Sunday, January 17, 2010


Never is there a moment when reality is divided.

What are the implications of that? It means that the entire paradigm of "me seeking enlightenment" falls away as false from the very beginning, simply because reality was never divided as this idea seems to indicate. It means that the very idea of the individual who seeks and later finds something in spirituality was itself the issue or obscuration of that nondual reality which IS.

There is never a moment when you are not in full knowledge and realization of your Self. And that Self IS the nondual reality.

We may say it begins with the original "split" - awareness or subject and object-world. That is indicated by the sentence "I am seeing the world" or the idea of "me seeing world". Object appears in awareness. From there we can go further into abstraction and imagination by saying the awareness is possessed or owned BY the individual and the object is the world "outside". But that is taking what is already false and, ignoring the falseness of that initial split, going farther by assigning individuality to one part - awareness - and objectivity to the other.

Instead of standing upon that platform, which is several layers deep into imagination, that platform of individuality, from which there is a person seeking some future state or experience - go back to the primary split itself - see if that is true, before then running into abstract ideas which require that split to be a solid and "true" reality.

Awareness is obvious. That is going on now. The objective appearance is going on now. That objective appearance REQUIRES awareness to be known, yes? So if you had to place your Self on one side or the other, it would obviously lie on the subjective/awareness side, so to speak. You aren't objective to your SELF. Yes? Therefore in the equation of awareness and objective, you are the awareness.

And the objective is simply experience. Perception. Sensation. Awareness is the experiencing, perceiving, sensing. Yet is there an actual split or division between experience and experiencing? Is there an actual division between perception and perceiving? Is there a dividing line between sensation and sensing?

There is not. Awareness and experience are two words for the same reality. It is only in calling them awareness and experience that there SEEMS TO BE a division. But is there? Test this in direct experience.

Therefore any object is a direct experience of your own SELF. There is no awareness HERE and object THERE. There is no awareness INSIDE and an objective world OUTSIDE. Awareness and experience are one and the same reality. One nondual reality. One IS-ness.

Is this not the most obvious thing?

So from there, the first question that comes is known to be already false. The question about realization can only be false because it requires that split, which is quite obviously not there. The questions about "how do I find it" are false, simply because they require that primary split, which can never actually be found.

I had it and lost it. I only have an intellectual understanding. I feel I am so close to realizing what I am. Can these questions even arise if that primary split never actually happened?

Therefore you already ARE what is being sought, that oneness or nondual reality. What you are is already THAT - the ideas of a world of things, within which you are only a small and insignificant "part", is an idea built upon a false platform. It is taking WHAT IS to be split up.

There is no reaching Oneness, no bondage to escape, no liberation to find. You are the Oneness you are seeking. There is no individual to reach it. Only the false ideas, the imagination of duality falls away quite naturally.

And all that remains is what ever IS, already.


Matty Boy said...


As a living being, we can see, hear, feel and taste... one cant deny this. The thoughts appear without any effort nor can a living being choose thoughts. Looks like everything appearing is automatic for no reason and there is no control.

Does this mean, the realisation of non duality is also automatic ?

My question comes from a point, where for few seconds i know that there is no duality but most of the time in day to day life we get lost in duality due to "image of me" which i know is false when looked at it. But this seeing doesn't happen regularly or continously

Do you always (i.e every moment both when you are sleep and awake ) know that this is it (i.e there is no duality) ? If yes, how does that complete shift from duality to non duality happen ?

Does this happen with practise or is this automatic ?

Randall Friend said...


Who knows of duality or nonduality? That person is the very core of duality itself. As long as there is the assumption of an individual who knows, who sees, who realizes, how can what is inherently dualistic realize nonduality? It cannot.

So is that a tragic misfortune? No. Because the "one who realizes" is itself the false duality.

Where does that leave you? What shift is required? Who remains to practice?

There is only ever What-IS - ever and ever and ever. See if What-IS is actually split down the middle first, before acting from the assumption.

Is there a pink elephant on the moon? If there is the assumption that there is, then from there we can ask how the elephant is doing, where did it come from, how does it breathe, what does it eat, how will it get home...

All these questions are nonsense when it is clear that the original assumption - pink elephant on the moon - is false. The questions about the elephant aren't answered, they are discarded as irrelevant and only referencing something which never existed.

Matty never existed. Why inquire about the assumed existence. See if he existed, then ask the question. Yes?

See if there is an actual split between subject and object, or are these two words spellbinding and projecting a reality that is false? Is there a boundary between sensing and sensation? Is there a gap or distance between experience and experiencing? Between the known and the knowing?

If there is, then we can entertain questions about the results of this split. If there is not, then what question can remain?


Matty Boy said...

Thanks Randall !

Your explanation and examples are always the best.