Hi Ed,
What is so crystal clear about Robert than one can't pick up on as well through the writings, is his incredible compassion. There is not an inkling of personal judgment in his responses to the questioners, a clear compassion.
S.
02 April 2009
30 March 2009
Hi Ed,
I have been seeking for over 30 years but the last 9 were more (or less) intensive.
Many teachers say Consciousness (turya, Brahman, I-Amness, etc,) is the final "goal". Some however say there is that which is beyond Consciousness which is the Absolute Reality. In fact Siddharameshwar calls Brahman the MahaMaya. It is the original illusion. The title of Jean Dunn's transcriptions, both titles approved by Nisargadatta: "Prior to Consciousness" and "Consciousness and the Absolute" speak to the point.
Consciousness may be a step towards realization of the Absolute, but as tourists say about the city of my birth, NYC., it's a nice place to visit but I wouldn't want to live there.
I now have copies in a binding of the talks by Robert Adams from your site. Will take it with me on my upcoming trip. Have already read the 1st two. Also the recording of him "Awareness of Consciousness", I have listened to it several times. Funny though, this morning was the first time all of it got through. Thank you for making these available.
Best wishes, R.
To R:
Re Maha Maha.
Most of the famous gurus have metaphysics associated with their
"school." Ramana has Turiya and Turiyatta as does Nisargadatta. Lots of Buddhist schools have their own ontology and epistemology, while Zen more or less has none.
Both Krishnamurtis talk of unity consciousness and accept consciousness as a brain phenomena, while the I and you disappear in unity consciousness. They don’t go far from that.
Robert didn't really have any ontolohy. He'd mention them to entertain people--like me, and then at the end of the talk admit he was pulling their leg.
You have to take all if this with a grain of salt. Lot's of people
describe almost exactly the same experience in very different ways, and probably more often, very different experiences in similar ways.
As long as words are used to communicate, we never know what another experiences. Music, I think, better conveys the experience of another without too much distortion, but sucks at conveying ontology.
Therefore, how can you trust what anyone says that their experience means?
That is why I just advise people to practice self-inquiry and find their own experience and truth which they can then express as their message.
Therefore too, I recommend listening to sacred music. I think those who get it, all get more or less the same experience.
Ed
I have been seeking for over 30 years but the last 9 were more (or less) intensive.
Many teachers say Consciousness (turya, Brahman, I-Amness, etc,) is the final "goal". Some however say there is that which is beyond Consciousness which is the Absolute Reality. In fact Siddharameshwar calls Brahman the MahaMaya. It is the original illusion. The title of Jean Dunn's transcriptions, both titles approved by Nisargadatta: "Prior to Consciousness" and "Consciousness and the Absolute" speak to the point.
Consciousness may be a step towards realization of the Absolute, but as tourists say about the city of my birth, NYC., it's a nice place to visit but I wouldn't want to live there.
I now have copies in a binding of the talks by Robert Adams from your site. Will take it with me on my upcoming trip. Have already read the 1st two. Also the recording of him "Awareness of Consciousness", I have listened to it several times. Funny though, this morning was the first time all of it got through. Thank you for making these available.
Best wishes, R.
To R:
Re Maha Maha.
Most of the famous gurus have metaphysics associated with their
"school." Ramana has Turiya and Turiyatta as does Nisargadatta. Lots of Buddhist schools have their own ontology and epistemology, while Zen more or less has none.
Both Krishnamurtis talk of unity consciousness and accept consciousness as a brain phenomena, while the I and you disappear in unity consciousness. They don’t go far from that.
Robert didn't really have any ontolohy. He'd mention them to entertain people--like me, and then at the end of the talk admit he was pulling their leg.
You have to take all if this with a grain of salt. Lot's of people
describe almost exactly the same experience in very different ways, and probably more often, very different experiences in similar ways.
As long as words are used to communicate, we never know what another experiences. Music, I think, better conveys the experience of another without too much distortion, but sucks at conveying ontology.
Therefore, how can you trust what anyone says that their experience means?
