All writings herein serve to open up the world towards knowledge that matters, to piece together the greatest philosophies of living, and to expound ways towards
the path of freedom, happiness & choice.
There appears to be an insatiable appetite for self-improvement. Many people seek to be better people with better lives. Many people seek something or someone to motivate them. Many people seek useful advice, tips and techniques. Although some of these people may believe they have become better people with better lives, despite this apparent achievement they seldom experience fulfillment and in many cases experience frustration, disappointment and emptiness.
There is an alternative to this self-improvement/motivation/advice orientation that focuses on self-awareness instead of self-improvement, transformation instead of motivation, and illumination instead of advice.
Self-improvement approaches are rooted in the context of judgment (i.e. good/bad, right/wrong, better/worse, positive/negative). Implicit in the concept of self-improvement is that if a person can be “more good,” “more right,” “more better,” and “more positive”, then those achievements will provide the person’s greatest opportunity to experience a fulfilling life. Unfortunately, people find that although they may be “more good” than they were in the past, they still experience themselves as not being “good” enough to experience fulfillment. Although they may be “more right” than they were in the past, they still experience themselves as not being “right” enough to experience fulfillment. Although they may be “more better” than they were in the past, they still experience themselves as not being “better” enough to experience fulfillment. Furthermore, although they may be “more positive” than they were in the past, they still experience themselves as not being “positive” enough to experience fulfillment. In other words, they have an experience similar to being a dog chasing its tail.
Self-awareness approaches, on the other hand, are premised on the concept that lack of awareness leads to inauthentic behavior (i.e. behavior that is inconsistent with the person’s true or inspired self). This inauthentic behavior is a barrier to full effectiveness, full self-expression, and having an inspired and fulfilling experience of life. Accordingly, with awareness, a fulfilling experience of life is possible immediately, while without awareness it may never be.
The essential difference in these two approaches is that self-improvement implies that a person needs to be better than they are and self-awareness implies that a person needs to be who they really are.
Motivational approaches are premised on the observation that people are prone to react to external stimulation and that it is possible to offer externally induced stimulation that can cause people to alter their behavior. Accordingly, if the “right” stimulus is offered, the “right” behavior should occur. The nature of this approach has it be dependent upon external stimuli to produce behavior that would not otherwise occur. Therefore, if you remove the stimuli, the alteration in behavior may cease. Furthermore, over time, that same stimuli may cease to cause that alteration of behavior and new stimuli may be required.
Transformational approaches are predicated on the premise that how a person behaves is a function of the way they are viewing life. Since the person’s viewpoint (i.e. mindset) is generally transparent to them (i.e. not readily seen), they may demonstrate little power in altering their viewpoint in ways that would lead to profound shifts in effectiveness and the experience of fulfillment. Transformational approaches are not focused on behavioral change, but are focused on impacting the viewpoint that is informing the behavior.
The essential difference between these approaches is that motivation approaches rely on the source of behavior being external while transformation approaches rely on the source of behavior being internal.
Advice oriented approaches are forms of self-improvement premised on the value of receiving tips, techniques, suggestions, and/or guidance, from some form of authority, that offers “a good or better way.” These approaches are naturally subject to the same pitfalls as other self-improvement approaches in that they are also improvement driven. Additionally, they are only as useful as the quality of the advice and the person’s willingness to take the advice and apply it correctly.
Illumination oriented approaches offer access to self-awareness. As with the self-awareness approaches, the value of illumination is predicated on the impact that occurs out of people seeing what they haven’t been seeing that is at the source of inauthentic behavior.
Advice oriented practitioners offer a “good or better way,” whereas illumination oriented practitioners offer the opportunity to “see” your way to personal effectiveness and fulfillment.
The movie ‘The Secret’ proposes that one can get one wants by applying ‘the law of attraction’. ‘Ask, believe and receive’ is the motto of those that wish to create abundance by applying the power of their mind and positive thinking. However there is a much more fundamental secret by which one can realize that one is, at the deepest level, totally abundant and lacking nothing … even if it appears this is not the case at the surface level of body/mind. When this realization kicks in one finds that ‘each moment is enough, or perfect, in itself’ and this leaves one truly ‘wanting nothing’, in both senses of the phrase! Then ‘asking, believing and receiving’ is truly too much effort, and even the thought of ‘positive thinking’ seems positively exhausting!
This ‘deeper level’ is always present, for it is within this that the body/mind appear, and can be readily discovered by direct investigation into one’s moment to moment experience:
1. Consider the following statement: ‘Life, for each of us, is just a series of moment-to-moment experiences’. These experiences start when we are born and continue until we die, rushing headlong after each other, so that they seem to merge into a whole that we call ‘my life’. However, if we stop to look we can readily see that, for each of us, every moment is just an experience.
2. Any moment of experience has only three elements: thoughts (including all mental images), sensations (everything sensed by the body and its sense organs) and awareness of these thoughts and sensations. Emotions and feelings are a combination of thought and sensation.
3. Thoughts and sensations are ephemeral, that is they come and go, and are objects, i.e. ‘things’ that are perceived.
4. Awareness is the constant subject, the ‘perceiver’ of thoughts and sensations and that which is always present. Even during sleep there is awareness of dreams and of the quality of that sleep; and there is also awareness of sensations; if a sensation becomes strong enough, such as a sound or uncomfortable sensation, one will wake up.
5. All thoughts and sensations appear in awareness, exist in awareness, and subside back into awareness. Before any particular thought or sensation there is effortless awareness of ‘what is’: the sum of all thoughts and sensations occurring at any given instant. During the thought or sensation in question there is effortless awareness of it within ‘what is’. Then when it has gone there is still effortless awareness of ‘what is’.
6. So the body/mind is experienced as a flow of ephemeral objects appearing in this awareness, the ever present subject. For each of us any external object or thing is experienced as a combination of thought and sensation, i.e. you may see it, touch it, know what it is called, and so on. The point is that for us to be aware of anything, real or imaginary, requires thought about and/or sensation of that thing and it is awareness of these thoughts and sensations that constitutes our experience.
7. Therefore this awareness is the constant substratum in which all things appear to arise, exist and subside. In addition, all living things rely on awareness of their environment to exist and their behaviour is directly affected by this. At the level of living cells and above this is self-evident, but it has been shown that even electrons change their behaviour when (aware of) being observed! Thus this awareness exists at a deeper level than body/mind (and matter/energy[1]) and we are this awareness!
8. This does not mean that at a surface level we are not the mind and body, for they arise in, are perceived by and subside back into awareness, which is the deepest and most fundamental level of our being. However, if we choose to identify with this deepest level – awareness – (the perceiver) rather than the surface level, mind/body (the perceived), then thoughts and sensations are seen for what they truly are, just ephemeral objects which come and go, leaving awareness itself totally unaffected.[2]
This awareness is always present, for without it we would not be aware of our own thoughts and sensations. Once we see this, and can identify with this deeper level of awareness, then it can be readily realised that ‘each moment is enough, or perfect, in itself’, for awareness just witnesses ‘what is’ at any given moment without wishing to achieve or change anything. Then this ‘each moment is enough’ becomes a powerful tool to overcome boredom, insomnia, mental restlessness, mind created suffering etc… For awareness itself is never afflicted by these problems, and identification with this gives perfect peace for awareness is always still and silent, which is perfect peace.
I have found that ‘each moment is enough’, and identification with this deeper level, is a marvellous way to overcome boredom whilst on long flights, as the time seems to pass miraculously and boredom completely vanishes for awareness itself is never bored. In fact boredom is a property of the mind caused by it judging every moment and seeking to change ‘what is’ to suit its own preferences, whereas awareness itself is always content and at peace.
This ‘each moment is enough’ is also a great way to overcome insomnia, for once the mind identifies with awareness it stops worrying about sleeplessness. When this occurs sleep automatically takes over if the mind is tired, and if not the peace provided by identifying with awareness provides refreshment and relaxation.
So for me ‘each moment is enough’, which implies identification with the pure awareness that one already is at the deepest level, is the fundamental secret. This leaves one ‘wanting no thing’ and ‘being nothing’ for awareness is not a thing, but is the constant conscious field of subjectivity which sees, or witnesses, everything appearing in it.
In fact ‘each moment is enough’ can be a ‘magic bullet’ to remove all mental anxiety and agitation. If these do occur then they too can be a wake up call to the fact that we have stopped identifying at the deeper level and are back at the surface level of body/mind.
(Update 29th June, 2010: I eventually realized that this is just a technical post based on a surface world. Technical as in it provides a technique, but remains just that – to learn more, you need to follow my more recent posts. Having a technique is cool, but having trust, that will help one even more.)
Dear readers,
I apologize for not having been writing to you much.
It didn’t motivate me to write something which its conclusion I still haven’t satisfactorily come about, so I have been holding off from writing a post.
However, that’s about to change.
For I may have something beneficial to share with you today.
I have, in the past few weeks, been involved in a sales development role.
