

Rate it!   0

Kimo (Jim) says:

Hi, somebody wrote why do I persist in writing about the ego or similar concepts as being in That rather than saying everything is That and seemingly discriminating between in and out.
Well, because it’s not helpful I’ve found to tell people that everything is That. It encourages complacency to the one who hasn’t finished the investigation. There’s no comfort level of feeling at home in saying, well the seeking will end when it will end and this character that comes and goes is still That so there’s no need for concern and no need to look further. Any conceptual framework you’d like to use doesn’t matter…the ego is in That, the ego is in That and out of That, the ego is neither in That or out of That and does not exist,….whatever.
The key is to look and notice that suffering thoughts and the construct of the ego BOTH appear. Okay, rather than continuing the investigation, now we’ll be stuck on semantics of whether there’s a dichotomy of something appearing to something else or whether they are separate at all. It all appears in the KNOWING, non-separate. But I’ve found it’s VERY helpful for some to stop their jabbering and notice this profundity of how the little buddy and all the rest of the thoughts are appearing. It’s a stunning realization to objectify what you thought you were for years and then say, wait a minute then that in itself can’t be what I am if it is appearing in the SEEING; in other words, in WHAT I AM.

Rate it!   0

pishta says:

I haven’t paid much value to Harding’s experiments before, but I start to find them interesting. There’s a great explanation by Richard Lang at http://nevernothere.com/_richard.htm
Is it anywhere close to say that the idea of me is generated the same way as the idea of the head? It is pretty clear, that there is no head when you look. The whole thing is just a generated idea, possibly based on a combination of memory (when I saw the head in the mirror) and a logical conclusion that the reflection in the mirror was right. I never thought about it that way and it makes sense… We keep on generating the ilusion of the head automatically and we don’t even realize it anymore. But there is nothing, just empty space, really. All it takes to recognize is the old ‘Look and see’.

Rate it!   0

Ralph says:

Shhh!, I enjoy reading your posts, please continue to do so.

.. the bottom line is to be clear on this stuff , however it turns out.

Rate it!   0

Ralph says:

Dan says: “Why would anyone then continue to put energy into something that is destined to never arrive?”

Until one is totally convinced that they will never arrive, they will continue to use energy (effort) to be convinced of that.

….. sometimes effort is nececessary to SEE that effort is what stands in the way of true seeing.

Rate it!   0

suki says:

There is an immutable certainty, that is incorruptible with a complete sense of invincibility that comes with the knowing,I AM HERE and NOW!(gateless-gate).
In contemplation of This!One may be wonder struck in mid sen………..

Rate it!   0

Richard says:

Imagine a woman named Joy. All day long she hears, “Hello Joy”, “What’s new Joy?”, “Joy, have you completed your assignment?”. With such reinforcement, it’s a good chance she is a joyful person.

About seekers efforting to find “Who am I?” and eventually realizing it to be a futile search: another scenerio is the seeking concludes with the realization of what I am not (neti, neti) and the knowing that the seeking ego is a fabrication.

The above is via negativa. There can also be via positiva where there is the sudden realizing of universal already awareness.

The above two are two sides of the same coin.

I’m not talking about a seeker seeking or not seeking, persisting or giving up. It is the feeling-knowing of the non-existence of a separate seeker.

Rate it!   0

areti says:

I encourage all you readers out there to ‘put up’ your posts. Bob encourages all people in his group to contribute their explanation of what it is they understand of what is being pointed to. He encourages people to ask questions. And there are many on this site offering some wonderful addresses to these questions.

He says, to paraphrase “Don’t worry about what other people think of you because everybody in this room will have a concept about you, you will have a concept about everyone else and you will have concept of your own about you, so which of these concept would be right? (None) So who cares what anybody thinks of you?”
So, isn’t it best to put your doubts to rest?

Rate it!   0

gilbert says:

Mike asks: When you say pure hearing is already happening, do you mean that hearing for example is the awareness itself or – awareness of hearing is the main point? so what I am asking is are you saying I am prior to hearing since I am aware of hearing, or hearing itself is the awareness, or same thing?

Reply: What you are is No Thing which has the capacity of KNOWING (cognition). Upon THAT hearing, seeing, tasting etc REGISTER……..with nothing in between.
“Let no man come between you and your God” is from the Bible and it expresses something about this.
Nothing can divide THAT…..into TWO.
Non Dual.
No thinking will ever bring any understanding……….the understanding is the IMMEDIACY of COGNITION and Nothing other than THAT.
The is no duality in Non Duality………Simple.
You KNOW this innately – I am just reminding you………so it seems.

Mike: Okay, so I take it that your answer is that there is no awareness/hearing, they are the same thing, or not separate.

Reply: Yes, that is correct. There is NO SEPARATION whatsoever. A concept may appear to come between awareness and what is perceived – but it is all conceptual – translations of the mind – and all concepts appear on or in awareness.

Rate it!   0

billtys says:

There are so many pointers on this site sufficient to create an Advaitapedia.

One pointer will take you home…as Bob says.

Rate it!   0

gilbert says:

The one who ‘uses’ a pointer to prop up his ‘attitude’ is just a pattern appearing.
There is NO ‘self’ and there are NO ‘others’.
No amount of words can change ‘what is’.
What isn’t never existed. There is only reality. What the mind ‘makes’ of it is not something ‘concrete’ or even some ‘thing’ that one can substantiate, except by the appearance of more and more ephemeral concepts. Where is the evidence to support anything? In the instant before a concept appears,is there any conflict in mind?
Who is bound to a concept? Isn’t it just an appearance of bondage.
Observe the disappearance of thought and see if there is any bondage anywhere.
The ripples on the surface of the lake register in or on awareness. That which causes the ripples is never ever witnessed.
The body, the world and the universe appear on what?
You can call it the self – but have you EVER seen it? Have ‘you’ ever known it. (It is) Self-Knowing. There is no ‘other’ to be known.
It is all appearance – phenomena – the KNOWING is not in the phenomena – the phenomena ‘appears’ in the KNOWING.
So simple – yet the mind can only play with concepts ‘about it’ – they all ‘appear’ and ‘disappear’. What you are remains, no ‘matter’ what ‘happens’.
Can you remember ever ‘not being here’? Truly?
“The sword can’t cut it – the wind can’t dry it – the fire can’t burn it – and the water cannot drown it.” (from The Gita in The Mahabharatta)
There is ONLY one KNOWING happening.
You cannot not be THAT.
‘Who’ will you argue with?
‘Who’ will you contest?
‘Who’ can you find as ‘another’?
It is only the wind on the lake that disturbs your peace of mind.

