The heart experience creates oneness via identity. As we be the change we want to see in the world, the world changes accordingly. Every thought, every feeling is recorded forever and affects all forever. That's quite enough power.
The nondual is and the apparent world is. They are not separate. Water has levels, the earth has levels of elevations, there are levels of heat, cold, roughness, radiation, and there are levels of consciousness. That is not to say that the levels are personal, since the field is one.
Soft light, bright light, absence of light, levels of brightness, and there are levels of consciousness. Depending on how you define or measure, levels can be determined.
Higher self, lower self, One Self. Who is who? One field, separate appearances. One Self, many selves. One up, one down. Ready, set go. Where?
All there is, is Love. One love, one heart. Let's get together and feel all right. Are lefties okay?
Bob Marley had a lot of love. Big heart. Are there levels of heart? Who's more loving?
Where's the beef? It's all in the pudding. There are levels in golf, tennis, pool, poker and horse racing. Who's the fastest? And there are levels of consciousness.
Does awareness enjoy different points of view? Does it know about the levels? Would "dumb as a rock" be a low level of consciousness? Would, "sharp as a tack" be a higher level of consciousness?
There are levels of neurosis, of ego, of self esteem. So are levels of consciousness not a possibility as well?
"Don't cast pearls before swine," said Jesus, meaning, at a level of consciousness that is not receptive. And, "let those with ears to hear, hear, .... for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven." A higher level perhaps?
Where does the personal end and Impersonal begin? The real mystery is how we can entertain these thoughts when all is One. There are levels of consciousness.
The oxymoron of the "obvious" is that what is obvious to some is not even seen by the rest. Who's in charge here? The Mystery? Oh, yeah. Thumbs up.
Where are these words coming from? Are these mine? Or do they belong to the Mystery. Can we say what level of consciousness these words come from? Would they make sense to anyone? Or just the few.
Who's reading these words? Are you reading with your heart or with your brain. Can you feel which?
Is the Karmic playing field level? Is a mountainous region on higher ground? Are some places more sacred than others? Who says? Who cares?
The world is round. If you start at any place and walk straight, you will meet yourself on the other side. Is there a here and a there on this little planet? Or are we all only always here. And always now.
A cork in the ocean floats to the level of the wave. Just so, consciousness attracts that which is at its own level. Intentions are realized. Karma is nourished. All is well. You are you. And you are that. All is wonderful. All is as it is, and as it should be.
Gloria in Excelsis Deo!
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
Friday, July 18, 2008
Knives in Their Heads
While the sugar plums danced in the plazas and squares, a number of them showed up with knives in their heads. The police were summoned. The poor sugar plums with knives stuck in their heads explained that the knives were only apparently there.
"It's a symbolic problem" they explained. "The knives are not real, and we did not stab ourselves in the head. No one did this to us. We are not even real, we are only apparently here."
The police did not take kindly to the joking around. So the captain asked what the knives symbolized. "Apparently, we're seekers, that's what we're called. A pain in the head called seeking, but we didn't think it showed."
"Well" said the captain, whether you are here or only apparently so, you must cover your heads or wear hats. You see, the apparent majority of sugar plums don't have knives in their heads. We don't want you to scare them."
The captain told the knively ones to go see their Parsons and Waite. The investigation continued, with liberals and traditionalists having their say. The neos were contrary and the conservatives stubborn.
In the end it was never agreed, one way or the other. An agreement could never be reached. Apparently no one ever came to the meetings. Only apparently so. The knives were symbolic, not even real, and the wounds didn't bleed. The wounds were apparently psychological or spiritual, and could not be found.
Meanwhile the sugar plums dance in the plazas and squares, oblivious to those who had been banished because of the knives in their heads. The seekers bled silently, dreaming in their beds, holding their heads. There was no one to rescue, and no one to teach. No one to heal. And no one to seek. .
"It's a symbolic problem" they explained. "The knives are not real, and we did not stab ourselves in the head. No one did this to us. We are not even real, we are only apparently here."
The police did not take kindly to the joking around. So the captain asked what the knives symbolized. "Apparently, we're seekers, that's what we're called. A pain in the head called seeking, but we didn't think it showed."
