Monday, May 18, 2009

Nothing is lacking

If thought is paused, do you disappear? No, that self-shining nature of present knowing remains, untouched, unaffected.

What-you-are is being sought AFTER. Yet what-you-are is not missing. It is the search itself which says it is. The search is dependent on what-you-are being absent. But how could it be?

You ARE and you know you ARE. WHAT you are is mistakenly taken to be the body-mind. But if the thought is paused, you do not disappear. If the body goes away (deep sleep) - you still ARE. When Consciousness reappears, memory must come rushing in to fill the void of I-AM-ness, before you can once again identify.

Before Consciousness appeared, you ARE.

So let's take a close look at the search itself. I am a body-mind-person - I am suffering and I want to be free of suffering - I want enlightenment.

This assumption automatically creates the gap of craving - because of the identification WITH the body-mind, there is apparent suffering, a constant self-reference. Yet FROM that platform, which is already false, the gap is seen to be "this body-mind wants to be free of suffering".

It is the assumption itself that "I am the body-mind-person", which CREATES the apparent gap. But that root assumption is false.

There is no body-mind-person which can suffer or be free of suffering.

Therefore, spiritual seeking is self-perpetuating, in the most literal sense. If we say - "I want to be free from suffering" or "I want enlightenment" - we are automatically binding the assumption of individual self AS reality, and FROM THERE the seeking goes on.

It is the assumption that something is lacking, which propels the search to find something. And that "something" is really vague - we cannot know what it is, until we apparently "find it". That, my friends, is complete bullshit.

Nothing is lacking. You ARE. You are not the body-mind mechanism which suffers, seeks and then "later" finds enlightenment. That's a bullshit story. That keeps the mind spinning forever. That story CREATES suffering, because it's a story of lack, a story of needing to find something which is presently missing, a story of looking for a state or experience, which are always impermanent, and trying to forcibly make them permanent.

The search requires that an assumption be made, an assumption that what-you-are NEEDS to be found. That what-you-are isn't already here. And that is read over and over and over and ignored. There is nothing to seek - no search will ever FIND it. The search itself is the veil - and the false ME is part and parcel of that veil.

WHAT you are cannot be described. THAT you are is undeniable. Stay with that undeniable sense of being - it cannot be captured in a word or a concept yet it cannot ever be denied. It is present when thoughts pause, when the body comes and goes, when the world is happy or sad.

You ARE - a lifetime of experience has come and gone. Instead of looking for MORE experience in which to "find yourself", realize right here and now that what-you-are has ALWAYS been present and undeniable, inescapable - the very basis for every experience, no matter what it is.

49 comments:

Anonymous said...

The irony in a sense is that you know you are because of the fact of being conscious...but that is still a time bound state;you don't need the sense of being to exist,yet this sense of being,this consciousness is your only capital...the Seeing is prior to consciousness.

Randall Friend said...

Anonymous,

Yes. What we call "Consciousness" is simply the appearance of the world - the world, body and mind IS Consciousness - pure beingness reflected to itself, knowing itself.

What you are is beyond even the knowledge of being or not-being. In that "deep sleep state", there isn't even the Consciousness to know that you are. Therefore no confirmation is necessary - the fact of YOU is self-evident.


love
randall

benjamin said...

Hello Randall,

There is no question that the belief in seeking is the denial of what-is and the cause of suffering itself.
Now what strikes me is the affirmation which is given as to the 'me' not being the body it's a common example but never i came across any logical argument to explain this. It is just 'obvious' to some and not to others. Now for the latter to simply accept this statement from the former would require belief, and this is not what we want is it?
Now if the body disappears in deep sleep (and if all thing disappear) how can memory be explained? Is not memory the trace of prior events? But how could there be such trace if all thing (and that would include traces) disappeared in deep sleep?
And why is it that Benjamin has the same face everyday? Now possibly, time could not be what it seems, and some other inquiry could reveal there is no succession of singular events (body, non-body, etc.)
It is an other thing to understand the 'me' is not limited to the body, that the entire Universe is the body (i.e. the manifested) or that consciousness and phenomena are not separate just as the two ends of a stick both unreal when taken separately.
It is another to say 'i am not the body'. Are there any proofs? There is no memory of a non-body me, (and we can deduce that) nor a thought happened in a non-body me.
And how do we explain the apparent singularity of consciousness?
Could you please explain your affirmation Randall? Thanks.