Rest in the knowing and be not disturbed – there is no entity here.

Rate it!   0

gilbert says:

Ha. I win the wooden spoon award. Well, from where seeing is happening ‘here’ it is clear that it is all bullshit, every last speck of it. But what a beautiful pattern it makes and it never repeats itself, not one iota of it is the same. Some say it is a Cosmic Fractal Pattern.
The activity of KNOWING is the activity that moves Planets and Galaxies in a harmonious dance through space, without ever changing in Essence.
When you recognize that you are this activity of knowing AND the ‘traces’ it ‘appears’ to make AND that there is no separation, it is the most intimate revelation of all revelations – and yet it is not personal, it is Cosmic, Timeless and ever-unchanging.
Nothing can stop this activity and nothing can harness it, use it or put it up for sale.
The WHOLE is enlightenment – there is no entity here.
Everything is CONTAINED in the SEEING.
Everything IS the SEEING.
If this factor comes home to rest, the ‘eye’ will be singular and the body will be full of LIGHT.
There is NO duality in Non Duality.

Random footnote: It ‘appears’ that so many expect anyone who is clear on ‘this stuff’ to be a certain way, to appear and behave in a certain way, be pure and holy or some such utter nonsense. They don’t see it is all bullshit that they have been filled with from those who don’t know what the hell they are talking about. it is all patterns appearing – nothing more. Whatever I am (is what you are) it is intelligence in action. Contemplate that and weep.

Rate it!   0

Shhh! says:

Dan says, “looking for some kind of outside indication that a recognition has occurred is quite simply just utter, utter bullshit”

When you cross paths with someone who very clearly evidences that he/she is everyone he/she meets… or that there is no separation between a him/her and you and me… or that “I am you” is embodied in him/her and manifests in everything that they do and say….

it is a recognition. Albeit a thoughtless/wordless one.

Although I would prefer to characterize it as an apperception instead (compared wih a percepotion, that is).

Many folks, who came to see Ramana when he was alive, never heard a word from him. But they were unquestionably able to recognize/apperceive his oneness with them. And an absence of separation between them.

I’ll playfully dissonate with you on this score. Oneness is recognizable/apperceivable.

But I will admit one thing, though. They tend to act and appear invisibly in life. Rarely initiating a trumpeting of their recognitions/apperceptions. Since there is no trumpeter to trumpet them.

Rate it!   0

Fenn says:

Yes… the gateless gate paradox shows up sooner or later. Many avoid mentioning it or even acknowledging it. But it can certainly appear as a puzzle in the seeking story. Here’s how it seems to work:

All there is, is awakeness – unawakeness is awakeness’s wide awake play.

In other words; all there is, is Beingness – and the not seeing that this is the case, is Beingness appearing as such.

So although there is always and ONLY awakeness/Beingness – within that, the PLAY of ‘not recognising that to be the case’… can apparently arise.

But as already said, this play of unawakeness is 100% ‘made of’ awakeness / Oneness / Beingness….

And so it can be seen that awakeness/Beingness is NEVER NOT THE CASE.

So… it seems that the only thing ‘required’ is for that to be recognised.

YET… paradoxically… that recognition confirms that there are NO REQUIREMENTS since there is no possible deviation from 100% awakeness/Beingness.

Rate it!   0

suki says:

Where could the One Indivisible Whole go? It is simultaneously Everywhere/Everything
and Nowhere/Nothing, its very essence is Immovable and Unchanging! This IS IT, right
Here, right Now! Mysteriously unfathomable, yet unavoidable.

Rate it!   0

suki says:

Where can the One Indivisible Whole go? It is simultaneously Everywhere/Everything
and Nowhere/Nothing. Immovable and unchanging is its essence. This right Here, right Now, IS IT! Mysteriously unfathomable, yet unavoidable and completely natural.

Rate it!   0

Jeremy says:

I agree that these last two speakers compliment each other quite well. Thanks for sharing their take on this. Have you thought of having Nathan Gill on the program?

Most of the regular posts here that don’t come from Gilbert, Areti, Dan, Morgan, or Kimo are nonsense. I hate to even dip my feet into these silly waters, but here it goes anyway. Someone posted something about meeting people who had truly understood there was no self as a reference point acting convincingly ‘at one’ with ‘others’. Acting is probably a good word to choose in describing them, actually. There is a potent pointer from Sailor Bob that I seemed to miss for a long while, which is, in realizing that there is no you right now, you must realize that there never was one. If you can see the truth in this statement, you can see the falsity of your own statement. Why should recognition of ones true nature change anything? If some body/mind has a dna pattern prone to acting like an asshole, why would recognizing his or her true nature change that? It might, but there is no reason to assume it would.

You will obviously tear these words apart quite easily. Go for it. Have fun puffing yourself up. But maybe if enough assholes stink up your room enough you will finally open a window.

Rate it!   0

Shhh! says:

Thanks for sharing that. I never heard of JS until now. But then again, I never swam in Sailor Bob’s waters until he was recently mentioned here too.

His use of the term “karmic forces” also prompted me to check out his website. It’s obvious he has a bad taste in his mouth for what he calls “neo-Advaita”:

http://www.shiningworld.com/Home Page Links/What is Neo-Advaita.htm

That term is new to me too.

