The story of ‘me’ is what we call ‘life’. But is it TRUE?

Life happens. To whom? Stuff happens. To whom? The pendulum swings back and forth between wanted and unwanted so long as there is the contraction of "individuality". What is That IN which that pendulum swings? And what is at the axis, the fulcrum, of that pendulum? And what is the pendulum made of? What IS an “individual” made of!?”

Let us start with an actual FACT: (“Just the facts. Ma’am” – Joe Friday).The FACT, the Living REALITY, Is: You are the Nonconceptual non-separate Being-Eternity IN which (and AS which) the opposites of duality appear. The movie show is entrancing only so long as that assumed-individual i.e. the energy contracted into a little speck of apparent temporality we call "me" is still happening. Yet all the while, What You Are remains ever present as Intemporality, The Eternal Statelessness...

Some have claimed quite convincingly that “the energetic contraction” pointed to by some who share this Message that is just a “nonsense concept”. But tell that to one who is STUCK IN (or AS) that sense of contraction! There is an old saying, that "A knowledge of Sanskrit is of no use to a man trapped in a sewer!" Indeed. And when it gets crystal clear that there is NO escape from the sewer (through investigation or any other so called means), then, it can so happen that the contraction ends, in a single unexpected instant outside of the delusion of "time".

Nasty stuff happens, and then contacted pattern of Infinite Energy commonly called “the individual” complains about it out of resistance to What Is. In this appearing life, there are ups and downs for everyone! The pendulum swings back and forth between wanted and unwanted so long as there is the contraction of "individuality". Friends die, or worse become “enemies”. Lovers leave. You lose a great job and cannot find another no matter how hard you try. You lose a ton of money is a crazy stock market. You are caught by a hurricane or an oil spill; No truer words were ever spoken: SHIT HAPPENS. And the assumption is, it happens “to ME” and therefore “I suffer”.

But IS there really a solid separate I or me? Or is that a pattern, a contracted energy that exists only as a bindle of thoughts, concepts, feelings, sensations, perceptions and experiences that happen beyond “your” ability to control!? Is that assumption actually TRUE? Maybe, if it is to happen in the unfolding of What Is, there will appear a questioning of that assumption: Is it true? How do I know it is true? then it may be suddenly seen that no one is speaking-thinking, and no one is listening-thinking; there is not two speaker-listener entities, it is a ONLY a story, a “tale told by an idiot, signifying nothing”.

So in the story, the cinema show, the pendulum swings; everything is ALWAYS changing! But wait! What is That IN which that pendulum swings? And what is at the axis, the fulcrum, of that pendulum? The space IN which the fulcrum appears is the basis and Sorce …of This … Living Reality…

You are That … the Space … A Locationless Being-Eternity IN which (and AS which) the opposites of duality appear. The movie show is entrancing only so long as that assumed-individual i.e. the energy contracted into a little speck of apparent temporality we call "me" is still happening. Yet all the while, What You Are remains ever present as Intemporality, The Eternal Statelessness...
Meanwhile a statement of pure FACT may provide some momentary insight (or more) ... "THY Will Be Done" ... i.e. NOT "my" will but "Thine" meaning ... Totality, the Universal Unfoldingness ... That is pointed at by The Buddha in: "Actions happen, deeds are done, but there is NO 'individual doer' thereof!"
One last point: There is no one to do anything to gain the final dissolution of the contraction out into Boundlessness. So if there is no one, that assumed one will lament, "There is nothing I can do to gain freedom!" Quite right as far as it goes, but deeper ... there IS no "I" to do or not do ANYTHING. Doing is NOT in "your" control! ALL simply HAPPENS ... as it does and as it does NOT!
So the other side of THAT coin is clearly, there is nothing "you" can do to PREVENT the dissolution either! That in itself, the seeing that there IS no one to either cause or prevent enlightenment, may offer some deeper peace with an unconditional yet uncaused acceptance of what is, as it is.

So be it, IF it happens. .. We shall see.
Now I suggest all the readers of this DROP this wanting a story and explanation of what IS! Enough already. Y'all: Go and BAKE in the Message of there being NO one to either "explode or not!" (IF you can, of course; a VERY big IF! We shall see if it happens or not, but that exhortation arises from the Infinite and Loving Energy that YOU ARE …)

Over and (with Grace) OUT!

There is No "I" to discover it's "absence"

Q: I always enjoy the directness of your posts, videos and Podcasts. Interesting to see you quoting Tony Parsons in recent posts, especially concerning something that Tony mentions a lot; that separateness is an energetic contraction not just simply the presence of the 'I' thought'.

I seem to remember you discussing this point in one of the series of Podcasts you did with another teacher and that teacher’s view (if I remember correctly) was that this was conceptual nonsense. Of course all expressions, ultimately, are conceptual nonsense although if there is resonance with a pointer it can have some relative value. Unless I'm mistaken (quite possible!) one of that teachers pointers is to look for the assumed 'I' and discover it's absence, whereas Tony is suggesting that nothing can be done about the contracted energy it either remains contracted or 'explodes'. Anything you can add?

C: Tony and I and a very few others sharing a direct Message are NOT saying "there is nothing can be done”; we are pointing out that THERE IS NO ONE! I found that so many who followed a teaching of "looking for the I to discover its absence" had seemingly produced a temporary sense of "no I" but that will always leave that "I" firmly in place. LOOK: "HOW is an absence to discover its own absence!?" It is oxymoronic! Any suggestion that there is an I that can look for itself becomes the ultimate con game, as seen here. Yet it certainly happened here along the way. All sorts of things happen in the "process of Liberation" after the "Rude Awakening" form the dream of “I” happens, there is a timeless apper5cption that appears as languaging, a kind of sensing in the organism, Oh god! I have no free will, there is NOTHING!

Given that there is no one, who is to "look"? This is where the final truth parts company with any suggestion that the phantom “seeker” DO ANYTHING! That particular “doing” may reinforce the false sense of a "me" with volition! It did in my case.

Yet it all happens as it DOES ... so no one is either right or wrong. At present Tony, Wayne Liquorman and Ramesh Balsekar are expressions that "feel" MOST potent here (and those three were my "teachers" before I met that other teacher and ultimately those three were seen to be THE ones who provided that needed push out of "becoming and investigating" etc.) And so there pointers are shared along with “mine”, as they are aligned with the experiencing more closely than others (who I still love and respect of course). It is ALL The One ... AND all words drop in This Silence at last and there goes all need for "teachings and teachers!"

Yes, it IS all bullshit, including THIS.  So what? Ha!!

Lets be clear! The "contracted or exploding" is beyond any "seeker's volitional control!!

Nothing against anyone, that teacher-friend or any others; these expressions happen as part of the Totality. So what? There is no one “doing” ANYTHING, including “doing nothing!”

It’s a about a false sense of being in control, in fact in my experience all attempts to "produce" that "absence" (which already IS the True condition) by personal "doing", firmly keep that contraction in place, and it IS a very powerful dream. But in that last step out of contraction that no one can take, what is blatantly OBVIOUS is that "Actions happen, deeds are done, but there is no individual doer thereof." As The Buddha said!

Good questions. I enjoyed watching the responses come out of nowhere.

Much Love to you.

This is not a "teaching" ...

All that happens here is a sharing, a One-to-One-ness that appears a functioning of the apparent-Universe (United-Diversity). What happens here is an offering of "fingers pointing to the moon", words that  point to the only authentic truth that exists any-where any-when: There is ONLY BEING, Being this, As It Is. If there is a readiness for the uncompromising Message of what is to be heard by no one, there can arise an intelligent Energy that resonates deeply ... and so this Energy undermines the very foundation of the false sense of ownership of life and living and the notion that "I" must control and manage things to get what is pleasant wanted and avoid what is painful and unwanted, which brings tremendous and unnecessary suffering.

What some call "enlightenment" is simply a natural and UN-Caused dis-identifying with a "me" as the controller, or doer, or creator/manager of Life. This is the end of that "me as seeker". There is no one, i.e. no "'me", to bring about this "enlightenment!"  It is a happening in this unfolding-expression of Energy appearing as creation, as is everything! It is all what could be called ... Grace. 

Or very good luck...

When there is Grace, there can be that last step off into Infinity-Love. Meanwhile, whatever happens is happening sans any  volition; realizing this is the beginning of the end of seeking ... and suffering.

Impersonal Communication

Here are a few potent excerpts from my friend Tony Parsons:

"Any communication that supports and encourages the seeker’s belief or idea that it can find something it feels it has lost is only reinforcing and perpetuating a dualistic illusion. It’s not right or wrong . . . it’s what apparently happens.