Randall Friend said...

Benjamin,

Hello my friend. Good to hear from you.

Yes - it's a total paradox to the mind, simply because the mind's job is to create boxes for everything, categorize and label. The mind takes what IS and splits it up, and in doing so, creates the opposite.

If I point out the "blue chair", I automatically must assume all that is NOT blue chair. The world comes into being as the opposite of what I distinguish.

Is there a "blue chair" separate from the world? Are they different or separately-existing pieces? Are they independently-existing?

Same goes for that body. In calling it a body, it takes on a reality of separate existence. Then it's "my body". But how do you know the body? This analytical, intellectual stuff is great but the answers you seek can never come via the mind. We must look at how the mind works. We must look at HOW we know what we know.

How do you know the body? It's one big assumption. The only way I know "body" is because some perceptions (I see hands on the keyboard) and sensations (I feel the butt in the chair). These perceptions and sensations are bundled together and a label is applied - "body", then "my body".

But if this conceptualization is laid aside for a moment, and if we really just pay attention to what IS, no body can be found in reality. No body can be found without the conceptualization happening.

Same with thoughts - what are they? There is a pre-conceived notion of what they are. Lay that aside for a moment - just look at thoughts. Aren't they just patterns appearing? Where can we say they are "my thoughts" or even "thoughts" at all? Where? In concept only.

So to place ownership on any of these perceptions or sensations is simply concept - a story. How do you know any of it is you?

The proof is YOU. You are the only authority. All so-called "advaita teachers" are only appearances to YOU. You are the authority. Look at present evidence only - don't blindly accept what the mind says - find your own proof. "Pointers" are simply pointing you in the direction to look.

You are the source of every experience - no exception. But every experience - body, memory, world, blue chairs - these all appear to YOU.

Do you appear to yourself?

love
randall

benjamin said...

Thanks Randall, it makes more 'sense' when put this way.
It is perhaps a matter of language: when you say "i am not the body" it follows "there is no body" (?).
Indeed where does the tree begin and where does the leaf begin? And the fruit? And is a see not a tree? Limits are imposed by and in the mind only.
If there are no real limits, then what 'me' can be which 'body'.
The whole deep-sleep story remains however incoherent to my little brain.

Cheers

Arcadi said...

What is fine with non duality is when it is experiencial;when you can test by yourself; the problem often is to trust "somebody" who talks about his awakening experience...for instance when it is said that everything is "unconditionnal love";this concept is quite murky and can reiforce the sense of separation because now there is a seeking for this love,energetic shift and so on...and that's when non duality becomes a problem!
when you don't trust anyone and you test things by yourself,it's no more a belief system,but an experimental fact...spontaneous awakenings are very rare,it's rather like a lotery...but what is pointed to is for "everyone", not just for the few...there is no need for awakening,for liberation,for an energetic shift,the fact of being is enough...but the mind says:"I want Tony Parsons experience,or Jeff Foster experience, what I read about liberation in their books,it looks so beautiful!"...but don't look for child like wonder,for unconditionnal love,for the wonderful,your own being is enough,and it's not a concept...what could me more than just being??

Dennis said...

Is there difrent level of awakening?
++Love Dennis++

Randall Friend said...

Benjamin,

Forget about it making sense. It never will. Simply recognize that YOU have been there for a lifetime of experience. Every single thing you know and take yourself to be comes and goes. Yet YOU do not come and go. YOU are the source, the limitless being/awareness in which all experiences appear, play for a while, and then pass.

And the body is another appearance. Is this not so?


love
randall

Randall Friend said...

Arcadi,

Well said, my friend. Absolutely discard anything that doesn't resonate - and if it does, investigate it without relying on any concept. As you said, test it and then it's direct experience. Anything else is bullshit, quite frankly.

love
randall

Randall Friend said...

Dennis,

Hello again my friend.

Are you awake right now? Yes. How do you know? How do you know you are awake? Because you are present and aware. Yes?

