Sunday, September 27, 2009

Discerning "I AM"

We're out looking FOR something in the spiritual search.  We're reading a book or a blog, hoping a phrase will suddenly transport us into Enlightenment, which will be what?  An experience.  A new "state".  We're not searching for what we are, we're searching for a better "state", one that isn't like the current one, or the one's we dread, like suffering or grief or worry or sadness or depression.  This "new" state will be permanent happiness, which is what we conceptualize "bliss" as.  This "new" state will be permanent something, but whatever that something is, it will be better than the ones we presently don't like.

Isn't that what the spiritual search is for you?

And this idea of spirituality or enlightenment or whatever label you like to use, as long as this is the idea of what  it's all about, frustration will continue.  Confusion will continue.  Because it's not a new "state".  It's not permanent happiness for you, the individual.  It has nothing at all to do with any individual.  The individual who will get this new state IS the veil itself, the obscuring factor to seeing what this is all about.

We must stop looking FOR something, for some new state, for something achieved by proper seeking, for something received anew.  We must directly question and investigate this idea of an individual, a separate self, an independent entity which was born separate of the world.

The most certain thing you know is that you ARE, you exist.  We confirm this when we say "I AM".  "I AM"-ness isn't conceptual, you didn't have to make it up, you didn't have to learn it, you didn't have to be TAUGHT that you exist.  You don't have to rely on any memory to know that you ARE.  You don't have to project a future to know that you ARE.  Right here and now, you know without any supporting evidence, that you ARE.  THAT YOU ARE is self-evident.

Why is it self-evident?  What is it, that makes your existence self-evident?  What is it BECAUSE OF WHICH you can claim with certainty - "I AM"?

Is it because there are thoughts?  Is it "I think, therefore I am"?  If thoughts pause, what remains to be aware of the pause?  If there is a brain injury or a stroke and thoughts stop, what remains to know of this absence of thought?  If no thought comes to claim - "I AM" - do you cease to exist?  Is that certainty of existence gone?  No.

Is it because there is a body?  There are hands appearing now.  Does that provide that certainty of "I AM"?  There is breathing being felt.  Does that provide that certainty of "I AM"?  No.  There is something which is aware of the breathing and body-form.

Isn't that "something" which is aware of the thoughts, the breathing, the body-form, isn't THAT why you know you exist?  Isn't that what is referred to with the words "I AM"?  Isn't that actually what we mean when we say "I"?  But due to inattention and lack of precise discernment between the body-mind and that PURE "I" or "I AM"-ness, that sense of existence is wrapped up with this objective content, this body-mind, and then the idea is created of a person, an individual, a separate entity, someone who came into existence and will eventually pass out of existence.  Cease to exist.

It is simply a confusion of that already-present "I AM"-ness with the objective qualities of appearance or awareness which creates the identification AS a person, as ME.

That "something" is always-here - always the basis or foundation or background or principle upon which or in which these passing or temporary objects come.  That "something" isn't an achievement, not a product of seeking.  It's not found anew.  It's recognized.  It's revealed to have always been there, only overlooked in focus on the objective, in identification WITH the objective, in conceptualization or belief/assumption that the objective IS what you are.  It's overlooked due to taking yourself TO BE a body, with a mind.

And this idea IS the false limitation, believing yourself to be a body IS the prison itself, the bondage from which we seek freedom.  This idea IS the very core of suffering.

You know that you are always-here - THAT is the reason you're certain of your existence, that always-here-ness is self-evident, nonconceptual.  Discern between the mind's translation of "I AM", which means "I AM" this and that, and the true "I AM", which is pure always-here-ness, pure background of knowing, the present SEEING or condition of awakeness.  THAT isn't in need of a search.  THAT isn't hidden and requiring a search.  It's just a mix-up - a simple confusion of ephemeral "thingness" with the obvious and rock-solid being/knowing that you are.

31 comments:

Matty Boy said...

That was beautiful Randall !

Thanks Matty

Anonymous said...

"We MUST stop looking for something", "We must directly question". Who says we Must do anything? We do what we do and can do no other. If stopping looking happens it happens of it's own accord surely?

Randall Friend said...

Anonymous,

Absolutely correct. "Stopping looking" happens on it's own, as does breathing, thinking, choosing, even seeking. The problem is, the mind doesn't want to go all the way, because it threatens the idea of the individual, which is held onto tightly. This threatens the idea of the looker, the breather, the thinker, the chooser, and the "seeker".