The impersonal perception is that all concepts, ideas, beliefs or thoughts about separation or enlightenment can only ever be a reflection of their opposite, and so they are only ever pointers towards, or away from, that which cannot be expressed or known.

Apparent separation is seen essentially as an embodied contracted energy which can simply and suddenly release into that boundless aliveness which is unknowable and impersonal. The circumstances are totally irrelevant. No amount of clear or confused concepts can ever touch or influence that energetically held sense of being apart.

A deeply felt “spiritual experience” can, to some people, seem to be an event of personal enlightenment. There can arise a wish to help or teach other people to have a similar experience. That communication can sometimes seem to be “non-dual” when the teacher describes the nature of oneness, but it contradicts itself by recommending a process which can help the seeker attain that oneness through self-enquiry, meditation or purification, etc. There can be the encouragement to “live in the moment” or “be here now” or “embrace the fear” in order that the person can find “their own true nature”. These kind of personal prescriptions are often accompanied by a repetition of inspiring but only ever positive ideals which can lift the seeker’s feelings and give them renewed hope and purpose. It seems that this kind of exchange between two people is, by its very nature, happening within the story in time, and so its influence is transitory. It fulfills a need . . . for a while.

An impersonal communication recognises and illuminates the apparent dilemma for the seeker of seeming to be imprisoned in the embodied experience of separation. It will inadequately describe the nature of unbounded aliveness and the feeling of dissatisfaction and longing that can arise out of seeming to be apart from that. It will also expose, without any kind of compromise, the absolute inevitability and hopelessness of seeking and the gift of freedom that is hidden within that hopelessness.

No-one can claim ownership of this impersonal message and so there would be no motivation to sing it's praises. Neither would there be any personal agenda to please, help or change the “person”. There is nothing here for the “person” except the awful possibility that everything that they dream is themselves could be lost.

Whenever the personal identity, its seeking, its hopes and dreams seem threatened, there can be a rejection of this message and a return to that which seems to serve and support the uniquely human illusion of self-autonomy leading to self-fulfillment. The impersonal message can then be seen as judgmental or nihilistic and may even be felt to be “unloving” because it leaves the “person” with nothing.

Certainly there can be something personally confronting about the singular constancy that arises only out of that unconditional compassion which reveals the illusion of personal imprisonment. Out of that revelation, can arise a resonance which is no-ones.

How can the “person” hear the impersonal?

How can there be a knowing of the unknowable?

How is it possible for a “person” to “confront their own absence”?

How can the seeker grasp that which is already everything?

It isn’t difficult . . . it’s impossible . . . and wonderfully irrelevant because there is nothing separate to grasp. Wholeness is already all there is! It is the unbounded, impersonal, unconditional freedom which is complete . . . nothing is needed by that which is everything!

However, and this is the paradox, wholeness, being everything, can also appear as anything.
   
Wholeness can appear as the story of self on a meaningful journey.

Wholeness can appear as a separate person with free will and choice.

Wholeness can appear as a person who seems to be enlightened and helps other people to become enlightened.

Wholeness can appear as a communication which divides and calls itself non-dual.

So, in the play of appearance, wholeness can pretend to be something apart which is rushing around all over the place looking for that which already is. It is an amazing and unfulfilling dream-like story which is uniquely human and is also sublimely without purpose. For the apparent seeker, however, the pain and longing of separation seems very real.

So, should the seeker climb the spiritual mountain or simply let go and surrender to life? . . . is that the question? Or is it possible that there is no question and no answer.

Maybe what is sought is all there is. Perhaps the beloved that is longed for is already constantly happening . . . it never went away . . . the seeker did, to look for it.

Perhaps, when the seeking dream dissolves into that unbounded energy, which sees no separation and has no agenda or expectation, then suddenly that longing is embraced in that unconditional love that is no-ones."

Tony Parsons' Website

This Is It

There is nothing wrong, never was

In this what-is as it is, everything is all right. There is no need or desire for something to happen; no more waiting, nothing is wrong any more -- and there never was, it was a dream of being-separate that dissolves into energy-livingness, awake and alive. This is not caused; there IS no "cause", no "God or Source apart from what-is as it is. The search became hopeless, and when that hopelessness sinks down "on its own" its opposite of hope dies. This is indescribable, words are energy-happening; all of this is energy-happening. You are all there is. That is what-is. So what? So nothing! All there is left now is to have a good laugh!

The "nonsense-story" of "Awakening and Liberation"

The Contracted Energy of the assumed "I and other"

Q: Whilst I had glimpses of  no “ me” ( separate entity )  here , I seem to have trouble seeing that there are no “others” out there , who are in particular , suffering ( e.g. starving Africans ) – I do see that I seem to be mixing up my concepts here in that if there is no “me” here , how can there be “others” out there  .

So lately there has been a bit of guilt coming up , the feeling that I’m not doing much to help the  “suffering others” – due to a comparison with my friend who appears to be doing more to help humanity .

Could you please comment on this as I am troubled with this issue at the moment .

C: "You" as an assumed "separate entity" CANNOT see that there are no "others" because "I and other" is the very basis for the contracted "sense of being me". Then the projection out will always be that there ARE others out there and in some organisms there arises a sense of compassion and a desire to help, while others couldn't care less. As we say the organism of a "Mother Teresa" and the organism of a "Charles Manson" are BOTH the perfect expression of What IS, AS It IS!

ALL concepts are absolutely false and useless as NO concept can describe or represent Wholeness. (And that INCLUDES the concept ...  the CONCEPT ..."Wholeness!) The thing the seeking mind simply CANNOT confront that there is an innate hopelessness to the search for what already IS. YOU are already all there is. Including suffering people AND the guilt arising... it is all Wholeness. As it is. Even including guilt! By the way guilt indicates a deep belief that you ARE a separate "me" and that is fueled by an energy that has contracted itself so as to play this game of hide and seek with itself, so to say a story about it. :-) ... guilt is the sense that What IS should be (and by implication COULD be) different than It IS. That is so utterly impossible yet the contracted me-sense believes that with all its heart because to have that belief shattered would look like death to it (which in fact it is... the unwelcome yet longed for death of a dreamed character.)

But all that is more concepts and bullshit too, dear one. The point is that there is absolutely NO way that a false entity can discover its falseness; it can only happen... as it does rarely ... in a fundamental issue for the seeking-mind-sense, the energy-contraction of "I and other", is that that contraction tries to undo itself, never really seeing that it is an impossible task! How can what does not exist "knoe" that it does not exist!?

The search is doomed; it is FUTILITY, IT IS HOPELESS. Now hopelessness, to the contracted ego-me, is anathema; "it" thrives on hope, which is the opposite of hopelessness.

TRUE and unopposed hopelessness contains an incredible Gift within it: the Gift of absolute freedom from seeking. Meanwhile if the hopelessness is taken to be "mine" then such things as "suffering people in Africa" or "poor people in war torn Afghanistan" etc will generate incredible suffering. And even these words, when taken as somehow "holy",  are a part of the Global Con Game of "religion" and "spirituality!" The game is, "you are a person who must attain non-person-hood!" It's a crappy CON and people spend millions on the con. yet that too is NOT "wrong"; THAT is ALSO the Perfect Play of the One.

In your specific case, what is seen HERE is that all your concepts, beliefs, and concerns are absolutely an integral part of What Is, As It Is! There is no "self-realization"; that is a myth, part of the perpetration of false spirituality. The con game.

Did you see this post?

A common question is, "what is the point of the website, the consultations,  your books, etc?"

There is no "point" to this place; it is just another appearance of Being, awake and alive as Itself; in two connected-words, nothing-everything.

There is no special state or "enlightenment" on offer here. All these words do is point to that which cannot be described and these words will always absolutely fail. The seeking is utterly hopeless. It is hope that keeps the dream of "me" happening; only when hope dies into hopelessness does the obvious wholeness become truly obvious ... for no one. Nobody can get that.  If the seeking mind takes the words to be "true" then that is what happens.  If the seeking mind takes the words to be "false" then that is what happens.  But the words are neither true nor false. All "codifications," no matter how seemingly "holy" or "spiritual", are utterly meaningless to What IS.

Yet, if the words seem to open a space of "resonance" in which the seeker disappears, then that's also what happens. There are no promises made here. Who would make promises to whom!?

Ultimately the search for "your true nature" is utterly hopeless. Any effort by an illusory "individual" to "transcend himself or herself” is absolutely futile! All teachings of attaining some state or special status are going to ultimately produce nothing of lasting value for the dreamed character.

So why bother? That question assumes that the apparent individual, which is merely a falsely-assumed-to-be-real "entity", has some capacity to "transcend itself!" That is patently impossible.