It is this presence/awareness which makes you certain of your "awakeness". This presence/awareness doesn't change, because it has no attributes or characteristics. Yet without that changeless presence, nothing would be known.

That is "wakefulness". And that is present right now, fully, and requires no "levels".

You ARE. That's it. Find out why that beingness is so certain. That's all that is required.


love
randall

Anonymous said...

Randal,
is this knowing that "you are" so intense that its known and felt that there is absolutely nothing outside the appearance of here and now.
That, that felt emptiness is actually the self and, here/now is consciousness of appearance. Emptiness Being consciousness as one is the only reality.
Your guidance or correction here would be much appreciated, thanks.

Odie said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Dennis said...

Hi Randal!
It seams that everything have a beginning middle and end but i am the equalness that see this process and everything arises from this equalness so it can`t be other than equalness it self.
Time after time i try to make someting real but Nop it does not change the equalness and i cant translate this as very depressing somehow from a ego wiepoint. Can you say someting about this?
++Love Dennis ++

Randall Friend said...

Anonymous,

How do you measure intensity? A strong feeling? Isn't this another experience? Is this knowing that you are a feeling? If there is anger, you ARE. If there is happiness, you ARE. If there is strong fear, you ARE. If there is strong compassion, you ARE. You are, while feelings/experiences come and go. It is that knowing that you are which makes the intensity, or lack thereof, known.

There is already nothing outside the appearance of here and now. If there is, please show it. You cannot - to do so it would necessarily need to come into here and now.

You are looking for another experience to validate. There can be NO condition on experience. Any experience will do. This one right here and now is perfect already. You call it "reading a blog". THAT is it. Whatever THIS is called, whatever the experience, the Self is already present.

YOU are the source and condition necessary for any and all experience to appear. But YOU do not appear and disappear with the varying experiences. What-you-are, the Self, is known simply because of the knowing of the experience.

Have you known any experience to arise without your presence?


love
randall

Randall Friend said...

Dennis,

How do you know it has a beginning, middle and end? You know it because you are already the changeless presence through it all. Even the "waking state" has a beginning and end. And if you were IN that state you wouldn't know it to begin or end. You only know it because you are prior to it, present to witness it begin and present to witness it end.

Is this not actual experience?

This "equalness" is the changelessness - the wholeness - THAT which is the ground of all experience. THAT is what you are.

This certainty of being is translated as "I AM" and then placed on the objects "body-mind". This is the only point of inquiry - find out how that certainty of being, that undeniable presence of changelessness or equalness became twisted up with the objects which so obviously come and go.


love
randall

Anonymous said...

Thank you Randall,
The feeling of intense emptiness was not seen as just another experience happening until the reply was read.
Without this constant reminding
how can the identification with experiences be broken.
Is it a matter of accepting these feelings of empty/nothingness and not endulging in thought.That seems like will power so obviously is not the answer.

Randall Friend said...

Hello again my friend.

Identification is simply seen through as false, like the water in the mirage is once and for all realized as not-water. Then even if the light appears as water in the road, it isn't believed in.

What is identification? It is a belief. It manifests as "I am thinking". "I am hungry". "I am sad".

This isn't actually direct experience. It's only a construction of mind. It isn't "I am thinking." It is the knowledge that thinking is happening. It isn't "I am hungry." It is the knowledge that hunger is happening.

Thinking and hunger are happening. The "I AM" is added on, in belief. The thinking and hunger are obvious appearances. The I AM is not. The I AM is added on. There is no one thinking, no one who is hungry. Yet in this formation, in this translation of I AM, the thinking and hunger is taken on as a doing by ME.

Once again, this is neti-neti. You are nothing perceivable or conceivable. Any sensation (thinking/hunger), perception (foot, hand, body), or concept (person, man, woman, father, mother, son, daughter, carpenter, doctor, etc.) - these are all concepts which color pure being with identification.

If it appears, it cannot be what you are. Yet what you are is undeniable. What you are is ever-present, knowing all these formations, knowing all these identifications, knowing all these experiences. It is the knowing itself that you ARE. THAT which KNOWS - and THAT is not another "thing", not another coloring, not an intense experience or state.