That is why I just advise people to practice self-inquiry and find their own experience and truth which they can then express as their message.
Therefore too, I recommend listening to sacred music. I think those who get it, all get more or less the same experience.
Ed
23 March 2009
A Reader Questions:
Dear Ed, it was recommended to me by a friend that I contact you with a few questions that I have. I am a 21 year old University of XXXX student majoring in Classics. I am having difficulty understanding the definition of existence in Mind 4 of the Blue website. I understand that since the world is defined by the mind's perception that it has no foundation in reality because thoughts are not real and do not exist. According to the definition of existence provided on the blue website there is nothing that exists because there is nothing that is tangible, and there is nothing that is tangible because perception defines tangibility, and perception is simply a thought, and thoughts are not tangible so they do not exist. This is where I stumble. The suggestion made by this definition that thought and perception are one in the same is true on a biological level. Chemical and electrical signals in the brain and body work to affect thought and perception in a similar manner, but I wonder if it might be incorrect to suggest that sensory perception and thought are no different. In addition it seems to me that the given definition of existence is too narrow. When I hear the word exist I assume it is referring to something that "is," or rather something that "is not a lack of something," although making nothing the subject of a sentence, and making nothing into something that I can refer to seems paradoxical. I understand that what is and what is not depends solely on my perception of it and in that way there is nothing without the mind's perception. Is it possible that the only way to understand non-existence is that non-existence is that which the mind cannot fathom or perceive, and by that definition it is impossible to ever reach a higher state of awareness? And if that were true might it also be true that enlightenment is just another mind state.
p.s. I am aware that I use the word "I" a lot, and I realize the implications of this. But I am not sure how to convey through speech what "I" am thinking.
Thank you for taking the time to consider my ramblings.
Dear YYYYYYYY
For future correspondence can you use a larger type, such as 12-14 pts and break up your questions into separate paragraphs to make it easier for this old mind to follow?
I am not defining thought or the world there. I am pointing out my understanding.
To use an analogy, thought is like a mass that distorts awareness, grabs hold of it, and creates a condition, such as an apparent object. Without the thought to give the formless awareness form, there would no form, no objects, no external world.
When the thoughts are no longer identified with through practice, they lose the ability to create forms including objects. Then they are seen to be unreal compared to the “seer” who is You.
You have the primary existence, all else is secondary to you, impermanent, having no substance. It is a passing imaginal form. You, as a person are as nothing in this scheme, just a passing form.
In any event, this is not a definition. Definitions are between words and concepts. It is more like a description which binds the world to concepts.
Ultimately awareness, the real, whatever you call it, cannot be described or defined. You need to get beyond this bottleneck of trying to understand with words, anything. The mind will never give you freedom. To go free you need to lose your mind.
03 March 2009
Communicating with a Teacher
I get several emails everyday form people asking directions about their practice and often with practices far from what I have recommended or practiced myself. These questions are very difficult to answer because I am not in their skin nor vice versa. We communicate through concepts, words and images, yet there is no common point "Rosetta Stone" whereby I can know that what you mean by "red" is the same as what I mean, or that your experience of "emptiness" or "I Am" is the same as mine was. We just all assume there is some correspondence, and in most instances things seem to work out as if there had been communication.
Therefore when you send a description, unless it is very detailed and dovetails into my own experiential progression on the path, I really can't tell where you are because you are still lost in what I call "Imaginal Space," the inner conceptualizing and imaging processes that fill our inner and outer sense of emptiness with a non-existent world of name, substance and form. That emptiness becomes polluted by the constant mentation/imaging processes.
The trick is to end imaginal space and its contents altogether. The I Am is the core component that arranges and orders that imaginal space giving the world its form and you your apparent body/mind.
But many of the questions I get are on how to proceed to enlightenment from some point inside of the questioner's imaginal space meditation experiences, which are all illusory. It is almost like asking, "In which direction do I need to walk in order to get into the Fifth Dimension?" Well, there is no Fifth Dimension from where you are, there will only be continuity of the illusion unless you want to wake up.
