Comments on: 51. Paul Hedderman In Recovery – Part 3

By: mrsnacks

mrsnacks — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 22:38:18 +0000

Eat the meat and spit out the bones is what I say . I have watched those like Mooji and many other so called teachers I have noticed that many have pictures of their teachers besides them and they bow and pay their respects before they teach. Are they set up as idols ? Some teachers dress up and make an attempt to look like a guru or look like Jesus etc. And then they speak of the self disappearing while spending a lot of time dressing up who and what they are not. Where is the focus ?

There is a looking past that into what is being said is the focus or should be. The message and not the messenger. What seekers have done is deconstruct their self and reconstruct the guru and worship that. Doing away with one addiction and picking up another. And to talk to any of these so called enlightened teachers I have found they charge an arm and a leg. So it is all arising and amusing to watch at times. But what is attractive here is the free access and no reaching into my pocket for money as if enlightenment has a heavy price tag for the personal contact by phone.
Anyway what a great site here.

Rate it! 0

By: Gilbert

Gilbert — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 06:34:06 +0000

Some good stuff getting stirred up and shared here.
When you notice a laugh pops up where a disturbance once would have kicked into gear, then things are dissolving nicely.
What makes sense to the intellect is not necessarily true.
The things that you’re liable to read in the Bible are not necessarily so (as the song goes).
Belief is not the actual.
Part two of Peter Brown looks at some of these points being discussed here rather well. Have a listen…..
It is published now. I had another listen this part two program of Paul’s – some really good stuff in there if you actually ‘hear’ it.
These programs are excellent in my opinion. Yes, I am allowed to have an opinion, thank you.
OK. Stay tuned to the UGC. The best damn thing since Sliced Bread – Warm regards – Gilbert.

Rate it! 0

By: Michael Scarfo

Michael Scarfo — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 04:47:33 +0000

“First, shift the focus of attention to the object. Now, without shifting attention away from the object, simply notice that the rest of awareness is still present even though it is being ignored and is not an object in awareness. Now relax and rest in this awareness without trying to find it or know it. Open yourself to it, and allow it to just be. Do not grasp at an inner Meaning, but open up to it as you would to the beloved and allow it to flow through you. Now simply behold the object as a mere appearance in consciousness. Then continue to rest in this recognition of the objectless complement of whatever object arises.”

-Wolff

Rate it! 0

By: Uncle Josh

Uncle Josh — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 03:58:40 +0000

Is this satsang? It feels like it. Non-sense and sense both happen. Sense seems more enjoyable.

Rate it! 0

By: Sully

Sully — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 01:08:15 +0000

“Dumb ass seekers are a bore until they get stirred up a little.”

Ha ha! Gilbert, The comic relief here is great!

Rate it! 0

By: fernando

fernando — Fri, 28 Aug 2009 00:07:02 +0000

IS-ness is the non-conceptual GROUND.
Is there something (or someone) separate from the GROUND?

Rate it! 0

By: Michael Scarfo

Michael Scarfo — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 22:37:08 +0000

Looks like i’m causing some stirring up to ….. And as for Papaji and Mooji, I don’t care for them at all, I never considered them my guru or anything so i’m not offended. I’m simply saying they aren’t faking enlightenment, I don’t think anyone has ever really faked it especially to that extent, maybe a fake blog or two. The only fakes are the worldly people trying to sell Tarot cards and crap.

Rate it! 0

By: Richard

Richard — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 22:15:06 +0000

I understand about the mirror/reflection metaphor and the Ocean/wave metafive.

What I’m saying is take away those concepts. Remove the mirror. Nothing changes, nothing happens, from Gaudapada’s ajatavada viewpoint, which Ramana Maharshi called the highest teaching.

All is at it is. Nothing has happened, is happening, or will ever happen in the nothingness of timelessness. All can be considered to be unchanging energy or space or stuff or essence. Illusion is the imposing of changing objects upon the Oneness. This is the dream. As Gilbert might say every other sentence, It is all appearance.

I didn’t do a great job in explaning but those interested can Google Ajatavada. Those not interested can….yaawwnn.

Rate it! 0

By: Gilbert

Gilbert — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 21:44:55 +0000

Look, it is all appearance.
I have met hundreds who have been with Papaji and his ‘replacements’. Not one of them has ceased seeking and they all talk ‘shit’ and have a deluded impression that they are on the ‘path’. They all talk of Ramana or Papaji or of one of his ‘replacements’ as if he or she were a god etc.
As long as a glorified image of ‘another’ is stuck in your consciousness it is nothing but NON RECOGNITION of your own true nature.
When you really see through the ‘appearance’ the ‘teacher’ you may have had is seen to be contained in what you are and a sense of equanimity prevails.
Being unconscious of the ego game is slavery. Playing with the ego game consciously is fun and ‘pissing off’ seekers stuck on ‘bowing’ to a guru is downright hilarious. They ALWAYS bite. As soon as you throw the line in the water, even if there is no bait or hook, they bite like crazy.
It is all appearance. Does that have to be stated every second sentence?
Dumb ass seekers are a bore until they get stirred up a little. When the mechanical nature of self-centered activities is shaken up a little, the ‘space’ between the cogs of the wheel ‘start’ to reveal ‘something’.
All we have is concepts to play with. It is a word game of sorts. The WORD has bound the mind and the word can loosen the bondage but NOT if the resistance is tenacious.
Come on, free up a little. SEE what is truly going on.
IS there anything actually happening – and if there is, WHO is it happening TO?
Sheeshkabab.
How thick is a brick?

Rate it! 0

By: dan

dan — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 20:52:02 +0000

it IS

Rate it! 0

By: Vlad

Vlad — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 20:38:42 +0000

There is no money to be made in this Non Duality thing unless you lead ‘people’ astray. So I am looking for a new career. Any offers?

Have you considered becoming a life coach?

So how’d the Wheeler/West/Adamson/Schultz Advaita celebrity grudge match turn out? Will there be upcoming podcasts?

Hey, for poops & giggles did you share the UGC on-goings with the gang? The personalities and melodrama in the appearance…

Rate it! 0

By: Ronna

Ronna — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 20:25:34 +0000

Gilbert

3 days of intense investigation and RECOGNITION is happening

Thanks for the “kick in my prudish ass”

Rate it! 0

By: Michael Scarfo

Michael Scarfo — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 19:37:10 +0000

If you think Papaji isn`t genuine, check out `Ryuho Okawa`, who claims supreme enlightenment and says he is higher than the Buddha, christ, etc… I don`t doubt that Papaji and Mooji know what they are, not sure what Gilbert has against them or the culture. The pointing`s are no different.

Rate it! 0

By: suki

suki — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 18:15:28 +0000

Reflection on or within mirror=1without a 2nd=Undifferentiated Indivisible Wholeness.

*Mirror is a simple metaphor symbolic of your intrinsic true nature.Reflections only appear and have no separate existence from the mirror,they are inseparable and constantly changing.The mirror is unchanging.

Rate it! 0

By: Richard

Richard — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 17:42:17 +0000

One source said Papaji was overheard saying, “I tell them they are enlightened so they will go away and leave me alone”.

*****************************************************

mirror+reflection=2.

There ain’t no mirror. There is only IS.

Rate it! 0

By: fernando

fernando — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 15:59:05 +0000

We can’t fall from the GROUND.
We can’t jump off the GROUND.
THIS, the GROUND, is ALL there is.

Rate it! 0

By: Fenn

Fenn — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 15:12:53 +0000

This satsang mishmash mix of advaita and half understood Buddhism leads to these rather silly proclamations that there is strictly no one who could enquire etc…

The One who enquires is YOU (Reality/Self/Consciousness). BUT only via the appearance – i.e. the erroneous concept of a separate substantial entity (‘me’).

Reality has no need to find itself! How absurd.

Finding oneself is strictly part of the play of the APPEARANCE!

————————

Meanwhile, THAT which is in no need of being found…

Radiates as this inescapable IS-ness / Beingness…

Expressing as the appearance – however it appears.

Rate it! 0

By: Gilbert

Gilbert — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 14:44:36 +0000

So many say “Everything is ONE”.
NO everything is not ONE. Everything is multiplicity.
ONE is everything – or appears as everything.

