Started reading Doors-of-Perception and realized Huxley’s mescaline experience is essentially the everyday without the buzz—when attentive.
Huxley describes experiencing objects as pure being and as being one with the being of his own being.
Huxley refers to objects & himself being one Not-Self, although in actuality, if he went further, he’d see his self is not a self at all.
As an aside, Huxley was not unversed in Zen or Vedanta so his mescaline experiences were somewhat confirmations of his intellectual studies.
When attentive, it is obvious what the mind interprets as separate objects are not, for it and me are one I that is.
All are appearances arising within the absolute reality of naked awareness. Call me consciousness; then I am awareness.
Nisargadatta speaks to this dual aspect of nonduality. Actually he refers to a trinity: being, breath, and universal consciousness.
Nisargadatta's triumvirate compares with that of sat-cit-ananda where breath is seen as the energetic quality of bliss.
But words cannot describe the actual experience. (Huxley also speaks to this early on.) Only is is is.
No words for Tao—all words exist as mind. Mind only interprets experience. At best, it will recognize there is an intuitive grasp of isness.
As another side, Atma Vichara is experienced energetically and intuitively when it becomes clear the question, Who-am-I? cannot be answered.
Thus, this actuality of a picture frame before me is not a mental experience. It is an insightful one, what Nisargadatta calls apperception.
I cannot explain with words this experience nor how it came to be, except see it always is and “I” was conditioned not to see it.
When one begins to see through the conceptual self, the doors of apperception are unlocked, the gateless gate is opened, and reality enters…
…but reality enters where reality has always been. Here and now. (and this has been just more words) Jai Guru Deva Om.
No comments:
Post a Comment