Meditation can only get you to an experience of a very refined emptiness such as the Clear Light Void I have talked about. The I Am feeling, imagining and thinking are in abeyance, and a feeling of the empty and void nature of things is strong.
This is very subtle and peaceful, but is not enlightenment which is a total blowing out of the imaginal space and its contents.
Nothing can show you the way to this true void, true emptiness; it has to happen to you. The best you can do is to prepare the way, that is, practice. Awakening becomes the focus of your attention.
Right now for the sake of communication, using a specific variety of Self-Inquiry which I feel is both rapid and least likely to cause you to go astray, I ask you to download Pradeep's "Nisragdatta Gita" from the Resource page. Print it out and put it in a 3 ring binder. Read 4-5 paragraphs every morning and "ponder" the meaning. Correct meditation then can be almost automatic.
I like his form because there is less likelyhood of getting lost compared practicing awareness watching awareness, or trying to follow the I-thought to its source.
As long as you can feel your sense of existence, you will have a guide. But asking yourself, "Who am I?, and waiting, or sitting trying to be aware of awareness, can lead to losing interest, getting lost, and puts an unnecessary emphasis on void-like or emptiness meditations. I know, because I did this meditation for many years.
After you do this a few weeks, then send questions and we will be a little bit "closer" to being on the same page.
Therefore when you send a description, unless it is very detailed and dovetails into my own experiential progression on the path, I really can't tell where you are because you are still lost in what I call "Imaginal Space," the inner conceptualizing and imaging processes that fill our inner and outer sense of emptiness with a non-existent world of name, substance and form. That emptiness becomes polluted by the constant mentation/imaging processes.
The trick is to end imaginal space and its contents altogether. The I Am is the core component that arranges and orders that imaginal space giving the world its form and you your apparent body/mind.
But many of the questions I get are on how to proceed to enlightenment from some point inside of the questioner's imaginal space meditation experiences, which are all illusory. It is almost like asking, "In which direction do I need to walk in order to get into the Fifth Dimension?" Well, there is no Fifth Dimension from where you are, there will only be continuity of the illusion unless you want to wake up.
Meditation can only get you to an experience of a very refined emptiness such as the Clear Light Void I have talked about. The I Am feeling, imagining and thinking are in abeyance, and a feeling of the empty and void nature of things is strong.
This is very subtle and peaceful, but is not enlightenment which is a total blowing out of the imaginal space and its contents.
Nothing can show you the way to this true void, true emptiness; it has to happen to you. The best you can do is to prepare the way, that is, practice. Awakening becomes the focus of your attention.
Right now for the sake of communication, using a specific variety of Self-Inquiry which I feel is both rapid and least likely to cause you to go astray, I ask you to download Pradeep's "Nisragdatta Gita" from the Resource page. Print it out and put it in a 3 ring binder. Read 4-5 paragraphs every morning and "ponder" the meaning. Correct meditation then can be almost automatic.
I like his form because there is less likelyhood of getting lost compared practicing awareness watching awareness, or trying to follow the I-thought to its source.
As long as you can feel your sense of existence, you will have a guide. But asking yourself, "Who am I?, and waiting, or sitting trying to be aware of awareness, can lead to losing interest, getting lost, and puts an unnecessary emphasis on void-like or emptiness meditations. I know, because I did this meditation for many years.
After you do this a few weeks, then send questions and we will be a little bit "closer" to being on the same page.
16 February 2009
The Reader Loses It Then Gets It Back Again
READER:
Hi again Ed, I know that you want me to dwell in emptiness, in true existence as much as possible. But last night, I was reading Robert's Collected Works and would appreciate your clarification if it's alright. If I shouldn't even be asking this, I understand. It relates to, but is also different from the original question I asked you about deep sleep.