This job has provided me an opportunity to talk to many, many people a day, thus allowing me to view the world and the characteristics of its people more clearly.
And I realized – sometimes, spirituality can be too spiritual.
Non-duality can be too non-dual.
The key to grasping what’s right can only be done by one being grounded in his or her maturity.
As I have come to observed, I may have involved myself too much in the spiritual sense, without knowing that what I’ve invested my time into was purely on one little side of what the world offers.
Why do some people seem so out of line to you in terms of their sense of reality?
How can some believe so strongly an ideology is true that their lives seem to revolve entirely around it, while others can discard the same ideology without so much as giving it a closer glance?
It’s not that one is right, or another’s wrong.
From my observations, it’s because many people, too many people, didn’t realize that they have listened or watched too attentively to the chatter or images they’ve construed in their minds.
Simply said – because people paid too much attention to the illusion that they hold in their minds – that often times reflect no direct consequences on the world they are living in right now.
Or if it does reflect anything when one base his or her life entirely in the mind, often it reflects in less admirable behaviors that gets expressed externally in reality (rarely with any positive results in return as one can usually observe).
In the past few weeks, I have come to terms on this:
That the internal mind and the external world are two different worlds, unless action has taken place.
Don’t take me wrong, I don’t mean to talk down on any teachings that have been taught on how the mind affects reality.
I’m just attempting to, for once, be mature enough to see through the fog and into the facts.
Goals and dreams aren’t bad things.
It’s only when one devotes his or her thinking to those thoughts that negative consequences surface.
Thoughts aren’t bad things either.
It’s only when one actively involve in the creation of it that confusion, fear, and many other negative emotions happen.
Eventually, I realized that the most respectable, most successful, most admired legends of the world who have accomplished great things do indeed function differently from the rest of the world.
The way they live is truly different, so ‘strange’ (genius) that it makes sense that most people never accepted that there is such a way to live their lives.
I realized that these outstanding personalities do live, think, and have dreams like all of us.
But the difference is:
They never actively push themselves to ‘mentalizing’ thoughts.
In other words, they don’t create unecessary chatters, don’t create dreamy scenes in their minds, and so on.
Instead, what they do is very simple:
They have an immense ability to focus.
If I hadn’t known any better, I would have thought that the word ‘focus’ means pushing myself hard in a direction while disregarding all distractions along the way when the word is expressed by someone.
But today, the word ‘focus’ carries or indicates something much, much more, simple, for me.
And it’s just this:
That nothing else exists within your attention, other than deep observance and engagement.
I can go on writing and explaining about this, but I believe that I should trust in my readers’ maturity as well.
Some things aren’t meant to be described in detail, as reading it and experiencing it means entirely different things.
Maturity.
It is truly important, if anything written here is to be correctly or clearly apprehended.
So how can you put this ideology into practice?
How could you perhaps have a taste at seeing through the eyes of true excellence?
How can you adopt this focus?
I don’t have a custom advice for everyone, but here’s something that I hope you can benefit from:
In the next few days, try committing yourself to doing this.
If you have a chatter in your brain, don’t allow it to continue – speak it out.
If scenes, stories or images appear in your mind, let it silent down and if you want, you can calmly talk about it.
The key is, no matter what, don’t allow the mind to get wild silently & internally inside of you.
Hear those words coming out of your mouth, and realize that the sound you hear is what’s real in the external world.
While all of us can imagine different things in our minds, what we sense on the outside is what’s feasible.
Then, once you have finished the talking, and have rested your lips, allow the focus to stay.
And if or when the thoughts distract you from your focus, speak it again.
Discuss it until you’re satisfied that the case is close, your mind is left with nothing, and you can be at peace with the presence of now.
Until you can observe everything with true focus.
Whatever it may be, allow yourself to learn from yourself.
Allow yourself to accept yourself.
Because let’s face the fact – our minds can ignore what’s before us, who we see in the mirror, or how the actual world appears.
But it would falter in attempt of exchanging a fantasy of the mind with reality.
I’m not asking you to accept reality, or to embrace it as the only thing that counts.
That never crossed my mind.
What I attempt to share with you, is the focus.
In which I hope, when you have grasped it, can improve your life so much for the better.
Thanks for reading.
Dear readers,
I apologize for not having been writing to you much.
In the past few weeks, or months, I have yet again learned so much more.
And it didn’t motivate me to write something which conclusion I still haven’t satisfactorily come about.
I curse myself for not being eloquent enough in speech or in the written word.
I curse myself for not being rich enough, so that I could distribute his words to the world.
I curse myself for being so unaware, of life’s greatest lessons when they presented themselves before me countless of times in life.
I bought a book titled “Tuesdays with Morrie” two days ago.
If I was rich enough, I would buy every person in this world a copy of this book.
Similar to Randy Pausch’s “The Last Lecture” – only more passionate, and carry more advices that the hour long lecture could contain, Morrie Schwartz – a sociology professor who embraced life on his deathbed, shared his greatest advices on living life with his student Mitch Albom.
Mitch Albom eventually written “Tuesdays with Morrie”, sharing his professor’s final ‘thesis’ with him, about what matters most to a person who knows his days are numbered, and the greatest points most of us have missed while going through our daily ordeals.
I only hope I could be eloquent enough to state how precious this book could be to you.
But no words can describe better, Morrie’s final days of being the teacher he is, than his advices which came straight from his examplary actions before he died.
I could go on writing every word I could muster from my brains about his teachings, but my heart aches knowing that I’ll never be able to accomplish a good job delivering his words to you.
I had only one way.
To let you know, that “Tuesdays with Morrie” exists on almost any major book store, and I sincerely hope you would buy it over any other books you’re considering next.
One of the biggest takeaways, and one of the most vivid picture I had in mind from reading “Tuesdays with Morrie” – is to realize that when I’m lying on the bed at old age, barely able to move my sunken, helpless body…
What I would want most,
Is to have many, many people who love me stay or visit my bedside, allowing me to still love them, and be loved in return, knowing that my final days are the brightest, truest, most giving – even if they may be most helpless, days of my life.
Just like Morrie.
For, what do all other things in the world matter to you, if you were to bring none of them with you, and had to be alone through your last days, not being able to wipe your own ass, not being able enough to toughen up for the next ordeal, not having anyone to accompany you in the darkness of your own room?
Anything I would say would only sound brash, forgive me.
I couldn’t do it as well as Morrie, who was able to put the harshest situations of life into a genuine perspective of kind, touching, and lasting lessons that anyone who listens to him would remember, if not for a long time, for life.
Too young, too naive, too egoistic, I couldn’t yet fully live out Morrie’s example, and this aches me.
But the least I can do is point you to that $7.50 book on the book shelf, give you my promise that it’ll be a book worth reading – no matter who you are – and nod solemnly in the direction of it earnestly expressing, “get it”.
I only hope I was rich enough, so I could buy every person in this world Morrie’s precious advices for free.
So that we could all know how to live a full life.
Every human being is that spark of consciousness coming into this dimension. It comes and then goes back into the source. And something takes something back to the source like a bee going back to the bee hive with some nectar. Not accumulated knowledge or anything like that but something takes back. That’s as far as I can go right now with this. And that comes out of an intuitive tuning in.
So to know who you are beyond concepts embrace the “not knowing” in yourself. And then you’re getting closer to the essence of who you are. Let’s see if you can get a limited understanding of what this not knowing is…thoughts subside for a moment but the strange thing is there is something that is still present there. I say something but it’s not something, but language is limited because language is about the world of things. Thoughts subside and there’s something even when you’re not thinking, you’re actually present. And even if you were not perceiving at that time…you could say, ‘yes I’m present because there’s sense perception happening.’ Even if you close you eyes and even if you put ear-plugs in or there’s total silence. We can even try it now. You close your eyes. All visual sense perception have become obliterated. And there’s no noise going on either. So before you were aware of visual perceptions and you are aware of this voice and now there’s neither visual perceptions nor auditory perceptions for a moment.
What’s left?
You are still there. The amazing thing is even without reminding yourself about your past or your future, your present life situation or your name or looking at your body, there is something that is still present. You know that, but it is not differentiated. It doesn’t have a history, what is still present. It has no past and no future to it.
You can’t really say much about it. You can’t define it further because it is what Buddhists call empty. It’s emptiness. It’s formlessness. It is formless consciousness. If you find that in yourself and it’s always there underneath the movement of form which is thinking and emotions and even sense perceptions. Underneath, it is always there. If you find that, even the most unprofitable life, people who have messed their whole life up, has become redeemed because you have found the one thing that really matters, yourself.
Of course you can’t stay there indefinitely in that space. At some point the world of form returns. But what is possible is not to lose connectedness with that dimension. In other words and this is the ultimate spiritual practice until it becomes a natural way to live. In the background you can sense that spaciousness still even while you’re perceiving things.