If Papaji was so CLEAR how come all his subsequent ‘teachers’ are all ego maniacs?

“Oh Deary me” – Eric – Delusional concepts unfortunately. While the mind is full of all those concepts and anticipations what I am pointing at will NEVER reveal itself at all. The busy mind is not where the KNOWING is. The busy mind is ‘appearances’ only. Step back prior to thought.
Thanks to ‘gurus’ so many are full of crappy concepts and erroneous beliefs – and because of that they can’t get to what they already ARE.
It does not matter. Don’t beat yourself up. Relax.
Next please……

Rate it! 0

By: Eric

Eric — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 14:13:00 +0000

I do take note of the disappearance of thought.
That is less blocked than “you are already that”.
Yes I don’t know and I hope I am not pretending to know.

Yeah there is that expectation that it is a Big Deal. That I will wake up and jump up and down and scream “hallelujah, I see the light” and speak in tongues and feel “energy” and talk to ascendant masters like Jesus or my higher self or the veil lifts and things will glow and I will wield power to create… I know all that is BS now a days but like other beliefs it’s probably still lurking in the mind that wants peak experiences or more entertainment out of it. blah blah blah…

Rate it! 0

By: Fenn

Fenn — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 14:12:20 +0000

Thanks for the comments Gilbert. I knew that there would be difficulties with this.

Yes, what ‘you’ are IS Reality.

AND…… Reality APPEARS as stuff.

That ‘stuff’ is where seeking AND ‘finding’ appears.

THAT which is ‘found’ to be never lost is the radiant Beingness/Aliveness which is the ‘ground’ / power / light of appearances.

YET… the ‘finding’ itself is also not other than a play in radiant Awakeness.

EVERYTHING that appears in YOU is an APPEARANCE.

That includes EVERYTHING……

Sleeping… seeking… contemplating… enquiry… insight…. awakenings….

REALITY is like the mirror, appearances are like reflections…. the mirror itself is not a reflection…. but ALL else is.

Rate it! 0

By: Gilbert

Gilbert — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 13:42:31 +0000

There is no relative reality. There is no final reality. Those concepts are just concepts that the mind automatically uses as labels.
Be honest: You don’t KNOW what you are talking about. It is ‘Piffle’ – intellectualizing. Reality can never be known. It is the KNOWING.
Reality is THAT which does NOT change – it has no levels and no degrees, no thing that you can select and put aside and call it reality.
You can never become reality. What you ARE is reality.
What appears is phenomena – energy – changing patterns of the Singular immediate expression of One Essence.
‘You’ will never conceive reality.
‘You’ will NEVER find non duality.
If what does not changed is approached through the mind, it will recede and be covered by conceptualization (change).
Where the mind is NOT there is no ‘me’, no ‘personal’ consciousness.
The ‘self’ cannot be seen, fleetingly ot otherwise.
Such concepts are just mind tricks that ‘seekers’ appear to play, pretending to be ‘spiritual beings’.
Try to get behind a thought.
As I have suggested many times now: Witness the disappearance of thought.
That is a ‘pointer’ potently rich with potential insight.
But the mind that is busy with seeking will NEVER open to the clear view of IN SEEING.
Everything is contained in the SEEING and IS the SEEING.
There is no separation.
If you are genuine and use the ‘pointer’ it WILL reveal ‘something’ unexpected.
Oddly enough it is no Big Deal. Those who make it into a Big Deal missed it altogether.
Where you are seeing from IS Non Duality.
The concept ‘seer’ cannot SEE.
No concept can SEE. Yet……SEEING is happening.
In recognizing the essential nature of this ‘pointer’ alone, it is enough.

A voice in the wilderness?…….where no one is there to hear it? – Yet HEARING is happening.

Rate it! 0

By: Eric

Eric — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 13:39:09 +0000

What he didn’t say is there is no person to become enlightened …. the enlightenment concept is just a myth.

So enlightenment is to realize there is no such thing as enlightenment for the individual?

Ed: There is NO individual enlightenment – Stop trying to BECOME something that you are NOT. Full Stop.

Rate it! 0

By: Eric

Eric — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 13:36:00 +0000

There goes the pessimistic mind again Eric, why even comment on each thing said when the main point is not to believe or analyze with the mind what is being said? It is like:

Guru says: You already are that, the mind will try to reject.

Seeker: But how, my mind says this is not true! oops.

The mind does what it does.

If I am already that, then so be it.

Apparently being “already that” is all involved in being ignorant.

Rate it! 0

By: Fenn

Fenn — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 11:18:18 +0000

The ‘me’ does have a relative reality.

A couple of points though.

1. This ‘me’ phenomenon is totally unstable and unfindable. Pause for a moment and it can’t be pinned down. Yet, in its place is inescapable aliveness.

2. This ‘me’ phenomenon is not the final reality. In order for the ‘me’ and anything else to appear, there needs to be Beingness, Reality itself.

This Reality is primary, all else is downstream of it (so to speak.)

Yet……

Who investigates?

Reality itself VIA the appearance. In other words, YOU.

The self can be seen to be fleeting, unstable and without inherent qualities – and its source, Reality is revealed.

In that revelation it is clear that the little self is not the ‘finder’ – the self is part of Oneness’s display. (This paradox is known as the gateless gate.)

This is how Oneness plays its game of revelation.

Hide and seek ONLY has meaning in the appearance.

Rate it! 0

By: dan

dan — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 09:24:20 +0000

Silent, wordless Knowing.

A ‘ghostly’ Knowing (if u like)

Who knows this?

It is ghostly, transparent….. an invisible acknowledgement.

Who can put their finger on it?

The problem, more often than not, is that the individual wants their cake and they want to EAT (experience) it too. They want a salad to go with their main meal. They want a story to go with the immediacy.

“Can I have a story to go with that please?”

The eating of the cake is THAT. No division.

Rate it! 0

By: Richard

Richard — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 06:43:20 +0000

pishta says: “You are not perceivable, so throw all perceivables away. In the end there is only “I am”. “I am this” is always false.”

“I am” is also illusory and is the primary illusion from which stem the other illusions (i.e. “I am this”).

“I am” is also called Self, Brahman, Sat-Chit-Ananda, the turya state. It has attributes (Being-Consciousness-Bliss) and as such has opposites. It is dependent upon a body/mind (manifestation) and goes when the body goes.

That brings us to the unmanifest, the Parabrahman, the turyatita. Following your model it can be referred to as the “I”. It is without attributes or opposites.

Rate it! 0

By: Michael Scarfo

Michael Scarfo — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 05:32:03 +0000

Yawn.

Rate it! 0

By: Richard

Richard — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 02:53:05 +0000

No one has or is more than anyone else. In fact there is no one nor is there other, but that remains to be seen by egojis.

To think, “He has it” or “She doesn’t have it” is sickness of the mind, a perpetuation of the conditional mind doing what it does …. judgementally dividing into dualistic concepts.

Papaji said, If you want to know if someone is enlightened, first you must become enlightened, then you can recognize such a person.

What he didn’t say is there is no person to become enlightened …. the enlightenment concept is just a myth.

Rate it! 0

By: Michael Scarfo

Michael Scarfo — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 02:42:29 +0000

I could now ask you the same!

Rate it! 0

By: Michael Scarfo

Michael Scarfo — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 21:40:28 +0000

There goes the pessimistic mind again Eric, why even comment on each thing said when the main point is not to believe or analyze with the mind what is being said? It is like:

Guru says: You already are that, the mind will try to reject.

Seeker: But how, my mind says this is not true! oops.

Rate it! 0

By: Eric

Eric — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 21:25:18 +0000

One Essence expressing and appearing AS everything.
appearing as ignorant separate false entities that believe they aren’t that?

There is no entity here or anywhere.
is ONE ESSENCE not an entity?

The spontaneous expression spills out without ‘internal considering’ or a ‘labor of thought’ and without disturbed feelings.
that sounds peaceful – but not my experience while a sleeper.

Belief is not the actual.
yeah I’ve heard that. TRUTH is everything other than beliefs.

The ‘me’ is belief – it is not the essential being-ness.
how the heck did I end up believing something so deeply and so not true? please break this trance…

The conflict of reference points in the mind is due to non investigated erroneous belief.
ok – so is seeking ok when done right? as in doing investigating to ferret out the erroneous?