The knowing is simply present. It's always there. It's unchanged, while a lifetime of experiences has come and gone, while everything you know has changed, including that body and mind.

Therefore the identification with the body-mind-person is, through this sort of investigation, seen as obviously not what you are. But it's no big deal, because what you are has ALWAYS been there, only it's not what it was taken to be. Therefore it doesn't require reminding - it's so obviously always present. Once that knowing awareness is seen as what-you-are, then it's known to always be shining prior to any and all experiences.


love
randall

Anonymous said...

Much gratitude for your writings Randall.

So, the Knowing Presence always is, yet its not an experience while the I Am is experienced in thought only.
I Am not here, Knowing Presence IS, knowing whatever is. Yes?

susana said...

Randall,
Am moving our conversation onto the blog as I appreciate the dialogue and questions others ask and your answers to them.

Anonymous wrote:
"The feeling of intense emptiness was not seen as just another experience happening until the reply was read.
Without this constant reminding
how can the identification with experiences be broken."

I feel the same way.
So often I write to you mentioning how I have got it, understand it, am it whatever and you always point me to the fact that identification is happening.

And again I thank you for not dangling the golden guru carrot just in front of my nose,promising me something that I can attain.
Thank you for relentlessly reminding me that I am that pure intelligence, spinning the planets and beating this heart.
Love
Susana

Randall Friend said...

Anonymous,

Hello again my friend.

Don't hold on to any of the words, knowing presence, I AM, whatever. Look to what they are pointing to in direct experience.

Right now - have a look. The screen appears. Awareness is registering the screen. Are the screen and awareness two different things?

If you say yes, show me the line which divides. If you say no, then is anything else apart from this immediacy of oneness? Is even the seer outside of this?


love
randall

Randall Friend said...

Susana,

The golden guru carrot sounds like an appetizer at the Urban Guru Cafe.

There is absolutely nothing to attain. THIS, right here and now, is already the wholeness which is sought after. It's already whole. You are already that wholeness, that perfection.

Assuming there is something to attain guarantees that THIS will be overlooked as only a speed bump in time, hurrying to get that instant spiritual makeover, that enlightenment-in-10-easy-steps.

This does nothing but hardens the seeker as reality - the seeker is a required component of the seeking package.

It's nothing more than glorified new-age self-help - making a better, more spiritual picture of ME. That image remains intact, rock solid - now we're laying spirituality on top.

The seer and the seen are not-two. They are the same thing. Conceptualization and assumption is required to make THIS separate. Yet even if that concept of separation comes in thought, it's THIS also.


love
randall

Anonymous said...

There is no dividing line !!

No one is pointing yet the pointing is seen, by no one.

Much love good friend.

Dennis said...

Hi Randall! In the seeing that all is equal something happens but i cant own it or say i am seprate from it. Its like sticking your head in whater and the hole world wanish and you become the whater.
++Love Dennis++

Anonymous said...

May I ask a a question. i apologise if it seems rather trite.

Why does God manifest as all of this - including as beings that can suffer the illusion of divorce.

I mean since there is no point or end result and it is all just happening. Why does it happen.

Does God 'decide' to manifest as the cosmos? Why is there cosmos as appose to not cosmos? And if there was no cosmos what would be?

If the cosmos is uneccesary, and not better than it not happening, and only merly apparant - why does it happen at all?
Does God make decisions?
Is God, the Great Self, a person?

Randall Friend said...

Anonymous,

As you say - God is manifested as THIS - so the question itself must also be God. The one asking the question cannot be apart from God.

So knowing yourself is knowing God.

"Why" is mind - purposes and meanings are always more translation - always relative. Why does the sun shine? Can that be answered? Does it have a master plan?

That intelligence which is spinning the planets, beating the heart - the very functioning AND form itself is nothing but that omnipresence (Being), omnipotence (Power), and omniscience (Knowing).

Can the thoughts and questions come without that?


love
randall

Randall Friend said...

Dennis,

The seer and the seen are concepts - a way of thinking and speaking. Yet we take the story implied in this subject/object formation to be reality.

There is no seer and nothing seen. The awareness and the world are the SAME.