Let’s go there again very briefly, close your eyes. No more visual perception. No more sounds. What’s left? A sense, there may be some thoughts left, but if you’re very alert, the alertness will obliterate the thoughts, too. So there are no thoughts left in that alertness. Alert!
What’s left. Can’t define it, but you are still there in that formless simple presence, you are actually being the essence of yourself. And it is that which gives you your sense of identity. Even when you associate your sense of identity with your life history and memories. That your memories get mixed up with the essential sense of beingness that is the formless empty space in yourself. That is the primordial “I,” the timeless “I.”
And that is your identity. In the unawakened unenlightenend state that primordial consciousness, formless consciousness, gets mixed up with the memory of who you are. And so you get a diluted version of who you are and you think you are your past history, your memories and your ambitions and your fears. But if you disentangle your sense of beingness, which is the essential sense of identity, if you disentangle that from thought and we’re doing it here, if you disentangle your sense of identity from thought, what is left then you can actually experience…I’m saying you experience it but that’s not right because language created-subject object divisions…you experience yourself as the subject, the subject experiences itself, the subject experiences itself as formless consciousness. It is that which is the very foundation for your identity. The preciousness that you are.
The preciousness that everybody feels, there is something there that is so wonderful. It’s “I,” but it gets mixed up with form and then people get some form identity.
So it’s vital to disentangle consciousness and form which usually are mixed up together. And once you’ve disentangled it you may want to do that quite often. But ultimately it’s living a normal life without losing that awareness of the essential formlessness of who you are in the background even while you’re perceiving forms. You are looking at the flowers, you’re looking at other human beings, you’re dealing with things without losing yourself in the forms anymore, because you still have in the background an awareness of the formlessness. In fact the awareness is the formless in the background. No matter where you go you are essentially a field of formless consciousness experiencing the things of this world. And the field of formless consciousness is also experiencing the person.
What is enlightenment, in the real world sense of its meaning?
I wouldn’t say I’m ‘enlightened’ as public media has labeled the term to be, but I’d probably say I know what it is.
And even how one is supposed to ‘get’ it.
Best of all, how one is supposed to be able to ‘get’ it Now.
But in the end, it would all be for nothing.
And why is this?
Because enlightenment is not a stage in which – after you’ve accomplished something – you arrive in.
In fact, the biggest misconception about enlightenment is that it’s something to ‘get’ to, to ‘do’, to ‘attain’.
I believe anyone who’ve done enough spiritual practice would agree…
That in the end, enlightenment is only about this, right here and now.
That’s all there is to it.
No meaning.
No difference.
No judgment.
The world doesn’t change after you understand enlightenment.
In fact, it stays the way it is.
Being enlightened just means you’ve understood what enlightenment means, and then choose to have peace with that understanding.
In short, to be at ease with this, here and now.
Or you could just say, in everyday terms, be patient, at ease, and OK with how things go.
Unfortunately, life ain’t easy, for many of us.
Sometimes it gives us great highs, and most of us would think that life’s amazing and it’s incredible to be alive after those moments.
But more often than not, it hits us right where it aches, and makes us dread this suffering-laden life.
In those times, many of us would choose to drown ourselves in the pain.
That’s why Zen advocates Zazen (sitting meditation).
What is Zazen all about in the end?
People say it’s a practice to silence the mind, so you can gain more clarity in life.
That’s one.
According to Zen Buddhism however, the biggest lesson to learn from Zazen, is to just do Zazen.
Some may think doing Zazen may actually lead them to ‘enlightenment’.
Unfortunately, anyone who’ve done enough Zazen knows that you don’t get anything from the meditation other than clarity of mind, and aches throughout your body.
But it is the enduring through those aches while you’re practicing Zazen that you can get the full purpose of it.
It’s to remind people, that during hard times, you just do Zazen anyway.
That when life isn’t great, you just do Zazen (keep living on) anyway.
A little discipline is involved.
I lied.
A lot of discipline is probably involved.
The world will never change.
What changes, ever, is our perception about it.
Enlightenment is a way of being present with this, right here and now.
What benefits does it bring you?
It just eases life for sufferers.
And… just perhaps, you may gain some knowledge and valuable wisdom, about life, because of your new-found clarity with what Is.
Is science beginning to verify ancient mystical truths? Here are two events as reported in Scientific American that, to me, show that continued discoveries in quantum physics leave little doubt as to the answer.
“PORTLAND, Ore. — Researchers have demonstrated a device that can pick up single quanta of mechanical vibration similar to those that shake molecules during chemical reactions, and have shown that the device itself, which is the width of a hair, acts as if it exists in two places at once—a “quantum weirdness” feat that so far had only been observed at the scale of molecules.
“This is a milestone,” says Wojciech Zurek, a theorist at the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico. “It confirms what many of us believe, but some continue to resist—that our universe is ‘quantum to the core’.”
Physicists have long known that, following the laws of quantum mechanics, objects at the scale of atoms or smaller can exist in multiple simultaneous states. For example, a single electron can move along multiple different paths or an atom can be placed in two different places, simultaneously. This so-called superposition of states should in principle apply to larger objects, as well… As to how the day-to-day reality of objects that we observe, such as furniture and fruit, emerges from such a different and exotic quantum world, that remains a mystery.”
In another story written by Geoff Brumfiel we see that, “A team of scientists has succeeded in putting an object large enough to be visible to the naked eye into a mixed quantum state of moving and not moving.
Andrew Cleland at the University of California, Santa Barbara, and his team cooled a tiny metal paddle until it reached its quantum mechanical “ground state”– the lowest-energy state permitted by quantum mechanics. They then used the weird rules of quantum mechanics to simultaneously set the paddle moving while leaving it standing still. The experiment shows that the principles of quantum mechanics can apply to everyday objects as well as as atomic-scale particles.
The work is simultaneously being published online today in Nature and presented today at the American Physical Society’s meeting in Portland, Oregon.
According to quantum theory, particles act as waves rather than point masses on very small scales. This has dozens of bizarre consequences: it is impossible to know a particle’s exact position and velocity through space, yet it is possible for the same particle to be doing two contradictory things simultaneously. Through a phenomenon known as “superposition” a particle can be moving and stationary at the same time–at least until an outside force acts on it. Then it instantly chooses one of the two contradictory positions.
But although the rules of quantum mechanics seem to apply at small scales, nobody has seen evidence of them on a large scale, where outside influences can more easily destroy fragile quantum states. “No one has shown to date that if you take a big object, with trillions of atoms in it, that quantum mechanics applies to its motion,” Cleland says.”
There is no obvious reason why the rules of quantum mechanics shouldn’t apply to large objects.
“It’s wonderful,” says Hailin Wang, a physicist at the University of Oregon in Eugene who has been working on a rival technique for putting an oscillator into the ground state. The work shows that the laws of quantum mechanics hold up as expected on a large scale. “It’s good for physics for sure,” Wang says.
So if trillions of atoms can be put into a quantum state, why don’t we see double-decker buses simultaneously stopping and going? Cleland says he believes size does matter: the larger an object, the easier it is for outside forces to disrupt its quantum state.
So what´s the big deal? Mystics have long held to several fundamental maxims. The macrocosm, large, and the microcosm, infinitely small, are one: what applies to one, applies to the other. Mystics have said that we create our own reality; form follows thought; what we seek is what we find; like attracts like; our focus is our reality; reality is merely our thoughts made manifest and we can alter that reality with thought; and we are all one.
Until now, many scientists simply shunned much of what was happening on the quantum scale and felt that it just did not matter with regard to the larger world in which we live. The mentioned experiments would seem to point in the direction that they are wrong. What we hold as laws of the physical world are not immutable and only reflect our current state of awareness. Almost every day, some basic scientific law is found to be false. We have seen that if we seek to measure electrons as particles, we get particles. But, if we seek to measure electrons as waves, we get waves. Science is finding that things can be in different places at the same time and can be opposite and alike at the same time. They have shown that what is done to one atom can affect an atom at an infinite distance at the same time. Words like quantum entanglement and superposition may not be just unusual phenomena at the sub-atomic level but can be observed at the larger scale. What may be happening is that as human awareness expands, granted at the moment through the use of new equipment, we are beginning to observe a closer version of reality–one that can change with a thought. When we are only aware of things at the gross level, then we only perceive what appears to be true at that level. But when we look closer at the detail, a whole new world and sets of laws emerge. These are the same laws that mystics intuited in ancient days when they were not under the mental restrictions of scientific, religious, political or even social dogma.
This is why I cannot accept some of the basic premises of author Sam Harris. While I applaud his fight against religious dogma, he is actually creating a new dogma based upon science and reason. But as we see, science and reason are also suspect as they are ever changing and never creating a true picture of the inner workings of the universe. They find what they seek. But if your search is based upon preconceived notions and false science, you have merely done what all movements do; collapse under their own biased philosophy. They create laws where there are none.