The mind tries to connect up things to bring about a change.
that grand pattern matching machine, ha? that has no personal power while it can think it has all the power. like the law of attraction, you create your universe power that is tossed around in the new age or left over new age thinking.

SEE that there is nothing separate and there is no need to connect anything.
lol (actually laughing as opposed to just writing lol) – nothing is separate, and not out of place – no need to fix anything or align anything, yeah?

Where are you seeing from?
I am seeing from somewhere that I can not see.

Rate it! 0

By: Gilbert

Gilbert — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 20:50:05 +0000

One Essence expressing and appearing AS everything.
There is no entity here or anywhere.
The spontaneous expression spills out without ‘internal considering’ or a ‘labor of thought’ and without disturbed feelings.
Belief is not the actual.
The ‘me’ is belief – it is not the essential being-ness.
The conflict of reference points in the mind is due to non investigated erroneous belief.
The mind tries to connect up things to bring about a change.
SEE that there is nothing separate and there is no need to connect anything.
Where are you seeing from?

Rate it! 0

By: Eric

Eric — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 18:54:34 +0000

“There is absolutely no point in pretending to know.”
Yeah, I’m pretty sure Gilbert was talking about people being ignorant but trying to write as if they are awake. I wish people wouldn’t do that. I should have made two posts as I just like the readers and writers to realize there are too many ignorants pretending, as far as I am concerned too.

however, to launch off that in a totally different context is the idea that maybe taming the ego is something that allows the waking to occur. that if one is carrying on with ego full blast they are “more ignorant” and less apt to have grace wake through them.

but also, I feel the tightness of my questions. of wanting to get it right. of wanting to find a way that I can do.

I have never gotten anywhere with the pointer “you are already that”. I think that is a cop out pointer. I am not already that! Maybe I am and don’t realize it – but there is no difference. I can just about intellectually conclude I am already that – but it does no good while I don’t know it as true to the core, while being ignorant.

It’s like saying to a smart person that is lazy – you are smart. A lazy smart person is the same as a not so mart person.

If we are already that but don’t realize it – that is is the same as not being that.

Rate it! 0

By: Morgan

Morgan — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 18:28:59 +0000

So long UGC and thanks for all the fish. Gil and Areti – keep up the good work.

Rate it! 0

By: Kimo (Jim)

Kimo (Jim) — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 17:57:27 +0000

Eric:
No, there is no way for the ego to fall into alignment with the truth of who you are.
The ego & person are just ideas; concepts that you have about yourself.
You are non-conceptual. You are only what the word Awareness points to.
Another question which is on the SAME MAGNITUDE as the question of whether the ego will ever get it or not is–
Hey, can somebody please convince the man-in-the-moon that he needs a college degree to get a good job? There is no man-in-the-moon except as a thought so the idea of whether he’ll ever get with the program and educate himself is senseless. The man-in-the-moon never understood anything and neither did the ego.
They are both objects in understanding. They appear in the knowing perfectly and hence are already “in-line with the truth” but that’s not what you’re asking.
There’s no problem with the Eric character or the Man-in-the-Moon character. Neither will ever get or know anything, but they appear effortlessly as concepts in what you already are. Where’s the problem?

Rate it! 0

By: Corey

Corey — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 17:04:50 +0000

Not that this site needs another b-hole ‘providing answers.’ But I thought what Gilbert was talking about when he mentions “there’s no point in pretending to know this stuff,” is that there’s folks here on the site, and all about town, carrying on using non-dual Advaita jargon giving all manner of so-called sharing and instruction.

It seems best to speak as genuinely and authentically as one can from the non-dual perspective of ignorance, I suppose, than to carry on from that same non-dual perspective of ignorance with a further deluded sense of non-dual realization, as that only irritates those still in the non-dual perspective of ignorance with an overwhelming sense of “STFU.”

Given that, it seems your last line there of trying to shuffle the ego is likely doomed to fail. But I’m on your team in trying to get this shit figured out and resolved.

Thanks for your help, don Gilbertoji (w/affection not sarcasm).

Rate it! 0

By: Eric

Eric — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 16:35:10 +0000

“There is absolutely no point in pretending to know.”

This is something I’ve wondered – is there a way to train the ego or habitual self to fall away or fall into alignment with knowing the truth of no self?

I imagine being asleep is a hypnotic trance of belief in a self entity.

So is there a way to un-hypnotize yourself?

Or to “align” your ego to what the truth is? Like act a certain way that would be how “awake” people act, and as such kind of invite the awakening to come over you?

Rate it! 0

By: Linus

Linus — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 15:15:52 +0000

It seems that all language is metaphor. Especially when it comes to this stuff.

My questions, other than not being all that bright, sorta feel like someone asking, “So just tell me, what is the size and color of the scent of cigar smoke?”

Or like words are trying to geometrically express the space-time continuum.

Not that I get it, but there’s something going on. Clearly Gilbert’s not writing himself blue in the face for the money and fame…

Thank you for your patience.

Rate it! 0

By: suki

suki — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 15:05:23 +0000

Richard,
In the last line of the same section:”There exist no appearances whatsoever that can be understood as not coming from mind.”

The way I understand it is that the author is making the point that it is still an appearance (it is but a manifestation) albeit a subtle one.It appears to ‘YOU’.The ‘YOU’ never appears or manifests, for the simple fact *YOU are always PRESENT.

*Universal Impersonal Presence/Awareness

Rate it! 0

By: Linda

Linda — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 07:05:57 +0000

what is spoken of as beans are no beans, thus are they called beans

what is spoken of as beens are no beens thus are they called has-beens

Rate it! 0

By: Claudia Luthi

Claudia Luthi — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 06:57:39 +0000

Here are some “Questions from the spiritual path” posted by Randall Friend in his blog You Are Dreaming:

How can I find the Self? (He owes me money.)

What color is Enlightenment? I hear it’s a light shade of periwinkle.

Does Enlightenment improve your sex life? Will Enlightenment help with male pattern balding? Do Guru’s drive Ferrari’s? Come on – my current pick up lines aren’t working!

Have you eaten your rice porridge yet? Have you washed your bowl, you freakin’ slob?

If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around?

What’s the deal with the Zen kid riding the damn Ox all the time? Doesn’t he have homework to do or something?

Does being infinite make you look fat?

Before enlightenment, chop wood and carry water. After enlightenment, pay your damn utility bill.

“While doing an advanced yoga posture, I experience a deep darkness that seems to go on forever. Is this enlightenment?” – You’re doing it wrong, that’s your colon.”

Rate it! 0

By: Linus

Linus — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 06:46:13 +0000

Hey Gilbert, I was with you up until the point you wrote, “You cannot slip anything in between the cognition and what is cognized.”

What does that mean? I know it’s a metaphor you’ve used before, but I just don’t get it and I kinda want to.

Please, pardon personal pronouns. PPPP

Rate it! 0

By: Claudia Luthi

Claudia Luthi — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 06:39:23 +0000

To José Muñoz: hahaha, neti-neti, Monette, even what you call knowing-seeing… no words are needed

Rate it! 0

By: Michael Scarfo

Michael Scarfo — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 06:00:30 +0000

I would like to know about some of the aspects, but not all, some mystery would be nice, though mystery is inevitable anyway since words do not suffice.

Rate it! 0

By: Gilbert

Gilbert — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 05:35:43 +0000

Knowing is cognition. The activity of knowing is cognition. It is the primary activity.
You cannot know it as an objective ‘thing’. It is space-less – time-less.
It is no thing to the mind. These words register in the knowing – the mind translates them instantly but the translation is not the pure knowing.
If you came into existence in this instant, there would be no words to label things with.
These squiggles on the screen would not be recognized to ‘carry’ any meaning beyond their appearance.
You cannot slip anything in between the cognition and what is cognized.
There is no separation.
What I described about being falling away is nonsense until it is ‘experienced’.
No one experiences anything in fact.
But who is going to believe that?
‘People’ believe. I am not a ‘person’.
There are many aspects of ‘this’ that I cannot speak about and if I tried, ‘they’ would put me away in a locked room somewhere.
Don’t get upset about my words. In the appearance of things, I have infuriated some brilliant scientists with just a few words. Not with any special language or knowledge – just with ordinary language – words that exposed the assumptions that they cling to.
It made me laugh, because I am not highly educated at all. In fact my science teacher in high school gave up on me in the first year. Ha.