Meanwhile all this happens exactly as it does, and in a very few rare cases, there is the unexpected dissolution of the seeker, and in that happening there is usually great laughter as it is so obvious that there never was a real seeker nor anything to be attained.

Love you,

Charlie

"An impersonal communication recognises and illuminates the apparent dilemma for the seeker of seeming to be imprisoned in the embodied experience of separation. It will inadequately describe the nature of unbounded aliveness and the feeling of dissatisfaction and longing that can arise out of seeming to be apart from that. It will also expose, without any kind of compromise, the absolute inevitability and hopelessness of seeking and the gift of freedom that is hidden within that hopelessness." ~ Tony Parsons

What's the point of this website?

A common question is, "what is the point of the website, the consultations,  your books, etc?"

There is no "point" to this place; it is just another appearance of Being, awake and alive as Itself; in two connected-words, nothing-everything.

There is no special state or "enlightenment" on offer here. All these words do is point to that which cannot be described and these words will always absolutely fail. The seeking is utterly hopeless. It is hope that keeps the dream of "me" happening; only when hope dies into hopelessness does the obvious wholeness become truly obvious ... for no one. Nobody can get that.  If the seeking mind takes the words to be "true" then that is what happens.  If the seeking mind takes the words to be "false" then that is what happens.  But the words are neither true nor false. All "codifications," no matter how seemingly "holy" or "spiritual", are utterly meaningless to What IS. 

Yet, if the words seem to open a space of "resonance" in which the seeker disappears, then that's also what happens. There are no promises made here. Who would make promises to whom!?

Ultimately the search for "your true nature" is utterly hopeless. Any effort by an illusory "individual" to ":transcend himself" is absolutely futile! All teachings of attaining some state or special status are going to ultimately produce nothing of lasting value for the dreamed character. 

So why bother? That question assumes that the apparent individual, which is merely a falsely-assumed-to-be-real "entity", has some capacity to "transcend itself!" That is patently impossible.

Meanwhile all this happens exactly as it does, and in a very few rare cases, there is the unexpected dissolution of the seeker, and in that happening there is usually great laughter as it is so obvious that there never was a real seeker nor anything to be attained.

Rare Authenticity

Tony Parsons and a few others are sharing a profoundly authentic Message. It is Being, Expressing; Being To Being, through the space as a clear and unambiguous Message that resonates deeply when there is a "readiness" to abandon all else ... all "paths" and "goals" ... which for the "seasoned spiritual seeker" is seen to have failed. A "personal" message MUST fail because it addresses a nonexistent entity. The following are potent excerpts from what Tony writes, with an encouragement to go to his site and imbibe fully:

"The titles non-dual and Advaita attempt to describe the principle of wholeness, unicity or that which is already at one.

A unified reality in which there are "not two" or there is "no other" surely confirms the illusory nature of separation. If separation is illusory, then any attempt to not be separate is rooted in a dualistic perspective. So the basic principle of any teaching which attempts to transform an illusory state of being separate into a state of at-oneness is based on the belief in a divided reality and cannot therefore claim to be non-dual.

… However, the perception here is that there are two distinctly different kinds of communication about the nature of enlightenment. One is personal and the other is impersonal.

The first offers the seeking “person” help and direction to find something called enlightenment. The second offers the “person” nothing.

The first comes in many forms and has a wide following because it seems to respond to the “person’s” needs. The second is unfamiliar and energetically confronting.

The personal message is based on the belief that there is something called a separate seeker that can attain something else called enlightenment.

The impersonal sees the embodied sense of seeming to be separate and unfulfilled as an illusory state which drives the apparent seeker to search for another illusion called personal enlightenment.

Any communication that supports and encourages the seeker’s belief or idea that it can find something it feels it has lost is only reinforcing and perpetuating a dualistic illusion. It’s not right or wrong . . . it’s what apparently happens.

The impersonal perception is that all concepts, ideas, beliefs or thoughts about separation or enlightenment can only ever be a reflection of their opposite, and so they are only ever pointers towards, or away from, that which cannot be expressed or known."

There is much more on Tony’s site at www.theopensecret.com. His latest audios can be downloaded there and are quite highly recommended to anyone who still considers himself or herself EITHER a “seeker” or “an enlightened one”.

Nothing to say

I have nothing to say that will be of any value to any person. All the books, videos, websites and teachings of Advaita Nonduality are, I am sorry to say, utterly useless ... for any individual.

Why do I say that? Because in the Fact of What IS, there is NO individual. This idea of a separate "me' is ONLY an idea, a thought, or "mental construct". What is this mental noise constructed out of? Energy. What is energy made of? That is like asking “what is electricity made of"? The reduction becomes an infinite regression, as in Nagarjuna's Negations or the Sages of Advaita Vedanta's Neti Neti - not this not that.

So all these words are useless. These “teachings of Advaita" are THE most useless appearance in the whole cosmos. So why keep babbling, you might ask with either disdain or curiosity? Time now for the TRUTH:

I DON'T KNOW.

All these discussions and ponderings are happening is a dream. This waking dream. You and me, we are dreamed-figures moving, eating, talking, sleeping, in a dream out of which we as individuals cannot wake ourselves up. So all these words will lead the illusory individual nowhere and there will be no caused awakening from any words whatever. When there is true Awakening, NOBODY WAKES UP!

So to assert a cause for an effect is to add clouds to clouds, to add more dreaming to the dream... though when so-called "individual-me" with the subsequent claim "I GOT IT!" awakening (pseudo- or intellectual-only awakening) from the dream happens you can bet everything you've got that a causal relationship will be CLAIMED! By whom? By the still dreaming character! Now dreaming that it is awake. IT will claim, “I meditated for 12 years and I got it! Or I asked “who am I” incessantly and finally I got it. I was lost but no I’m found! I am FREE! FREE! Free at last!

Sorry mate... No cigar,

Awakening to this dream, in other words, realizing that this dream IS only a dream, is uncaused! In the same way the Universe is uncaused, where it appears (only appears) that everything causes everything else i.e. “the butterfly effect”.

Do all these words effect a sense of frustration, and being discouraged? For whom? ONLY an assumed individual. Show me the actual personal individual self. Can you?

And while you are attempting that futile task, notice that you are present and aware, and that this presence of awareness is an indisputable FACT. The fact is, YOU, as that presence of awareness, are never not here. That which is forever is YOU as that Aware Being, Conscious of Itself as appearance-manifestation.

So (gently now) allow the focus of the mind to return to this natural, eternal What-Is that has never changed. From the earliest memory (being conscious as ‘I Am”) that essence of Present-Nowness-Isness has remained forever unaltered. To know your (really, THE) Self as THAT is what happens in so-called “authentic awakening”.

It is impossible for the individual to wake up because in this true awakening it’s plain as the air you breathe that there simply is and never was any “individual”. Then the true meaning of “individual” is naturally cognized in and by the aware-emptiness that you ARE: “I AM is the Undivided Whole”.

Naturally knowing this, the life of the organism lives out its designed span of years and hours and at death, absolutely nothing changes!

Call it awakening, enlightenment, the eternal state, God, love, Beingness; call it what you like.

I call it Nothing.

"The basis of ”true" understanding is truly simple: the totality of manifestation is an appearance in Consciousness, which arises precisely like the personal dream -- the waking dream and the personal dream are qualitatively not different  in any way; it’s functioning is an impersonal and self-generated process in phenomenality, and it takes place through the billions of sentient beings as instruments." ~ Ramesh Balsekar

The Final "Guru" is The Self

Some readers of this site have noticed that of late I have been mentioning and pointing to the Pure Advaita teachings of Ramesh Balsekar and Wayne Liquorman. There have been questions popping like are you simply hopping about from guru to guru?" And "what about those who in the past you acknowledged as "final teachers" or some such?" And "isn't Wayne just another guru du jour for you?" For WHOM!?

This manifest expression is absolutely unpredictable! All happens as it happens. The question I suggest is this: WHO thinks there is more than one guru? The One Guru is your very own Self, or Consciousness Itself, as has been stated over and over by every sage worthy of the label.

When I met Wayne in 2002, he said, "You have had many gurus. We will have to see if I am the last one." He was and IS that last one, yet along the way there were many others, teachers I loved and respected greatly,  in the apparent process. But when the natural apperception happened that there is NO duality in fact, that duality is appearance and gurus are a part of the appearance, there came the seeing and knowing that NO guru is "The Guru" and yet ALL are the One. So for a guru to take exception when I acknowledged my profound love and respect for Wayne and Ramesh, as one recently did, then it must be clear that in that guru there must still be so A'Vidya, a thread of confusion regarding the facts or Reality as what IS is that ALL is One.