Ultimately there is no one who can or must do anything, but that's the absolute perspective. Sometimes pointing happens from this perspective, sometimes it happens from the standpoint of the "seeker".

Even the pointing happens of it's own accord.


love
randall

Matty Boy said...

Vedas also mentions about ones duty "one must do his duty and not worry about results as the results are not in your hands" If there is absolutely no choice, how can one do his duty ?

Does this mean the duty is not to be this or that and just be ?

Randall Friend said...

Matty,

Great question.

The Vedas, and really all traditional Vedanta teaching, starts with the individual, with the "seeker". It is somewhat the opposite of what we see mostly in the west, either the Direct Path or so-called "neo" Advaita teachings.

These teachings cut out the middle-man and go straight for the Absolute - traditional Vedanta points the individual to living a good and moral life, reading the scriptures, and studying under a Guru, as well as "doing one's duty" without clinging to results.

Few are well-suited to the directness, diving head-first into discarding all concepts and ideas about yourself. The traditional Vedanta seems to be a broader approach, logically deconstructing the existing beliefs.

But the mind wants to make one right and the other wrong. It's just a different approach. Ultimately, the benefactor of either approach is annihilated. Life expresses itself in infinite ways without ever becoming separate from itself.

Duty is for an individual, as is seeking AND liberation. You are beyond both, already. If that isn't understood, then either read scriptures, do your duty, meditate, read pointers and blogs, or do nothing at all. It really is irrelevant, after all, because the "doer" is itself the illusion or false belief.


love
randall

Anonymous said...

Randall,
you say that always- here-ness is self evident and there is the rock-solid being/knowing that you are.
Surely knowing is coming and going, as in sleep I do not know that I Am.
When the thought arrives that Iam I know Iam, when the thought disappears Iam but I no longer know that Iam. Now I'm confused as to what you mean by knowing. Can you comment further.Thanks Dave

Randall Friend said...

Dave,

Yes - that "I AM"-ness, that knowledge that you exist, is temporary. Yet it's the only clue you have. What the mind translates as "I AM"-ness IS your true Self - yet it takes that "I AM"-ness as some "thing" - a body-mind.

We call it "knowing" or "awareness" - but those words ultimately fail, as all words do. What is it that you know as knowing or awareness? What is it?

Can you find it? Can you put your finger on it? Can you capture it in space? Discard the words knowing or awareness and investigate this pure cognizing or experienc-ING. Investigate it like a child, who hasn't yet learned the meaning of words.

What is this activity of knowing, going on in the immediacy of this very moment? What is this "light" which illuminates sentience? What is it that knows thoughts, that knows Consciousness itself?

This pure "knowing" IS Being - all comes within, all appears as a projection, imagination, translation, within it. The "mind" creates this story from memories and imagination - this duality, this play, this dream. Without it you would not know of your pure existence.

So it's not a rejection of duality - it's an embrace, a celebration. All that appears, appears IN and AS the SEEING itself - the pure Being that you are. THIS is literally IT - whatever THIS might be conceptualized as, however THIS might be behaving. There is nothing outside of THIS, right here and now. All else is mental translation.

Even "knowing" is a mental translation. Give up the attempt at translating at rest AS the seeing. Discover it. You cannot FIND it or objectify it because you ARE it.


love
randall

Anonymous said...

Yes Randall, I have been caught up in the word knowing for so long now. Thank you for clearing this confusion.
The word knowing is pointing to the Knowing-ness itself.The knowing is coming and going yet the Knowing-ness remains and I Am That.
I've been thinking it needs to be held on to, which would be mindful knowing that is then lost.
This is seen in all its fullness now.
"So it's not a rejection of duality - it's an embrace, a celebration.
Without it you would not know of your pure existence."
Much love for your kindness and sharing, Dave

Anonymous said...

ordinary human beings who have not realized the self - what happens to them after they die?

Randall Friend said...

Anonymous,

Why create a problem and then ask for an explanation of the problem?

Look and recognize that "ordinary human being" is a false limitation, placed upon the limitless. There are no such limits in Reality, only in imagination.


love
randall

Anonymous said...

well yes all that is true of the self perhaps, and i guess you were pointing it out - so rather than my dwelling. point noted. still i am curious to know what has become of my mother and father. have they just been snuffed out?

Randall Friend said...

Anonymous,

Once again, something is created in concept and then there is an attempt to figure it out.

What, outside of pure appearance, sensation and perception, do you know of your mother and father? Is there actually separately-existing entities or individuals who existed for a while then their independent existence died?