Rate it! 0

By: Michael Scarfo

Michael Scarfo — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 05:29:20 +0000

what else isn’t me, you think one should ignore sense perception, and the world? also non-dual means no separation right, and niz said we are everything and nothing…

Rate it! 0

By: Richard

Richard — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 05:28:57 +0000

Suki,

Are you sure that quote is by Chuang Tzu? Maybe it was thought up by the butterfly while dreaming he was Chuang Tzu.

Good quote.

Rate it! 0

By: pishta

pishta — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 05:25:05 +0000

I’d say it is recommended to discard and ignore everything that is not you (neti, neti), not just a thought.

You are not perceivable, so throw all perceivables away. In the end there is only “I am”. “I am this” is always false.

Rate it! 0

By: Michael Scarfo

Michael Scarfo — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 04:27:32 +0000

Ok well, don’t say that things fall off then if you don’t mean it. You made it sound like existence falls off ‘amness’ and then non-being… When you really mean the false thought belief falls away, which never existed in the first place. Anywho, do you care to say what knowing is, you use the word all the time but never actually say what knowing is.

ed.. Is it safe or recommended to ignore thought’s? (as when they arise in awareness )

Rate it! 0

By: Michael Scarfo

Michael Scarfo — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 04:22:18 +0000

Edit: is it safe or recommended to ignore thought? (speaking as consciousness so don’t say who is the ‘I’ that would ignore thought blah blah.)

Rate it! 0

By: Gilbert

Gilbert — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 04:08:21 +0000

No separation.
It is only the mind that ‘seemingly’ separates what is actually Non Dual.
Where does the next thought come from?
Where does it go?
Can you actually examine a thought?
Can you see the ‘me’?
Being is recognized from the ‘place’ of non being.
Everything you perceive is a movement of energy, creating patterns, space and time.
Retrace your ‘steps’ into the SEEING.
I will not be able to convince your mind about non being.
You will never find it because it does not exist and yet it is REALITY.
Unchanging, solid, stable – your true identity.
The resistance to SEEING clearly is called ‘me’.
Nothing falls off. Belief appears to fall off with all the ‘things’ that were believed in.
The ‘Me’ is the core belief.
It does not exist, never did.
The ‘word’ is not the reality.
When you understand this, you can play with words and have fun.
Serious spiritual ‘people’ are caught up in words and definitions, fancy Indian terms or whatever. Satsang bullshit and such like.

Rate it! 0

By: Michael Scarfo

Michael Scarfo — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 03:52:12 +0000

What the hell do you mean by non-being? What exactly falls off? I thought this was all about BEING.

also, ‘knowing’ as you say, is just like for example the hearing of a car?

Rate it! 0

By: Gilbert

Gilbert — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 03:44:56 +0000

If you perceive someone here ‘having a go at you’ then it is being translated by the mind in those terms. When you see that there is nobody there, where you appear to be, what concern is there for anything ‘personal’?
Staring at you is mild. When I tap you on the shoulder and blow in your ear, that is when it is time to skid-attle.
The title of my e-book is “Who do you think you are?”
That may seem like a scary title for any book. In fact the books content isn’t about what the title suggests at all.
There is a courage that is necessary when you ‘get serious’ about this stuff.
That courage appears in BEING yet the source is No Thing – the indestructible Essence that expresses and appears AS everything.
What is interesting here is that the various comments that are made have several facets to them. If there is some ‘personal agenda’ lurking about, it will be stirred up and a comment appears as a response. Great fortune may come from such stirring.
The non existent ‘me’ has no being whatsoever – belief is not the actual.
Being and Non Being are not TWO.
At any moment the possibility is present to SEE what is truly going on.
Without that ‘In-Seeing’, all this is no different to any other website.
Those who know what I am saying don’t need to hear it. Those who hang onto old view points don’t want to hear it. Is that called Catch 22? Probably not but who cares?
It is all good stuff – even the bad bits. (I am not a Catholic by the way)

No one has ever been harmed by words. SEE the truth of that and relax.

Rate it! 0

By: Michael Scarfo

Michael Scarfo — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 03:01:15 +0000

I had a odd vivid dream while I was meditating a few minutes ago, it was night time and I was in a car, commenting on this forum on a laptop, and Gilbert came towards the car and stared at me through the front windshield with sunglasses on, then it startled me back into awareness. Weird huh?

Rate it! 0

By: suki

suki — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 02:57:57 +0000

Study is to study what cannot be studied. Undertaking means undertaking what cannot be undertaken. Philosophizing is to philosophize about what cannot be philosophized about. Knowing that knowing is unknowable is true perfection.

~Chuang Tzu

Rate it! 0

By: Richard

Richard — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 02:44:09 +0000

To Gilbert,

Firstly, I was commenting on your comment about unpopular teachers being better than popular ones. Why not stick to the topic rather than an ad hominem attack? Many teachers both popular and not popular have misguided their students and taken advantage of them financially or sexually. If you can’t back up your original statement with logic, feel free to have at personal attacks. They are hilarious and I love you anyhow.

Secondly, I did say I liked many of your recent posts, and meant it.

Thirdly, As Linus assumes, I wasn’t talking about you in the loudmouth drunk example. Just demonstrating by extreme example that obnoxious or conflictual people don’t necessarily make effective teachers, as you seem to imply.

Fourthly, I would like to get out and exercise, as you suggest, preferably in Australia. But the motels there are too expensive for me. Can I come stay with you for a few weeks? You can be the new friend you recommend I make.

To Everyone, what do you make of this statement from “Self Liberation Through Seeing With Naked Awareness” 26th section?:

“Even though intrinsic awareness which is self-originated primal awareness appears to you, it is but a manifestation of mind.”

I think this goes to the heart of a misconception I sometimes see in this forum and hear from the guest speakers. I look forward to hearing how others interpret this.

Rate it! 0

By: Michael Scarfo

Michael Scarfo — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 02:09:59 +0000

Can you address my last question? Also, if it is NON-BEING, denying being means there is being to deny it, so what the hell? Why confuse us even more?

Rate it! 0

By: Jose Muñoz

Jose Muñoz — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 01:57:31 +0000

Claudia :
Is there a neti-neti for the (your) seeing-knowing?

Rate it! 0

By: Jose MuÃ±oz

Jose MuÃ±oz — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 01:57:31 +0000

Claudia :
Is there a neti-neti for the (your) seeing-knowing?

Rate it! 0

By: Kimo (Jim)

Kimo (Jim) — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 01:06:54 +0000

Okay, I don’t know if it’s a rhetorical question, but here’s my vote for the UGC bean:
Royal Kona Coffee 100% Kona (100% Awareness too!) Medium Roast
It may arise as little c consciousness, but Royal Kona puts the Big C in Coffee.
Ed: We love you Kimo. I will get some Kona and see for myself.

Rate it! 0

By: tj

tj — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 00:49:58 +0000

“The ultimate revelation is that everything is perfect just as it is right now.
Everything is the perfect expression of THAT, just as it is.”

““Rats on a treadmill going nowhere, expending all their energy just to give themselves a sense of purpose – on a planet that no one knows where it is going or where it has come from.”

So the human ‘rats’ are perfect, giving themselves an illusional sense of purpose is perfect etc. etc.

Perfect!

Ed: Exactly. So ‘who’ can complain about what?