New bath waters to swim in is always a treat to someone who enjoys to swim on a daily basis. Which I do.

Thanks again.

Rate it!   0

gilbert says:

There is NO awakening. There is no entity that is asleep. There is no entity anywhere, whatsoever – full stop – Finito.
All this crap about being helpful in awakening people is just nonsense. ‘Feeding’ on such nonsense keeps the mind occupied in belief and it is useless, worthless rubbish and it is nothing more than rubbish, no matter who the ‘writer’ appears to be. He can be a High Priest from ancient Egypt or the Chief Enlightenment Officer from the most respected organization for the Eternal Bliss of Satsang or whatever. It is crap and only serves to prolong belief in rubbish. All these words are concepts.
Drop the meaning from all such ideas and what is left? Belief in all these concepts about awakening is nothing but ignorance. ‘Seekers’ love it all of course because it is a ‘worm on the hook’ – something to give some substance to this believed in ‘entity’ that will ‘one day’ awaken and be enlightened. All crap…..total crap. Why is this so distasteful to mention?
Only because it is a slap in the facade of belief.
Simply SEE that there is actually NO ‘entity’ right there where seeing-knowing is ‘happening’. Simple – so obvious.
Any evidence of a self is only an appearance and if you stop giving it attention it will slide away. The ‘self’ casts no shadow simply because it has NO substance at all.
Actually an ordinary shadow has more ‘substance’ than the concept of ‘self’ or ‘me’.
Isn’t that so obvious – stop thought and SEE. What is the delay about? Why postpone it? ‘Who’ is avoiding what?
It is all concepts. Have you ever seen a concept? What color is it? What shape is it?
It seems rather pathetic to see the comments fall back into the same old traps over and over – but who cares? Suffer and squirm over the ‘self’ if you must – it is totally unnecessary- always was and always will be unnecessary.
All objections and doubts are concepts, thoughts.
Are you a thought, a concept?
There is no awakening – there is no rude awakening either.
The question you need to be asked is: Are you actually asleep?
The answer is clear and obvious and it is not a concept, it does not even need to be thought about – at all.
The answer spontaneously is here – it is WHAT you ARE. THAT has never been asleep or in need of awakening.
The ONLY value any pointer has is in the recognition that ‘appears’ to come from the pointer. Recognition does not come or go, it appears to ‘appear’ out of nowhere.
It is ACTUALLY Pure-Cognition – That is the ever-present actuality of any true and spontaneous re-cognition.
‘Who’ can argue with this? A believed in character must argue with it because that character depends on the belief remaining as an un-investigated belief.
The ‘me’ is ‘NON recognition of our true nature’ – that is all it is. It is merely the busy dualistic mind – busy with concepts about an entity that does not exist anywhere except in ‘the mind’. It is a concept – that is all it is. So obvious, it seems ridiculous to even have to mention it.
Give yourself another kick if you must. It won’t do any good.
The mind is dualistic – the mind divides what can NEVER truly be divided.
So, there is no need to dislike Neo-Advaita or Traditional Advaita. They are both conceptualizations ONLY. Two camps sites divided by another concept – that does not make a WHOLE.
There is NO duality in Non Duality. Full Stop.
Awake now?

Rate it!   0

Lev says:

Ah,LOOOOVE!:-)

Rate it!   0

gilbert says:

It fascinates the empty space here, how the word love gets thrown around so much, LOVE is a buzz word in spiritual circles. Heads in the Clouds.
Why even mention the word ‘love’ at all? If you watch the mind, you will see it is like a mechanical apparatus. using the word love mechanically is useless and as a tool of communication it is manipulative. Who wants a bunch of swooning seekers hanging around, all stuck in deluded states of mind?
The impulse to use the word doesn’t happen ‘here’ any more, except when it has been brought up by ‘someone else’. It seems that the word ‘love’ is always accompanied by an ‘agenda’. If there is no warmth towards your own being (love) then one will probably keep talking about love a thousand times a day.
“What the world needs now is love, sweet love” – No. The world needs nothing – the world appears in what you are. If there is a sense of ‘lacking’ it is due to a belief in being separate – in short a belief in ‘me’. Love is just another word for BEING – Light – Consciousness – Presence.
‘People’ talk about not being present or “I forgot” and “I had it yesterday but now it is gone”. The ‘person’ is NOT the reality.
Now that may be a shock to hear – but there is no point in squirming and wriggling ‘out back’ in the ‘sick bay’. Who gives a rats a….? Well? You can’t blame anyone else about some lack of love or awareness. It all comes down to YOU.
Find out what this YOU is made of.
Once this is done, I doubt you will ever use the word ‘love’ in an opening sentence in conversation. Slippery Gurus mention love constantly to reassure their ‘prisoners’ – instead of pointing them to the ‘way out’ – which by the way is INSTANTLY available to ALL – and it is available to ALL, SIMPLY because it IS your true nature.
There was never anyone bound up in belief or thoughts and concepts.
To keep seekers on the ‘path’ in the name of ‘love and compassion’ is most insidious and devious. But that is how it appears to pattern itself out as for a majority of non existent ‘seekers’. Now if you believe you are a ‘seeker’ then have a close look. Look really closely – go into it – expand it all until some clear space opens up.
In this space like awareness it will be so very, very clearly obvious that not only is there NO seeker present but you will SEE that there is no ‘entity’ here either.
It may leave you speech-less. No harm done. There has been far too much talking anyway.
Once this is ‘done’ conceptualization takes its rightful place in the scheme of things – it loses its apparent power to obscure awareness. How does this happen? It naturally ‘happens’ because the energy of belief is retained in the SEEING and the apparent ‘power’ of the mind to divide everything falls away. You recognize that the mind never ever actually divided anything. The mind is nothing but thought. You cannot cut hot butter with the concept of ‘knife’. You cannot drink the word ‘water’.
Sounds simplistic but that is why we miss the direct pointers. ‘We’ make everything so complex, when it isn’t complex at all.
Philosophers and Gurus have been playing ‘the word game’ for centuries.
The ‘word’ is NOT the REAL. In exposing the false through ‘neti neti’ what is real makes itself obvious quite naturally.