If there is an earnestness to know what you are, then discard all concepts and beliefs and remain with what you are absolutely certain of without relying on any concepts. That certainty is that you ARE, that you are always here, always aware.

You are always the "aware-ness" - the present activity of knowing - the pure formless and nonconceptual cognition which isn't dependent on a concept, which cannot fall within the idea of "thingness".

What you are is not a separate "thing", not a separate individual, not an entity which exists apart from other entities.

Your true nature is, right here and now, timeless and limitless being/awareness.


love
randall

Mulla said...

Randall
I resonate with what you say but ….
You need a material substrate where the experiencing of "I AM"-ness takes place which is the body including the brain and when the body comes to its end so would the experiencing of "I AM"-ness or Beingness even though the "I AM"-ness or Beingness is not the body or the brain.

A book can be stored on paper but the book is not the paper. It can also be stored on a CD, in a flash memory or in the brain but the book is not the CD, the flash memory or the brain and yet the book would not exist without a substrate such as paper, CD, etc. where it can be contained.

We can think of some teaching such as the Dhammapada that stayed for hundred of years not committed to any specific substrate but existing from generation to generation only by words of mouth before they were committed to writing. But even these needed the chain of brains to carry them from generation to generation or they would not have survived. Here the substrate is not one single brain but a chain of brains.

In the same way the "I AM"-ness continues as the same for years and years despite the changes taking place bodily and mentally because the "I AM"-ness is not the body or the mind with its thoughts and feelings. But that does not mean that "I AM"-ness can float without a substrate of a body and a brain.

Even though the book may become old, moldy and tattered, as long as the words are discernible the book (as concepts and ideas) would stay the same. But when the book eventually dissolves so would the concepts and ideas contained within it. No paper means no book.

In the same way, even though the "I AM"-ness stays unchanged despite the changes taking place in the body and mind, yet no body and no brain mean no "I AM"-ness.
Love
Mulla

Randall Friend said...

Mulla,

Your postulations are very logical. It is the mind's job to logically analyze - it's a wonderful tool for that but in directly knowing reality it fails without exception.

The entire theory of the brain as the substrate or basis for this knowledge to be carried out, relies on the belief that there is actually a brain, actually some "thing" in existence.

Right now, the idea of a brain is a belief. Any evidence can come only through sensation, perception, or imagination. None of these can provide absolute reality.

It is this idea of "thingness" which binds. Lay aside this idea and remain in your own pure Beingness - THAT is beyond all concepts of brains and individuals who carry such things across time.

If "brain" was only a false belief, what would you be, right here and now?


love
randall

Mulla said...

Randall

The "brain" is a useful and a practical concept for communication, experimentations and medicine. We can touch it, hold it, cut it up and do with it many other things.

The "I" is also a useful concept for thinking and communication but does not exist in the way a "brain" exists. You cannot point to it, hold it or do anything physical with it and psychologically it is but a source of suffering.

We could easily say that the "I" is false in the sense that we cannot find an entity to which we can point and say," here is the I." But the "brain", if it is false, it cannot be so in the same sense the "I" is false.

So, in what sense is the "brain" false?

Love
Mulla

gayathri said...

Mulla:

The existense of the brain is false in the sense of Mithya. We do have to deal with the brain and other "solid"ly existing things, although in the light of "enlightenment" you are convinced that those solid things are just appearances in the everlasting Brahman.

Mulla said...

Randall
What does a "thing", or whatever, has to do to be true or to exist?
Or, are you saying that nothing really exists? Or that things exist but not in the way we usually think they do?

gayathri

What did Brahman do to make us believe or experience its existence that other tangible objects could not do?
Peace
Mulla

Anonymous said...

Mulla,

I think your issue is basically the assumption of an absolute reality regardless of perception. When you are in deep sleep, there is no "mulla's brain" - it does not exist, period. But Awareness does as evidenced by the fact that an alarm wakes you. Everything else arises on waking - the world, the bed, the brain... awareness is the first principle following which only, things can be said to exist.

cheers

Mulla said...

Hi Anonymous

Of course there is Mulla's brain even in deep sleep because it can be scanned for any electrical activities even in deep sleep and when the alarm clock goes off the ear drum will vibrate and will send electrical signal to the brain which could be detected by the scanner. These are the signals that will wake up the Mulla.

Love
Mulla

Anonymous said...

Go, Mulla...

Shalom!
Rabbi

Anonymous said...