Rate it! 0

By: Gilbert

Gilbert — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 00:43:54 +0000

Awareness is NOT in the body. The body appears in awareness.
All speculations are conceptual appearances.
You cannot know death. There is ONLY life.
A ‘dead’ body is alive with microbes. They are having a great time feeding on the material body.
Who has ever come back to tell us of what it is like to be dead. Lazareth was raised from the dead by Jesus. What for? To die once more? Where is he now?
One hears of certain individuals who are a thousand years old, in places like India.
It is all concepts and time is relative. There is ONLY NOW.
Drop all concepts and take an interest in this PRESENCE – it is ALL inclusive.
Watch the mechanics of the mind and understand it. It will serve you much better when it is understood. The believed in ‘entity’ runs a muck and prances about in delirious states of belief. It is madness and we can see the ‘results’ of that madness on the Tele-News every night. It is all self-centered activities. But is there a distinct ‘self’?
The reason of unhappiness is because there is no ‘self’ and the struggle to re-create one is exhausting, to say the least.
It is often said that a profound relaxation comes, once we recognize our true nature. I can confirm that but what good is my confirmation to you? At worst it is just an annoying thing to hear, thus ‘creating’ more dis-ease.
If I were to declare that I am the most enlightened being on this planet, there would be a few who would ‘believe’ me. Assuming that ‘I’ do not ‘lose it’ in a mess of delusional states of mind, ‘I’ could direct the believers to discover that it is not ‘I’ that is enlightened but the WHOLE that is enlightened. With eyes wide OPEN, it may be possible ‘for them’ to SEE and know for themselves that ‘I AM THAT’. The ‘I’ falls away. The Am-ness falls away leaving NON BEING – NO THING. ‘Who’ truly wants to know that?
Fact is that there is no ‘I’ to make any declaration. So all the gurus who talk that shit are deluded – no matter what they or YOU think.
It is all concepts parading as ‘other’ than THAT.
Fact: It is ALL THAT.

There is absolutely no point in pretending to know.
Once this ‘knowing’ is clear of erroneous beliefs, everything is clear and obvious.
It is already so – but ‘thought’ and belief in thought seemingly obscures it.
If I listen to some popular guru speaking, it is extremely obvious where they are coming from. The conceited-ness is written all over them and they talk about love endlessly.
In my case I was never attracted to the devotional way. There was a burning desire to KNOW for myself. Devotion may work in the scheme of things but what I see in all devotees I meet, is a glossy look in the eyes and the expressions just ring like a cracked bell to my ear. And of all the devotees they are, how many are set free? Why does it take SO LONG? The recognition of ones true nature is totally available right NOW and it is instant. It is NOT in time. It may appear to ‘come about’ but the intelligence that unfolds in one instant ‘tells one’ that you have never actually been bound EVER.
Expressing it in dualistic language always fails.
Basically this KNOWING is always here. The concepts that come and go are NOT the knowing. Trying to CLAIM the knowing as a personal acquisition is the problem.
What you seek, you already ARE.

P.S. There is no money to be made in this Non Duality thing unless you lead ‘people’ astray. So I am looking for a new career. Any offers?

Rate it! 0

By: Michael Scarfo

Michael Scarfo — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 00:23:48 +0000

Yes but, does it really matter if what is being seen isn’t empty, as long as I am constantly coming back to the seeing/knowing, until there is no one to come back to it? Because I said I am looking and staying aware for whatever arises. And by knowing you just mean a thought arises, and it is known yes?

thanks, mike

Rate it! 0

By: Linus

Linus — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 00:18:32 +0000

So you’re kind of saying that speculating about what takes place at the moment of physical death — animated embodied life form becoming un-animated life form canister — is somewhat immaterial? As whatever takes place will or will not be registering on Awareness at that moment anyway…?

Also, I don’t think Richard was referring to you specifically as the “half-drunk obnoxious loudmouth spouting off about something” if you took it as such. Even if he did, the two of you are old enough to know better.

Ed: If you perceive a problem, then it is your problem. The fact is that there never was a problem. The ‘person’ (with a problem) never actually existed. That is either known completely or not. If not, then it is ignorance – if known then it is simply clear and present knowing – nothing more, nothing less.

No problem, it just looked like a couple old dudes rattling sabers. It’s all good.

“Who has ever come back to tell us of what it is like to be dead?”

These people apparently: http://www.youtube.com/billsvideos123

Rate it! 0

By: Gilbert

Gilbert — Wed, 26 Aug 2009 00:06:28 +0000

And where do the sensations appear? Isn’t it obvious that ‘between’ all the sensations there is clear ‘space’ and a ‘seeming’ volume to it all.
Where are you SEEING it all from?
Is there a distinct ‘place’ where all the impressions register?
The ‘emergence’ of phenomena, ALL phenomena, registers clearly and precisely with NO separation.
Can you find a ‘point’ of ‘registering’ that is ‘located’ anywhere in particular?
You don’t need to THINK about it. SEE.
It is pure SEEING, which has an intelligence far beyond imagination.
It is Cosmic in nature.
Stay with it………..this is as close as you can get……..

SEE that you are THAT in-describe-able ‘knowing presence’.

No label will fit.

All labels appear and disappear in THAT.

Rate it! 0

By: Michael Scarfo

Michael Scarfo — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 23:22:24 +0000

As I look around the space with no-thought, it isn’t empty, it is a sea of sensations….

Rate it! 0

By: Gilbert

Gilbert — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 22:33:19 +0000

There is no separation.
Intelligence is ‘doing’ everything.
Only the mind ‘creates’ TWO-ness.
Stop thinking and SEE.
In that clear space-like awareness, seeing is happening. Look around in that space.
Isn’t it empty? Yet there is an intelligence present. It is not personal.
Is there ‘someone’ there in that clear space?
Are there a pile of old concepts banked up in the corner of your mind?
Is the view obscured by anything at all?
Everything ‘comes out of emptiness’ and everything goes back into emptiness.
The ‘phenomena’ of appearance and disappearance is called ‘the world’.
The evidence is quite obvious. The apparent variations in ‘duration’ of ‘things’ appear as overlapping independent appearance(s) – Duality.
Witness the disappearance of thought and the view will open up.
A conviction will come all by itself. A conviction that nothing can destroy.

Rate it! 0

By: Linus

Linus — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 22:24:33 +0000

Is there a difference between the clear and silent presence-awareness which animates a living body, and the intelligence-energy that breaks down its subsequent corpse?

Rate it! 0

By: Gilbert

Gilbert — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 21:48:21 +0000

To Pishta.
It isn’t a matter of WHO is going to pause a thought. Thought can be paused. But the mind says “Who is going to do that?”
The same ‘who’ that you believe is doing everything else.
In the pausing of thought, the crystal clear view is that there is no entity here.
There is no answer in the mind.
The difference between mentation (thinking) and clear and silent awareness is quite obvious. But to the identified ‘me’ the silence and emptiness of mind ‘does not count’.
We miss the obvious because we look for complexity. The brain is like a pattern recognizing machine – it focuses on the patterns and misses the background. The mind is dualistic.
It ‘creates’ subject and object (Duality). Where the seeing is happening, there is no duality.
It is more simple than simpleness. More obvious than obviousness.
One without a second. There is only one. ONE-ly one.
You are that one. No you. No one.
Zero Degrees of Separation.
Not even One – Less than One – Zero – Minus Zero.
No expression can capture it – not because of the poverty of words.
Because ALL expressions are THAT but not as they appear – they appear to be distinct and separate.
Honestly, you may just laugh for a couple of hours if you see the truth of it.
One hears stories of someone running around the streets shouting ’stuff’ hugging every stranger and oozing loving vibrations etc etc.
The ultimate revelation is that everything is perfect just as it is right now.
Everything is the perfect expression of THAT, just as it is. Look out the window……whatever you see, where ever you ‘appear’ to be ‘located’ the expressions that register as impressions in the seeing, hearing, tasting, touching – it is ALL THAT.
Undifferentiated Wholeness.
There is ONLY you – what you ARE.

I could be humorous and say, ‘We are all waiting for you to ‘get it’.
But so many don’t have a sense of humor yet. So serious, so up themselves about this Non Duality thing, whatever it is.

Rate it! 0

By: Gilbert

Gilbert — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 21:31:29 +0000

To Richard. You a good teacher? Teaching what? Teaching goldfish to swim in a restricted area? You are the bait, silly. Don’t be a dork. Just stick to quoting the masters Richard. When you try to say something of your own it falls flat on its face. Go for a walk. Turn off the computer for three days and then see who you are. (I am just pulling your leg. You keep sticking it out of the cage) You are the master of patronizing as I see it. It is the story of your life, isn’t it?
It isn’t personal – we have a contract to entertain, simple as that – there are hundreds and hundreds reading these comments every day and they love this sort of bitchy hair and beard pulling crap. How is the pulse rate today? Who else but ME gets your heart rate up to a reasonable beat?