Have a look!


love
randall

msayers said...

Randall,

You have a distinct way of putting things that I've come to appreciate. However, it all seems to be at arms reach no matter what. I understand you sought like me and many others, and at some point it must've all just coalesced, and there was this "Ah ha" moment when it all gelled and made perfect sense. How did that happen for you? What was the trigger?

I know, I know... I'm looking for something to do when it would make perfect sense for you to say back to me, "There is nothing to do, and no one to do it... you are that already... enlightenment happens." As true as those words, and similar others are, they are very foreign to me. Help!

Mike

Randall Friend said...

Mike,

"How did that happen for you" assumes that something happened. This is a subtle expectation of something to change, some "state" to be reached, some experience to be different.

Nothing happened. Nothing changed. No "state" was reached. No experience was different.

Reality was seen as made up of separate things, the center of which was a "randall". That reality was seen as only a story, only a belief, completely an assumption.

So nothing was gained. The story fell away because it's not reality. That's all.

There is an assumption that you are the body-mind, that there is a separate person living in that body-mind, separate from the world.

This assumption is not based on direct experience. There is absolutely no evidence to support this assumption in direct experience.

Confirm what is being pointed to in your direct experience.

You know the world. It is an object of your knowledge. But in all this knowledge, nothing else is referred to as "I". Vedanta calls this "atma". Atma - "I" objectifies the world. The world is an object of your knowledge. It appears to "I" - to "atma".

All that is not atma is "anatma". Not-"I".

What about the body? Atma or anatma? Is it an object of your knowledge? Yes. You can describe it. You can say it's white or black, tall or short, skinny or fat, young or old. You can tell me about 2 legs and 2 arms. You can describe hunger, fear, breathing, heartbeat. The body is an object to "I". The body is anatma. The body is not-"I". Yes?

What about thoughts? Atma or anatma? Thoughts appear to "I" - you can describe them - you can say there are many thoughts, few thoughts, no thoughts. You can say thoughts are about work or family. So thoughts appear TO "I" - to atma. Therefore thoughts are anatma - not-"I". Thoughts are not "I". Yes?

What about emotions? Atma or anatma? Same thing, yes? They are describable, knowable - they appear and disappear to "I". Emotions are anatma - not-"I".

So what about "Mike"? Atma or anatma? "I" or not-"I"?

All these "things" are negated in this way - it seems everything can be negated as not-"I", yes? Yet "I" is certain - it is the most certain aspect of ALL experience. "I" has been there to objectify every single experience you've ever had. Yes?

Yet nothing we can find as a "thing" is "I". Nothing we can find, in the normal way of looking, is "I".

The only thing we haven't negated is the fact of Being. The ever-present knowing. THAT which is DOING the looking.

So let's apply our exercise again. Let's look at this obvious knowing, that is going on right now.

Is this knowing objectified by "I"? No. This knowing is not an object appearing TO "I". Can you describe the knowing? Can you tell it's size, shape, color? Can you tell it's location or duration? No. Yet it is undeniable, yes? You couldn't know the thoughts, body or world without it.

Therefore the present activity of knowing is ATMA - "I". THAT is what you are - that is what the "I" really is - knowing - awareness.

This may be suddenly blindingly obvious - as if you've always known it yet overlooked it. There has always been an outward focus - a focus on objects, in fact an identification with objects - body-mind - which creates the concept of "person" - that concept is absolutely false - there is no person. There simply is no one separate in a body.

The knowing is obvious. It's what you are. All things come and go while that knowing is rock solid, unshakable, unchanging - it is the same unchanged knowing that witnessed the body as a child, as a teen, as an adult. It is that knowing in which that body is now appearing. And thoughts appear in that present knowing. No matter what the thoughts say - good or bad, active or calm - no matter the condition of thoughts or the condition of ANY experience - that knowing that you are is the primary principle, the absolute necessity for any "thing" to arise.

Verify this in your own experience.

love
randall

Atagrasin said...

Why does God manifest as all of this - including as beings that can suffer the illusion of divorce?.

