When you really understand who you are, you will experience unalloyed happiness. Happiness that you only dreamed about, happiness in the Silence, when nothing is happening but you’re happy. Always happy, always at peace. All of the Gods that you have been praying to all your life, all of the Buddha’s you’ve taken refuge in, the Krishnas, the Kalmias, the Shivahs, the Christ, Allah, they’re all within you. You are that. There is only the one Self and you are That. Ponder this.
The knowledge of this brings you eternally infinite happiness instantly. When you begin to understand who you are, your Divine nature, that you are not the body, you’re not the mind, once you understand your Infinite nature, who you really are and there’s nothing else, you immediately become instantly happy. For happiness is your very nature. Happiness, the Self are synonymous. Consciousness, Absolute Reality, Pure Awareness, are all synonymous. There is only One. It has many names, but the One pervades all of space and time. And it is the only existence and you are That. There is no other existence. Awaken to this truth. You are the only One that does exist. And you are Consciousness.
~Robert Adams
••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
And this ‘knowing’ is our self, aware presence. In other words, all that is ever experienced is our self knowing itself, awareness aware of awareness.
~Rupert Spira
Who am I? = From where does I arise? Where does the mind go to answer that question?
Consciousness is the knowing with which experience is known. Body, mind, world are objects in the foreground. Consciousness is the knower in the background. Objects seem to appear TO consciousness but they’re really appearing IN consciousness. Finally we realize the objects are made OF consciousness.
THE OBJECT-NESS OF THE OBJECT BECOMES PERVADED BY THE SUBJECT-NESS OF THE SUBJECT. There’s no longer a subject and object. It’s no longer I know this object. That’s what Rupert means when he says the outshining of the body, mind and world by the light of pure consciousness. It’s not the object that dissolves but the object-ness that dissolves.
Don’t look for a magical experience with objects!
Don’t be satisfied with occasional glimpses.
The dead, inert stuff that is other than myself we call matter.
The only thing I can know of the world is the knowing of it and that knowing is my own infinite self. It’s not what we see that changes, its the way we see that changes. This seems to change what we see. It does and it doesn’t. The appearance stays the same. The appearance is no longer mistaken for the reality and because we see the reality in the appearance, the relationship with the appearance changes.
Maya is the appearance. Ignorance is to mistake the appearance for reality. When the subject object relationship collapses the separate me in here – inside my chest and the separate world out there – collapses it is felt as Joy and peace. In relationship to people it’s love; in relationship to objects its beauty. When SAT and CHIT (being and consciousness) are one, the third element shines and that element is happiness. What I essentially am CHIT and what it essentially is – existence – are seen to be one and the same and this third element, the experience of happiness, peace or joy, shines = SAT CHIT ANANDA.
Rupert Spira
‘Pseudo Advaita’
Q: “I understand that the natural response of awakening is to see all as Grace, but if awakening has not yet become apparent and irritation does arise, and the best you can do is pseudo advaita, is that “wrong”?”
R: I have certainly not suggested anywhere that ‘pseudo advaita’ is ‘wrong.’ However, perhaps I should clarify what I mean by ‘pseudo advaita’:
One way of defining advaita is to say that it is the experiential understanding that there are no separate entities or objects to be found anywhere in experience.
If we think and feel that we are a separate entity and think at the same time that there are no separate entities in experience, we are contradicting ourselves.
The deeper of these two thoughts is the thought that we are a separate entity (because this thought has a strong feeling attached to it) and, for this reason, I suggest that the subsequent thought that there are no entities, is simply a belief, that is is not actually true of our experience. One cannot stand as impersonal, unlimited Awareness and, at the same time, as a separate, limited entity. To take this position is disingenuous and hence the term ‘pseudo advaita.’
To say ‘I accept my suffering as an expression of Grace’ is one form of this contradiction. The ‘I’ that is suffering and the ‘I’ that is accepting is made out of the belief that ‘some-things-are-Grace-and-others-are-not.’