Try and see the mechanics of your own machine. The dynamics on display here are not so obvious, only because ‘people’ react almost instantly to the surface stuff. Being easily disturbed by the slightest ‘glitch’ only demonstrates a limited view and a limited attention span. Common sense is not so common.
Richard, I suggest that you try and make a new friend this week. That should be possible. Sitting at home with the computer, playing about in cyberspace can be addictive. Get ‘out there’ and test your new understanding. Shrinking Violets need some sunshine and fresh water.

Rate it! 0

By: pishta

pishta — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 20:11:19 +0000

I’ve read some Maharaj talks:

The world is because I am.
I am the proof of God. It is universal, not limited to the body.

Can anyone confirm?
My explanation would be that the world and God are meant as concepts in the mind.

Without creating those concepts – when mind stops, world simply stops existing – is it possible that this is what he meant? I mean, it is really huge. Without me there is no world. I am the source. I create it moment by moment just by generating thoughts about it.
Or is it me who generates those thoughts? I guess I am generated the same way also. It’s a funny circle.
But if there is no entity, then who is supposed to pause a thought?

Rate it! 0

By: Richard

Richard — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 19:20:41 +0000

Hey management, I like many of your recent posts.

However I (or ‘here’ or however you think Advaita-speak should be and whatever you think Advaita-speak proves) don’t see that it is cut and dry the formulas, popular teacher=poor teaching and unpopular teacher=good teaching.

Go into any bar anywhere and you will hear some half-drunk obnoxious loudmouth spouting off about something. Most will avoid him or her. That doesn’t make him or her a good teacher…just obnoxious.

Conversely, many popular teachers might be helpful to some and say great things, but are popularized for the wrong reason by the sheep.

No need to get into your patronizing “Aha you took the bait” mode whenever contradicted. You did ask us to write here. And if you find my words obnoxious, then, hell, I must be a good teacher.

Rate it! 0

By: Linus

Linus — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 15:37:50 +0000

It seems that getting a real clear look at this ME would help. But that’s not possible, or is it? I dunno, it seems shifty like a morphing jellyfish net or something.

Also, the UGC Beans should contain coupons redeemable towards UGC merch. Say a hundred pounds nets an officially licensed vest.

Cool site. Thanks.

Rate it! 0

By: Management of UGC

Management of UGC — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 14:37:56 +0000

Here is an extract from my website notes:
You can say “I am aware”.
It is more correct to say “There is awareness here”.
This awareness is ALL INCLUSIVE. There is NO ‘I’ as such. Cognitive researchers have spent thirty years trying to locate the ‘I’. Logic should tell you that if they have had no success – and they have had at their disposal highly sophisticated instruments – then what chance have you got? And yet you probably say ‘I’ a hundred times a day or more.
What do you truly know about this ‘I’?
This is no game. What is on offer is the re-discovery of your own true nature and the end of ALL psychological suffering. It is no piddling matter by any means. And there is a great deal of resistance that usually ’shows up’ with direct pointing.
Cocky intellectuals and smart ass ‘non dual types’ are a dime a dozen. Gurus that will keep the seeker bound into endless conceptual bondage to a future time of deliverance are also very common. In the appearance of things, it is a rare thing, it seems, for anyone to truly cease from seeking. There are many pretenders (teachers) but their words fail to do anything but engage the mind in an endless search.
Those who truly get a taste of what is on offer here, they are not put off the scent.
Those who dabble in spirituality for whatever reason, they are put off by the smallest obstacle because they are not genuine. They get easily offended.
For some this is a battle, a struggle against all odds. For others it is as simple as a spontaneous recognition.
I can tell you one thing: Those who are genuinely speaking about this direct ‘message’ are not popular with the masses. If a guru is popular, you can be sure he is peddling bullshit by the barrow load.
Lifted from ‘Writings’ on http://www.seeing-knowing.com

Rate it! 0

By: Management of UGC

Management of UGC — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 14:08:24 +0000

News: The management of the UGC is looking for the best coffee beans in the world.
We will do a deal with the company who owns the best beans and make the ‘Urban Guru Coffee Bean Company’ products a world wide phenomenal success. The production of programs will leap into top gear and the clear message will spread across the globe with unprecedented coverage. Spread the word. They have to be the best beans.
Can you smell the coffee beans already?

Rate it! 0

By: Richard

Richard — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 12:33:00 +0000

From The Ribhu Gita:

29. … all this does not exist in the least at any time: neither you nor I, neither this nor that. There being only Brahman alone, be of the certitude that there is no non-Self.

30. There is nothing by way of example in this world, nor is there anything for which an example is to be given. There being only Brahman alone, be of the certitude that there is no non-Self.

31. There is no mind to think, “I am the Supreme Brahman,” “This universe is only Brahman alone,” “You are also only Brahman.”

32. I am Consciousness, and there is no non-Self. Be of this certitude.

Rate it! 0

By: Fenn

Fenn — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 11:05:17 +0000

In the appearance there are APPARENT persons/organisms – just as there are dogs and bookshelves and washing machines.

Dogs bark. Bookshelves support books. Washing machines wash clothes. People eat, sleep and seek.

All of the above is utterly conditioned.

Apparent phenomena such as dogs and washing machines and people, are unfindable as inherent entities – they are labels given to complex conditions.

Just like dogs and washing machines, organisms are not the source, power or instigators of anything.

Like all ‘things’ they APPEAR on the screen of wide awake Reality / Beingness.

That being the case, what needs to change?

Why worry about an ego. An ego is an utterly conditioned process like the central nervous system or gravity.

Even the ‘me’ thought need not be a problem. Me and mine refer to a relativity with the organism. The thought ‘my car’ will need to arise in order for the organism to not take the neighbors car.

The ‘me’ that relates to the organism is not who you are – that ‘me’ belongs to the body / mind.

The body / mind / ‘me thought’ appears in this wide awake Presence.

Rate it! 0

By: Sully

Sully — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 06:30:54 +0000

Thanks Gilbert,

I came home really late from work tonight, tired, dirty & hungry. Ate a cold dinner. Felt like life really had no meaning. (ha) Decide to check out UGC and read this:

“Rats on a treadmill going nowhere, expending all their energy just to give themselves a sense of purpose – on a planet that no one knows where it is going or where it has come from. Negative imagination comes up with a threat, a comet on a collision course with the planet. Doom and Gloom and Grimm Fairy Tales. Wow is ME.
It is all bullshit but you love it. Why? Because it ‘makes’ the ‘me’ feel like it is real. It is glue, the sticky glue of belief.
It is not real – get over it.”

All that depressing woe is me BS is just keeping the sense of “me” alive. I never saw it that way before.

Rate it! 0

By: gilbert

gilbert — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 05:11:36 +0000

And……’progress’ and ‘becoming’ are illusions of mind. Depth of being and shallowness of personality are also illusions of mind.
The true nature of mind is clear and empty. The activity of KNOWING is all that is happening. Pure experiencing.
You were always THAT.

Rate it! 0

By: Michael Scarfo

Michael Scarfo — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 04:36:23 +0000

The mind is unitary, yet has the ability to be mirror like, thus it can create subject/object but in itself it is unified. We aren’t seeing the unification – mind reflecting itself turns into thought, so say the mind is the computer you are looking into, and thought that is one. But then thought shapes itself as subject to the computer, and words form from the formless. Therein we see that thought is an object like a computer, and so it is merely a psuedo-subject which consciousness identifies with but does not see the emptiness of the mind! So when Gilbert is talking to us, he is actually speaking to consciousness, not the pseudo-subject. The pointers are there for the hope that consciousness recognizes that it is not exclusively the body-mind, but the totality of consciousness. Thus the mind is infinite AND EMPTY – one-.