How beautifully ridiculous this play can be: Jealously among "gurus!"

It has been said as a metaphor that gurus are like buses; if you are riding a route where there are many transfers from bus to bus, the observer might judge that as guru hopping. Where another seeker might find him or herself on an express bus, thereby elimination the need for transfers, which the split minded observer would classify as "best". But BOTH routes take tyhe seeker to the same destination, the Home he or she never left.

So these judging and evaluating split minds fail to really understand the nature of this play of Consciousness. And that TOO is PART of the play! All Is One, and that concept, when really assimilated, renders all such judgments and opinions just plain silly. ALL that happens is what is already in the script; the actor is not the playwright! The organism is merely an instrument through which Consciousness acts! As The Buddha said, "Actions happen, deeds are done, but there is no individual doer thereof."

So I am quite happy to affirm that Wayne was and is my Final Guru in the sense that all there IS is what Wayne, and YOU, are? The Absolute Eternal Subject which is manifest as all that appears on Its own screen, in Its own mirror.

There is only the One Guru, and You Are That. That is All There Is.

A VERY Potent bit from UG Krishnamurti!

THE NATURAL STATE is not the state of a self-realized, God-realized man. 

It is not a thing to be achieved or attained. It is not a thing to be willed into existence; it is there—it is the living state. This state is just the functional activity of life. By 'life' I do not mean something abstract; it is the life of the senses, functioning naturally without the interference of thought. Thought is an interloper, which thrusts itself into the affairs of the senses. It has a profit motive: thought directs the activity of the senses to get something out of them, and uses them to give continuity to itself.

Your natural state has no relationship whatsoever with the religious states of bliss, beatitude and ecstasy; they lie within the field of experience. Those who have led man on his search for religiousness throughout the centuries have perhaps experienced those religious states. So can you. They are thought-induced states of being, and as they come, so do they go. Krishna Consciousness, Buddha Consciousness, Christ Consciousness, or what have you, are all trips in the wrong direction: they are all within the field of time. The timeless can never be experienced, can never be grasped, contained, much less given expression to, by any man. That beaten track will lead you nowhere. There is no oasis situated yonder; you are stuck with the mirage.

You can never understand the tremendous peace that is always there within you, that is your natural state. Your trying to create a peaceful state of mind is in fact creating disturbance within you. You can only talk of peace, create a state of mind and say to yourself that you are very peaceful—but that is not peace; that is violence. So there is no use in practicing peace, there is no reason to practice silence.

~ UG Krishnamurti

What Of The "Value Of Knowledge"? ~ Updated

Q: I find myself still musing on the value of accumulated knowledge, particularly scientific breakthroughs, medicine, historical research, this kind of thing. Not so much bothered about what 'I' know anymore, but the apparent collective 'knowledge' of the species that built rockets and cured diseases. What does it amount to Charlie? Nothing. And yet, this apparent something has an apparent worth. If we say it doesn't then why ever move out of caves?

C: God’s will! Period! All human input (DNA, Conditioning, including the brain of an Einstein that could receive the theory of relativity and the brain of bin Laden that could murder 3000 innocents comes from God or Consciousness. These human mechanisms are programmed instruments through which God functions according the His/Her Will. There is ONLY God’s will, and Nothing!

Q: We could have stayed watching the dancing firelight dreaming of new ways to catch mammoths.

C: Really? Could anything other than what happened in this already-written drama really happen? That is an assumption that is wanting a deeper look at what is actually happening and what the true cause is!

Q: I don't know.
 

C: Good. Stay there!

Q: It feels as if it needs an answer. To who? A sticking point, for me, sometimes, thinking what does all this knowledge amount to?

C: Oops! You could not "stay in Not Knowing", isn't it? Okay, here's a bit more ... All of that (above)  is merely mental energy-noise; when taken to be real it brings suffering and doubts!

Q: If I say 'nothing', saying what can these changes through apparent time mean to 'me'?, then I have to nod sagely. And yet, here it is, spaceflight, brain surgery, libraries of knowledge (useful and not useful). It seems that though Noumenon has no intention, as phenomenon it is all intention.

C: Indeed, so it does SEEM! But is what “seems to be” what IS? On another note, what is “intention”? Just more mental noise. Or a thought that qualifies some previously designed and happening activity as “my intention”. All there is is the already-designed and produces PLAY, the Leela or God’s Spell, His/Her DREAM! There is no intention in Noumenon OR phenomenality! Take it back to ground zero: Noumenon is That Which IS (GOD or Silence) and Phenomenality is that which APPEARS to be. Can an appearance have any “intention”? In your dreams do you as Phenomena have a trace or speck of any such “intention” to do or not do anything? This we call “life” is precisely like the dream at night. “Life is but a dream.” Little kids know that, until intellect appears and says otherwise and the start to believe iot, like they believe in Santa Claus.

Q: What do you suggest Charlie?

C: Just keep looking as if you have volition, knowing all the while you do not. Then see what God produces through that machine! Best of luck and much love, thanks for a good question. And recognize that all that appears is conceptual (that is, conceived-perceived as in the dream), and what IS is no concept, a point that cannot be over-emphasized. Inj the words of Jnaneshwar Maharaj, “When Noumenality is the total of presence, absolute presence, why connect it with the appearance of phenomenality? When there is no perceiver, who will look in the mirror?”(Amritanubhava, 7:230)

Give that one some deep meditation and see what happens.

Follow-up

Q: Thanks Charlie, for your answer to my question. Yes, it seems since I asked it I have already come to the conclusion that it really does boil down to surrendering the doer (thought I had... but looks like I only thought I had). Ramesh Balsekar  said something in a video I watched earlier that strangely seems to resonate with this question: 'If I am not the doer, I can do anything.' Somehow this removed my 'concern' about not being able to do anything without replacing it with any desire to do anything. Ever since I have been laughing at a joke I don't quite 'get' but seems funny anyhow. Similarly, what I felt needed answering before doesn't require answering any more. You echo that. Indeed, if Noumenon has no intention, then where could Phenomena possibly get it from?

Thoughts that come from emptiness can only be made of that. It's an odd thing, I could have sworn it was a pressing question, but it was only a lingering doubt. Very curious, isn't it? Thanks again Charlie.

C: Curiouser and curiouser!

It Is So Very Simple!

Stay On The basics Of This ... All There Is, is GOD i.e. YOU and You called "not-You"

1. YOU are Awareness, simply being. No one can say they do not exist. That existence, the sense of "I" as in "I Am," is undeniable and inescapable. Try to NOT BE. Cannot be done. So the simple pointer is, what you are is That Presence or Awareness that YOU ARE. Being. Just That! This True You ... BE-ING... is POINTED TO in language with concepts like Impersonal Consciousness; Awareness, Being ... YOU are just THAT, prior to the mind's translation into the thought I Am and I am this or that.

2. You are NOT an "individual." There are NO "individuals" anywhere except in unreal stories. The idea of a separate person is a fiction, a mind-construction, a house of cards, as the story tries to say, “I’m ME! (Unsuccessfully!) This idea of a "me" is ... on investigation ... seen to be a false claim by the thinking machinery to it's own separate existence. This ever-changing idea of a person is simply unreal. WHO says "I'm Me?" The mind. To be blunt, it's bullshit. The whole fabricated story of me is pure bullshit: all stories of “individuals” is actually a fiction. As Shakespeare said, it’s a tale told by an idiot, filled with sound and fury, signifying … NOTHING.

Look right now! Seeing with naked Awareness, where is any person … unless you (as a mind-identity) think about it? Thoughts come and go. What you ARE NEVER comes and goes anywhere. It is (You Are) fully Here Now and Eternally Free and Clear, Eternally Presence, Shining before the mind.

YOU are not a thought, not a concept, not a feeling, not a time bound entity. You are Awakeness, Aliveness, Presence-Awareness. Just THAT and NOTHING else. The story of “me” … ANY “me” … is irrelevant. Let's cut through that crap right now! Okay?

Let's bring this back to the basics: What in YOU never changes? Being-Awareness, just That. That is your True Nature.

Where is a separate entity when you are in deep dreamless sleep? Or under anesthesia? There is none. Obviously! But some Presence beats the heart, breathes air in and out, flows the blood, grows new cells and disintegrates other cells, grows hair and fingernails, ages the body etc etc! Who or what is "doing" all that? Not an "individual," "amazing" or otherwise.