One easy and direct answer would be to replay, "why not"? To this we might add that if we define "God as an omnipotent intelligent force or energy,an infinite "creative" capacity ,would be one of its aspects.For example if "it" could only manifest "good", without its complementary opposite, "evil", this could be taken as a limitation of it power.We must bear in mind that talking about good without bad is nonsense since any knowledge of an alleged "good" is only known by contrast with its opposite.
This answer is only a vague attempt to coloring our ignorance with concepts,it´s worth to clarify that.

Atagrasin

Note :Hi Randall, nice blog

Anonymous said...

Dear Randall,

Hello my name is David - I have wrote to you a few times and you have ben gracious enough to answer my questions.

I was thinking of that persons comment were he said you seem a little at 'arms reach'. I too have felt that. But when i read your words closely i think that youa re doing something more than just vagely poiting to the self. I think you never satisfy the questioner. I think you negate that ones perspective and so the content of the questioner is almost beside the point. i can at least in sympathy see how all things object to me could be God!

I have had some spiritual experiences - the first of which i saw everything object to me was God - radiantly, happily and there was no fear. And this was all beofre i had ever read of that notion.

Now in my practice i feel a constant sense of fullness in the heart region of the physical body - and it feels like i link up to a great spiritual body and the every arising i ignore i am entered into a great open space of happiness. This is not the self. i feel myself to be a radiant physical body in an oepn field of happiness wherein i serve God. Still - i feel mysel to be something whcih will die, and if i dwell on it for a moment i feel real anxiety. and all the daily pusuits seem absurd. I cant get rid of this fear through any mental propositions or life pleasures. I can see no other motivation other than the motive of the true self. Yet from my 'point of view' i cant even imagine how that coud come to any good.
yet sometimes when i look down at my hand it seems strangely alien and even rather arbitary and i wonder, is that me?
anyway my question. although you always seem to point to the always already nature of the self. in your lifetime there must ahve been a moment when you knew the self nature as apposed to a moment before in time when you did not.
what changed in that moment. i realize the self did not chnage. but surely there must have been some apparatus or mechanism or release of contraction or insight into consciousness.
as i am asking thsi question i am imagine what your response will be and i think again you wil simply point me to the source of the question. its frustrating for us poor fuckers you know! well let me see. i think my questio is rooted in the assumption something must be done. hmmm
is it simply ignoring every... single...
thing?
love
david

Atagrasin said...

Benjamin: It is perhaps a matter of language: when you say "i am not the body" it follows "there is no body" (?).

Atagrasin: To avoid this is preferable to say ,I am not "only" the body.

Atagrasin

Atagrasin said...

Benjamin: It is perhaps a matter of language: when you say "i am not the body" it follows "there is no body" (?).

Atagrasin: To avoid this is preferable to say ,I am not "only" the body.

Atagrasin

Randall Friend said...

David,

Hello again my friend. Love to you.

There was a story being believed in, now there is not. That's really the best description in answering your question.

There was a story of "randall" - a separate life - a "person". That story was seen for what it truly is - a story and not based in reality. Yet no one came from outside with the golden blueprint of existence, pointing out the absence of "randall". This "person" that was believed to be real was clearly seen as just a belief - never actually in existence. Every experience was investigated, and never did a "randall" actually appear - the "randall" was always a belief which was added on conceptually. That's it.

There was a story of duality - a ME and a WORLD - an "inside" world and an "outside" world. Yet upon investigation, with the desire to know the truth of my existence at all costs - the false could not stand - duality was known as absolutely false. But once again, no Supreme Being came with the magical blueprint to reality - pointing out the falseness of duality. Reality was simply looked at without the colored glasses, without all the conceptual baggage - and without that - THIS right here and now - is IT.

THIS MOMENT is all there ever is.

And THIS MOMEMT is Advaita - not-two - not broken up into separate parts and pieces - not broken up into a ME and a WORLD.

The ME-SEEING is an added-on concept to what IS - there IS no ME SEEING A WORLD. There is only the pure unconditioned and nonconceptual SEEING, which IS the WORLD ITSELF.

The SELF - IS THE WORLD. And it's the most natural and obvious thing - it's not spiritual or mystical - it's already THIS. YOU ARE THIS.

love
randall

Randall Friend said...