Rate it! 0

By: gilbert

gilbert — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 03:26:04 +0000

It is unusual that our guest speakers actually come onto the site an answer questions. Most of them can be contacted via their own websites and many do that. The number of ‘serious’ questions that get posted here is but a few. Since the guests don’t respond all that often, I keep the ball rolling and clobber a few egos along the way. These comment pages are read by hundreds every day. When it gets into a ‘hot’ debate the number jumps much higher. The UGC is exposing a lot of the bullshit that goes on. Other sites are more interested in sucking seekers into new beliefs and there is usually heavy high bias towards one teacher, who is often smothered with doe eyed devotees. There is a revolution going on, in the appearance of things. There are many teachers who would shudder at the thought of coming onto this site to be interviewed and there are many we would not bother to interview. The programs are packed solid with excellent material and I think it is rather unique to have it all in one place – the Cafe with no coffee.
Heroine is a drug. Enlightenment is an addictive conceptual drug which has a great number in its grip, so it seems.
I will leave the rest for Paul to answer if he actually takes time to read this stuff and then respond.
Paul expressed a couple of points worth noting: Immunity to thought and traveling lighter. Such expressions never arise from one who is bound into erroneous beliefs. “They all love me on the first day” and then the having to leave town after three days, only happens because no compromise is taken by the messenger.
The NEED to have everyone ‘love me’ is the guru game. Paul obviously does not play that game. He is highly animated and clear in his expressions. Everyone is different. Funny how it ‘seems’ that so many miss the point over and over and go on making erroneous comments based on points that have already been exposed as useless.
If a studious type were to make a close study of what is being pointed out here over and over, in so many ways, it would revolutionize the ‘education system’ – but notice that the ‘system’ and ‘main stream media’ avoids any contact usually. Pick up a spiritual magazine and you will find a hundred examples of misleading spiritual nonsense and advertisements for endless gadgets to enhance a ‘state of being’. Listen to a spiritual broadcast and you will hear umpteen biased views and erroneous beliefs by the dozen – all presented with apparent authority by someone soaked in beliefs. Belief is not the actual.
As soon as you get down to tin tacks the ‘blinds come down and the doors are locked’ and ‘they’ want to ‘run you out of town’.
I am just tossing in a few red herrings, only because your mind goes around in circles and left to its own devices it will just turn on a dead spot until the cows come home.
No offense intended, mind you.

Rate it! 0

By: Michael Scarfo

Michael Scarfo — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 03:15:56 +0000

This is a serious question, somewhat directed at Paul… Is enlightenment better than heroin? I mean like continuously, or can you go into void like states like the Tolle park bench thing where he would just stay there for hours or days in this unspeakable bliss… Yeah this sounds dumb but it kind of gives one an incentive.

Rate it! 0

By: Claudia Luthi

Claudia Luthi — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 02:05:23 +0000

It is funny seeing that all questions are useless because I already know the answers and more so, they all turn out to be irrelevant. And that all what I am doing here (whilst having great fun) is speaking to myself. Between “Gilbert” and what “he” says – apparently with limitless authority – and “I”, entering a bit shaky and awkwardly (because it is just coming out of the advaita closet, haha)… between this “i”, which is completely taken by the urge of asking a question, and the answer it expects from “Gilbert”, is no separation. Neither, with any voice that is expressed here or anywhere. And this whole play that myself – or itself, to prevent rhetorical problems – is playing with itself… it is fcunking amazing!

Note: “a big hello to Ronna, I am liking her interventions”

Rate it! 0

By: Vlad

Vlad — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 01:53:48 +0000

Gilberto, are you partying with John Wheeler tonight?

-We love ya’, you old goat!

Ed: Could be. Jealous? ‘Get a life’ Vladivostock

Rate it! 0

By: gilbert

gilbert — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 01:06:44 +0000

No one is seeing anything. The bait on the hook is an illusion. Bite away if you want.
Squeaky clean expressions may satisfy your mind but the slightest incongruous expression raises the hairs on the back of your neck. Who is disturbed by words? If you want squeaky clean expressions then go to some dead gurus website or read a squeaky clean ‘new age’ book.
If you want peace of mind, you wont find it here. ‘My job’ is to stir you up into a frenzy. You perceive an ego at work, where there is none.
‘I will’ rattle your bones and threaten to knock down the facade. Those who are beyond the facade just laugh. Those hiding in the curtains play mind games with themselves. Don’t bother ‘having a go at me’ here, investigate your own beliefs and join me in a good belly laugh.
It is highly entertaining and NO HARM is done to anyone. FACT.
As the old song goes: “We will Rock you”. Pretentious spiritualized beings are fictional characters. Ashrams are full of them. If you think you are enlightened then you are deluded. There is no separate individual anywhere. All that bullshit about gurus being special beings is hogwash.
Kiss their feet if you want but you will only get an infection and blame someone else.
Come-on, stop being a prude. As soon as you take it ‘personally’ the anguish rises up and disturbs the mind. Are you truly that?

Rate it! 0

By: Ronna

Ronna — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 00:17:41 +0000

“‘People’ play with concepts and non duality jargon and it is rather pathetic to see but that is how it expresses itself”

Why is it pathetic and who is seeing it?

Rate it! 0

By: gilbert

gilbert — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 23:57:51 +0000

There is no separation. The mind divides what cannot be truly divided. One KNOWING is clear and obvious. Concepts are multiple and diverse.
Who can tell the difference? Is that merely a story?
The ‘me’ is just an idea. It knows nothing at all. It is a belief that it is ‘I’ that is seeing, hearing etc. It is a description, words, concepts, ideas.
As long as you take the position of being the (snake skin) facade, the reference point in mind, the identification of a separate individual, then the naked seeing is seemingly obscured. The reflections in a mirror have no volition of their own. They can’t do anything at all. Stand in front of a mirror. Now, if that reflection makes a move or speaks to you, you will jump out of your own pants. You KNOW… or better put, there is KNOWING. It is not a personal knowing.
This knowing is NOT post mind translation. All your problems are in the conceptualization.
The ‘main problem’ is that the mind translates events and things into a ‘story’ and that story is believed to be reality along with the central character who these events and experiences are ‘happening to’. But is that character real?
It isn’t real and no wonder it all turns to shit so often. It is all a fiction.
There is only one knowing happening and that is what you ARE.
Stay with that ‘thoughtless reality’, that non conceptual awareness and recognize your own true nature.
It is as simple as that.
If you want a method or practice, then be the witness of thoughts disappearing.
This will reveal what you are.
However, so few will even entertain this ‘suggestion’ because the habit of mind is to dismiss anything that is a threat to the fabricated ‘kingdom of erroneous beliefs’. The ‘king’ is ‘me’ and he is not interested in stepping down.
But as soon as the clear SEEING presents itself, ‘he’ runs for cover because ‘belief’ has NO substance and CANNOT stand up to the investigation.
It is so simple – how strange that so few ‘hear’ the message.

Rate it! 0

By: Michael Scarfo

Michael Scarfo — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 23:42:50 +0000

I still can’t decipher if you mean be conscious of what is or be conscious of that which is conscious of what is. ( (I) can tell the difference between the me/ and the knowing of the me).

Rate it! 0

By: gilbert

gilbert — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 23:10:27 +0000

It does not mean anything to the mind of habits. The true nature of the mind is infinite.
The Buddhists speak of ‘mindfulness’.
There is no method. The suggestion is to be conscious of consciousness.
The conscious being is not in thought.
The habit is to believe in the reference point (me). The subtle conscious intent to be conscious of consciousness will ‘bring’ the ‘answer’ you are looking for.
I cannot presume to know how it will present itself ‘there’.
All I can say is that it is unmistakable – indescribable – it is the unknown, revealing itself as this ever fresh conscious being. It is One in Essence.
A confidence beyond all imagination eliminates all doubts.
That is what is on offer and there is no one offering it and no one to take it.
It IS your true nature.
How can you not know it?
By belief in erroneous things.
So, be conscious of this consciousness.
You can be grateful ‘later’.
Many are bitter and twisted because they want to hang onto the ‘me’ and ‘get enlightened’ and as Paul expresses it clearly in this program, that activity of ‘selfing’ is the obstacle. Who will give it up?

Rate it! 0

By: Michael Scarfo

Michael Scarfo — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 22:56:18 +0000

What does be conscious of consciousness mean exactly? Does it mean be conscious of sensations, thoughts, feelings, or be conscious of what is CONSCIOUS of that??????