"Well" said the captain, whether you are here or only apparently so, you must cover your heads or wear hats. You see, the apparent majority of sugar plums don't have knives in their heads. We don't want you to scare them."
The captain told the knively ones to go see their Parsons and Waite. The investigation continued, with liberals and traditionalists having their say. The neos were contrary and the conservatives stubborn.
In the end it was never agreed, one way or the other. An agreement could never be reached. Apparently no one ever came to the meetings. Only apparently so. The knives were symbolic, not even real, and the wounds didn't bleed. The wounds were apparently psychological or spiritual, and could not be found.
Meanwhile the sugar plums dance in the plazas and squares, oblivious to those who had been banished because of the knives in their heads. The seekers bled silently, dreaming in their beds, holding their heads. There was no one to rescue, and no one to teach. No one to heal. And no one to seek. .
Friday, July 11, 2008
I think, therefore I am
I think, therefore I am is the simplest and truest statement of the false, or ego self. That thought begets all other self thoughts. Your whole identity is wrapped up in subsequent thoughts.
The "I" thought has taken over when you believe, "I think therefore I am." This is a false identity. You are prior to the "I" thought.
I am, therefore I think, is truer. At least it points to the "I am" that is prior to thought. Beingnes is multitude. And that's OK. But the truth is prior to the multitude that believes it is.
All bodies have a sense of beingness, of I amness. But, did any body create this sense? Did you create your own beingness as an individual? Or, did beingness arrive, unbidden, to take you for a drive? Take a look. Are you the driver? Or are you driven.
When the beingness arrived, it took a couple years for the mind to develop. At around two or three, the conceptual mind found it's first foothold as "I." The rest is a house of cards. The whole you that you think you are is based on this first "I" thought.
You have to go back to the original "I" thought and back track from there. The "I" thought is the result of Being in a body. You are the Beingness that created the body.
You can only think your way out of this by coming to the end of thought. Or, one might say, when thinking is no longer satisfactory, and sees its own limitation, perhaps there will just be seeing/knowing, without a thinker, without a you.
The "I" thought has taken over when you believe, "I think therefore I am." This is a false identity. You are prior to the "I" thought.
I am, therefore I think, is truer. At least it points to the "I am" that is prior to thought. Beingnes is multitude. And that's OK. But the truth is prior to the multitude that believes it is.
All bodies have a sense of beingness, of I amness. But, did any body create this sense? Did you create your own beingness as an individual? Or, did beingness arrive, unbidden, to take you for a drive? Take a look. Are you the driver? Or are you driven.
When the beingness arrived, it took a couple years for the mind to develop. At around two or three, the conceptual mind found it's first foothold as "I." The rest is a house of cards. The whole you that you think you are is based on this first "I" thought.
You have to go back to the original "I" thought and back track from there. The "I" thought is the result of Being in a body. You are the Beingness that created the body.
You can only think your way out of this by coming to the end of thought. Or, one might say, when thinking is no longer satisfactory, and sees its own limitation, perhaps there will just be seeing/knowing, without a thinker, without a you.
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
Viewing Furniture
Have you ever considered the point of view of furniture? It's rather amazing that so few have done so? It can be quite educational. Take a moment while sitting in your living room and observe your furniture. Each piece has a different purpose, each is labeled accordingly: table, chair, couch, footstool.
The labels and definitions are based on concepts, and the human purpose invested in the design. However, the objects themselves have no such identity or purpose. A wooden chair, for example, consists of wood, shaped in a particular way. But, does the chair know its purpose? Does a chair know its meaning?
Does a couch know that it is for sitting or laying on? Does a table know it is a surface for holding other objects, or for eating from? The whole meaning of these objects is a projection of the human mind.
A chair was conceived by the human mind, created by the human mind, and human hands. It's chairness is a human factor. To the chair, is there purpose? Does the chair know it is for sitting on? For the chair, is there such a thing as a chair?
To a very large extent our concepts of ourselves are just as meaningless as a chairness to a chair. We are programmed with ideas and concepts about ourselves that come from conditions that no longer exist. We are living our lives based on traditions that are no longer valid, and may in fact be harmful.