Rate it!   0

Michael Scarfo says:

.. Gilbert can you give details exactly what you mean by seeing, like a 20 seconds account of what you are seeing in that time. So for example to me seeing right now is the feeling of typing, the actual visual seeing of the computer and room, tingling in legs, some resistance or pain in the chest, and hearing a tv off in the distance, and obviously the awareness of all those things but I don’t want to separate awareness from those things because them happening themselves is awareness in itself? Is this what you mean by seeing, noticing what is, but not separating the noticer from the noticed? Sounds kinda like the The observer is the observed pointer by Jiddu, but that still implies a pinch of duality.

Rate it!   0

Ralph says:

Since we are on the subject of LOVE. I love the way Timothy Freke put it.

“love is ….how oneness feels.”

… that says it all doesn’t it?…. if not then screw you.

Rate it!   0

tj says:

People might want to have a listen to Charlie Hayes’s podcast 12 “It’s all about love”.

http://beingisknowing.blogspot.com/

Rate it!   0

billtys says:

The tasting of the pizza appears before the thought “I am really enjoying this pizza!”

The thought “I am really enjoying this pizza!” is appearing in or on the tasting.

The tasting is there prior to the “I” appearing.

The tasting is there with or without the “I”.

The tasting is just happening.

The imagined entity is just a thought appearing on or in the natural fuctioning/intelligence.

Next time you bite into your cheese and pickle sandwich, the tasting is there prior to the thought “I am really enjoying this taste!”

The “I” and the “sandwich” are now conceptual/thought subject and object appearing on or in the tasting.

Where are you in all this?

PS: Right now…notice the knowing presence which is inseparable from what you are…making words like “prior to” not at all accurate. There is only the immediacy and everything is appearing in It…without exception…the tasting AND the thoughts of subject and object.

Rate it!   0

Shhh! says:

billtys:

You can avoid all this conceptual speculation merely by tasting the pizza without a taster.

With the absence of a taster, there is only tasting.

As many practitioners of zen will point their finger towards.

Rate it!   0

Shhh! says:

Conceptualizing the nonconceptual… or using tools of differentiation (words, thoughts, concepts, etc.) to refer to the undifferentiated… is wrought with potential delusions.

On the other hand, and when there is doing without the do-er… subject-object is absent.

No do-er… no self… no other… no perceived separation of anything/one from anything/one else.

No words/thoughts/concepts either. No matter how inviting and enticing they may seem to be.

Which is only an appearance, of course.

And yes, I’m temporarily on the west coast. But Asia is where I will be returning to eventually.

Rate it!   0

Ralph says:

Wow! …. you guys sure know how to complicate the simplicity of ‘what is’ .

Rate it!   0

billtys says:

Shhh!

I know who I am…so I know who you are.

The important thing is…do you know who I am?

Rate it!   0

Claudia Luthi says:

I have been following urban guru café since the very beginning, and have enjoyed it greatly. I find that to hear the actual voices is far more effective than reading. My congratulations to the unique work you are doing, Gilbert and Areti! And, believe me, many times felt tempted to join all these blunt, ardent, spirited, (not to confuse with “spiritual”) and resounding conversations held through the comments. But I had nothing to say, no questions… I don’t have one now, or maybe I do. It is about the function of the teacher. I mean, I remember Gilbert’s urging call to run and see Sailor Bob. So what does Sailor Bob do? He apparently cuts efficiently through the hallucination, through the minds lethargy, and the identification with the story is dropped. End of the story…
Now, I live in Lima, Peru and to go to see Sailor Bob is not possible, unless I win the lottery or something… My thing is, I find that the hallucination, the lethargy, the habit of identification with the story has a very hard grip, it’s like the addiction to cigarette smoking, a constant temptation to follow the rush of thoughts, to get lost in the naughty carnival of words… Though sooner or later a pointer is also formulated and a “full stop” happens and everything is clear and obvious… Maybe there are some advaitic nicotin patches available, haha, I am joking of course… And if I have aquestion, I don’t know which one it is, I am just this one big questionmark…

P.S. I guess I have given Shhh a lot of food here for metaphysical excersises, haha

Rate it!   0

Friar Tuck says:

I’ve always thought of “consciousness” as having the same meaning as “awareness” — but it seems that for Nisargadatta “consciousness” has a different meaning than “awareness.” Maybe this is just the result of the translating between languages.

Rate it!   0

big john says:

“Consciousness comes and goes, within the Absolute. A play of the Absolute, the only way It can know Itself. Consciousness, a product of the “meat body” arises at a body’s birth and goes upon it’s disintegration. The Absolute is immoveable and unchanging.”

Consciousness is not a product of the meat body, its concepts and belief in a separate entity with its own consciousness. I doubt Nisargadatta said that.

Rate it!   0

Arsenio says:

It’s the whole “thinkin’ thing” though, right? That’s the DEALIO, right?

~’~

“As my teacher once told me, as we sat on thin mats in our socks — ‘THERE IS NO DUALITY IN NON-DUALITY.’”

mY TEACHER WAS gILBERT sCHULTZ

SEEING-kNOWING.com <3

[Ed note: Arsenio suffers from dyslexic-irritable nicorette-Down's syndrome.]

Can awakening happen on the other end of the internet? In the sense that the ‘thought character’ gets a little “wavery,” if you will.

Rate it!   0

Shhh! says:

As I mentioned earlier, I’m not too keen on using the concepts of “knowing” and “understanding” in creating a differentiated finger that points to the undifferentiated.