Mulla,

The discussion is not on if anything physical exists. The discussion is on what is that mind calls "I".

M

Mulla said...

To All
It is clear that the discussion about whether a thing exists or not is not fruitful. It will just be an endless discussion that would lead nowhere.

What is fruitful is seeing directly the illusion of the existence of the separate entity that we call "I" and "me" which leads to delusion. What is fruitful is constant watchfulness not to be caught in the dream of a "me" thinking, feeling and doing.

I will just leave it at this.

Peace
Mulla

Randall Friend said...

Mulla,

Well put.

The veil or obscuring factor to direct realization of what you are or so-called "reality" is the very idea of "thingness". If I presuppose the existence of "things", that itself is duality. And that idea of "thingness" is only a mental division, not an actual one.

Therefore the concept of "brain" as some "thing" in existence, is only a mental idea. What is the brain made of? How far do we need to break down or divide the brain to come to it's ACTUAL essence, it's true existence?

If I have a plastic cup, I ask "does cup exist?" You say of course it exists. But if I tear the cup, break it down flat - then cup disappears. Cup was only a name and form - plastic is more "real" than cup. But plastic is also a name and form for something. If I break down plastic I find other elements. What is the essence of these elements? We can talk about molecules, atoms... do these exist apart from plastic? No - they ARE plastic, from one perspective. Therefore plastic is merely name and form - it's a manifestation of the elements. The atom IS plastic. It doesn't exist apart FROM plastic.

Even "atom" is merely a mental division. Can you find an atom? Are you seeing an actual separate "thing"?

So "cup" is only a mental concept. In the same way, brain is only a mental concept of something that has independent existence. We're not denying the appearance of "brain" - we're denying the absolute independent and separate existence of "brain" or "cup" or plastic, or any "thingness" as absolute reality.

When we see the illusory and spellbinding nature of "thingness", of words and concepts, we are immediately beyond it - what is it that is beyond "thingness"?


love
randall

Mulla said...

Randall

I see what you mean. Every thing is conventional (i.e. conceptual) and temporary truth because of that fact that you can make it disappear out of existence as you have done to the plastic cup. But their conventional or temporary truth is so true that it could be a matter of life or death. A heavy stone may kill you if you thought it was only a false thing and not avoid it hitting you on the head. But the same stone can be made into a fine powder and thrown at you to make you laugh in a divali festival in India.

Every compounded thing may disappear or made to disappear by dismantling it into parts which can be dismantled further into more parts and so on.

Ultimately you can reduce every material thing into energy of one form or another and energy is a thing that cannot be made to disappear.

You ask," What is it that is beyond thingness?" or we may put your question as follow; is there that which is not a thing that is always true because it would not and cannot be made to disappear out of existence?

The false "I" of course does not qualify as such. It does not even have the qualitative conventional and temporary existence as that of a plastic cup. At least one can point a finger and says," Here is a plastic cup" which one cannot similarly do for the "I" or "me".

What about that constant knowingness, constant awareness in which everything material and mental appears and disappears?

This seems to be uncompounded and cannot be reduced further to parts. But I know it can disappear suddenly as happened when I was anesthetized before an operation. I was talking to my wife as I was waiting to be wheeled into the operation room and the next moment she was patting my hands and saying," wake up. It is all over."

The collection of neurons we conventionally call brain was still alive while I was anesthetized and awareness was back after the operation.

As answer to your question above I will say that I see none.

Peace
Mulla

Randall Friend said...

Mulla,

What you're referring to, which disappears for surgery or sleep, is Consciousness or Mind, which are really two concepts for the same principle. Mind goes to sleep. Along with Mind goes the objective Consciousness, the world, body and thoughts.

But your essence, what you are, remains.

Knowledge of the body, thoughts, world, and idea of "mulla" completely passes.

The answer or resolution to the spiritual search will never come in thought, in analysis. Believe me when I tell you from experience that the analytical mind is a hindrance. There are many paths - this one of analysis is the most brutal.

The spiritual search is ultimately about knowing "what am I?" Am I truly a limited and separate individual, born insignificantly into this world only to await a certain dissolution of my existence?

Instead of the attempt to analyze it, lay aside ALL preconceived notions, all beliefs which were issued upon growing up, all assumptions which stem from other assumptions. Look at the world as if through the eyes of a child. Look at the world, for once, without the first attempt to dissect it.

With earnestness and willingness to simply investigate these possibilities, you may come to realize that what you are, in essence, is already whole, already full, already limitless and timeless, inseparable from the world which lies under your analytical microscope.