Many seers and prophets tell of two possible futures for humanity: one in which dogma leads to destruction and one where spiritual enlightenment leads to a world of balance and harmony. Nostradamus, the Mayans, the Hopi, biblical seers, Newton, DaVinci and others tried to tell us that we cannot rely upon our physical senses, science or religion to guide our thoughts and actions. They tell us that there is something deeper, something spiritual, that we must remember if we are to control the future of our evolution. Those working on the quantum physics scale are beginning to ´get it.´ Given enough time, if there is enough time, they will lead us full circle back to ancient truths that were discovered without the microscope or the Bible. If there is to be a “Great Awakening” by 2012, it will be necessary to shed all of the old ways of thinking and embrace a new reality that we consciously create and founded on the ancient universal principles that include: what we due to the least of our brethren, including all species, we do to us and, what we do to others, we do to ourselves.
I got into a long-drawn argument with one side of my parent.
One of those that some might perhaps regret over for a long time.
I know it is preventable. And as someone who preaches nonduality, my actions could even prove to be hypocritic. Isn’t everything perfect in its own way, so there shouldn’t be anything that I should fight against?
All I knew was, I was not going to be bound.
I was not going to stay patient anymore with circumstances pressuring me down.
Because I deserve to get real as well.
The problem is I have the intelligence to see through the problems in every situation.
I can identify what’s wrong, and what should be absolutely done in every moment.
Most of the times, people just chose to let the bad situations go.
Let them go as they are because, ‘we’ don’t want to mess things up.
‘We’ don’t want to be seen as the bad guys, the problem-makers, or the abnormal kind.
But as this character, I can not be satisfied seeing things worsen without doing anything to change it.
That’s why the arguments had to happen sometimes, all for a better future.
###
In the end, despite the ‘scars’ edged on my body as a result of my struggle in the journey of life, my heart will be alive because I’ve done what I truly deem as right.
I’m going to keep hanging on with my actions until things are headed in the direction where my eyes are set upon.
No matter what happens as a result, it is what it is.
What’s most important is only having myself walk the way that I truly want to walk on.
###
For the very last time -
I’ve decided to abandon formal university education.
And will continue to learn only what is practical for this real life.
In the end, I couldn’t turn a blind eye towards what is right and wrong for me.
To me on a battlefield, theories about swordfight will benefit one very little.
The practice of lifting up a sword to either save or kill on the otherhand, that’s far more valuable.
As such, I’m going to exchange my formal education with a career.
Even if it means that my future job prospects may be bleak.
###
Age 21 this year, I hereby swear myself off all imposterisation.
And would fight against all consequences to remain as much as possible a man of his truest intent.
Fighting in this case, then prove not to be against my own teachings of not struggling after all.
For I feel so much freer as a result.
Especially when compared to one whose genuine expressions are buried by the emotional & psychological baggages that he/she gathered in life – never able to break free, because nothing was ever done to change the circumstances.
For happiness, the fight for one’s own freedom is crucial.
I am working full time at Stanford and I write and do a lot else too, Recently I found myself feeling uncomfortably cramped – like there was just too much to do and not enough time or space to do it. Familiar to anyone? It seems to naturally come with a kind of enthusiasm for life. My reading pile was overflowing. My to do list was overwhelming.
The usual responses (for me) are rebellion, which means doing nothing but relaxing in my spare time, or dropping some projects or becoming more efficient with my projects. Earlier in my life I was a GTD (David Allen’s system) person, enabling me to handle overload moments systematically. His system has great tools for getting organized.
But there is something significantly different now. There is some new perspective. The moments of discomfort are being welcomed, and are seeming very interesting.
I heard myself saying to a friend this week that “life is a game”, and since then I’ve been pondering how that doesn’t quite say it for me. It’s not about winning a game. Not really. It’s more like “life is an art form” that you and I create with everyone else, without ever knowing about a final product. So if I get to play the disorganized, overwhelmed person today, that’s fine too, and then I get to respond to that in innumerable ways. There appears now to be a wide expanse of possible responses to playing that role today. I know the Advaita folks say there is no choice, and that is true from a certain perspective, but I’m talking about a down-to-earth, what-are we-doing-with-our-lives perspective. Its as if I’m no longer required to respond (make a choice) according to my history, and neither am I frozen into inaction. I am now able to take up the tools that I bring thanks to my history, and see what can be created with this life, and what can’t and have it be fine either way.
There is a continuing exploration of what this seeming constriction is pointing to and a lack of assumption that the process is anything but perfect. It feels like life is just showing me something it wants me to see, by bringing this experience into my worldly life. And I get to use this incredible tool (the mind) to work with it on that level and see what happens.
Hoping March goes well for all of you and that this lovely California springtime we are having out here spreads to all in the best possible timing. May your high water run smooth this spring!
Driving to work, I heard the old Joni Mitchell song, “For Free,” in which she compares herself to a street musician:
I slept last night in a good hotel / I went shopping today for jewels / The wind rushed around in the dirty town / And the children let out from the schools / I was standing on a noisy corner / Waiting for the walking green / Across the street he stood / And he played real good / On his clarinet, for free
Now me I play for fortunes / And those velvet curtain calls / I’ve got a black limousine / And two gentlemen / Escorting me to the halls / And I play if you have the money / Or if you’re a friend to me / But the one man band / By the quick lunch stand / He was playing real good, for free
Nobody stopped to hear him / Though he played so sweet and high / They knew he had never / Been on their TV / So they passed his music by / I meant to go over and ask for a song / Maybe put on a harmony… / I heard his refrain / As the signal changed / He was playing real good, for free
It reminded me of the street musicians I always encounter on my annual Mardi Gras trip to New Orleans — some very talented, some not so much, all nobodies struggling for a buck.
Or not. Because it also reminded me of the experiment conducted by the Washington Post in January 2007, in which world-acclaimed virtuoso violinist Joshua Bell, incognito, played masterpieces on a Stradivarius for 45 minutes in a Washington metro station during the morning commute. Of 1,097 passersby, only 7 stopped to listen at length. Most ignored him entirely. Donations totalled $32, although on the previous night Bell had played a concert where seats sold for $100.
I’m not commenting on the rat race or cultural ignorance or mercenary urges, nor am I pondering the meaning of context, “art without a frame,” etc. Instead, I’m thinking about the role each of us plays in the drama of life… how we were chosen for the part, how well we perform despite the payback or lack thereof, how graciously we accept the role we’ve been given.
In my view, fame and fortune are not earned. Neither intensity of labor nor quality of work has a cause-effect relationship to worldly rewards. Some folks have been selected to be stars; others have not. The universe has birthed everything we see to be exactly as it is. Nothing can be otherwise. If a droplet in the ocean were sentient, it might easily convince itself that it is a powerful free agent whose own decisions make it go this way and that, up and down, here and there, without ever being aware of the ocean’s vast currents at work underneath its every move (when it is one and the same with the ocean?). While human free will itself may not be an illusion, its consequences are. When someone lifts himself by his own bootstraps, it’s because he’s playing the “Bootstrap Guy” in the script. He deserves praise for his sweat, but that does not mean it actually caused his success.
“He was playing real good, for free…” Joni saw that she and the street clarinetist were equals, just performing on different stages, and being rewarded differently. The unfortunate fact is that too many people didn’t listen because “They knew he had never / Been on their TV.” If Joshua Bell had been a more familiar face from pop culture, more people would have paid attention. To them, fame equals value… consensus is more important than personal perception… nothing not already known is worth knowing.
In the literary arena, there are blockbuster author-celebrities, hardworking genre craftspeople, fringe-dwelling creatives, and an ever-growing mob of scrambling self-published storytellers and poets with skills from the ridiculous to the sublime. I’m among that latter group. Apparently my role is not to be a big-selling author but to be an independent artist, and my responsibility is stay true to myself, do the best work I can, and let go of the results.
It’s not always easy to duck the missiles of “fame equals value.” Invisibility hurts; not so much when it’s “me” who’s invisible, but rather when it’s my work — work that I know is good — that’s ignored. Ignored because I have no “platform” — that is, fame. One of the ever-more-prominent protocols in self-publishing is to give away one’s work in e-book format as a way to jump-start a following. In other words, to be that street-corner clarinetist, playing real good, for free. I’ve had very mixed feelings about that.
This discussion intersects with the always lucid thoughts of Mark Barrett on Ditchwalk.com. His March 1 post called “Doctorow, Anderson and Godin, Oh My” shines an Emperor’s New Clothes light on the “free content” movement. I’m with Barrett: I don’t want to be part of the trend toward celebrity as a measure of value. I say let celebrities play their celebrity roles; I’ll play my writer role, thank you very much. However it works out, that’s how it works out.
Eckhart Tolle tells me to ask myself, “Can I be the space for this?” Part of what that means to me is, to follow Byron Katie’s presciption, “loving what is.” Opening my arms to welcome the actual… breathing… knowing that in this moment, all is well… not resisting my emotions, my intuitions, the whispers of truth from the world. These positions all of us hold in the heirarchy of this dreamscape, these roles we are playing in the drama, they are exactly the right roles. For free or not, let’s play them the best we can.
