0.1 there are no words for truth and only lies in words. yet these words are one way for pointing to truth, although truth is always unsaid.
1.1 mind is consciousness limiting itself in order to eat itself in order to create more of itself that appears a little less limited.
2.1 identifying with mind ensures suffering. first, it’s incomplete always looking for completeness; second, it’s divisive guaranteeing violence.
2.2 division creates separation creates association creates disassociation creates division in a never-ending vicious cycle.
2.3 mind will never stop the vicious cycle: it is what it is. there is no choice but to understand the vicious cycle for what it is; or suffer and cause suffering.
3.1 if identification with mind (a person) is a vicious cycle of incompleteness and violence, then what is love, and why can’t a person do that?
3.2 a person can’t love. one doesn’t love. one ~is~ love. a person isn’t love. a person is mind which distorts love into filtered false emotions.
3.3 as long as one identifies with mind, and thinks of oneself as a person, love will never be; no matter how much a person may believe (mind on mind) in love.
3.4 therefore a person cannot love the world to save it; all a person can 'do' is deconstruct itself, eliminating the false to reveal the true.
4.1 in truth, the person doesn’t deconstruct itself; love deconstructs the person; this love is called the satguru.
4.2 all the person can ‘do’ is let love deconstruct the person; this love is called understanding.
4.3 the knowledge of the understanding is love, is the satguru, is being, is consciousness, is is: i am.
5.1 consciousness, being, i-am can not be thought; as love is obviously not a thought; i-am is intuitively known, experienced, apperceived.
5.2 this felt intuitive apperception of i-am is one of nondual consciousness, experiencing the universe as oneself, not ten thousand, not two.
6.1 these first two steps form a natural yoga, deconstruction of the person (not thought) & apperception of not two (i-am) which leads to a third—reality.
6.2 this third step, reality, the absolute, is not something a person can think, nor does i-am attain; the truth comes to i-am.
7.1 these three steps are not three steps in truth; they are one: not thought—i-am—the truth (pure affectionate awareness).
7.2 awareness isn’t experienced nor does ‘it’ experience; to the dream of a waking state, it appears as the pure potential reality of deep sleep.
8.1 there may be other ways, but they haven't been seen here; and what has been seen here as other ways appear to be just tricks of mind.
9.1 As always, these are merely words used by consciousness to talk to itself, understanding reality is available only to itself—Jai Guru Deva Om
Showing posts with label abooks. Show all posts
Showing posts with label abooks. Show all posts
2011-08-05
2011-07-30
The Secret Book of Apperception
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.
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.
2011-07-28
the apocryphon of aum dada
The whole world is the creation of I-Am. Mind has always been its tool although mind ran way with that world.
Within the context of mind and its egoic self, there is no point to that world. Fear appears to be king and runs randomly rampant.
But in the context of I-Am, there is absolutely one point in that world and that is to break out of that world.
In the context of egoic self, the world appears to be real yet pointless and meaningless.
In the context of I-Am, the world appears to be a dream with a single point and meaning: waking up from that dreamstate.
Pulling back and looking at the physical realm of consciousness, in the context of egoic self, it appears violent and random.
In the light of consciousness, the physical world is one of light descending into matter and ascending back to light—one point.
In the unconscious ways of consciousness, the body appears to be involved within this reflexive drive of the universe in space-time.
In the conscious workings of consciousness, the mind appears to be involved within this reflexive drive of the dreamstate in human time.
Natural disasters as experienced within the dreamstate are meaningful on the unconscious level of the reflexive universe.
Human tragedies as experienced within the dreamstate are meaningful on the conscious level of the reflexive dreamstate.
All is expendable and all is sacrificial—consciousness is always ever-changing, ever-renewing, always making more of itself.
But when sitting on the pinnacle of both reflexive universe and reflexive dreamstate, one is truly blessed with double responsibility—svaha!
As the drive of the reflexive universe is pure light, the drive of the reflexive dreamstate is pure love, Satguru, I-Am itself alone and one.
The love of the Satguru is a love that can’t be expressed in terms of egoic self; it is as to compare electric light with sunlight.
But the loving drive of the reflexive dreamstate is just as powerful and single-driven as the nuclear drive of the reflexive universe.
Light, love, call it sunlove, has descended into the dreamstate of egoic self and is now being pulled up into itself by itself—the Satguru.
Each and every dreamstate interaction can be viewed within this so-called serendipitous and meaningful framework of waking up.
Again, it should be remembered that sunlove can be tough love, not completely understood by mind—but the Satguru will always make more.
The closer the egoic self is to dissolving into the pure awareness of I-Am, the more this serendipity will be experienced and understood…
until the only purpose of the dream character is the purpose of the reflexive dreamstate itself—the Bodhisattva drive of the Satguru.
As always, these are merely words used by consciousness to talk to itself understanding reality is available only to itself—Jai Guru Deva Om
Within the context of mind and its egoic self, there is no point to that world. Fear appears to be king and runs randomly rampant.
But in the context of I-Am, there is absolutely one point in that world and that is to break out of that world.
In the context of egoic self, the world appears to be real yet pointless and meaningless.
In the context of I-Am, the world appears to be a dream with a single point and meaning: waking up from that dreamstate.
Pulling back and looking at the physical realm of consciousness, in the context of egoic self, it appears violent and random.
In the light of consciousness, the physical world is one of light descending into matter and ascending back to light—one point.
In the unconscious ways of consciousness, the body appears to be involved within this reflexive drive of the universe in space-time.
In the conscious workings of consciousness, the mind appears to be involved within this reflexive drive of the dreamstate in human time.
Natural disasters as experienced within the dreamstate are meaningful on the unconscious level of the reflexive universe.