Robert states: "Once you go to sleep, the world no longer exists for you and you are is a state of dreamless sleep. The state of dreamless sleep is like jnana, self-realization, except you have consciousness. But there is no denying that you exist, for when you wake up you say, "I slept well." The state of dreamless sleep is like a person who died. It gives you an idea of what happens to you when you die, so to speak....So the first state of consciousness is dreamless sleep, and you exist in dreamless sleep."
This does not feel true for me as there are often times in which I am not aware that I had been sleeping (only the clock tells me) and so Robert's statement does not for me, "confirm" my existence, my undying consciousness. In fact, deep sleep seems to be the exception to the recognition that I exist. I do realize that my question is also rooted in an egoic fear, in old family history, but it snags me.
In your own writings you say: "Even the deep sleep state is a state of consciousness. The brain, mind and body are shut down during that ‘time’. All is forgotten because remembering requires mind. Mind is shut down during deep sleep as is the brain. Both are forgotten. But an underlying tone of awareness continues. Many people after some practice "feel" the presence of the sleep state even when awake. YOU are that which can simultaneously be aware of both waking and sleeping, even though you are primarily the waking state at the time.....There is no argument that can prove there is an observing consciousness or existence in sleep. All arguments that there is consciousness in sleep depend on argumentation and inference. They try to convince the reader that this is their direct experience by inference. This is a weakness of all Jnani-style expositions: he mystery of the deep sleep state..."
What you write is true, isn't it? Unborn existence or awareness cannot be confirmed in deep sleep, the one state free of mind. Awareness in deep sleep appears to have been unquestionably true for Robert as an exception. Still any clarification would again be helpful.
ANSWER:
Ahh, you lost it. That is to be expected.
Robert was repeating the standard Jnana-Advaita argument that just does not wash. It is a ridiculous argument.
BUT, you are still looking for a waking-type of awareness in deep sleep. It won't happen. Ever.
The question again comes from a place of identification with waking consciousness as the only "real" consciousness.
However, the waking consciousness is an artifact of having a body and depends on the state of the body. It is weak, feeble and temporary. Ditto dream sleep.
Dream sleep is the imaginal world weakly illuminated by waking consciousness.
The real argument is that you are That which is aware of the coming and going of waking consciousness.
The analogy I used was a candle flame. The flame itself, if conscious, would not be aware of its non-existence. Only the wick and the observer would be aware of the coming and going of the flame.
So too with you. You are aware you are aware now, and you are also aware you will not be aware 12 hours from now.
That you is like the wick or the observer.
You can argue that it is only the conscious mind that knows it will not be a few hours hence and not something beyond, yet, when you wake up and when you go to sleep you do watch the coming and going of sleep. It is not the waking mind that observes that, it is the underlying consciousness associated with having an alive body, Turiya.
It is this recognition that you see the coming and going that creates the knowledge you are beyond all this. You can never see That which is beyond it, but you become rooted in it with that knowledge.
I go one step further than most Advaita. Most take that emptiness and Void they perceive to be that out of which the world and body arise, but the Void is merely another percept. You perceive it. You are beyond by having no property at all, not even void or space, just as when you sleep.
That is, without a body you are nothing at all, not even sentient. You are the witness of all sentience including waking consciousness.
I never asked Robert if he had a waking consciousness with memory at night. I think if I were to ask him, he would say he did not.
You have to lose hold of waking consciousness as being the measure of all existence. It is not.
READER:
Wow Ed, Thank you for your response. Everything you say is extremely clear. Formless, aware presence "returned". No qualities or properties here, not a mark. This reality is so real, yet of nothing. Also today, I directly saw the made-up quality of my fear. So made up! I heard that people laugh when seeing this, but I never did. Today though, the seriousness with which I had taken this storybook sense of reality made me laugh. I also see that I have always known this true reality.
I do have another question that rises from this awareness.
Last week I wrote this down: There is no separation between mind and no mind, even though mind is a conceptual overlay. Paradox vanishes. Even untruth is of the One and yet not, infused, supported by an emptiness that cannot be described. Thought does not bother me. I engage in the world as a play and though unreal, is loved as the All.