(I don’t agree or disagree with this article. The reason why I posted it here is to let people know that it’s alright if they can’t agree with many of the societal conditions imposed upon them today. Apparently, their divergence may actually be an indication of higher intelligence. Whether this article is correct is for you to observe. Hope you’ll find it at least a little bit useful.)
-=-=-=-
Intelligent people have ‘unnatural’ preferences and values that are novel in human evolution
February 24, 2010
More intelligent people are significantly more likely to exhibit social values and religious and political preferences that are novel to the human species in evolutionary history. Specifically, liberalism and atheism, and for men (but not women), preference for sexual exclusivity correlate with higher intelligence, a new study finds.
The study, published in the March 2010 issue of the peer-reviewed scientific journal Social Psychology Quarterly, advances a new theory to explain why people form particular preferences and values. The theory suggests that more intelligent people are more likely than less intelligent people to adopt evolutionarily novel preferences and values, but intelligence does not correlate with preferences and values that are old enough to have been shaped by evolution over millions of years.”
“Evolutionarily novel” preferences and values are those that humans are not biologically designed to have and our ancestors probably did not possess. In contrast, those that our ancestors had for millions of years are “evolutionarily familiar.”
“General intelligence, the ability to think and reason, endowed our ancestors with advantages in solving evolutionarily novel problems for which they did not have innate solutions,” says Satoshi Kanazawa, an evolutionary psychologist at the London School of Economics and Political Science. “As a result, more intelligent people are more likely to recognize and understand such novel entities and situations than less intelligent people, and some of these entities and situations are preferences, values, and lifestyles.”
An earlier study by Kanazawa found that more intelligent individuals were more nocturnal, waking up and staying up later than less intelligent individuals. Because our ancestors lacked artificial light, they tended to wake up shortly before dawn and go to sleep shortly after dusk. Being nocturnal is evolutionarily novel.
In the current study, Kanazawa argues that humans are evolutionarily designed to be conservative, caring mostly about their family and friends, and being liberal, caring about an indefinite number of genetically unrelated strangers they never meet or interact with, is evolutionarily novel. So more intelligent children may be more likely to grow up to be liberals.
Data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health (Add Health) support Kanazawa’s hypothesis. Young adults who subjectively identify themselves as “very liberal” have an average IQ of 106 during adolescence while those who identify themselves as “very conservative” have an average IQ of 95 during adolescence.
Similarly, religion is a byproduct of humans’ tendency to perceive agency and intention as causes of events, to see “the hands of God” at work behind otherwise natural phenomena. “Humans are evolutionarily designed to be paranoid, and they believe in God because they are paranoid,” says Kanazawa. This innate bias toward paranoia served humans well when self-preservation and protection of their families and clans depended on extreme vigilance to all potential dangers. “So, more intelligent children are more likely to grow up to go against their natural evolutionary tendency to believe in God, and they become atheists.”
Young adults who identify themselves as “not at all religious” have an average IQ of 103 during adolescence, while those who identify themselves as “very religious” have an average IQ of 97 during adolescence.
In addition, humans have always been mildly polygynous (having more than one wife at a time) in evolutionary history. Men in polygynous marriages were not expected to be sexually exclusive to one mate, whereas men in monogamous marriages were. In sharp contrast, whether they are in a monogamous or polygynous marriage, women were always expected to be sexually exclusive to one mate. So being sexually exclusive is evolutionarily novel for men, but not for women. And the theory predicts that more intelligent men are more likely to value sexual exclusivity than less intelligent men, but general intelligence makes no difference for women’s value on sexual exclusivity. Kanazawa’s analysis of Add Health data supports these sex-specific predictions as well.
One intriguing but theoretically predicted finding of the study is that more intelligent people likely value no more or less such evolutionarily familiar entities as marriage, family, children, and friends.
(If it helps to improve your understanding of nonduality, you can exchange every first person pronoun representing the writer/reader here with “this point-of-view”. All other pronouns can be seen in the light of “that point-of-view”. The aim here is to cognize that human interaction is not between separate entities, but point-of-views which play out different stories. If we’re going to try to write while keeping the nouns correct in the context of nonduality, it’d take rigorous effort so I’ll just say what I think in the simplest manner.)
I’ve recently responded to the comments on post titled “#73 Non-Duality, By Greg Goode”.
After considering it, I thought it would be good to turn the response into a new post.
See many people who read this blog may probably share the commenters’ sentiments.
Some may ask, “I know that what I do comes as a result of my choice, isn’t that free will?”
Others may disagree, and attempt to exert their will over others.
If the above describes you, this post is for you.
But honestly, I’m really writing this to save myself time from responding to similar comments in the future.
May you find it useful.
-=-=-=-
Kirk Crist: for the life of me i cannot understand why the thought ‘i would like to take a walk’ is not one of free choosing. i look at the woods think about them and then i decide to walk in them. i am sorry but it seems to me that many non-dual teachers [greg goode, rupert spira] really bend the laws of logic to fit their premise and therefore their conclusions for instance i freely chose to write and email this opinion now.
Reply:
I agree. With the conventional way of thinking, I couldn’t agree more. The reason why I accepted nonduality is because I’ve eventually inquired far enough.
More often than not, people accept what they have been told, without inquiring further into the truth of a situation. For example – we believe in the free will of choosing what to do. The question is: Where is this free will coming from?
If you think it came from the brain, the brain is just matter. In science, it’s just referred to as a machine that interprets/works with electromagnetic waves. By itself, it’s like a chip in a computer – without electricity, it’s a static object that serves no purpose. If you’d research into the source of matter, you’d find out that everything is energy. Even atom – magnified down into its core, is just energy that appears from and disappears into nothingness constantly. In other words, despite seeing your body as a solid object, emptiness is actually its base. You may even have learned that your body when you’re 30 is a completely different body than when you’re 10. So where is this you who created thoughts?
Then, we have people who believe in the existence of the soul as religions refer to the word. However, are you satisfied with the explanation that free will is generated from the soul? Is it a belief, or is it the truth?
Given the choice, which of the previous two options would you prefer to know more about?
Back to your view about free will. I held the same perception, until I realize how many things are not within my control. e.g. You’re rushing for work. Once you’re out of the home, you realize you forgot your keys. Now, did you, as the person with free will, planned to forget about taking your keys beforehand?
If you believe that you came up with your thoughts, then where do your thoughts come from? Did they – appear out of nowhere? If this is the case, can you prove me wrong when I say that they may not come from the character named as [your name], but is served to you from somewhere?
That they have arisen, but not created?
When you try not to fear, but nervousness still arise, did you will the circumstance to happen?
You mentioned that the few authors above have bended logic to their premise.
What if because of classic conditioning, we have accepted a faulty premise and thus bended all logic?
We can hold on tightly onto our age-old beliefs, which could be based nowhere close to truth. Or we can simply be present and observe, with clarity, what is nearer to it. We can believe a movie is real, or we can see it as it is,
and work on what counts.
All I did was ask questions that allow me to do more of that.
Some people may not want to ask these questions.
And even that, by itself, is not wrong after all.
Because at the end of the day, no one is ever wrong.
It is all perfect.
-=-
Ted Snyder: Just stopped by, by accident, and could not help but feel sorry for you. Please do not continue this ridiculous line of thought. You are wasting your life away with constant thought about thought. I had no idea that there was a group of people wasting time and energy on such thinking. The politicians must love the idea that people would waste their time away in such a fashion. Please for the sake of your own sanity and your usefulness to others stop wasting time and do something. It is plain that you are well read, but you have read all the wrong books and sought for all the wrong answers.
Read the Bible again and this time look for your self there. Then regardless of what you think do something for someone. Bake some cookies for the widow downstairs or volunteer in your local school or take a child to the park, just stop wasting time. Just food for thought.
Reply:
I could almost imagine that if you bump into someone who suffers from anorexic disorders, this might be the comment that ensues:
“Why won’t you just eat? Please do not continue this ridiculous line of thought that you’re fat. I can’t believe you’re wasting your life away with constant thought about being fat. Please for the sake of your own sanity and your usefulness to others stop wasting time and eat something. Regardless of what you think put food in your mouth and swallow it, just stop wasting time. Just food for thought.”
If the speech healed the person on the spot just like that, great job.
But chances are, the commenter would be ignored for being deemed shallow.
I’m asking questions about thought because the answers may potentially solve much of the mental distresses that people are suffering from today.
So that we can have greater understanding about life, to have peace, to have fulfillment in our hearts.
That’s why we have doctors/psychologists/therapists who’re willing to investigate into the causes of physical/mental disorders.
Asking questions to solve the problems that we face.
If the logic still doesn’t appear to you, that’s fine.