Look and see that you are present and aware right now. That is the "Eternal," The Natural State; there is no other, no attainment, no flashy enlightened state, no carrot on a stick. There is NO someday when “you” will “get enlightened.” It's what you are right now. There is no other than NOW. Wherever you are you are ... Here. That's IT. Big Casino. You already got it in total and there's nothing more to this Nonduality stuff than that simple seeing, that you ARE. Awareness, Simply That. Period. Full Stop.

In our meetings and consultations, there's just friends, sharing what works to end any suffering and recognize that you are already free and clear. Really. There’s nothing to get and no one to get it. Drop the belief in “individuality” and there you are, Present and Alive, the Light of loving being, just that, nothing else. That’s IT.

That is God. That Thou Art.

"Self-realization is the total realization that there is no one to realize (or achieve) anything." ~ Ramesh Balsekar

All “Knowledge” Is In The Dream

You know an enormous amount of stuff, don't you? Since the arrival of intellect in the machine you call “your self” at around the age of two, all manner of conceptual "knowledge" has been downloaded as constant new conditioning, into the brain by Source. That conditioning plus the essence of the Genetic material (DNA) which was in the sperm and egg is what we call “knowledge” but ALL such "knowledge is mere mental noise! 

If I ask you to tell me something you know that you don't know, what will you say? Please stop now and do this: What is your answer. What is another answer?

For example I (as this apparent "Charlie-thing") don't know how to pass the bar and practice law. I also don't know how to fly a jet airplane. Now if you haven't come up with at least two answers please do that now. You need that data to go on with this investigation!

Okay done? Now the next step is a new question:

Tell me something that you DON'T KNOW that you don't know! What is one thing that you do not know that you do not know? Don't skip over this. Really ask, ask, ask until what I am pointing out is crystal clear!

That seeing, clarity,  hints at What IS. That which is Eternal and Free. The Self consists in Not-knowing!

What if: All of your mental "learned-acquired” knowledge is but a dream, what the Sages call the "dream of being this individual person ("Jiva", "dreamed character" .... or "Maya" or the "mirage or illusion of solidity, time and locale." And that makes some programmed objects seem like stubborn know-it-alls who cannot hear anything that does not fit their programming! Try running a Windows program on a Mac! But only ALL of it!!

Or as Shakespeare said, "A tale told by an idiot, signifying ... NOTHING!"

You see, intellect (as Jnansehwar Maharaj points out in “Amritanubhava") can understand objects but NOT Noumenon (The Absolute).  Intellect can express ONLY what it is programmed by Source for it to “know!” A Windows computer cannot run a program designed only for a Mac.

So if you can simply stop interpreting reality in accordance with your false knowledge for a split moment, perhaps is will dawn on you that, as Nisargadatta Maharaj said, “All knowledge is actually ignorance”. And that, in my concept, INCLUDES the “knowledge that knowledge is ignorance”. There is, in the authentic Understanding that is absolutely IMPERSONAL, neither “knowledge NOR ignorance”. There is NOTHING! And That Nothing APPEARS in this Dream-Play as what? Everything. Nothing and everything are NOT two. It’s all the One Absolute… dreaming that it is not whole and must strive to become whole. In Its conceived-believed space-time matrix, it observes itself like your body sees itself in a mirror.

So what? IT IS as IT IS and IT IS NOT as IT IS NOT.

Who cares?

Find out who cares. What will be found is there is no one who cares, yet caring appears to happen. But it is all the Dream of Shiva, whose aspect of Shakti makes the dancers all dance.

Seeing without a se-er, hearing without ears, knowing without a knower … these words point like a finger points to the moon. Look not at the finger. Looking ate the finger is the split mind trying to grasp the ungraspable. In the Final Understanding that entire house of dream cards falls in on itself and leaves What-You-Are … No Thing!

"what Got him was Noth
ing & nothing's exAct
ly what any one Living
(or some
body
Dead like even a Poet)could
hardly express what
i Mean is
what knocked him over Wasn't
(for instance)the Knowing your

whole(yes god

damned)life is a Flop or even
to
Feel how
Everything(dreamed
& hoped &
prayed for
months & weeks & days & years
& nights &
forever)is Less Than
Nothing(which would have been

Something)what got him was nothing"

~ ee cummings


This is a Companion Post to "Limitations Of The Mind-Intellect"

Instant Apperception

Limitations of the Mind-Intellect

From "Experience Of Immortality" (Amritanubhava) By Jnaneshwar Maharaj ... translation and commentary by the Sage Ramesh Balsekar:

110. Intellect can understand all objects but not the Noumenon; intellect can express volition or desire only about the objects which it knows.

111. Noumenon certainly is not perceivable by the senses, which are all the time running after sensual pleasures that end in misery. (Senses rub their faces all the time against the rocks of desires). [Especially the desire for 'enlightenment!' -ch].

The process of mind-intellect cognizing is essentially based on a subject cognizing an object. In other words, the process of cognizing can operate only in duality through the split-mind, and therefore this split-mind cannot cognize its own wholeness. The whole-mind cannot be an object, and only an object can be cognized, as Jnaneshwar contends in verse 110.

The split-mind trying to cognize the whole-mind is tantamount to an effort to cognize what is itself cognizing - the eye trying to see itself! [Or a knife trying to cut itself, a tongue trying to taste itself. ~ch].

This is also the reason why we cannot intellectually understand our true nature. Even an intellectual understanding of this very fact is only knowledge, not awareness. Any kind of knowledge can only be within the framework of the conceptual space-time continuum, knowledge is like the reflection of the sun on a drop of dew, which is not the sun. Indeed, for the awareness to happen, the split-mind conceptualizing - that is, the working of the mind-intellect - must cease. The "me" must be totally absent for the awareness of "I" to be present.

Why is this so? Because the working of the mind-intellect or reasoning is a relative process of the comparison of opposing concepts. It works through the psycho-physical mechanism or body-mind by creating the relevant objects as mind images and comparing them with other objects. This working needs a subject to do the comparing of the objects so conceived, and this is where the "me-concept" or the ego is born, because the process of conceiving - the operational element - is itself so conceived as the suppositional subject vis a’ vis the objects. This is the relative reasoning of split-mind, and obviously it is totally inadequate to deal with the whole mind of the {REAL] subjective Noumenon.

Apprehension of the subjective noumenality we are clearly belong to the non-relative dimension, which has nothing whatsoever to do with the conceptual division into subiect/obiect in a space-time context. It can only happen in the integrality of the whole-mind where no comprehender exists. In other words, the phenomenal universe, within the framework of the duality of space-time and subiect/obiect relationship, is a manifestation in consciousness' A parallel in ordinary life is the dreaming with which all of us are familiar. But what is not generally accepted or believed is that the ordinary life we generally know as "realty" is a comparable dream manifested in consciousness. The important and significant point is that the consciousness in which this "reality" appears - and which is the "cause" of its appearance - has no objective quality and therefore is not available for objective cognition in any form.

In other words, as Nisargadatta Maharaj said, the nature of consciousness is quite inconceivable. But, he asked, where is the need for such conceiving? If it is the individual ego that wants to do this conceiving, there is no such thing as an ego' for it is only a concept' Indeed, any deliberate attempt at such conceiving is an obstruction' Further, as Maharaj constantly stated, when the "me" disappears, the "I" appears: when the conceptual obstruction of the temporal ego is absent, that which is intemporal and infinite is always present' Any attempt to cognize intemporality would be absurd! How could temporality cognize intemporality? How could subject be cognized by its object? That would mean subject has been made an object, which is impossible.

For this very reason, Maharaj would say, any spiritual discipline as such is in serious danger of degenerating into what he called "mere entertainment" or “a way of passing time," because such disciplinary practices would necessarily involve duration and would be based on the allied concept of a separate entity. He constantly emphasized that all such endeavors ultimately are not compatible with instantaneous apperception of (spontaneous awakening to) reality outside the relative space-time framework. Liberation is essentially freedom from the entitification of the individual and from the conceptual chain of duration or temporality.

You can get this fantastic book HERE.  Recently I reviewed the book:  Here is what was written ....

This one is THE "proverbial book I want to take with if I am to be marooned on a desert island." There are so many elucidations of both the false sense of "me" (or "FSA" as Wayne makes the sharp distinction) and the Eternal No-Concept-Truth of The Absolute, with simply awesome clarity, that I can only recommend this work to any "seeker" still imbued with a trace of confusion or misunderstanding of what Wayne and Ramesh are sharing so generously. Get it. In my view, you will not regret it!