There may be some validity in looking at oneself as a peace of furniture. Realize that you might be rather presumptuous in your ideas about yourself. You may, in fact, have totally defined yourself by what you were told to believe. You may be living your life entirely based on projections you received from your parents, your brothers and sisters, and your culture. None of these are you.
As created beings we may not be in a position to know what our meaning is, our purpose. Having taken up our roles as prescribed by the play, we act them out with sound and fury, and yet unconsciously. Perhaps if we looked at ourselves as furniture in a room, we might discern a self nature that is something other than what we have projected on ourselves.
There is something deeper in us. An essence, undefinable, ineffable, yet knowing. We don't become aware of this essence, playing our prescribed roles. We become awareness by stepping aside, by letting go, by questioning our ideas and presumptions. Step back and observe oneself without ideas, and see what arises.
The labels and definitions are based on concepts, and the human purpose invested in the design. However, the objects themselves have no such identity or purpose. A wooden chair, for example, consists of wood, shaped in a particular way. But, does the chair know its purpose? Does a chair know its meaning?
Does a couch know that it is for sitting or laying on? Does a table know it is a surface for holding other objects, or for eating from? The whole meaning of these objects is a projection of the human mind.
A chair was conceived by the human mind, created by the human mind, and human hands. It's chairness is a human factor. To the chair, is there purpose? Does the chair know it is for sitting on? For the chair, is there such a thing as a chair?
To a very large extent our concepts of ourselves are just as meaningless as a chairness to a chair. We are programmed with ideas and concepts about ourselves that come from conditions that no longer exist. We are living our lives based on traditions that are no longer valid, and may in fact be harmful.
There may be some validity in looking at oneself as a peace of furniture. Realize that you might be rather presumptuous in your ideas about yourself. You may, in fact, have totally defined yourself by what you were told to believe. You may be living your life entirely based on projections you received from your parents, your brothers and sisters, and your culture. None of these are you.
As created beings we may not be in a position to know what our meaning is, our purpose. Having taken up our roles as prescribed by the play, we act them out with sound and fury, and yet unconsciously. Perhaps if we looked at ourselves as furniture in a room, we might discern a self nature that is something other than what we have projected on ourselves.
There is something deeper in us. An essence, undefinable, ineffable, yet knowing. We don't become aware of this essence, playing our prescribed roles. We become awareness by stepping aside, by letting go, by questioning our ideas and presumptions. Step back and observe oneself without ideas, and see what arises.
Tuesday, July 8, 2008
There is a seeming I
There is a seeming I here. There are interests, avoidances, but mostly peace, contentment - not bliss, not joy, just this.
The nondual is. The fact that there still an apparent person here is not a problem. This appearance is operating, much as it always did, except the search is finished.
There is no need here to get rid of the person. No sense that the person should go away, become non existent. Why, because the truth is known that appearances are, but I am not that. I am all appearances. The personality is like an old shoe. it's here, it's comfortable. Who says I need to get rid of it?
Who is going to make the effort to get rid of this appearance? Since the appearance is part of the play, why not enjoy the show?
There is an ease in allowing the appearance to be as it is. There is awareness that catches what is rises as resistance, irritation, judgment. When awareness senses these, it brings them into focus. The simple recognition releases the resistance as not needed. All is well.
There does not need to be any purpose to this. Who is here to judge, to determine what that purpose is? Just observing, holding back judgment is enough. Just see how much one can accept and love. That is enough.
The nondual is. The fact that there still an apparent person here is not a problem. This appearance is operating, much as it always did, except the search is finished.
There is no need here to get rid of the person. No sense that the person should go away, become non existent. Why, because the truth is known that appearances are, but I am not that. I am all appearances. The personality is like an old shoe. it's here, it's comfortable. Who says I need to get rid of it?
Who is going to make the effort to get rid of this appearance? Since the appearance is part of the play, why not enjoy the show?
There is an ease in allowing the appearance to be as it is. There is awareness that catches what is rises as resistance, irritation, judgment. When awareness senses these, it brings them into focus. The simple recognition releases the resistance as not needed. All is well.