Sometimes however and today, this is noticed: True reality is not aware of anything, not even of dream states. Only the pure, unmarked, absolute reality exists, so there is nothing else to be aware of.
When you have time, can you let me in on any sense of what is going on here? The awareness is different.
Thank you for being there.
ANSWER:
Part of the old you is struggle desperately to stay alive--or this is how it appears.
Actually, there is a loose wheel portion of your mind that keeps spinning out of habit, generating questions and perplexities.
Sort of like having a sore tooth, but after the root canal, something seems wrong without it.
At times you let this process take over and out spins questions and perplexities.
The only light to shed is that this is a pathological part of yourself that needs passive observation and separation from.
It is almost like you just received $20,000,000 and then start asking questions about how two bills seem to have been printed at different mints, have different signatures on them, and different colors, thinking there might be some deep meaning.
You have been searching a long time and part of you would feel lost if there were nothing more to do except sit still.
READER:
Thank you Ed. Your description is so brilliantly clear that I have to laugh. I see the residual habit. I see my endearing toothache. I will sit still, passively observing. I don't mind. The old is not my only choice anymore. Thank you again for your keen guidance. I don't believe you fully know how much you help me.
READER:
Hi again Ed, I know that you want me to dwell in emptiness, in true existence as much as possible. But last night, I was reading Robert's Collected Works and would appreciate your clarification if it's alright. If I shouldn't even be asking this, I understand. It relates to, but is also different from the original question I asked you about deep sleep.
Robert states: "Once you go to sleep, the world no longer exists for you and you are is a state of dreamless sleep. The state of dreamless sleep is like jnana, self-realization, except you have consciousness. But there is no denying that you exist, for when you wake up you say, "I slept well." The state of dreamless sleep is like a person who died. It gives you an idea of what happens to you when you die, so to speak....So the first state of consciousness is dreamless sleep, and you exist in dreamless sleep."
This does not feel true for me as there are often times in which I am not aware that I had been sleeping (only the clock tells me) and so Robert's statement does not for me, "confirm" my existence, my undying consciousness. In fact, deep sleep seems to be the exception to the recognition that I exist. I do realize that my question is also rooted in an egoic fear, in old family history, but it snags me.
In your own writings you say: "Even the deep sleep state is a state of consciousness. The brain, mind and body are shut down during that ‘time’. All is forgotten because remembering requires mind. Mind is shut down during deep sleep as is the brain. Both are forgotten. But an underlying tone of awareness continues. Many people after some practice "feel" the presence of the sleep state even when awake. YOU are that which can simultaneously be aware of both waking and sleeping, even though you are primarily the waking state at the time.....There is no argument that can prove there is an observing consciousness or existence in sleep. All arguments that there is consciousness in sleep depend on argumentation and inference. They try to convince the reader that this is their direct experience by inference. This is a weakness of all Jnani-style expositions: he mystery of the deep sleep state..."
What you write is true, isn't it? Unborn existence or awareness cannot be confirmed in deep sleep, the one state free of mind. Awareness in deep sleep appears to have been unquestionably true for Robert as an exception. Still any clarification would again be helpful.
ANSWER:
Ahh, you lost it. That is to be expected.
Robert was repeating the standard Jnana-Advaita argument that just does not wash. It is a ridiculous argument.
BUT, you are still looking for a waking-type of awareness in deep sleep. It won't happen. Ever.
The question again comes from a place of identification with waking consciousness as the only "real" consciousness.
However, the waking consciousness is an artifact of having a body and depends on the state of the body. It is weak, feeble and temporary. Ditto dream sleep.
Dream sleep is the imaginal world weakly illuminated by waking consciousness.
The real argument is that you are That which is aware of the coming and going of waking consciousness.
The analogy I used was a candle flame. The flame itself, if conscious, would not be aware of its non-existence. Only the wick and the observer would be aware of the coming and going of the flame.
So too with you. You are aware you are aware now, and you are also aware you will not be aware 12 hours from now.
That you is like the wick or the observer.