I don’t expect or want anyone else to feel the same way. It’s just a quirk of how I create such fingers. Other fingers may not have that quirk. That’s just fine and dandy with me. For I am them too.

“I am that”… to include everything that appears… works fine for me. In all of its forms and manifestations. material or otherwise.

Rate it!   0

Arsenio says:

“…the finger I do resonate with.”

But you’re just sorta gabbin’ though.

Rate it!   0

Arsenio says:

Are you typing with one hand?

PETER BROWN — CAN YOU HEAR ME!?

Rate it!   0

Richard says:

big john,

I’m pretty sure I read about consciousness resulting from the meat body by Nisargadatta, or else by Ramesh Balsekar summerizing Nisargadatta, or both.

Anyway, here is a somewhat similar quote from Nisargadatta in “Consciousness and the Absolute” January 30, 1981 A.M.:

“I am telling you with the authority of a jnani, everything is unreal. This is all the play due to your consciousness, and your consciousness is due to the food essence body.”

He considers consciousness to be an unreal concept to be transcended.

Of course, Nisargadatta said many things, some of which contradict one another.

Rate it!   0

Shhh! says:

gilbert says, “if you cannot recognize what seeing-knowing is, without tying yourself in conceptual knots, then what can I do to help you?”

Why would you want anyone to see something the same way that you do?

And why would you want to be of help for them to see something as you do?

Do you believe that others needs help… even if they themselves believe that they do?

Because You Are Me, it is inconsequential to me if you see anything differently than I do.

I have no desire for you to see anything as I do. No matter what the subject matter may be.

I will juxtapose something that I resonate with next to something that you do, of course.

But that’s only to see if the juxtaposition will have any affect on any of the perspectives.

Not to get you or anyone to see anything a certain way.

You are free to be anyone whom you believe yourself to be. Or not, of course.

Simply because, and in spite of anything that you may believe, You Are Me and I Am You.

Regardless of how little or how much we may resonate on any perspective.

You Are Me and I Am You.

Rate it!   0

gilbert says:

There you go tying yourself up with more words. I set a little trap and the bunnies jump into it almost straight away. I need a worthy opponent. It is like playing chess with children around here.
I do have a wicked sense of humor but most get hot under the collar so quick, they miss it altogether. There are some quite subtle mind games that go on here. It is hilarious and good fun most of the time but like watching a poor dog chase its tail for too long, it turns into a pitiful sight. Ah, I gotta stop teasing non existent seekers. I might just design a super dooper computer game for spiritual seekers and sit back and get rich. Imagine what an amazing game that could be produced. And it may even work – recognition can arise anywhere at any time. Maybe the Urban Guru Cafe Seeker Game may be the next best thing since sliced bread.
Richard is the King Bunny. When you come out of your shell Richard, you might just start to SEE LIFE as it is. Turn you computer off for three days and then SEE who you are, then. As soon as you take things ‘personally’ you have really swallowed the bait. Snappy come backs are welcome, just don’t bother taking a shot at ME because there isn’t one. You will only shoot yourself in the foot.
As they say with gusto: “Get a Life”. And don’t give me that ‘I am shy bullshit’ ever again. Keep taking the pills and drink clean water often, it may flush some of the crap out of your system. Ooow, I am wicked aren’t I. Chuckle Chuckle.
Don’t forget, it is all about the programs or what they are pointing to. This can’t be a social club thing – that would be really sad. So, yeah, get a life, get out of the house more often, walk the dog and take in some fresh air.
SEE what IS.

Rate it!   0

gilbert says:

Discernment and judgment are of the dualistic nature of mind. You can spend a life time splitting hairs and words. Nothing is truly achieved. Responses happen spontaneously – YOU do not have a choice. If you imagine that you are better than another because of your unique responses – who cares? You do. Do you see the trap? Or has it already snapped. There is NO answer in the MIND. The ONLY way out of the mind is FULL STOP.
Chasing the tail does eventually grow tiresome. Who cares? I don’t have a tail to chase.
I chase your non existent tail instead but you don’t see the joke. All this Non Duality ‘correctness’ jargon is really kinder-garden stuff and so, so boring.
Whatever the mind translates, it is only conceptual. Who is stuck on concepts? Squeaky clean non-duality ‘entities’? …….Get outta here.
If the essence of the message has registered totally then all these conflicts disappear naturally. There is NO point in pretending to Know this stuff.

KNOWING is not in the concepts. the concepts appear in the KNOWING.
Simple. Get that one and the rest will take care of itself.
The simplest pointers are the hardest to ‘get’ because the sophisticated mind always misses the simplicity…..always.
Turn off your computer for three days and then SEE who you are.

Rate it!   0

gilbert says:

Transcendence is only in the appearance – transmission is also in the appearance.
However, if you believe you need to transcend something, then do it. What is the problem? You can climb a mountain because it has some substance to support you as you climb it. How will a believed in ‘entity’ achieve anything at all? It can’t but in the attempt it may just dawn on you that it is all a fiction.
Any method is valid – it is worth discovering that some ‘methods’ are ‘time bound’ methods and some are so direct, that ‘time’ has no footing to it.
This is the blindingly obvious difference between popular teachings, which always captures the believed in ‘entity’ and makes it into a prisoner of time, a ‘waiting’ for ‘perfection’ to come – and all manner of practices are used to purify the body and mind. Meanwhile the True Essence is ALREADY and ever pure.
The direct ‘teachings’ always…ALWAYS cut away such nonsense as ‘deliverence’ concepts and ‘the embodiment’ rubbish. The constant re-occurring ‘problem’ is that the ‘me’ has no interest in anything direct and immediate. It is ‘time’ and knows nothing about the immediacy. It will resist the direct message and go into top gear to escape it. “Yes But……” is very common. Pulling out ‘evidence’ from memory is another common mind trick to avoid what is totally obvious.
You see, it is all about this ‘me’ who is bent on achieving something, something that it has ‘heard about’. Something that tickles its fancy – something that ‘feels good’ in the imagination.
You are completely FREE right now but not as that ‘you’.
What you truly are can NEVER be described or squeezed into a concept. There is no need for that.
The majority of ‘seekers’ have been filled with so much bullshit by those who do not KNOW, it is just a big shit-fight to engage with most of them. the mind will always JUSTIFY itself as a ‘me’, even under the disguise of ‘there is no me’.
It is pathetic to watch someone who is playing that holy game, ‘I got it’ and “I am proving it to you with what I am telling you now’. The self-centered-ness is oozing out of every pour of skin. Like a wolf in sheepskin disguise, it only fools those who play the same game, those who are attempting to perfect the illusion of convincing everyone else that they have ‘made it’. We have even had a couple of examples on these programs.
‘Love’ is always on the menu of course, because that is one of the big draw cards for seekers. But who wants to collect seekers? Guru fixated ‘me’s', that’s who.
I tell ‘em to piss off. Take your ‘love’ and shove it right where it hurts.
What bloody awakening?
Are you actually asleep?
‘No’ must be the answer.
So, what is this bloody awakening everyone is going on about?
Pathetic…..really pathetic.
Surely this point is so obvious it shouldn’t need to be pointed out. Isn’t it blindingly obvious?
Colorful language never truly hurt anyone – “stick and stones may break my bones but ‘names’ (words) will never hurt me” – wisdom from children in the playground.
Now, ‘who’ is offended by a few words? Who is hurt by ephemeral appearances? What substance does any of these words have? Does any word get stuck in your throat? – Or in your mind?
It can only be a ‘me’ that is offended. One idea in conflict with another idea – that is all it is – with an image of ‘self’ thrown in for good measure.
How can anyone be fooled by such ‘things’? But it appears that 99.9999% of the world’s population are fooled by it. It does not mean that you have to be fooled.
So, if there is some ‘being offended’ happening – take a very close look at what that ‘me’ is. If you refuse to do that, then what the hell are you doing on this site.
The WHOLE point of this site has been ramming the same message over and over.
Are you THICK as a BRICK?
(Is he jesting or pushing buttons? Well, if some buttons have been pushed, maybe this guy is the ‘proverbial the button pusher’ or is he just a bored creative writer playing the Non Duality Mind Game) If you don’t know already then you will never know.
Note to anyone with high blood pressure: Don’t take it too seriously. “Much ado about nothing”

Rate it!   0

Corey says:

“The sweetness of love is the merging of the sense of ‘I’ and ‘you’. In love, the separate ‘I’ sense dissolves. The power of love is the dissolution of the rigid sense of ‘me’.” -John Wheeler, “Sailor” Bob’s Favorite Disciple

Reminder for locals in Melbourne and Victoria, Sydney etc. John Wheeler and Mark West will be at Bob’s meetings from next Sunday. They will be around for about a week.
Get there if you can. It will be crowded, some come early to get a good seat.
P.S. Gilbert may be along at some of the meetings: pack a handgun. Areti finds too much egoic bullshit on parade and will likely not be in attendance.

Rate it!   0

Shhh! says:

“too much egoic bullshit on parade”?

How much is too much?

Is there a lesser amount of egoic bullshit that is more acceptable?

Or is some egoic bullshit simply “better” than others?

Sometimes, we may feel bothered by another person’s egoic bullshit… because we are so enamored with our own.

Egoic bullshit is egoic bullshit.

Quantities and qualities are irrelevant.

They only become relevant when we think that ours don’t stink.

Rate it!   0

Shhh! says:

LOL

I always stand in my own egoic bullshit.

It comes with the territory of inhaling and exhaling.

And I haven’t met anyone, who is also inhaling and exhaling, who isn’t standing in their egoic bullshit too.

If you’re inhaing and exhaling, you’re standing in egoic bullshit.

The question is, do you believe that yours stinks less than someone else’s? Or not at all?

Here’s something to chew on:

Egoic bullshit is rarely the problem. Believing that yours stinks less, or not at all, is the seed of the problem.

P.S. I wasn’t the one who claimed that someone might not do something because of “too much egoic bullshit”.

Rate it!   0

Shhh! says:

“Shhh – for ‘someone’ who thinks that words are patently dualistic, you sure pump alot of them out.”

Words are never a problem, Morgan. They are, after all, just words.

How you use them, however, determines if they point with discernment or with judgment.

Or whether you believe that someone’s egoic bullshit stink’s more than someone else’s.

How you use words reveals a lot more than the quantity of words that you use.

Don’t ya think?

Rate it!   0

Richard says:

Gilbert,

Jack Benny and Fred Allen used to have a fake feud in order to amuse their radio listeners. I suspect you take up the cudgel to windmills for the same purpose….amusement.

I think you may have taken my post the wrong way and then over-reacted. Perhaps the button pusher had his buttons pushed, for no reason.

Here’s what I posted:

“Gilbert: – how many ways does it have to be told? IS anyone really ‘onto this’?

Richard: No one Gilbert; just you.

Gilbert: Or is everyone just on a merry go ride at Luna Park?

Richard: No one Gilbert; just you.”

Here’s what it means: There is only You, no one else. You are preaching to the non-existant choir.

More power to you Gilbert. It was an honor meeting you. Gotta get outside now and walk my invisible dog.

Rate it!   0

Michael Scarfo says:

I tried to stop myself from doing this many times but now I am just going to ask, is it just me or am I the only one that thinks Shhh! is posting on here pretending he knows what is going on? I mean fine your daughter calls you Shhh! That is cute for a day but psychotic afterwards to try and impose all your enlightenment concepts on her. First realize who you are and then change your name, and most awakened ones say never to impose this stuff on a child. I don’t know I just do not think someone who is lost should be pointing or trying to point and stir up bullshit.

Rate it!   0

Sully says:

I think Shhhhh wants attention & he seems to get it here. As long as we talk about him he is happy.