On the topic of the bible – my father’s a pastor. I’ve lived decades of years as a Christian, in a strict Christian environment. Surely, I have reasons why I eventually steered away from the book. If you’re interested to know why by any reason, check out my blog post titled “#70 Religions and the Theory of Oneness”. It’d explain more.
In the end – I can only wonder whether the book(s) you’ve read are actually beneficial to mankind, since their affect on you makes me feel yucky.
-=-
In the course of history, the difference of opinions will always be present.
My intention for these posts are meant to inform, and not to push any opinions onto others.
For people who feel the need to push their opinions onto me, I can only say:
Prove yourself right.
Convince me of your truth.
Because otherwise, you’ll only establish evidence in your ignorance.
Anyways, the way I see it –
All opinions are part of the play.
And it looks like, I’ve been writing to entertain it.
It seems that the questions which have always been keeping my curious mind unsatisfied have finally been answered.
And now, I course through life in a more relieved way.
See, remember those moments when you can explain most of something – but not the other parts of it?
For example, like how science can describe to us the natural laws of the universe (e.g. gravity, growth, electric), but could never explain how they first exist?
Or how religions can explain why you’re living on earth, but can hardly give you a factual, convincing & down to earth answer when you ask about the purpose of being alive?
Well, I’m relieved.
Because now, perhaps I could stop being bothered by the countless of questions I have in my mind.
Previously, life has always remained a mystery that I could never figure out.
I’m not saying that now I’ve solved its mysteries, but at the least – I’ve found out how to live with them.
Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you:
An answer that can merge together everything in life,
A hope for the living to grasp onto and
move forward with despite how difficult the circumstances are,
A path that suits those who are honest
-
Nonduality.
If you have been following my blog for some time, you probably would’ve known some of the reasons why I’ve picked the path of nonduality.
By asking simple questions that point back to the source of all things, we could discover who the Creator really is.
As it is proven by science, all matter in the most fundamental form is created by the compression of energy.
Further investigation can show anyone that energy doesn’t have a defined shape or form – and appears out of nowhere.
Considering these points, one can only wonder how the whole world is actually kept together.
Something, someone, some force, has been allowing all the things in the world to work they way they do.
Although we see each other as separate entities, in the most fundamental scientific sense, we are energy that disappears and appears out of nowhere - the point that links all of us together.
That is why spiritual teachers have repeated that the world as we see it is an illusion.
An illusion convince us that it is true, absolutely true, if we didn’t see the truth behind it with our own eyes.
And this life you and I are living, everything that appears can convince you of its reality – but all of it would only remain illusionary, until you discover the source that made all of their existences possible.
On the path towards finding happiness and leaving pain behind, I’ve tried almost every illusionary way that can provide me with the relief I need.
In their places, I found impermanency.
I found ineffectiveness.
I found inconsistency.
I got tired.
And only when I let everything go, that the answer which had always stared straight into my eyes eventually materialize in my vision.
Ahh!!! After I’ve seen it, I breathed a sigh of relief, followed by one of the most satisfactory smiles I’ve ever expressed. So that is what it is.
Nonduality presented itself to me in such a sweet way, no other explanations about what life is could be sweeter to me at this time and age.
It describes that separation never really exists in the most fundamental sense.
There is no inside, and outside, of you.
You are all that is.
Everything that you see in the world that appears to be separate – they are actually just a play of motion functioning as the world has been directed to function.
You, as nothingness or the consciousness that is aware, was never just a small part of it, but all parts of it.
You could be aware of these words right now, because you are ever observing.
Life could appear to be painful instead of joyful, but as the director who’ve created the play, you were just there to see things from start to finish as you’ve planned it to be.
Seeing things from the point of view of just one mind, perhaps you could never understand life.
It’s like taking a tiny fragment out of a beautiful masterpiece.
The small piece could never paint everything that the big picture is able to convey.
But altogether, it makes sense.
Everything now makes sense.
Your thoughts, which continues to appear out of nothingness, nowhere, is the result of no particular person.
It does not belong to you, the one who has a name, who is seen by others today as a separate individual or figure.
Every idea, every action, every story that has ever arisen does not ever belong to a separate identity.
Rather, they all appear from a same place.
Nowhere.
Call it consciousness, God, the Creator – it doesn’t matter.
Nonduality describes that everything happens in accordance to what is.
Therefore, there is no reason for any minds to worry.
For, who they are is making sure that the play is performed perfectly.
Once again, looking at the tiny fragment of the picture – the mind may struggle to be satisfied.
But seeing the big picture, nothing ever needs to be said.
It is all beautiful.
It is all perfect.
Being consciousness, the awareness of everything completes the show.
Nothing ever needs to be pushed, for it all happens despite control.
Nonduality describes that if you like this post, it’s not because you liked it.
Rather, it’s because the thought of liking this post arose within your mind.
The character’s mind whose name is [your name].
It’s a pretty fun perception of life isn’t it?
Puppets talking to other puppets about being a puppet.
All while the master who pulls the strings stays one and the same.
It’s the perfection in the creation of this world that made this illusionary world we live in seems so real.
If we can understand that, we can begin to receive better the understanding of nonduality.
(These articles when read slowly can give you a much, much clearer understanding of their message than if you were to just skim through the words. I hope you’ll find them entertaining. Please enjoy.)
No Separation
Years ago, there was lots and lots of vigilance in my life. Before and during spiritual seeking, I wasn’t badly suffering or in pain or unhappy with circumstances in life or stuck in dysfunctional patterns. Instead, I felt a deep sense of loneliness, alienation, lack of fulfillment, and a strong yearning from the heart and mind to know “What is it all about? What is the purpose of life? What happens after? What are all these mystical truths that are spoken of? Where is fulfillment to be found?” I was very vigilant about it.
Going back 30+ years, I tried many, many different paths, from Ayn Rand’s icy “Rational Selfishness” to the strictness and ecstasy of Born-Again Pentacostal Christianity. Years later, this all settled down to an intense inquiry.
For about 5 years, one question kept itself rooted in front of me. “What is the core of me?” I couldn’t help it – I’d ponder this in every spare moment the mind wasn’t engaged in something else. It was a sweet and relentless yearning. I really wanted to burrow into the deepest secrets of this. After a few years, the question refined itself. “What or where is this choosing, willing entity that seems to be in evidence?” “Is that the me?” “But where is it?”
The answer came one day while I was reading a book about consciousness. I was standing on the Grand Central subway platform during the evening rush hour, and the answer came. It didn’t come as a conceptual statement like “It is ABC.” Rather, it came by way of the world and the body imploding into a brilliant light, and the willing, phenomenal self thinning out, disappearing in a blaze of the same light. No separation was experienced; no time or space was experienced, yet I knew myself as the seeing itself. All “willings,” “desirings,” “thoughts” and other mentations were deeply experienced as spontaneous arisings in awareness, happening around no fixed point or location. And it wasn’t personal. Not only the entity “Greg,” but all apparent personal entities dissolved.
Out of nowhere, lightness, sweetness, brightness, and a fluidity of the world became qualities of everything, and became one with all experiences. My long-standing question had vanished along with what I had believed was “me.” There arose resiliency, joy, and an untouchable happiness.
This experience uncovered the realization that without the conceptual structures that make things seem real, there is no presumption of a separate center. There is no suffering and no basis for suffering. There is no feeling that things should be different than they are. This is a sense of peace far beyond what happens when we get what we dream about.
-=-=-=–=-=-=–=-=-=-
Free Will and Freedom
The question of free will is from the perspective of the person. Does the person have free will? Many of the person’s actions are forced or determined by factors over which it has no control. Some of these actions are accompanied by the feeling of being lived, of being in the flow, in the “zone.” People often count these as the best times. But are at least some of the person’s decisions and actions freely chosen? To establish free will, as is discussed in Philosophy 101 classes everywhere, it is not necessary to show that every action is free. Even one free action would be sufficient.
Case 1:
“Will that be coffee or tea?”
“Hmmm, let me think…. I’ll have tea, thanks.”
Case 2:
(Thought bubble rising:) “I’d love to take a walk in the beautiful woods. I’d like to surround myself with peace and serenity and inquire into my true nature.” (Putting on hiking boots, opening the camper door and stepping out), “Here I go.”
From the perspective of the person, if the decision process is not analyzed, the actions and decisions in both cases above seem to be perfect examples of free will. Upon analysis however, a free action and a free chooser cannot be found. A thought comes, followed by a desire, followed by a decision, followed by an action. Tracing backwards, the action is controlled by the decision, the decision is controlled by the desire, the desire is prompted by the thought. The thought arises spontaneously, itself unbidden, un-asked-for, unchosen. First the thought is not there, then it is. Nowhere in this process can a free will be found. Nowhere can a freely-acting chooser be found.
It is even too much to say that the actions, decisions, desires and thoughts can control or prompt each other. These cause-and-effect dynamics are not even observed. Rather, they arise as inferences and conclusions about what happened, that is, they arise as thoughts that rise and fall.