You can argue that it is only the conscious mind that knows it will not be a few hours hence and not something beyond, yet, when you wake up and when you go to sleep you do watch the coming and going of sleep. It is not the waking mind that observes that, it is the underlying consciousness associated with having an alive body, Turiya.
It is this recognition that you see the coming and going that creates the knowledge you are beyond all this. You can never see That which is beyond it, but you become rooted in it with that knowledge.
I go one step further than most Advaita. Most take that emptiness and Void they perceive to be that out of which the world and body arise, but the Void is merely another percept. You perceive it. You are beyond by having no property at all, not even void or space, just as when you sleep.
That is, without a body you are nothing at all, not even sentient. You are the witness of all sentience including waking consciousness.
I never asked Robert if he had a waking consciousness with memory at night. I think if I were to ask him, he would say he did not.
You have to lose hold of waking consciousness as being the measure of all existence. It is not.
READER:
Wow Ed, Thank you for your response. Everything you say is extremely clear. Formless, aware presence "returned". No qualities or properties here, not a mark. This reality is so real, yet of nothing. Also today, I directly saw the made-up quality of my fear. So made up! I heard that people laugh when seeing this, but I never did. Today though, the seriousness with which I had taken this storybook sense of reality made me laugh. I also see that I have always known this true reality.
I do have another question that rises from this awareness.
Last week I wrote this down: There is no separation between mind and no mind, even though mind is a conceptual overlay. Paradox vanishes. Even untruth is of the One and yet not, infused, supported by an emptiness that cannot be described. Thought does not bother me. I engage in the world as a play and though unreal, is loved as the All.
Sometimes however and today, this is noticed: True reality is not aware of anything, not even of dream states. Only the pure, unmarked, absolute reality exists, so there is nothing else to be aware of.
When you have time, can you let me in on any sense of what is going on here? The awareness is different.
Thank you for being there.
ANSWER:
Part of the old you is struggle desperately to stay alive--or this is how it appears.
Actually, there is a loose wheel portion of your mind that keeps spinning out of habit, generating questions and perplexities.
Sort of like having a sore tooth, but after the root canal, something seems wrong without it.
At times you let this process take over and out spins questions and perplexities.
The only light to shed is that this is a pathological part of yourself that needs passive observation and separation from.
It is almost like you just received $20,000,000 and then start asking questions about how two bills seem to have been printed at different mints, have different signatures on them, and different colors, thinking there might be some deep meaning.
You have been searching a long time and part of you would feel lost if there were nothing more to do except sit still.
READER:
Thank you Ed. Your description is so brilliantly clear that I have to laugh. I see the residual habit. I see my endearing toothache. I will sit still, passively observing. I don't mind. The old is not my only choice anymore. Thank you again for your keen guidance. I don't believe you fully know how much you help me.
07 February 2009
A Reader Awakens
...
...
The last post was a question from a reader and my responses. The topic was sleep. The exchange is listed in the previous post.
Since then, there were additional exchanges recorded immediately below.
She has awakened. Her experience is real. It is obvious by her comments and questions that she has been wandering in the foothills of enlightenment for some time. This will not be her last Satori.
Now that she has seen clearly who she is, she will need to hold onto it and deepen both her experience and understanding. Remember, Robert spent 17 years wandering around India making sure, as he put it, that “I didn’t miss anything.” Ramana spent years living in the basement of temples or caves speaking to no one. This is the real beginning of practice.
As Philip Kapleau told me, the initial seeing is like finding the light switch in a dark room. When the light goes on so to speak, you begin to see the wonders of consciousness and beyond.
READER:
Hi Ed,
Yesterday, I witnessed the coming and going of appearances for about ten hours. I saw that all objects are empty of inherent Being, are a reflection of mind and yet in a way, are themselves of Being, of Consciousness, because they are objects or reflections of Consciousness. I can generally embrace this, even though at times I can get a kind of ego rebellion and feel unpleasantly dead. I realize that this feeling is just another thought, an identification with mind and body, and will need to witness this too.