Rate it!   0

Richard says:

Ronna,

You can’t get it. You can’t lose it. You already Are it! …. whether on or off the merry-go-round.

Have a nice ride,
R.

Rate it!   0

Ronna says:

It seems to me that what I am getting is that seeing-knowing is all there is and when I am not seeing-knowing that I am on the merry go round. Just seeing-knowing or on the merry go round I don’t see any other choices? I am seeing how hard it is to put this into words. There is no “me” making choices or getting anything and it seems like I can sense the difference between the merry go round and seeing-knowing. I wanted to let Gilbert know that his efforts in pointing are helping.

Rate it!   0

Ronna says:

Not sure what happend with my last post but it came up saying “fatal error” which made me stop and think about what I had posted! Anyways it is very difficult to word this and my intention was to let Gilbert know that what “I am getting” is that there is a some kind of a difference between being on the merry go round and knowing it and being on it and not knowing it. I am beginning to see and know that difference.

Rate it!   0

will says:

Hic

Rate it!   0

will says:

Hic! It is sinking in Gilbert. It is very most definitely sinking in.
Very great gratitude here. You kicked me in the ole metaphorical nut cluster more than once, you and a couple others but you with sufficient ruthlessness. Do not imagine your efforts are wasted. They are not.
I am a little drunker than before. Everyone I love is dying. I am in it. I see I am in it. This too is seen. The seeing is all. The I is somehow freely allowed pain and is fully in pain and the seeing is untouched. The seeing is all and nothing changes for I yet I am in it being what is seen. It is unexplainable, incomprehensible, for I. Seen, it simply is. Astounding comes up. Seen. Backward step, it seems, until it stops.

(took so long to edit this, only HIC came up before)

Rate it!   0

Ronna says:

“Of course no one ever ‘gets it’ but lives are turned around and seeking falls away. Gratitude arises naturally but there is no obligation to the messenger”

Thanks Gilbert this is exactly what I was trying to say. The falling away of seeking is awesome, gratitude for the pointers to seeing-knowing is immense and thanks to what you and many others do by pointing to this has “worked for me. I am hoping that many more programs will be produced as I love the music!

Rate it!   0

will says:

Know this – Fosters isn’t beer.

Rate it!   0

Ralph says:

Are you all convinced now that ‘we’ (including Gilbert) know shit. It’s amazing to watch egos at work, trying to explain or describe the indescribable.

As I said in a previous podcast :

“before enlightement your’re an asshole……. after enlightement you’re still an asshole.”

….. difference being that now the ‘seeing’ of being an asshole is crystal clear.

Rate it!   0

Shhh! says:

MS said, “I tried to stop myself from doing this many times but now I am just going to ask, is it just me or am I the only one that thinks Shhh! is posting on here pretending he knows what is going on? I mean fine your daughter calls you Shhh! That is cute for a day but psychotic afterwards to try and impose all your enlightenment concepts on her. First realize who you are and then change your name, and most awakened ones say never to impose this stuff on a child. I don’t know I just do not think someone who is lost should be pointing or trying to point and stir up bullshit.”

Care to specifically point to where I asserted, either directly or indirectly, that I “knew what is going on”, as you assert that I did?

And care to cite any actual evidence that I impose anything on my daughter? You have no clue about our interaction(s). Although I suspect that if you did, you couldn’t make this stuff up (that I impose anything on her) sofreely as you do.

And when did I ever, either directly or indirectly, assert that I was “awakened” in any shape or form? Oneness is certainly something that I enjoy discussing. But I rarely use that “a” word. Why do you want to pretend that I did?

Is it your preferred style to create critiques out of thin air, instead of basing things that someone actually said or did?

If so, I’ll just note it for future circumstances. It can become your modus operandi for how you create critiques.

Rate it!   0

gilbert says:

Hooks and bait. Some fish bite before they see the hook. Some never see the hook at all. Some look at life through a pin hole and believe they see the vastness of reality.
If you perceive an ego anywhere ‘out there’ then the one closest to YOU isn’t being recognized. SEE that there is no ego where you appear to be. Then it will be known that there is no ego anywhere else – it is just a concept. It is all appearances.
There are some excellent pointers in Peter’s program part one and in a couple of weeks, part two has some more ‘gems’ for y’all. Many clear ‘pointers’ that really pull the rug out from under so many postures that the mind ‘appears’ to take. But as with all of these programs the subtle pointers are often missed. Who cares?
Hopefully Peter will be active here when he can and chat with y’all. I will be on the road for a little bit, out of reach. So try not to slaughter each other while I am away.
The site will be checked regularly by the administrator. A little respect never goes astray. We don’t this site to degenerate into the back biting sort of stuff that one sees on so many site these days. The next Paul Hedderman program, part 3, will be published tomorrow sometime. Enjoy it all. And be grateful for small blessings.
Warm regards – Gilbert.

Rate it!   0

areti says:

Here is the second:

‘But still one can’t just stop seeking and go back to belief in being an entity – that’s no way to stop seeking.’

See, Eric, you are wrong and right with what you say. If you stop seeking, you don’t go back to being an entity. That’s the point, you realize there is no ‘you’ to seek. There is no entity! Therefore, end of seeking that never began! If you tell yourself that you are going to stop seeking, you have built into that equation a ‘you’ exists, and it’s going to find something. Whenever there is a ‘you’ there will always be seeking and not finding. As Peter says, to paraphrase, focus on all that you are that cannot be named. You are so much more of the real estate than this thinking mind. You can see that in a second’s pause of mind. That’s why Bob says ‘Full stop (.)!’

‘And isn’t asking “what am I?” seeking that can stop the seeking once there’s no “I” to be found? Then you are left with no self entity to ask that question and no seeking is possible because there’s no entity there to seek anything.’