In something like Case 1, the decision might even be accompanied by a small feeling of freedom, lightness, and spaciousness. And maybe also accompanied by a thought, “I’m choosing tea but I could freely choose coffee instead.” But the feeling of freedom and the thought “I could” also arise unbidden. That is, the feeling of freedom is not freely chosen.
The person is not the locus of freedom.
The person and the rest of the world cannot be found apart from the awareness in which all things appear. The person, the mind, body and world arise as thoughts, feelings, and sensations. These are nothing other than objects in awareness, and are nothing other than awareness itself. The person does not experience; the person is experienced. As awareness, we are That to which these objects appear. Thoughts, feelings, sensations – these objects arise from the background of silent awareness, they subsist in awareness, and they slip back into awareness. The awareness in which they appear is not itself an object but the background of all objects. It is our true nature. But the objects come and go unbidden, without autonomy. They are powerless and cannot do anything on their own. Objects cannot possess or contain freedom.
Is there freedom?
The silent awareness in which all objects appear is the true nature of all things. Awareness says YES to everything. Even if a NO arises, awareness says YES to the NO. Awareness is without resistance, without limits or edges, without refusal and without obstruction. Awareness is not free, it is freedom itself. What we truly are is not the person but this awareness, this freedom.
The person wants to co-opt this freedom, to own it, to behold it, to be present to use and enjoy it. But in spite of this desire from the perspective of the person, the person can never own That in which the person appears.
What about teachings that emphasize free will?
Entire religions and ethical systems are based on this idea. Ramana Maharshi told a questioner that all actions are determined except the ability to inquire into one’s true nature. Isn’t Case 2 above different from Case 1?
Sometimes teachings and exhortations about personal freedom are a beautiful, effective and necessary step for freedom from the idea of being a person. A person who prematurely adopts a “no-free-will” teaching can lapse into depression and antinomian behavior. “You have to be someone before you can be no one.” The teachings on free will borrow from the freedom that we are. Among the many objects that arise in the mirror of awareness, some objects arise as images of mirrors. These images are taken as representations of their source. Like a mirror appearing in a mirror, Ramana’s teaching serves as a pointer to freedom. Case 2 is not different in this respect from Case 1. As objects, all cases and their characters, and all teachings and all discourse (even this one!) are not themselves free or self-powered, but they arise from freedom and consist in freedom.
The person is never free.
As awareness, we are never bound.
-=-=-=-
Physical Objects Disappear!
George Berkeley’s THREE DIALOGUES BETWEEN HYLAS AND PHILONOUS is a remarkable book. It is a short, well written set of dialogues, arguing in exemplary style that there can be no external physical objects which are somehow perceived by our sensory apparatus.
And over 20 years ago, it had the most amazing effect on the globality of my experience.
Who is Berkeley? You know that old philosophical question about the tree in the forest, would it make a sound if no one were there to hear it? He’s the guy in the 18th century who answered “No.” Berkeley argued tirelessly that there is no external physical substance. Our thoughts do not point to external objects like rocks and automobiles. Rocks and automobiles do not cause our thoughts.
When I was in grad school going for a philosophy doctorate, my teacher Colin Murray Turbayne was acknowledged as one of the world’s great Berkeley scholars. But to get a good grade in his class, you could never write anything against Berkeley. So we had to study Berkeley really carefully, because his ideas sounded so utterly unintuitive, crazy really. But after several months, they began to make sense.
One day after a lot of reading, Berkeley’s arguments crystalized, and it felt like a fog cleared from my mind. The feelings and convictions about supposed external objects vanished! The concepts of material substance and the attandant inside/outside distinction vanished. Nor were they necessary to explain our experiences. I was shaking with excitement, and not just because I thought I’d now get an “A” in Professor Turbayne’s class.
I went to Professor Turbayne’s office. He instantly saw that something was different. He looked questioningly at me, and I could only nod. He smiled and said, “Aha! Now go write about it!”
Since that time, over two decades years ago, the inside/outside disctinction has been useless to me. The notion of “material substance” has been just like the notion of “Santa Claus.” And amazingly enough, the dissolution of these notions has made it easier for me to interact in what is often called the physical world. Because I haven’t seen anything as physical for decades, there has been no fear factor. I learned to rollerblade and ride a bicycle with no brakes in the traffic-filled streets of New York City.
Perceptions that are usually called “physical” occur as a kind of language that has no inside or outside, where each concept refers to other concepts in a growing and consistent way. But there’s nothing Out There to which any of these ideas refer.
In my case, it was an excellent shake-up, like a mental Vege-matic blender, preparing me for non-dualist teachings.
George Berkeley’s THREE DIALOGUES BETWEEN HYLAS AND PHILONOUS is a remarkable book. It is a short, well written set of dialogues, arguing in exemplary style that there can be no external physical objects which are somehow perceived by our sensory apparatus.
And over 20 years ago, it had the most amazing effect on the globality of my experience.
Who is Berkeley? You know that old philosophical question about the tree in the forest, would it make a sound if no one were there to hear it? He’s the guy in the 18th century who answered “No.” Berkeley argued tirelessly that there is no external physical substance. Our thoughts do not point to external objects like rocks and automobiles. Rocks and automobiles do not cause our thoughts.
When I was in grad school going for a philosophy doctorate, my teacher Colin Murray Turbayne was acknowledged as one of the world’s great Berkeley scholars. But to get a good grade in his class, you could never write anything against Berkeley. So we had to study Berkeley really carefully, because his ideas sounded so utterly unintuitive, crazy really. But after several months, they began to make sense.
One day after a lot of reading, Berkeley’s arguments crystalized, and it felt like a fog cleared from my mind. The feelings and convictions about supposed external objects vanished! The concepts of material substance and the attandant inside/outside distinction vanished. Nor were they necessary to explain our experiences. I was shaking with excitement, and not just because I thought I’d now get an “A” in Professor Turbayne’s class.
I went to Professor Turbayne’s office. He instantly saw that something was different. He looked questioningly at me, and I could only nod. He smiled and said, “Aha! Now go write about it!”
Since that time, over two decades years ago, the inside/outside disctinction has been useless to me. The notion of “material substance” has been just like the notion of “Santa Claus.” And amazingly enough, the dissolution of these notions has made it easier for me to interact in what is often called the physical world. Because I haven’t seen anything as physical for decades, there has been no fear factor. I learned to rollerblade and ride a bicycle with no brakes in the traffic-filled streets of New York City.
Perceptions that are usually called “physical” occur as a kind of language that has no inside or outside, where each concept refers to other concepts in a growing and consistent way. But there’s nothing Out There to which any of these ideas refer.
In my case, it was an excellent shake-up, like a mental Vege-matic blender, preparing me for non-dualist teachings.
“Words are what we do to keep the mind busy while the transmission happens in the silence.”
And it makes sense, because recent scientific researches have shown us that the human brain sends out electrical impulses (to form actions) even before the intellectual mind decides to do so.
That as we commit to an action, the process actually seems something more like this:
Brain sends nerve impulses for action.
Mind follows up thinking it was the source.
Brain sends nerve impulses for action.
Mind follows up thinking it was the source.
Brain sends nerve impulses for action.
Mind follows up thinking it was the source.
Now the question then becomes – if everything just happens, as is, even despite the control of the mind…
Then what is individual free will really?
I can only smile at the thought.
Because the answer, the real answer in the end, is truly positive & empowering.
If the world was created out of something, created by the one we refer to as God, Consciousness, the Creator who’s naturally perceived as perfect in every way, would the world in itself be a perfect creation?
I stumbled upon this question because of a conversation I had with a friend.
We came from devout Christian backgrounds, and so we’re innately interested in the concept of God.
But because of our curiosity, we had also questioned the truth behind this almighty religious figure.
What we really didn’t understand, with our logical minds, is -
“Why would our God who is supposed to be perfect in every way, and the most loving amongst all that ever exists according to the bible (he knows everything, is everywhere, has all the power) sometimes act in ways that are less than what a human is capable of?”
From what I learned, people who worship him goes to heaven, and others to the place where they are punished with the worst of punishments for eternity.
Why would a God who has so much love do that to anyone at all?
Why would this God who knows everything (omniscient), created sin for us to commit, and then decides to punish us – for eternity, because of what He has done?
The same goes for the God as referred to by Islams.
I don’t mean any offense for anyone’s beliefs in this post.
That is not my intention at all.
On the other hand, what I really mean to do is bring forth a logical argument that we can ponder over, especially if it could bring more love, peace & happiness into our lives.
As a human, if I were God – I would know that everything acts and exists in the way it is because It Is.
Because I have made it that way, and that is why it exists the way it does.
Now, I’m not saying that I could ever understand things the way God does.
But with the mind that he has granted me, with the consciousness he’d allowed me to have, with the intelligence that he has filled my mind with – it just doesn’t make sense to me why the God as described in doctrinal religions can ever be accounted as the one who is perfect in every way or the most loving of all.