Such a one is the very denial of the understanding that all things are Grace, that is, it is a denial of the non-dual understanding that everything is equally an expression of Awareness. Of course, ultimately that very denial is made out of nothing but Awareness, hence, as I have often said in our correspondence, there is no real ignorance.
However, once Awareness has taken the shape of the mind which says ‘I, Awareness, am this little entity and I am therefore not everything else,’ its reality as the substance of all things, seems to be veiled. This veiling is known to us as the experience of suffering.
The position of suffering and the position in which we understand that Awareness is the substance of all things are therefore mutually exclusive. In this case non-duality is simply a belief superimposed on our dualistic feelings.
Such a position is one in which we It is think that everything is equally an expression of Awareness, whilst feeling that in fact everything is not. And then, in order to accommodate this contradiction, we add another thought which says that I completely accept my suffering as an expression of Awareness, that is, I accept my rejection of the current situation. However, suffering is synonymous with searching. If we completely accept the current situation (our suffering) why are we simultaneously rejecting it and searching for a better one?
To accept suffering is, by definition, to have no motivation to change it, but suffering is, by definition, the desire to change the current situation. So which is true, the acceptance of the current situation or the desire to change it? They cannot both be true.
This contradiction is at the heart of ‘pseudo advaita.’ Perhaps the term ‘pseudo advaita’ has a judgemental connotation to it, which is certainly not intended. It is meant to be factual. Maybe ‘intellectual advaita’ would be a better term. It is meant to indicate a situation where we have appropriated the belief in advaita and adopted it as yet one more strategy to avoid honestly facing our suffering. It is a pretence. This belief downgrades advaita from a living experiential understanding to a religion. Of course, if we are happy with this superficial understanding of life, then that is fine – there is no judgement of that. (I am not not suggesting that this is so in your case.)
Q: “On the “path” to awakening we are taught that acceptance of everything that arises is key to living with more peace……”
R: You must ask those who say such things to explain their teaching – it is certainly not what is being suggested here.
If we are suffering, we are, by definition searching, trying to change the current situation. If ‘acceptance’ is our new strategy to avoid suffering, it is just a slightly more healthy alternative to going to the fridge or whatever….It is in fact nothing to do with acceptance. Accepting something in order to get rid of it is not acceptance. It is rejection pretending to be acceptance.
Q: “If the best you can do at the time is a mental process, shouldn’t you go ahead and do it?”
R: Yes, certainly, but believing that everything is an expression of Grace whilst feeling that it is not, is not a ‘mental process.’ It is the opposite of a ‘mental process.’ It is a fixed position.
Advaita is not a fixed position or a dogma, always meeting a variety of situations or questions with the same ‘Awareness is all, Awareness is all, Awareness is all’ answer. It is true that Awareness is all, but this understanding can be refracted into as many different forms as there are situations or questions. As soon as ‘Awareness is all’ becomes a belief, it is dead. It is, as such, the opposite of advaita.
If one is suffering, I suggest that she or he has the courage and the honesty to face their suffering without any attempt to get rid of it. Just to look at it and see the facts of the situation: one, our psychological suffering involves a rejection of the current situation and two, there is a presumed separate entity at the heart of this rejection. That is the first step of the ‘mental process.’
The second is to enquire into the nature of this apparent entity. After all, if our suffering revolves around it, any understanding of suffering must involve an understanding of this apparent entity. Please note, the suggestion here is to understand suffering, not to get rid of it.
As we look towards this apparent limited entity, to our surprise we do not find it. We just find a belief and a few bodily sensations appearing in and, ultimately, made out of our own intimate Knowing Presence or Awareness. At this point the ‘mental process’ comes to an end and we simply take our stand knowingly as that which we always already are.
If the belief or feeling of separation arises again, we gently resume our investigation and exploration until we find ourselves again knowingly established as Awareness. As time goes on there is less and less investigation and more and more abidance.