Before the next thought, you ARE. Before, during and after the fleeting appearances of Consciousness or Mind, you ARE. Everything you know comes within this very IS-ness. This moment, whatever it is, whatever it's eventually analyzed as, is IT.

Right here, right now - Reality or Truth is shining with obviousness, clarity and simplicity. YOU are the ultimate Reality.


love to you
randall

Anonymous said...

Randall,

I think words like " Truth is shining" projects a view of enlightenment or knowing one's absolute reality as magical experience.

Is this true ?

Randall Friend said...

Anonymous,

Stating that something projects is a very clear pointer to the way the mind operates. The mind projects according to it's bundle of assimilated concepts. So holding out enlightenment as a magic experience comes from an incorrect concept.

ME-seeing is another example of the mind's projection of the layout of reality. It's a foundational template from which all else is seen.

Reality and Truth are meaningless words - the only meaning they can have is that which the mind gives them. In this case Reality or Truth is a direct pointer to your true nature, to the singular essence of YOU.

Reality can only be THIS, right here and now. The mind splits THIS up into parts, into a speed bump, into an inconvenient delay.

Therefore THIS, right here and right now, whatever THIS might be in appearance, whatever THIS might be in mental stories or concepts - THIS is the ultimate direction the pointers "point". Seeing enlightenment as a magical experience means that THIS isn't good enough, unless THIS is magical. And when the magic passes, as all experiences do, then the search begins again.

There is no condition on experience. Any experience, magical or mundane, is IT. Your true Self is known in EVERY experience.


love
randall

Mulla said...

Randall

Hearing arises....drinking arises...breathing arises...thinking arises...no one is doing any of this. No thing is hearing and yet there is hearing. Whether this hearing is an outcome of a brain activity or not is of no interest.

Nothing else except what is happening at the moment. Why should I call this my true being? No need for such a phrase. There is just this; the arising in awareness, the knowing of arising. Why call it anything and make a thing of it?

There is no one to be known as answer to the question; "who am I?"
There is hearing. There is this knowing and nothing else.

Whether this knowing of arising comes to an end when the body dies is of no interest even though it makes good scientific sense.

Right now there is just no one and no thing. Only hearing. There is just what is happening now and it makes sense not to call it anything. Not I-AM-ness...not Beingness. It is just knowing what is happening by no one.

Thank you
Mulla

Randall Friend said...

Mulla,

Yes! Very nicely said. Not only it makes sense not to call it anything - the very calling it of something, making it into something separate, is what appears to bind.

And ultimately even the so-called binding or duality is just THIS, something which can never be quantified or described, yet is the fullness or wholeness which was being sought after, already the very IS-ness of this right here and now.

Yes - we can certainly talk about the brain and body from a scientific perspective. But insistence on any perspective as the absolute perspective is false. It tends to bind to the idea of separate "thingness", which is false.

Very clear, my friend.


love
randall

Mulla said...

Randall

This morning...
Brushing the teeth is happening. No one is brushing. No thing is brushing. There is just the knowing of brushing happening. No one and no thing is knowing. There is only knowing moment to moment.

Is the body brushing? But there is no body. There are only parts (arm, hand, torso, eyes, mouth, etc.) that have come together with some mental programs to make brushing happen. But there are really no parts or programs either because each part and each mental program is also the result of collaboration of other parts and programs that extend in space and time and so on ad infinitum until the whole universe is found to come together to make brushing happen. In a way we may say that the universe is brushing.

Is there brushing? There is nothing that can be separated and pointed at saying "Here is brushing!" It is a process that results from the coming together of parts (brush, hand, teeth, etc.) and mental programs and actions. But each of these too are the result of more parts, programs and actions and so on until the entire universe is seen to be involved in making brushing happen. In a way we may say there is just aliveness.

It is a practical convention to say "I am brushing my teeth." However, in reality there is no "I", no ownership as when we say "my", no teeth and no brushing.

What is there then? There is only the aliveness of the universe.
Knowing is also the aliveness of the universe. There is no knower.

Although this may appear as a logical analysis. That is not how it is.

Thank you
Mulla

Randall Friend said...

Mulla,

Yes. Very well said. And as even time and space are objective and conceptual, there is nowhere and no "when" that the universe exists, that brushing happens, outside of THIS. THIS is not a block of time. THIS is eternity itself - THIS, right here and now, is timeless and limitless.

And you are THIS.


love to you
randall