Eventually, I could only arrive at this understanding right now:
That everything in this world is perfect.
See my friend brought up a good point the other day when we were talking.
He said, consider all the things that exists within the Universe.
With its wonder, beauty, amazement – it is only logical that the God who created them is beyond their qualities.
We casually talked about how, if the planets surrounding the sun would have just slipped and gone off its course, disasters would happen.
But they didn’t.
The earth has rotated around the sun for millions of years without ever leaving the track.
With this understanding, we could only deduce that since perfection exists within his creation, the Creator himself must be beyond Perfect – and as such would most likely create existences which are nothing less than perfect in themselves.
If you would, think about this:
Without sadness, would we have appreciated happiness?
Without things that chain our expressions, would we have yearned freedom?
Without the poor, would we have specifically desired to be rich?
It is as if everything that has ever existed was created because they were made to complement each other!
It was as if, everything was made to be perfect since the beginning of time.
I thought about the many people who could offer unconditional love irregardless of what they are faced with.
And then I thought about the God as described by Christianity & Islam.
I couldn’t accept that my God could be less loving than I can be e.g. in the context of heaven and its counterpart – and that is why I’ve decided to put them aside on my path towards happiness.
So we have talked about two religions.
Now what about Buddhism or Hinduism?
First, I have to clarify what I’m referring to as Buddhism and Hinduism:
For me, any religions with statues of worship is disregarded.
But that’s only because I believe that God is above them all (and could just be All) and defining this figure would be like putting a limitation on the Creator.
What many people don’t know is that Buddhism and Hinduism has several (perhaps just two) sides to them.
One is idol worship.
Another side advocates the teaching of Oneness.
What Oneness implies is that everything that exists in this world is actually One and the same.
This means, even as you’re reading these texts out of your computer, you are still the computer and the computer is still you (denoting your true nature, not your character).
So is everything else which ever exists.
The way this can be understood is not by literally taking the words I’ve said above with a logical mind. You would have to understand them from a spiritual sense, following what’s described below.
Another direction which both these religions similarly point to is the concept of Consciousness.
How you could put Oneness and Consciousness together is perhaps by seeing the world in this way:
Everything is actually a play in motion happening at once, only being observed by Consciousness (which is referred to as God).
So even though we are two different individuals, you and I – we are in this context the same Consciousness, only being separated by some condition(s) in the play of Life.
In this case, one can assume that one is simply a character that lives, moves and thinks irregardless of one’s true Self, and that the Self is actually just God -
Observing.
In this case, the world can be considered perfect in every way.
Even though the character we assume as our Self experiences pains, peace, sufferings, happines or anything, it was actually already meant to be.
The world was created to function in the perfect way (according to God, not our minds) that it is.
As God, you’re really just observing how everything Is.
Of course, not everyone will understand this post at first glance.
Not even I fully understand what I just wrote.
All I know is that I’ve thought about this – and everything I wrote would be how I’d piece the picture of Life together right now if the concept of the Creator, God or Consciousness truly exists.
May this post be informative to you in any way.
Thanks for reading.
P.S. If you want to entertain yourself with questions, here’s one you can have fun with sometimes:
Ask yourself, “Where do ‘my’ thoughts come from?”
Some people will answer, “My mind, my brain, my _____ etc.”
Of course, those answers are mostly correct – when thought upon from the individual/character’s perspective.
But what if you are consciousness itself, only ever observing (or perhaps, maybe, sometimes, influence what thoughts would come up) the character which is called [your name] separately from all other beings that exists?
It’s interesting, huh?
For me, the answer then becomes: “Thoughts aren’t really ‘mine’ per se, but arises out of a field which exists to fulfill that which has always been made to happen.”
You’re rushing for work, you’re out of your door, you forgot your car keys.
Hm… why does the thought that you forgot your car keys appear now, and not before?
Did you, [your name], came up with the plan so it happens that way?
Are your thoughts ‘yours’ (the character’s), or are your thoughts out of someone else’s arrangements in perfect synchronicity?
Of course, this question is posed just for fun purposes.
I myself can’t really believe what a year can do to change a person.
A year ago, I had great ambition, only with a closed mind.
A year later, I have great ambition, only with a conscious mind.
And that by itself, is actually supposed to be a HUGE change.
I guess this is what spirituality is all about.
It’s about a journey, a series of experiences that changes a person in the way he/she sees the world.
And it isn’t so much about changing your mind, really.
It’s more about changing who you are, and as a result what you do.
As who you are changes, despite things staying exactly the same way as they were, they are now entirely different.
A metaphore that I could come up with right now is:
It’s as if in the past, life is like a very aggressive river gushing you along its stream as it sometimes drown you within itself.
However, now – as a wholly grown person, even though the river carries the same characteristics, your mind, body & soul has functioned in a way that’s much more different than before, that despite being put in the same situation, you are able to remain in control of where & how the stream will float you.
Previously, I thought living a certain ‘way’ of life could make one become happier.
Or that, a certain ‘way’ of life is wrong, and another right.
But what life forced me to understand was that, the path to happiness is actually not a single path, but a combination of ALL paths as one – that if someone were to be truly enlightened, what he/she has to do is understand and see all of the paths in life, accept all of them as a part of each other, and then decide to live the unique life which is meant for him/her through conscious decisions which are made from him/herself as much as it is possible all of the time.
The tiny little joke here is -
The world will stay the same as it has always been.
But it will just never be the same again.
In the past, the earth may appear to be this dark character always throwing pains, sufferings & torture your way, causing your life to be miserable, never showing you light in the worst of situations.
In the present moment however, with the understanding of how life works and the exercising of this knowledge from within, it may appear more like a nurturing mother perhaps, bright and cheery, always making sure that you are taken care of on your journey towards growth as a human being, rewarding you for your actions as they make her proud.
I guess you might have deduced the key to this message by now.
Because it’s really all about living the same life – only with down to earth consciousness this time around, with power solely belonging to you, with decisions clearly made from within you, and with you knowing what to do in times of trouble (and doing it) because of what you learned from all your painful experiences in the past.
Living with a certain sense of Selfishness, but without the negative side of selfishness, because who you are inside is clear, clarified & wise.
Another thing I learned was:
When life becomes plain, flat or completely depressing, you could always decide on two things to do:
Do nothing, or give yourself some distractions.
Distraction carries with it no negative side, if you consciously choose to be distracted.
Which in this case – can be described as just directing your attention from what’s bad to good.
It could be something like coming up with a big picture of how you want your life to be, and then working yourself towards it.
Any activity that could keep you occupied, and benefit you in terms of something new to learn, a skill to be sharpened, some small fun to be gained, etc.
Or something as simple as looking forward to attending a party or event tomorrow, on the weekends, few more days, preparing yourself for it (shopping maybe?) and so on.
If not, doing nothing until time passes and sends something your way works fine too (just not as good perhaps, when you’re in a bad state).
You could always keep yourself in a state of power and get something out of it, if you’re conscious.
You can always make the world work in favor of you.
Combine everything you have, know or can do, work them in a conscious way that is unique to you, and I believe that you would have retrieved your rights to the ultimate secret of life, to become happy, to live without regrets.
I hope this piece of article has been of value to you.
How many times in life have we kept ourselves troubled with petty matters that could be brushed off if we wanted?
I won’t describe specifically what ‘petty’ means in this context, because it really depends on where you perceive life from.
If your eyes are shrouded by the waves of life, chances are you could be peeved with the smallest of problems – e.g. allowing negative emotions to take over you for not seeing others act exactly the way you want them to, not having what you want exactly according to your expectations, or not experiencing what you want exactly according to your taste, and etc.
On the other hand, if your eyes are cleared by the waves of life, and you could see life as it really Is – chances are you could live life in a way that no matter what happens, you’ll still be grateful, content or at peace.
It’s not an easy choice to pick between those two circumstances, mind you.
If it is, all of us would have been picked the path of happiness.
But the fact remains that within each human lies this thing called Ego.
What we could safely refer to as the mind, with its own soul.
Now ego has an offer most of us couldn’t resist.
It is a master of preference, who has the ability to give us stories that highly entertain us (with factors usually created by two sides of the extreme, e.g. empowering pleasure/excruciating pain, extreme excitement/depressing apathy, immense satisfaction/raging dislike & etc.) for as long as we choose to feed it with power.
The only down side is – it’s like making a deal with the devil (watched the movie “The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus”?).
With every pact he makes with you, you are sure to give him more.
He never loses.
—
What then should we do?
How should we live life in this case?
In the end, which is the way that can fulfill us the most?
The most honest answer I can give you is:
I don’t really know.
But here’s my observation -
Those I know who are most genuinely happy in this world are the ones who are generally more conscious of what truly matters in life.
And the higher they view life from, the lesser problems of all kinds bother them.
After all, human lives, when seen from the edges of the Universe, are but existences that could be easily dismissed.
For descriptive purposes, I think this video can show you a more vivid imagery of the above statement.