Atagrasin,

Very nice, my friend.


love to you
randall

Walter said...

Randall,
From the perspective of "there is no way out of the dream in the dream" - you have to wake-up,
And knowing that I am awake right here right now,
I AM AWARE of sensations and perceptions
Is it valid to ask the questions;
1) what am I aware of ( sickness,poverty,problems,anger...)
2) why am I aware of that (poverty,sickness,loneliness...)
3) can I be aware of something else (prosperity,health,love,companionship)
I guess the question is can this pure consciousness change its focus-shift its attention to other things and therefore be experiencing more pleasant appearances?
Thanks, Walter

Randall Friend said...

Walter,

Hello my friend. Good to hear from you.

Who is it that wakes up? See the dream as a dream - then the character IN the dream cannot be what-you-are. That's it. The dream comes and goes - what knows that fact? Is THAT appearing in the dream?

All questions are valid - yet they make assumptions which remain uninvestigated.

1) What am I aware of - it is the assumption that there is something separate from the aware-er that obscures.

2) Why am I aware of that - it is the assumption that there is awareness OF something separate that obscures.

3) Can I be aware of something else - see #1 and #2.

Look at reality, at what you are absolutely certain of yet may have overlooked - Consciousness comes and goes. The world, whatever it is referred to in questions 1, 2 and 3 - is dependent on that Consciousness to appear. The world has never once appeared outside of that Consciousness. When Consciousness appears, the world is known. When Consciousness dissolves, the world goes with it.

What is overlooked is that "walter" goes, along with Consciousness.

This is very simple. What is it that knows the passing, the coming and going of Consciousness?

That's it. That's what you are. Call it awareness, being - it doesn't need to be labeled. You ARE. You know the world to pass with Consciousness. Yet you do not pass. You are unchanging.

You do not need to be found - finding is looking for some "thing". The body-mind appears with Consciousness. Spiritual states can only come with Consciousness. Can Reality, can what-you-are come and go? Is that possible?

That is enough.


love
randall

Walter said...

Randall,
Yes, I know that nobody wakes-up, that I am not the character in the dream ,that I am THAT that is aware of the passing states. I am witnessing consciousness (and the world and the body-mind ) come and go.
I am not looking for myself. I know that I AM THAT, that knows,that is aware.I am very clear about that.
What is not clear is what about the dream and its character? Despite my realization the dream is still going on ,it did not end! So now what?
The body-mind is still the instrument that I use to experience and perceive.
Is there a choice of what you can perceive?
Thanks, Walter

Randall Friend said...

Walter,

Is the dream separate from the awareness of the dream?

Anonymous said...

"What is overlooked is that "walter" goes, along with Consciousness."

thanks Randall!
This is it really. ALL the questions, concerns, improvements, modelling of Reality, ALL OF IT - depends on the one who comes and goes. So it isn't absolute. I would usually think of "the world" as what we refer to as appearances, but not include "me" in it. The questioner, seeker, doubter, was always left untouched.

Giving credence to "my" search/ideas as Reality is like looking at a rabbit shaped cloud and fretting over where the 'rabbit' will get its next meal.

This makes no sense whatsoever.
"S" is an appearance and appearances don't 'wake up'.
So me reading your blog, u answering with profound pointers ....all of this is apearance too yes? Nothing is going to come of it that is not appearance also! We seek to transcend appearance by trying to modify the state of the appearnce to a different appearance. Foolishness.

Yet there is a wave of relief. To whom? Can this mechanism ever be understood? The mechanism of what is actually happening here?

thanks again
S

Randall Friend said...

Shiva (isn't it?),

Hello again my friend.

Yes. This is it. Right here and now. Everything you know and everything you take yourself to be, comes and goes with Consciousness. Without Consciousness, there is no search and no one who seeks.

Yet you ARE.

So whatever THIS is translated as, never affects what IS. That means that saying "shiva is seeing the world" isn't the actuality of what IS.

Right now - shiva is looking at a computer screen. But that's only a translation of what IS. That isn't actual reality. What is the reality?

The reality is - the KNOWING of the screen and the APPEARANCE of the screen are the SAME THING. They are not-two.