This is a Companion Post to All “Knowledge” Is In The Dream

Keys To The Kingdom

The amazing Sage Sri Ramana Maharshi gave all who could "hear with no ears" (i.e. Consciousness-to-Consciousness) the MAJOR keys to the Kingdom of Heaven within EVERY Human Organism: A simple yet devastatingly powerful "means" of direct investigation into and discovery of our True Nature of timeless Awareness. The book linked in this post contains that nd a lot more. Here is the Essence of Ramana's great Teaching of Self-Realization. I know from DIRECT EXPERIENCE (not mere "theory" that when applied with diligence, it does in fact WORK.

It is my hope and intent that all seekers of Truth who have found their way to this website will "try this on"; giving it a GOOD and EARNEST test. I assure you with complete confidence it is an undertaking worthy of up sustained "looking" at what and who We Are.

With All My Love,

Charlie

13 Jan. 2011

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -  - - - - - - - - - - - -  - - - - - - - - - - - -  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

SRI RAMANA MAHARSHI’S
WHO AM I? - (NAN YAR?)

As all living beings desire to be happy always, without misery, as in the case of everyone there is observed supreme love for one's self, and as happiness alone is the cause for love, in order to gain that happiness which is one's nature and which is experienced in the state of deep sleep where there is no mind, one should know one's self. For that, the path of knowledge, the inquiry of the form "Who am I?", is the principal means.

1. Who am I ?

The gross body which is composed of the seven humours (dhatus), I am not; the five cognitive sense organs, viz. the senses of hearing, touch, sight, taste, and smell, which apprehend their respective objects, viz. sound, touch, colour, taste, and odour, I am not; the five cognitive sense-organs, viz. the organs of speech, locomotion, grasping, excretion, and procreation, which have as their respective functions speaking, moving, grasping, excreting, and enjoying, I am not; the five vital airs, prana, etc., which perform respectively the five functions of in-breathing, etc., I am not; even the mind which thinks, I am not; the nescience too, which is endowed only with the residual impressions of objects, and in which there are no objects and no functioning's, I am not.

2. If I am none of these, then who am I?

After negating all of the above-mentioned as 'not this', 'not this', that Awareness which alone remains - that I am.

3. What is the nature of Awareness?

The nature of Awareness is existence-consciousness-bliss.

4. When will the realization of the Self be gained?

When the world which is what-is-seen has been removed, there will be realization of the Self which is the seer.

5. Will there not be realization of the Self even while the world is there (taken as real)?
There will not be.

6. Why?

The seer and the object seen are like the rope and the snake. Just as the knowledge of the rope which is the substrate will not arise unless the false knowledge of the illusory serpent goes, so the realization of the Self which is the substrate will not be gained unless the belief that the world is real is removed.

7. When will the world which is the object seen be removed?

When the mind, which is the cause of all cognition's and of all actions, becomes quiescent, the world will disappear.

8. What is the nature of the mind?

What is called 'mind' is a wondrous power residing in the Self. It causes all thoughts to arise. Apart from thoughts, there is no such thing as mind. Therefore, thought is the nature of mind. Apart from thoughts, there is no independent entity called the world. In deep sleep there are no thoughts, and there is no world. In the states of waking and dream, there are thoughts, and there is a world also. Just as the spider emits the thread (of the web) out of itself and again withdraws it into itself, likewise the mind projects the world out of itself and again resolves it into itself. When the mind comes out of the Self, the world appears. Therefore, when the world appears (to be real), the Self does not appear; and when the Self appears (shines) the world does not appear. When one persistently inquires into the nature of the mind, the mind will end leaving the Self (as the residue). What is referred to as the Self is the Atman. The mind always exists only in dependence on something gross; it cannot stay alone. It is the mind that is called the subtle body or the soul (jiva).

9. What is the path of inquiry for understanding the nature of the mind?

That which rises as 'I' in this body is the mind. If one inquires as to where in the body the thought 'I' rises first, one would discover that it rises in the heart. That is the place of the mind's origin. Even if one thinks constantly 'I' 'I', one will be led to that place. Of all the thoughts that arise in the mind, the 'I' thought is the first. It is only after the rise of this that the other thoughts arise. It is after the appearance of the first personal pronoun that the second and third personal pronouns appear; without the first personal pronoun there will not be the second and third.

10. How will the mind become quiescent?

By the inquiry 'Who am I?'. The thought 'who am I?' will destroy all other thoughts, and like the stick used for stirring the burning pyre, it will itself in the end get destroyed. Then, there will arise Self-realization.

11. What is the means for constantly holding on to the thought 'Who am I?'

When other thoughts arise, one should not pursue them, but should inquire: 'To whom do they arise?' It does not matter how many thoughts arise. As each thought arises, one should inquire with diligence, "To whom has this thought arisen?". The answer that would emerge would be "To me". Thereupon if one inquires "Who am I?", the mind will go back to its source; and the thought that arose will become quiescent.

With repeated practice in this manner, the mind will develop the skill to stay in its source. When the mind that is subtle goes out through the brain and the sense-organs, the gross names and forms appear; when it stays in the heart, the names and forms disappear. Not letting the mind go out, but retaining it in the Heart is what is called "inwardness" (antar-mukha). Letting the mind go out of the Heart is known as "externalisation" (bahir-mukha). Thus, when the mind stays in the Heart, the 'I' which is the source of all thoughts will go, and the Self which ever exists will shine. Whatever one does, one should do without the egoity "I". If one acts in that way, all will appear as of the nature of Siva (God).

12. Are there no other means for making the mind quiescent?

Other than inquiry, there are no adequate means. If through other means it is sought to control the mind, the mind will appear to be controlled, but will again go forth. Through the control of breath also, the mind will become quiescent; but it will be quiescent only so long as the breath remains controlled, and when the breath resumes the mind also will again start moving and will wander as impelled by residual impressions. The source is the same for both mind and breath. Thought, indeed, is the nature of the mind. The thought "I" is the first thought of the mind; and that is egoity.
It is from that whence egoity originates that breath also originates. Therefore, when the mind becomes quiescent, the breath is controlled, and when the breath is controlled the mind becomes quiescent. But in deep sleep, although the mind becomes quiescent, the breath does not stop. This is because of the will of God, so that the body may be preserved and other people may not be under the impression that it is dead. In the state of waking and in samadhi, when the mind becomes quiescent the breath is controlled. Breath is the gross form of mind. Till the time of death, the mind keeps breath in the body; and when the body dies the mind takes the breath along with it. Therefore, the exercise of breath-control is only an aid for rendering the mind quiescent (manonigraha); it will not destroy the mind (manonasa).

Like the practice of breath-control. meditation on the forms of God, repetition of mantras, restriction on food, etc., are but aids for rendering the mind quiescent.
Through meditation on the forms of God and through repetition of mantras, the mind becomes one-pointed. The mind will always be wandering. Just as when a chain is given to an elephant to hold in its trunk it will go along grasping the chain and nothing else, so also when the mind is occupied with a name or form it will grasp that alone. When the mind expands in the form of countless thoughts, each thought becomes weak; but as thoughts get resolved the mind becomes one-pointed and strong; for such a mind Self-inquiry will become easy. Of all the restrictive rules, that relating to the taking of sattvic food in moderate quantities is the best; by observing this rule, the sattvic quality of mind will increase, and that will be helpful to Self-inquiry.

13. The residual impressions (thoughts) of objects appear wending like the waves of an ocean. When will all of them get destroyed?

As the meditation on the Self rises higher and higher, the thoughts will get destroyed.

14. Is it possible for the residual impressions of objects that come from beginningless time, as it were, to be resolved, and for one to remain as the pure Self?

Without yielding to the doubt "Is it possible, or not?", one should persistently hold on to the meditation on the Self. Even if one be a great sinner, one should not worry and weep "O! I am a sinner, how can I be saved?"; one should completely renounce the thought "I am a sinner"; and concentrate keenly on meditation on the Self; then, one would surely succeed. There are not two minds - one good and the other evil; the mind is only one. It is the residual impressions that are of two kinds - auspicious and inauspicious. When the mind is under the influence of auspicious impressions it is called good; and when it is under the influence of inauspicious impressions it is regarded as evil.
The mind should not be allowed to wander towards worldly objects and what concerns other people. However bad other people may be, one should bear no hatred for them. Both desire and hatred should be eschewed. All that one gives to others one gives to one's self. If this truth is understood who will not give to others? When one's self arises all arises; when one's self becomes quiescent all becomes quiescent. To the extent we behave with humility, to that extent there will result good. If the mind is rendered quiescent, one may live anywhere.

15. How long should inquiry be practised?

As long as there are impressions of objects in the mind, so long the inquiry "Who am I?" is required.  [NOTE It is surprising to me that so many miss this point!! C.H.] As thoughts arise they should be destroyed then and there in the very place of their origin, through inquiry. If one resorts to contemplation of the Self unintermittently, until the Self is gained, that alone would do. As long as there are enemies within the fortress, they will continue to sally forth; if they are destroyed as they emerge, the fortress will fall into our hands.