Anyway, here is my question. Although it is clear to me that the object world is a reflection of mind-body thoughts and perceptions, are there not objects or a world outside of the human mind-body that are also reflections of the one ultimate conscious reality? If I see a tree for instance, I can "see" that this appearance includes a product of thought and perception. However, if I tell another "person" about the tree, its appearance and location, it will be recognized by the other as the same tree.
So is there not an illusory reflection of Reality or Supreme Consciousness going on that is not an exclusive reflection of the human perceptual, thinking mind alone and that creates the appearance of a world? That is, is ultimate reality reflecting an illusory world as well as and including an illusory human thinking mind that also creates an image of a world, or is there only the human mind creating the dream of world?
If it's the later, I don't understand it, cannot reconcile the contradiction of the apparent consistency of the world even in light of the mere inferences of sensory perception. For me this makes it difficult to know how to address and live in this world even as a dream.
Thanks so much for being there. Being able to write to you is so helpful.
RESPONSE:
Why are you doing this?
The question is only philosophy, asking epistemological and ontological opinions. This is only thinking. The question is bullcrappy. It is of no more value than asking whether the numbers 2 and 5 have some actual physical existence as a logical set somewhere in space-time.
All elements of consciousness are illusion, including your question. There is no human. There is no human mind. There is no Cosmic mind or Absolute. These are just words. There is nothing behind them.
You are getting close, don't screw around "reconciling." What is there to reconcile in order to drink coffee at Starbucks?
What you are to do is investigate your experience, isolate unadulterated consciousness and dwell there.
In any event, you can answer the question yourself and see what it does for you. Ask the question and then say, "Yes there is." Then ask and say, "No, there isn't." See whether either answer helps you in any way. Perhaps you just enjoy feeling perplexed.
Have you discovered what the dark denseness experience is yet?
READER:
Hi Ed, I understand and see that what you said is so. I'll drop all this and go back to dwelling in reality, in true conscious awareness. I started already. I watched the dark emptiness for two hours when I woke up, but it remained dense. When I look at it right now, I sense it as an illusory thought form, but in this next moment, it is lighter and not truly dead. I still don't know. I will look at it through the evening and then again in the morning when the experience of the dense darkness is very strong.
Thank you for the wake up call. I am very grateful.
RESPONSE:
The darkness is only sleep.
You are always aware of all three states, deep sleep, waking and dream. Everyone is always aware of the dream state always without knowing it. It is the constant movement of thought forms and images I call imaginal space.
You are aware of all three states at once. That You is beyond them and has no characteristic they have such as waking consciousness, time, space, objects, etc.
Please read the new site very carefully. Most of your questions will be answered there. It is the blue site within the yellow/orange site.
READER:
Ed, I gasped when I read your response. After looking at the dense darkness for over an hour, I saw that it was of the mind, but did not grasp its nature. When you just said, "The darkness is only sleep", there was complete clarity. That's what I was seeing, a mind-based sleep state!! This clarity is liberating. Yet, I am also aware that I am beyond "this clarity". I am beyond this knowing, yet not separate from it. I am beyond being and not-being, beyond all concepts. I read the new site twice and will continue to read it carefully. I am so very grateful for your guidance.
RESPONSE:
Congratulations!
Don’t lose it.
Practice.
Since then, there were additional exchanges recorded immediately below.
She has awakened. Her experience is real. It is obvious by her comments and questions that she has been wandering in the foothills of enlightenment for some time. This will not be her last Satori.
Now that she has seen clearly who she is, she will need to hold onto it and deepen both her experience and understanding. Remember, Robert spent 17 years wandering around India making sure, as he put it, that “I didn’t miss anything.” Ramana spent years living in the basement of temples or caves speaking to no one. This is the real beginning of practice.
As Philip Kapleau told me, the initial seeing is like finding the light switch in a dark room. When the light goes on so to speak, you begin to see the wonders of consciousness and beyond.