There does not need to be any purpose to this. Who is here to judge, to determine what that purpose is? Just observing, holding back judgment is enough. Just see how much one can accept and love. That is enough.
Alphabet Soup
Pour a cup of Alphabet Soup and you can play with the letters, making many different words. The letters make words for animals, and things, and yet they remain soup. The liquid and the letters are one soup. We are like that soup, appearing as separate pieces, but still soup.
That which looks out from this body/mind sees only itself. That which sees from every other body/mind sees only itself. Different points of view only. We are like raindrops from the same storm, each with our story to tell of how we fell. Only to find that we are all washed back into the sea.
Oh, the stories we tell! Oh, the experiences we have! We should all wink when we tell them. Somehow, in our hearts, we know that all our stories are about the One. The One we are. Why else would we listen?
Listen to your own story lightly. Take a step back as you tell it. Be sure to laugh.
That which looks out from this body/mind sees only itself. That which sees from every other body/mind sees only itself. Different points of view only. We are like raindrops from the same storm, each with our story to tell of how we fell. Only to find that we are all washed back into the sea.
Oh, the stories we tell! Oh, the experiences we have! We should all wink when we tell them. Somehow, in our hearts, we know that all our stories are about the One. The One we are. Why else would we listen?
Listen to your own story lightly. Take a step back as you tell it. Be sure to laugh.
Sunday, July 6, 2008
Who Am I?
When there is recall, there are memories of being a child, and there are memories of joys and fears. When there is recall there are memories of teenage and college years. But, whose memories are they? They are certainly not mine!
Whoever I am now, which is more like no one, nowhere, I am not that child, not that college kid, not any of those memories. The memories are there, this body/mind can recall them, but there is no one here to own them.
Long ago I wrote an autobiography. It seemed really important at the time. The problem is that I waited too long to publish it. Now, the person that wrote it is no longer here. Now there is no motive to publish it. Who is it important to now? No one! Whoever wrote it has long since died.
The body/mind remains. It is here at this computer typing these words. And though memories attest to experience, they don't attest to what remains: nothing definable as the person who experienced them.
From here, this body/mind has enough distance from itself to ask, who is here now typing this? Rather than answer directly, a little trip into the future will certainly reveal that whoever thinks they are writing this now, will not be here in the future. So, is there really anyone writing this?
Bodies are born and mindfields form around them. If they are unchallenged, they stabilize and a person is born. But the person that is born is just thoughts, opinions, ideas, nothing one can put in a box and keep.
Suffering is good at dispelling long held cherished beliefs. Suffering breaks up cherished positions, thoughts and ideas. The suffering is equal to the strength of the chains of thought. So much suffering to keep from seeing, to keep from changing.
There is a cool wind blowing where the web of thoughts used to be. With no web, no chains, what can stick? Where am I? Not here, not there, perhaps only everywhere.
Whoever I am now, which is more like no one, nowhere, I am not that child, not that college kid, not any of those memories. The memories are there, this body/mind can recall them, but there is no one here to own them.
Long ago I wrote an autobiography. It seemed really important at the time. The problem is that I waited too long to publish it. Now, the person that wrote it is no longer here. Now there is no motive to publish it. Who is it important to now? No one! Whoever wrote it has long since died.
The body/mind remains. It is here at this computer typing these words. And though memories attest to experience, they don't attest to what remains: nothing definable as the person who experienced them.
From here, this body/mind has enough distance from itself to ask, who is here now typing this? Rather than answer directly, a little trip into the future will certainly reveal that whoever thinks they are writing this now, will not be here in the future. So, is there really anyone writing this?
Bodies are born and mindfields form around them. If they are unchallenged, they stabilize and a person is born. But the person that is born is just thoughts, opinions, ideas, nothing one can put in a box and keep.
Suffering is good at dispelling long held cherished beliefs. Suffering breaks up cherished positions, thoughts and ideas. The suffering is equal to the strength of the chains of thought. So much suffering to keep from seeing, to keep from changing.
There is a cool wind blowing where the web of thoughts used to be. With no web, no chains, what can stick? Where am I? Not here, not there, perhaps only everywhere.