16. What is the nature of the Self?

What exists in truth is the Self alone. The world, the individual soul, and God are appearances in it. like silver in mother-of-pearl, these three appear at the same time, and disappear at the same time. The Self is that where there is absolutely no "I" thought. That is called "Silence". The Self itself is the world; the Self itself is "I"; the Self itself is God; all is Shiva, the Self.

17. Is not everything the work of God?

Without desire, resolve, or effort, the sun rises; and in its mere presence, the sun-stone emits fire, the lotus blooms, water evaporates; people perform their various functions and then rest. Just as in the presence of the magnet the needle moves, it is by virtue of the mere presence of God that the souls governed by the three (cosmic) functions or the fivefold divine activity perform their actions and then rest, in accordance with their respective karmas. God has no resolve; no karma attaches itself to Him. That is like worldly actions not affecting the sun, or like the merits and demerits of the other four elements not affecting all pervading space.

18. Of the devotees, who is the greatest?

He who gives himself up to the Self that is God is the most excellent devotee. Giving one's self up to God means remaining constantly in the Self without giving room for the rise of any thoughts other than that of the Self. Whatever burdens are thrown on God, He bears them. Since the supreme power of God makes all things move, why should we, without submitting ourselves to it, constantly worry ourselves with thoughts as to what should be done and how, and what should not be done and how not? We know that the train carries all loads, so after getting on it why should we carry our small luggage on our head to our discomfort, instead of putting it down in the train and feeling at ease?

19. What is non-attachment?

As thoughts arise, destroying them utterly without any residue in the very place of their origin is non-attachment. Just as the pearl-diver ties a stone to his waist, sinks to the bottom of the sea and there takes the pearls, so each one of us should be endowed with non-attachment, dive within oneself and obtain the Self-Pearl.

20. Is it not possible for God and the Guru to effect the release of a soul?

God and the Guru will only show the way to release; they will not by themselves take the soul to the state of release. In truth, God and the Guru are not different. Just as the prey which has fallen into the jaws of a tiger has no escape, so those who have come within the ambit of the Guru's gracious look will be saved by the Guru and will not get lost; yet, each one should by his own effort pursue the path shown by God or Guru and gain release. One can know oneself only with one's own eye of knowledge, and not with somebody else's. Does he who is Rama require the help of a mirror to know that he is Rama?

21. Is it necessary for one who longs for release to inquire into the nature of categories (tattvas)?

Just as one who wants to throw away garbage has no need to analyse it and see what it is, so one who wants to know the Self has no need to count the number of categories or inquire into their characteristics; what he has to do is to reject altogether the categories that hide the Self. The world should be considered like a dream.

22. Is there no difference between waking and dream?

Waking is long and a dream short; other than this there is no difference. Just as waking happenings seem real while awake. so do those in a dream while dreaming. In dream the mind takes on another body. In both waking and dream states thoughts. names and forms occur simultaneously.

23. Is it any use reading books for those who long for release?

All the texts say that in order to gain release one should render the mind quiescent; therefore their conclusive teaching is that the mind should be rendered quiescent; once this has been understood there is no need for endless reading. In order to quieten the mind one has only to inquire within oneself what one's Self is; how could this search be done in books? One should know one's Self with one's own eye of wisdom. The Self is within the five sheaths; but books are outside them. Since the Self has to be inquired into by discarding the five sheaths, it is futile to search for it in books. There will come a time when one will have to forget all that one has learned.

24. What is happiness?

Happiness is the very nature of the Self; happiness and the Self are not different. There is no happiness in any object of the world. We imagine through our ignorance that we derive happiness from objects. When the mind goes out, it experiences misery. In truth, when its desires are fulfilled, it returns to its own place and enjoys the happiness that is the Self. Similarly, in the states of sleep, samadhi and fainting, and when the object desired is obtained or the object disliked is removed, the mind becomes inward-turned, and enjoys pure Self-Happiness. Thus the mind moves without rest alternately going out of the Self and returning to it. Under the tree the shade is pleasant; out in the open the heat is scorching. A person who has been going about in the sun feels cool when he reaches the shade. Someone who keeps on going from the shade into the sun and then back into the shade is a fool. A wise man stays permanently in the shade. Similarly, the mind of the one who knows the truth does not leave Brahman. The mind of the ignorant, on the contrary, revolves in the world, feeling miserable, and for a little time returns to Brahman to experience happiness. In fact, what is called the world is only thought. When the world disappears, i.e. when there is no thought, the mind experiences happiness; and when the world appears, it goes through misery.

25. What is wisdom-insight (jnana-drsti)?

Remaining quiet is what is called wisdom-insight. To remain quiet is to resolve the mind in the Self. Telepathy, knowing past, present and future happenings and clairvoyance do not constitute wisdom-insight.

26. What is the relation between desirelessness and wisdom?

Desirelessness is wisdom. The two are not different; they are the same. Desirelessness is refraining from turning the mind towards any object. Wisdom means the appearance of no object. In other words, not seeking what is other than the Self is detachment or desirelessness; not leaving the Self is wisdom.

27. What is the difference between inquiry and meditation?

Inquiry consists in retaining the mind in the Self. Meditation consists in thinking that one's self is Brahman, existence-consciousness-bliss.

28. What is release?

Inquiring into the nature of one's self that is in bondage, and realising one's true nature is release. 

- Sri Ramana Maharshi

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -  - - - - - - - - - - - -  - - - - - - - - - - - -  - - - - - - - - - - -


Sri Ramana also noted:

(When asked whether an individual had no free will at all):

He reportedly said, "The 'individual' certainly has free will to inquire into his or her true nature by 'self inquiry'. And such inquiry would surely reveal that the 'individual' is the ego, a mere concept which is in itself the bondage. And that liberation is nothing but the liberation from this concept of bondage."

He also said,

"You are awareness. Awareness is another name for you. Since you are awareness there is no need to attain or cultivate it. All that you have to do is to give up being aware of other things, that is of the not-Self. If one gives up being aware of them then pure awareness alone remains, and that is the Self."

"Liberation is our very nature. We are that. The very fact that we wish for liberation shows that freedom from all bondage is our real nature. It is not to be freshly acquired. All that is necessary is to get rid of the false notion that we are bound. When we achieve that, there will be no desire or thought of any sort. So long as one desires liberation, so long, you may take it, one is in bondage."

"There is only one state, that of consciousness or awareness or existence. The three states of waking, dream and sleep cannot be real. They simply come and go. The real will always exist."

"In deep sleep man is devoid of possessions, including his own body. Instead of being unhappy he is quite happy. Everyone desires to sleep soundly. The conclusion is that happiness is inherent in man and is not due to external causes. One must realize the Self in order to open the store of unalloyed happiness."

"Realization is nothing to be gained afresh; it is already there. All that is necessary is to get rid of the thought `I have not realized'."

"It is the ego which raises such difficulties, creating obstacles and then suffering from the perplexity of apparent paradoxes. Find out who makes the enquiries and the Self will be found."

In short: Two Questions ... "Who Am I?" and "Who Asks This Question?"

Advaita Means Nonseparate Reality

This Is A Non-Separate Reality

Years ago I was exposed to the fascinating writings of one Carlos Castaneda. One of his books was called “A Separate Reality”.

There is a core assumption that creates an enormous amount of mischief: There are “powers” an individual can gain; there is a possibility of “co-creating” with God (as if God needs our help!) Castaneda learned, from his guru Don Juan, such things as stopping the world. I wonder now, WHO is this that was going to DO that!?

There is ONLY ONE REALITY. Defining Reality as That which IS, That which dances as the worlds as God-In-Drag, That One-Essence that is BOTH nothing and everything, ONE Non-Separate Reality is ALL There IS.

Here is a bit of dialogue that may shed a bit of light on this:

Q: I caught one of your videos on YouTube and wanted to ask you if you have become broad enough to realize God. I call it God, you can call it what you like, out of existence and both in and out? 

C: This Loving Oneness (god or whatever label you like) cannot Be Known. To "know" Oneness there would have to be a sense of separation FROM Oneness. Who cannot see the fault in that logic? Being, Awareness, Livingness is right here. That registers all thoughts, emotions, stories, identities etc. in Timeless Space. YOU ARE THAT.