READER:
Hi Ed,
Yesterday, I witnessed the coming and going of appearances for about ten hours. I saw that all objects are empty of inherent Being, are a reflection of mind and yet in a way, are themselves of Being, of Consciousness, because they are objects or reflections of Consciousness. I can generally embrace this, even though at times I can get a kind of ego rebellion and feel unpleasantly dead. I realize that this feeling is just another thought, an identification with mind and body, and will need to witness this too.
Anyway, here is my question. Although it is clear to me that the object world is a reflection of mind-body thoughts and perceptions, are there not objects or a world outside of the human mind-body that are also reflections of the one ultimate conscious reality? If I see a tree for instance, I can "see" that this appearance includes a product of thought and perception. However, if I tell another "person" about the tree, its appearance and location, it will be recognized by the other as the same tree.
So is there not an illusory reflection of Reality or Supreme Consciousness going on that is not an exclusive reflection of the human perceptual, thinking mind alone and that creates the appearance of a world? That is, is ultimate reality reflecting an illusory world as well as and including an illusory human thinking mind that also creates an image of a world, or is there only the human mind creating the dream of world?
If it's the later, I don't understand it, cannot reconcile the contradiction of the apparent consistency of the world even in light of the mere inferences of sensory perception. For me this makes it difficult to know how to address and live in this world even as a dream.
Thanks so much for being there. Being able to write to you is so helpful.
RESPONSE:
Why are you doing this?
The question is only philosophy, asking epistemological and ontological opinions. This is only thinking. The question is bullcrappy. It is of no more value than asking whether the numbers 2 and 5 have some actual physical existence as a logical set somewhere in space-time.
All elements of consciousness are illusion, including your question. There is no human. There is no human mind. There is no Cosmic mind or Absolute. These are just words. There is nothing behind them.
You are getting close, don't screw around "reconciling." What is there to reconcile in order to drink coffee at Starbucks?
What you are to do is investigate your experience, isolate unadulterated consciousness and dwell there.
In any event, you can answer the question yourself and see what it does for you. Ask the question and then say, "Yes there is." Then ask and say, "No, there isn't." See whether either answer helps you in any way. Perhaps you just enjoy feeling perplexed.
Have you discovered what the dark denseness experience is yet?
READER:
Hi Ed, I understand and see that what you said is so. I'll drop all this and go back to dwelling in reality, in true conscious awareness. I started already. I watched the dark emptiness for two hours when I woke up, but it remained dense. When I look at it right now, I sense it as an illusory thought form, but in this next moment, it is lighter and not truly dead. I still don't know. I will look at it through the evening and then again in the morning when the experience of the dense darkness is very strong.
Thank you for the wake up call. I am very grateful.
RESPONSE:
The darkness is only sleep.
You are always aware of all three states, deep sleep, waking and dream. Everyone is always aware of the dream state always without knowing it. It is the constant movement of thought forms and images I call imaginal space.
You are aware of all three states at once. That You is beyond them and has no characteristic they have such as waking consciousness, time, space, objects, etc.
Please read the new site very carefully. Most of your questions will be answered there. It is the blue site within the yellow/orange site.
READER:
Ed, I gasped when I read your response. After looking at the dense darkness for over an hour, I saw that it was of the mind, but did not grasp its nature. When you just said, "The darkness is only sleep", there was complete clarity. That's what I was seeing, a mind-based sleep state!! This clarity is liberating. Yet, I am also aware that I am beyond "this clarity". I am beyond this knowing, yet not separate from it. I am beyond being and not-being, beyond all concepts. I read the new site twice and will continue to read it carefully. I am so very grateful for your guidance.
RESPONSE:
Congratulations!
Don’t lose it.
Practice.
READER:
Thanks Ed. New morning. The mind "does not work" in the deep sleep state, so there is the appearance of dense darkness. I am now aware of this as an appearance, aware that this is a mind state that comes and goes and that I am not it. I am beyond all arisings in the imaginal mind. I am aware of this state, yet "have no characteristic of it". In under one week, you saved me an additional ten years of searching, or maybe a lifetime. Thank you, thank you!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