Rate it! 0

By: gilbert

gilbert — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 22:28:13 +0000

There ‘was’ (is) the appearance of such a moment. There is an intelligence present and that is the KNOWING. It has never been in the phenomena, in this case, the ‘me’.
Because the mind is so closely aligned with this intelligence, it ‘appears’ through belief that the ‘me’ is aware and can see, hear and do.
Once the pure SEEING cuts through those beliefs, it is impossible to believe in them again.
In the SEEING, the seeing that the me is not real NOW it is known that it never ever was real.
So, no event took place. Your true nature has always been timeless – free of phenomena, completely.
Who will believe this? No one.
That is the irony of it all.
There is no self to believe or not believe.
‘People’ play with concepts and non duality jargon and it is rather pathetic to see but that is how it expresses itself.
Some seeds fall on barren ground and others sprout into healthy fruitful, seed baring ‘trees’. “My cup runneth over” The more you share this, the more it flows.
Because it is empty, it is filled. Because it is full, it is emptied.

Rate it! 0

By: Corey

Corey — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 22:14:42 +0000

Gilbert, was there a seeming moment when the thought-gripped ‘me’ evaporated — or whatever you’d choose to call it?

Rate it! 0

By: gilbert

gilbert — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 21:28:36 +0000

There is NO answer in the mind.

Tossing concepts around will not bring anything new. Letter Soup has no meaning.
There is NO duality in Non Duality.

The mind is dualistic, restless.
There are NO awakened beings separate from the WHOLE.
It is the WHOLE that is Wakefulness.

The identification of the so-called individual is nothing but the ‘glue effect’ that the contrasting impressions of life ‘create’ (light-darkness, sound-silence, warmth-coldness etc).
What these impressions of dualism register on is singular in nature Non Dual.
How many of you are there? Your absolute uniqueness is not in differentiation.
The multiplicity of concepts and thought can never put ‘humpty together again’.
Who do ‘you’ THINK ‘you’ are? Can a thought encompass your true nature?
There is ONLY ONE knowing.
The moon is reflected in a thousand pools of water.
Many reflection, one moon.
The dark side of the moon is not visible. You imagine all kinds of things about who you are. Yet you are totally invisible.
True identity is pure cognition.
The instruments that cognition ‘appear’ within cognition and are merely instruments.
There is no ‘entity’ in the instrument.
SEEING is not in the ‘eye’. The eye is in the SEEING. The ‘I’ appears as a concepts in the infinite nature of mind or pure cognition.

‘You’ are convinced that you are in a world. Is that true? Or is that glue?
‘You’ refuse to investigate this error because of attachment.
Buddhism is about non attachment yet it appears that ‘every Buddhist’ is attached to Buddhism. All on an eightfold ‘path’ – which was conceived in mind by who knows who.
“If you see the Buddha on the road – Kill him”. Basically Buddha said that there is no self. Okay. Is he right or is he wrong?
Those who discover the truth of it do not claim to be a Buddhist or anything at all.
A Buddhist will tell you it will take a thousand life times. It is a concept (that someone placed in his ‘mind’) and it is believed in – non investigated belief is the bondage of self.
It is all bullshit, utter bullshit. Pure cognition is not swayed by belief or by any thing whatsoever.
It takes NO time to realize your true nature. Your true nature is timeless.
Investigate the ‘entity’ and realize that there is no self.
Pointless sitting meditating and cultivating compassion and love.
ALL qualities belong to the appearance of things.
Pure cognition (knowing) is emptiness.
Pure emptiness has NO investment in any ‘thing’.
The KNOWING is not contained in phenomena.
Phenomena ‘appears’ in the KNOWING.
Got it?
Rats on a treadmill going nowhere, expending all their energy just to give themselves a sense of purpose – on a planet that no one knows where it is going or where it has come from. Negative imagination comes up with a threat, a comet on a collision course with the planet. Doom and Gloom and Grimm Fairy Tales. Wow is ME.
It is all bullshit but you love it. Why? Because it ‘makes’ the ‘me’ feel like it is real. It is glue, the sticky glue of belief.
It is not real – get over it.
So ‘many’ want to lull themselves into the loving arms of god – yet there cannot be a god as such, except in belief. Imaginary god, imaginary arms and imaginary love. They call this awakening. I say “Bollocks”. It is a dream – a belief in separation. It is bullshit from its imaginary beginning to its non-existent end.
Give ‘me’ a break? No need – I never ever was in phenomena from the first instant. Do you want pleasant concepts and do you avoid the rudeness and jolt of waking up to the erroneous bullshit story of ME? Do you turn off the alarm clock and put your head back on the pillow – ‘Just a few more minutes’.

Rate it! 0

By: Ralph

Ralph — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 19:24:10 +0000

Yes Eric, this is how it is seen when the belief in a separate self is still running the show. The ‘me’ cannot get what the pointers are pointing to. It is not designed for the ‘me’ to get. The ‘me’ is too busy analyzing the pointers and creating concepts.

The ‘looking’ keeps you in the game of ‘not seeing’ BUT the ‘seeing’ of this sets you free ( not ‘I’ see but just seeing). All these concepts and pointers are just food for the mind but they also may help for realization to occur.

It all comes down to….. ‘you’ cannot get this. ‘You’ are in the way of true seeing. This is very frustrating for the ‘me’ to get . The ‘me’ never gets this. This must be seen. Give up the search and there it is, HERE, it never left. Who you ‘think you are is what stands in the way of true seeing. Again, this must be seen but not from a ‘me’.

The answer is really quite simple “JUST SEE and not I SEE” but how many SEE this. Yes I know, there is ‘no other’ but until you get this, there is ‘other’ and a ‘me’ , of course. To lose is to win in this game. Lose yourself to find yourself (true nature).

‘Die before you die’ is a great pointer into seeing what cannot be seem by a ‘me’.

Rate it! 0

By: Morgan

Morgan — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 19:04:06 +0000

Eric, there is no one who is asleep. No thing can appear other than in wakefulness/consciousness. In the absence of consciousness (such as in deep sleep) there is no appearance of a “me” to ask questions or feel confused and, therefore, no problem.

Rate it! 0

By: Eric

Eric — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 18:53:08 +0000

Why do this? Why “stop thinking and find your True Nature”?

If there is no self, as is said, there is no self that can stop thinking and find it’s true nature anyway.

But I wonder the same. What’s in it for me? Nothing, right? Other that obliterating the “me”.

How many are on this kick looking to make their dream of life a better dream instead of waking up from the dream?

“The end of suffering” right? But the end of the self that suffers is probably more like it.

Rate it! 0

By: Eric

Eric — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 18:48:32 +0000

“There is nobody awake.”

Right because there is no such thing as a self entity, so it’s said.

Still, there are those apparent individuals that are in a state of not seeking and say things like they know there is no self (all coming through a self of some kind as far as I’m concerned). So, for example, Gilbert isn’t awake – but is the one awake through the facade of Gilbert? Just as much as any of us but we (that are asleep) can’t recognize that we are awake?

Rate it! 0

By: Ronna

Ronna — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 18:19:12 +0000

A little more to the story . . .

WHAT IS is Seeing-Knowing . . . Non Duality
WHAT ISN’T is everything appearing . . . Duality

Since there is no duality in non-duality

The story ends . . .

Rate it! 0

By: suki

suki — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 18:09:28 +0000

There is nobody awake.

There is awakeness only.

Are you not awake right now! How are you are typing these posts? Are they not contingent on the fact that you are awake? What has belief got to do anything with being awake?

Do the investigation. See if you can locate the self or ‘me’?

Should be simple and straight forward, right?

What color is the me? What shape? What size? Where is it located?

What’s looking is what you are looking for? Yes…….No?

Rate it! 0

By: Ronna

Ronna — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 18:02:04 +0000

Upon “me” waking up this morning confusion, frustration and impatience also woke up and I am wondering . . .

Why do this? Why “stop thinking and find your True Nature”?

It seems to be enough to realize that “me” is just a story, that there is a reality that all “this” appears in and it can’t be known or seen or gotten etc and I AM THAT. I still woke up this morning with a body that has to be washed, fed and excercised as well as dogs, a garden, money to be made etc. to exist in this apparent illusionary world that I find myself in. What is the reason for seeking more than this?

Seeing-Knowing is and all else isn’t end of story?

Rate it! 0