Q: Yes, I do perceive this, what I was referring to was the process. Some would say that enlightenment is "now" and that it takes no time, and it does not, for those who are enlightened, but enlightenment does take time and it is a process when you are in the midst of it, at least it was for me, but I can only speak of my own experiences, not for yours or others.  To realize god, is to realize god in existence and out of existence, and in both and be able to have sufficient ground, to be big enough to realize god both within and without as the one. To see god in gods terrible, torridness, and to see god's magnificent beauty and to have realized that underneath it all, its nothing, nothing to speak of.

C:  Well said.

Q: You are Guru, I bow at your lotus feet.

C: YOU are "The Guru", there is ONLY You.

It's all the Mirror - The One Self. God is All There Is.

Q: Ah, well Charlie, there is only one Guru in existence and that is "I". That "I" that is reading these words and that "I" that is typing them now, is Guru.  "I", who am Guru acknowledge the Guru,” I" within you. Guru appears outside of you to push your awareness inward so that Guru within you may arise, that is the way I perceive it. But I am preaching to the preacher now aren't I?

I have climbed the mountain of myself. In this place, where the air is so thin, and the coldness of truth for most would be unbearable, I can look down and see where I have come from, and survey my surroundings. In this place where there are so few, I can see others who have climbed to their peak, summit or pinnacle, out there I can see you my friend, and I know that indeed I am in resplendent company.

C: Ditto. Because you are the mirror and I am the mirror – NOT Two. More musings on This Wordlessness ….. you are the mirror and I am the mirror – NOT Two. we remain as we are, one I called we, one humanity called us, one Self called ALL-THERE-IS.... and yet - there IS no IS… No guru no disciple no path no goal no space no time no self no other yet this IS that is NOT seems so very seems that it IS.

One Essence appearing as.... everything. As Bob Adamson puts it.

No one out here. You see your Self in the mirror of the empty mind, dear One. Just poetry. I have no Truth to tell or know, not here not now, not as This. Thanks for writing. Your expression of This is very sublime and enjoyable.

The True Guru and True Disciple

The True Guru and True Disciple

Long ago there was a novice archer named Eklavya, who longed for a True Guru to show him the finest art of archery. But Eklavya had no physical Guru. Why? The Guru of Archery at the time, Dronacharya, had refused to accept him as a disciple as he belonged to a lower "caste". Eklavya desperately wanted Dronacharya to teach him the art of archery. But when it finally dawned on Eklavya that come whatever may Dronacharya would never accept him as his pupil, he made a clay mold (a “Murti”) of Dronacharya, worshiped that image of the guru, and practiced archery with great commitment.

With the passage of time Eklavya mastered the art of archery and it transpired that there was none comparable to him. His skills and accomplishments of archery far exceeded the best pupil of Dronacharya... the famous Arjuna of the Bhagavad Gita! One day Dronacharya came across a very unfamiliar sight. He observed that someone had filled the mouth of a dog with arrows with such precision that the dog was not least harmed. According to him only Dronacharya was competent for such a feat.

He was filled with awe as he realized that such an art had not even been taught to Arjuna by him. He called for the incumbent. Eklavya was brought on the scene and realizing that Eklavya’s art of archery far exceeded his best pupil.... There and then he asked of Eklavya how he had performed this feat. Eklavya explain the circumstances and described the whole episode of making a clay mold of Dronacharya and practicing archery and worshipping his Murti.

Years ago the character called Charlie was very frustrated and therefor quite inappropriate and disrespectful toward my Sadguru, Wayne Liquorman. My nature as this organism, programmed as it is by DNA and conditioning with a destiny stamped at conception, is to be short tempered, and impatient. No wonder it became a racing driver! Fortunately for my friends and others, that tendency has abated quite a lot since the Understanding began replacing "me" with Itself!

In ay event when Wayne subsequently  requested that I not return to his meetings (Wayne is not one to suffer fools, gladly or otherwise, that is HIS programming!) I was initially devastated as I though I had lost my Guru. 

But some time later, after exploring Advaita through other avenues and sources, I came to see that never had I lost my Guru; only in concept was there ever any separation of Guru and Disciple, and in the final seeing the Guru and Disciple are BOTH the Noumenal Absolute and so no clay image or body form is required for the natural worship of the Guru as my very Self was needed, and in fact that notion of a separate Guru could become a gigantic obstacle! That said, I did and do in fact enjoy Wayne's MP3s, Videos and Live Talks on the Net tremendously heart-resonant! That is my version of Eklavya's Murti.

I find the legend of Eklavya spot on point in understanding the real nature of the Guru-Disciple play: regardless of the apparent actions of either Guru or Disciple the Heart knows what is real … and so I affirm with complete respect and love that indeed, Wayne was, and IS “my Sadguru”.

And so far as I know I am still NOT welcome at his meetings. So what? Who cares? The one who cares has been assimilated into the timeless formless Absolute which is the True Guru, That which manifests as both Guru and Disciple.

I love Wayne … and YOU, dear reader, as my own True Self, the Self of ALL.

(I am grateful to my first Sadguru, Baba Muktananda, for sharing this story. I had no idea that it would "hit home" over 3o years later! Sadgurunath maharaj ki jay!)

Follow-up to “Just "Because" ...

Q: Thanks so much for your detailed and directly to-the-point response.

C: You are very welcome, my friend.

Q: Yesterday it seemed as though the background became the foreground and the foreground slipped to the background - I thought, "This is it!" All was flowing and I can only describe it as feels like I was a single point of consciousness to which everything was appearing and happening. At the same time, it was spacious - so spacious.

C: That IS your True nature. The “experience” of that is a sort of free sample, a peek behind the veil. Yet that Seeing can never go to waste!

Q: This morning I woke up and felt different - "I" was definitely back and thinking/longing for the "experience" of yesterday! So that is what is happening today - the thinking is longing for a memory of an apparent experience.

C: Yes, the infamous “flip-flop” happens. That TOO is the natural functioning of Consciousness appearing as a “me” or pseudo-subject”. The final apperception is beyond both the presence of that experience of “the Single Point of Consciousness” and the absence of that experience. That apperception (outside of time and space) produces the absolute non-conceptual knowing-sans-knower that What Is (the Eternal State) is neither presence NOR absence, but rather the demise of the false subject to whom either experience appears. In short is the Experience-ING which is the manifest appearance of the unbroken Whole. Consciousness is all there is, manifest and unmanifest, or objective appearance and the nonobjective screen on which all appears … these are Not Two. Ye Olde mind, being a hypnosis of “subject/object dichotomy”, cannot cognize That!

Q: Yesterday it seemed like there were no borders and everything was just flowing. Today, it seems like there is a border which is the surface of my body - a border which seems to limit "me" to this body - how can "who I am" be everything if my consciousness is limited to the confines of this body?

C: The false identity CLAIMS (Incorrectly!) to be the body! This is the hypnosis. And the hypnotic pseudo-subject cannot dehypnotize itself. Only That which performed the hypnosis (to manifest Itself as what appears) can remove the hypnosis. Understanding that whet you THIN K you are is not what you TRULY are is the beginning. Let the pointers sink in, without attempting to comprehend or memorize them. The “process” is happening; as Ramana Maharshi said, “Your head is in the tiger’s mouth”. When or even if the tiger will bite off the head (the notion of being a separate volitional “entity” is NOT in your control, nor in anyone’s control.

Q: This was the first thing that stopped the flow and the other thing is about thinking. If thinking just happens, how is it that we can direct our thinking to consider particular issues such as "Who am I?"? It feels like thinking just happens until steered to a particular matter.

C: All thoughts are produced in and by Consciousness and that includes the thought “who am I?”. There is no one to assert you must ask who am I, nor is there anyone to ask who am I. It happens! All that appears in phenomenality simply HAPPENS. Consciousness knows itself ONLY in and as its manifest appearance. The objects are reflections in the Mirror of Consciousness and ultimately seen clearly as Not Two. All there IS is Consciousness. Let that pointer sink down under the conceptual structure called “you or me”. There is only I (Consciousness); no "me" is real, merely a mirage, imagination of mind. Only the I (Consciousness-arising as I AM) is real and never-changing! Let it all sink in as best you can.

Q: Please don't feel you have to reply to this - I just wanted to let you know what happened so far!

C: It’s all happening exactly As It Is. Including your report and this response. Consciousness writes and Consciousness reads. There is no actual separation; that was only a wrong concept. Simple! Perfect. And whatever you can objectify is NOT what You are, ie The Absolute Nonconceptual Infinite SUBJECT. The phenomenal objsctive bodymind and the phenomenal notion that the there is a subjct-me IN the bodymond is delusion. Seeing this dissolves the hypnosis here and now!

Q: Thanks again and love…

C: And All Love To YOU!

“The very act of perceiving shows that you are not what you perceive”. ~ Nisargadatta Maharaj