To this I say what Bob would say, ‘If you see there was no ‘you’ now, was there ever a ‘you’? So, was there ever any seeking done by a seeker, Eric or Areti?

‘But while there’s a belief in the self – then seek the self and supposedly expose the lie and fabrication and then does one wake up this way?’

‘You’ doesn’t wake up or, even, ‘you’ was ever not unawake. There is no ‘you’, fullstop! Is there not ‘wakefulness’ right now? Isn’t there awareness of all that’s playing right now? Isn’t seeing and hearing always happening? Knowing? Thinking and breathing? Is that ‘you’ that is awake, or is there just wakefulness?

And further, who is this ‘you’ that could ever have been? Ever have existed? Ever have had the thought ‘I am not awake’—did not wakefulness exist for that arising thought? Does it have any more substance than a thought? Wouldn’t wakefulness be here, even, without a thought? Does all existence vanish without thought?

Rate it!   0

Shhh! says:

“There is nothing other than THAT.”

Is not-that a something as well?

If what is is defined what it is not, then both what is and what it is not are somethings.

A is a thing; is the absence of A a thing as well?

If it is, then maybe undifferentiation is the absence of both that and not-that.

Which are both things.

Descriptors which differentiate something from something else (me from not-me, that from not-that, etc.) still keep the semblance of the differentiation intact.

Rate it!   0

Shhh! says:

The alternative is to exercise the power of the clicker in your mind and place your attention on another channel/post, of course.

Why would you want to stop a transmission instead of using your clicker?

Rate it!   0

Eric says:

areti – thanks

People are either seeking or not seeking.

But those that are not seeking go into two categories: awake or ignorant.

In other words to stop seeking isn’t what produces being awake.

As for me as a seeker, to stop seeking, seems to put me back in ignorance.
When I give up on the idea that there’s a way to undo the belief in a self entity, I still seem to carry on with a self entity.

Of coarse, if there’s no self entity, then there’s no way that there is anything that seeks.
But, if there’s a belief in the self entity – there is either seeking or ignorance, yes?

“I am not awake.” – if ever there is a belief in the self entity this is always true.

To be awake is to have no belief in the self entity, in which case there is no “I” to be awake or not.

I guess.

From the standpoint of psychology, being able to not be focused on yourself is how to be “cool”. Like if you are always looking for attention or praise or being self indulgent – like depressed about what you don’t have – those ways of acting are all involved with the self and cause all sorts of friction in life. In other words, basic psychology is also about losing grip on obsessive self importance. Then waking up is just the ultimate letting go of self, yes?

Rate it!   0

suki says:

If you understand, things are just as they are… If you do not understand, things are just as they are….
~Zen Saying

Rate it!   0

Ralph says:

Bob always says, ‘No one can tell me what their next thought will be.’

True but I sure can tell that the ‘repressed’ uncomfortable thoughts (beliefs) will resurface time and time again . Why is that ?

…. maybe what we are searching for ‘lies’ within these particular thoughts ?

Rate it!   0

Morgan says:

Are you a thought?

Rate it!   0

Ralph says:

Morgan, the belief is already there. The falseness of the belief must be seen.

Quote: “It is not our idea of ourselves that wakes up — it is the dormant consciousness within that awakens to itself. “

Rate it!   0

Shhh! says:

Morgan asks, ‘are you a thought?”

Ralph replies, “Morgan, the belief is already there. The falseness of the belief must be seen.”

So if you are a thought (which you are)… and you see if to be false (which is also a thought, the thought of falseness)…

aren’t you creating a thought about a thought?

Believing something to be true or false is thought-based.

Just another set of concepts about concepts, which keeps the conceptual ball of yarn growing.

Could it be that nothing needs to be seen in any particular way (including true or false), for the conceptual ball of yarn to unravel?

Rate it!   0

Shhh! says:

Ralph asks, “sometimes I wonder, are you more interested in proving the pointers wrong or do you really want to end your search and rest in awareness, your true nature ?”

May I suggest Ralph, that you hone your inquiry skills by inquiring, instead of assuming, as to what a person’s motivation might be?

They (inquiry skills) can be helpful in any self-inquiry effort, if that is your passion.

Had you asked, I would revealed that I am not on a search. I gave up being a searcher or seeker quite some time ago.

As for a true nature, true as opposed to what? An untrue one?

True and untrue are differentiation tools of the mind.

And any conviction that something is true… scratch that, ALL such convictions… are mental constructs.

And while I have no aversion to mental constructs, I also have no obsession with them.

Inquire, Ralph, instead of form assumptions. It might lead to different (albeit temporary) (ap)perceptions.

Lastly, and had you asked, I am not interested in proving any pointer wrong.

Instead, they are all entertaining to me.

And equally impotent in removing the separation between an “I” (subject) and an other (object).

Simply because any concept merely only reinforces the concept maker, The Mind.

I don’t bite, Ralph. Feel free to inquire when you feel tempted to assume instead.

Rate it!   0

Shhh! says:

Because I real-ized that you need a searcher to search for anything, or a seeker to seek anything.

It really doesn’t matter what you may be searching for or seeking. Fame, fortune or enlightenment.

They all have one thing in common.

To search (for anything), you need a searcher. Ditto for seeking.

And “searcher” and “seeker” are just two of a myriad of identities that we can mask ourselves with.

What you are searching for or seeking… is pretty much inconsequential.

That there is a searcher or seeker intact… is more importrant to real-ize.

Thanks for the inquiry.

Running streams are always more fun to dip one’s feet in than the still water of an assumption.

Rate it!   0

Shhh! says:

For someone who was never a communicator of thoughts (a la there never was a seeker), you’re sure doing an impressive job pretending that you are one now.

Or were the previous thoughts communicated by noone?

A noone who has asserted, on more than one occasion, that the mind needs to be understood?

Rate it!   0

Ralph says:

“The mind needs to be understood?”

… use the mind to know the mind to go beyond the mind.

Rate it!   0