Q: “Isn’t irritation an expression of Grace? How could it not be?”
R: I think I have answered this now, but at the risk of being repetitive and for the sake of thoroughness, this is tantamount to saying, “Isn’t suffering an expression of Grace?” Whilst in theory and from the absolute point of view, it is, in practise and at a relative level, it is not. If we are feeling irritated we are standing as a person, not as the absolute.
If we truly feel that our suffering is a gift of Grace (not in retrospect but while it is actually taking place) then we would be happy with our suffering; we would be glad to be suffering. In which case our suffering would be an experience of happiness, and would not therefore be experienced as suffering.
So, again, suffering is, by definition, a rejection of the current situation. Can we legitimately and honestly say, “I dislike the current situation and am therefore suffering and also enjoy it as a gift of grace?” No, these two positions are mutually exclusive. We cannot be both happy and unhappy with the current situation. It is only possible to have one feeling at a time. In such a case we are feeling one thing and thinking another.
I would suggest that such a situation is intolerable for one who is deeply interested in the nature of reality. In time, either suffering or intelligence will compel the search for a resolution.
PROGRESSIVE VS DIRECT PATHS = Traditional (Feeling), don’t go directly to true nature but go to true nature via steps or stages, like guru, sound, object to purify. In the end, sink attention into Source. VERSUS (Direct) don’t focus on body but go directly to presence of awareness.
How do you recognize a truly enlightened guru?
If they dress in orange, carry the paraphernalia, utter non-duality sayings …? No!
Ramana Maharshi recognized his true nature (in a near-death experience) was at odds with his everyday life.
All [bad, amoral, unethical] actions are perpetrated by people who believe they are temporary, limited, separated selves – to aggrandize or protect them.
PROGRESSIVE PATH involves gradual purification, cleaning up, growing up.
No cleaning up on the way with Direct Path.
ON THE TOPIC WITH FRANK JOHNSON:
TO WHAT EXTENT SHOULD WE FOCUS ON THE PROBLEM (PAIN) THAT WE WANT TO HEAL ?
▪︎▪︎▪︎▪︎▪︎▪︎▪︎▪︎▪︎▪︎▪︎▪︎▪︎▪︎▪︎
FJ:
“The problem (so many [have,] believers included) is trying to figure things out with the mind, trying to see what the mind cannot see (aka Religion).
We don’t want to let go, we want to add to our false sense of self.
This pattern, found in religious doctrine, only leaves you confused and empty.”
Frank Johnson
●●●●●●●●●●
“Ultimately, there are no mistakes. There are only temporary learning situations. It’s all taken you to this moment of presence and so it worked. If you look at your own suffering, you can see that it has its place and it has had its place. It has deepened you. You probably wouldn’t be here without it. You would be watching TV or something like that. So you can see that it has produced the deepening or it will produce the deepening in every life form.”
Eckhart Tolle, Freedom from the world (2004 lecture)
●●●●●●●●●●
AWARENESS. \/ \/ \/
“Everybody is aware, all seven billion of us. We are aware of thoughts, feelings, sensations, and perceptions. All people share the experience of being aware, but relatively few people are aware that they are aware. Most people’s lives consist of a flow of thoughts, images, ideas, feelings, sensations, sights, sounds, and so on. Very few people ask, ‘What is it that knows this flow of thoughts, feelings, and perceptions? With what am I aware of my experience?’
The knowing of our being – or rather, awareness’s knowing of its own being in us – is our primary, fundamental and most intimate experience. It is in this experience that the peace, happiness and love for which all people long reside.
The knowing of our own being shines in each of us as the experience ‘I am’ or ‘I am aware’, or simply the knowledge ‘I’. This obvious, familiar experience has no objective qualities and is, therefore, overlooked or ignored by the majority of people. This overlooking of our own being is the ultimate cause of unhappiness.”
The Mind in you is the Mind of God.
The Self in you is the only Self there is.