Human tragedies as experienced within the dreamstate are meaningful on the conscious level of the reflexive dreamstate.
All is expendable and all is sacrificial—consciousness is always ever-changing, ever-renewing, always making more of itself.
But when sitting on the pinnacle of both reflexive universe and reflexive dreamstate, one is truly blessed with double responsibility—svaha!
As the drive of the reflexive universe is pure light, the drive of the reflexive dreamstate is pure love, Satguru, I-Am itself alone and one.
The love of the Satguru is a love that can’t be expressed in terms of egoic self; it is as to compare electric light with sunlight.
But the loving drive of the reflexive dreamstate is just as powerful and single-driven as the nuclear drive of the reflexive universe.
Light, love, call it sunlove, has descended into the dreamstate of egoic self and is now being pulled up into itself by itself—the Satguru.
Each and every dreamstate interaction can be viewed within this so-called serendipitous and meaningful framework of waking up.
Again, it should be remembered that sunlove can be tough love, not completely understood by mind—but the Satguru will always make more.
The closer the egoic self is to dissolving into the pure awareness of I-Am, the more this serendipity will be experienced and understood…
until the only purpose of the dream character is the purpose of the reflexive dreamstate itself—the Bodhisattva drive of the Satguru.
As always, these are merely words used by consciousness to talk to itself understanding reality is available only to itself—Jai Guru Deva Om
2011-07-27
the apocalypse of aum dada
I took a ride this afternoon and was almost hit twice by oncoming cars swerving into the wrong lane.
It appeared to be a message, repeated, and if I didn’t get it, there’d be a third one I wouldn’t be able to get—it would get me.
I knew what it meant almost as soon I realized they were messages—surrender is not a negative movement.
It begins as such, when one begins to realize one’s sense of self, that egoic sense of I, is purely a conceptual one.
It is at this level one uses the thorn to remove the thorn, that is, one uses the mind to remove identification with the mind.
This is the yoga of wisdom, and it is in its nature, negative, a neti-neti approach. Who am I? Not this; not this.
Nisargadatta Maharaj, though, also emphasizes the positive result of such a negative and self-destructive approach.
Once the objects of this self-identification are removed, the I am this or this or this and so on and so on, only the I Am remains.
This pure “I Am” is all there is, pure non-conceptual self-existence; it is the only thing that cannot be denied.
And the whole world is its creation! Mind has always been its tool although the mind ran away with world.
Ultimately then, the surrender of the egoic self is not so much a surrender as it is the unavoidable awakening triumph of I Am.
Since the egoic self is just shifting conceptual identifications entirely mind-created, there is really no one there to surrender.
This is why it is said all one can do is understand. The understanding of the falsehood leads to a natural lessening of self-identification.
One cannot believe in one that doesn’t exist. The power of the false declines gradually until there is a sudden final letting-go.
It is the final letting-go that will appear as something completely negative to the remaining, almost now purely habitual, egoic self.
It is as if it knows it doesn’t exist except in concept, yet still holds on to the habit of that conceptual existence. Maybe dangerously so.
Therefore when faced with some line-in-the-sand kind of action (or non-action), the surrender of the egoic self is a deathlike one.
Alternatively, when vestiges of egoic self are utilized as a finishing tool, it becomes clear the hand that holds the tool isn’t the tool.
Such letting-go then is not a negative movement, but a positive inevitability: the tool surrenders to the hand that’s always held it: I Am!
As always, these concepts are subtle ones, and they are merely words used by consciousness to talk to itself…
in the understanding the ultimate reality of that pointless point of pure awareness is available only to itself—and not its tool of mind.
Jai Guru Deva Om—I Am That.
It appeared to be a message, repeated, and if I didn’t get it, there’d be a third one I wouldn’t be able to get—it would get me.
I knew what it meant almost as soon I realized they were messages—surrender is not a negative movement.
It begins as such, when one begins to realize one’s sense of self, that egoic sense of I, is purely a conceptual one.
It is at this level one uses the thorn to remove the thorn, that is, one uses the mind to remove identification with the mind.
This is the yoga of wisdom, and it is in its nature, negative, a neti-neti approach. Who am I? Not this; not this.
Nisargadatta Maharaj, though, also emphasizes the positive result of such a negative and self-destructive approach.
Once the objects of this self-identification are removed, the I am this or this or this and so on and so on, only the I Am remains.
This pure “I Am” is all there is, pure non-conceptual self-existence; it is the only thing that cannot be denied.
And the whole world is its creation! Mind has always been its tool although the mind ran away with world.
Ultimately then, the surrender of the egoic self is not so much a surrender as it is the unavoidable awakening triumph of I Am.
Since the egoic self is just shifting conceptual identifications entirely mind-created, there is really no one there to surrender.
This is why it is said all one can do is understand. The understanding of the falsehood leads to a natural lessening of self-identification.
One cannot believe in one that doesn’t exist. The power of the false declines gradually until there is a sudden final letting-go.
It is the final letting-go that will appear as something completely negative to the remaining, almost now purely habitual, egoic self.
It is as if it knows it doesn’t exist except in concept, yet still holds on to the habit of that conceptual existence. Maybe dangerously so.
Therefore when faced with some line-in-the-sand kind of action (or non-action), the surrender of the egoic self is a deathlike one.
Alternatively, when vestiges of egoic self are utilized as a finishing tool, it becomes clear the hand that holds the tool isn’t the tool.
Such letting-go then is not a negative movement, but a positive inevitability: the tool surrenders to the hand that’s always held it: I Am!
As always, these concepts are subtle ones, and they are merely words used by consciousness to talk to itself…
in the understanding the ultimate reality of that pointless point of pure awareness is available only to itself—and not its tool of mind.
Jai Guru Deva Om—I Am That.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)