Look around - can awareness be separate from what appears? Aren't they the same thing, in actual experience?

Therefore, in saying "I am seeing the screen" - reality is seemingly broken up into subject and object. And then this is further taken to be - shiva-the-body-mind-which-is-the-seer is seeing the screen-which-is-out-there, separate from shiva.

There IS no shiva and no screen. There is only the pure seeing - the seeing is, conceptually, shiva/screen.

But shiva/screen is only a concept.

The Self is known in any and ALL experience. It's already known - it's already obvious. It's simply overlooked because the concepts, the subject/object equation is the default belief.

SEE that the knowing of screen and screen are the same. Then the default belief is actual reality.


love
randall

classicjobby said...

Hi Randall, the me cant cease trying to see this to get this no translation seeing. to just be.
HELP! tied up strongly in trying and failing. not able to just relax and simply be. love Jacob

Anonymous said...

Hi Randall,

thank you. Yes Shiva it is.

Really appreciate the time and effort you put into answering questions.. thanks again!

It just oocured to me, a whole bunch of us are basically looking to experience 'non-experience' as indication of enlightenment. "I want to be aware of/in the "deep sleep state" or whatever....but then it just becomes another experience experienced by a subject that cannot be experienced. What we are trying to get is impossible.

Shiva

Anonymous said...

... and this is because we what we consider 'know" is EXPERIENCE. That is really teh crux of the issue i think. The self-evident proof-less 100% subjective Knowing doesnt add up to themind, which understands knowing only as subject-object knowing. And what we (or at least I) try to do is try and manipulate self-awareness into some way by which i can "know" it in the way most familiar to me - as an object. and in that, i fail and will continue to fail.

The thing is, the way i know a ball or a tree or Randall - its all the same relationship. Its easy to compare and validate one against the other. With non-objective Knowing, there is one relationship only. So there is no other knowing against which to validate it, confirm it. It just IS what it IS.

something that that, i cant quite express this too well...


Shiva

Randall Friend said...

Jacob,

There is an idea that "I must do something". Trying to see this, trying to just be, trying to relax. This is all irrelevant.

Your true nature doesn't need to be seen or found or figured out. Your true nature is already shining.

Are you presently reading these words? Yes. Your Self is already fully known in that experience. How so?

You are present and aware - if not could you read these words? No. So the words, the screen, the desk, the room, the body, the thoughts and the idea of "jacob" are all presently known. Yes?

All of this is presently known - yet what you've taken yourself to be is part of what is known.

What you are is simply the condition necessary for all of this to be known.

And as the experience changes from reading a blog to making coffee, driving a car, going to work, eating dinner, whatever - that condition is always the most primary fact and always there - never changing while the experience is always changing.

Is that condition present right now? Yes.

That's it. Simply recognize that this condition is actually what you are, is always present, doesn't need to be found, doesn't need to be figured out or remembered, and can never leave. Recognize that this unchanging condition is immovable and ever unaffected even as the thoughts (experiences) come and go with their ranting and acrobatic intellectual goings on.


love
randall

Randall Friend said...

Shiva,

It requires a separate entity to "experience non-experience" or to "be aware of...".

These are all passing experiences within the non-experience that you already ARE.


love
randall

Randall Friend said...

Shiva,

Yes. Knowing is self-evident. "I know" requires concepts - "I know" is not self-evident.

The "I" who knows is more experience in the knowing.


love
randall

Anonymous said...

*Words*

My words are easy to comprehend
And easy to bring to practice
Yet no one in the world wants to surrender to them
And no one feels capable of living according to them
My words have an origin, my way of living a principle
But because the people do not dare to see this

They are not able to understand me. There are only a few who understand me and to them I am most precious
One who is wise therefore acts unnoticed, but remains oneself.

Tao Te Ching

namaste

Anonymous said...

Makes perfect sense to me! I remember the first time I discovered the word, 'enlightenment,' and oh I was so curious! "What is this 'enlightened' feeling? How can I be enlightened? I want to be enlightened, it sounds so lovely!"
But it wasn't long before I realized it was just a word that I already am and always have been :)

<3Cari

Randall Friend said...

Cari,

Hello my friend. Love to you.